►
From YouTube: Planning Committee - May 23, 2019
Description
Planning Committee meeting - May 23, 2019 - Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
Thirty,
this
is
when
we
start.
This
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
items
one
to
four
on
today's
agenda.
For
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
oral
submissions
today
or
written
submissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal
within
150
days
of
receipt
of
the
application
for
zoning
and
210
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment.
A
A
So,
as
I
said
today's
a
very
special
day
and
we're
going
to
be
taking
a
few
minutes
to
recognize
an
important
milestone,
one
that's
very
much
related
to
the
work
we
do
at
this
committee
at
the
planning
committee
we
have
with
us
today,
representatives
from
the
Canadian
Institute
of
planners.
The
Institute
is
the
voice
of
Canada's
planning
community
and
it's
about
to
celebrate
its
100th
anniversary
anniversary
later
this
month.
A
We
only
get
to
work
with
a
handful
at
each
of
our
planning
committee
meetings
of
our
professional
planners,
but
we're
very
fortunate
to
have
access
to
their
expertise,
but
it's
really
rare
to
get
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
such
a
large
number
of
you
from
this
incredible
team,
and
so,
while
you're
all
here,
I'd
like
to
take
the
opportunity
to,
on
behalf
of
the
members
of
this
committee,
to
say.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
for
your
thoughtful
work
you
put
in
and
for
the
valuable
service
you
provide
for
us
as
we
consider
the
files
that
come
before
us
planning
regulations
can
sometimes
be
arcane
and
complex,
but
your
continued
guidance
is
critical
to
our
understanding.
You're
always
prepared
to
answer
questions
about
every
detail
of
a
project
and
to
clarify
the
information
we
need
to
make
our
decisions.
You
are
an
important
resource
and,
frankly,
we
rely
on
you.
So
thank
you
very
much.
A
As
I
understand,
we
have
86
86
members
of
the
Canadian
Institute
of
planners
on
staff
here
at
the
city,
so
there's
clearly
a
major
crossover
between
the
work
that
we
do
and
the
service
of
the
Institute
provides
as
a
voice
for
Canada's
planning
community.
With
that
I'm
going
to
invite
mayor
Watson
up
he's
going
to
give
you
more
details.
B
B
They
give
us,
as
members
of
council,
the
ability
to
make
informed
decisions
and
there's
an
incredible
effort
that
goes
into
any
city
building
project
well
before
it
ever
gets
to
the
committee
stage,
but
it's
often
at
Planning
Committee,
which
is
the
really
the
workhorse
committee
of
Council
that
meets
the
most
often
has
the
longest
meetings
where
the
professional
advice
of
the
planners
that
do
work
for
the
city
and
and
others
come
to.
Bear
you
an
important
partner,
ensuring
we
have
knowledgeable
experienced
professional
planners
to
do
that.
Early
groundwork.
Who's
at
the
doulton
area
has
important.
B
You
know.
Permit
Duvall
days,
urbanist
professional
inform
a
poor
affects
you.
A
truce
at
rabbi
repertoire
I'd
like
to
recognize
Beth
McMahon.
Who
is
the
chief
executive
officer,
the
Canadian
stitute
of
planners
and
our
neighbor
just
across
the
street
members
of
the
Planning
Committee
Steve
Willis?
And,
of
course,
our
city
planners,
many
of
whom
are
here
with
us
today?
Addressing
the
use
of
land
resources,
facilities
and
services
is
really
a
complex
task
and
I
often
say
there
are
a
lot
of
professional
transit
experts
and
planning
experts
that
call
into
talk
radio
a
lot.
B
B
So
it's
no
small,
endeavor
and
the
Institute
has
been
around
since
1919
and
has
provided
a
voice
for
the
professional
planners.
We
rely
on
each
and
every
meeting
of
the
planning
committee
and
that's
no
small
endeavor.
They
now
count
membership
of
more
than
7,000
planning
professionals
across
Canada,
including
about
300
right
here
in
Ottawa,
and
we
benefit
directly
as
the
Institute
ensures.
Its
members
maintain
a
high
level
of
excellence
and
expertise,
moves
all
profit.
B
All
director
ma
care,
Institute,
vey,
asuka
Samara
met
na
and
Kenneth
neva
Dexter
halls
and
experience,
and
the
Institute
promotes
professional
development
in
fields
as
diverse
as
land
use
and
transportation
planning,
environmental
resource
management,
heritage
conservation,
social
planning
and
economic
development,
and
that
means
the
City
of
Ottawa
has
access
to
the
most
talented
planners
in
the
country,
many
of
whom
sit
with
us
in
the
gallery
today.
So
together,
the
Institute
and
its
members
help
to
keep
the
city
growing
physically,
economically
and
with
an
eye
on
protecting
our
shared
environment
and
built
heritage.
B
The
City
of
Ottawa
congratulate
s',
the
Canadian
Institute
of
planners,
and
we
thank
its
members
and
leadership
for
working
tirelessly
to
safeguard
our
urban
and
rural
centers
and
I'd
like
to
invite
MS
McMahon
to
come
forward.
Maybe
we'll
get
all
members
of
council
who
are
here
to
present
a
proclamation
up
here.
It's
my
pleasure.
Come
on
we'll
do
a
little
group
shot
here.
It's
my
pleasure
to
officially
proclaim
Canadian
Institute
a
planners
day,
May
21st,
2019,
open,
May,
31st.
Sorry
I
just
had
a
nice
surgery,
I
can't
read
it.
Is
it
May
31st.
A
A
B
C
D
C
E
A
G
Thank
you
so
much.
This
is
being
a
great
honor
and
privilege
to
be
here
with
you
today
to
bring
I
guess
some
smiles.
It
felt
like
an
Ellen
moment.
We
should
be
doing
a
big
group
selfie
as
but,
but
quite
honestly,
like
we
take
this
very
seriously.
There's
been
years
of
work
leading
up
to
our
centenary
year
and
the
very
idea
of
declarations
came
from
our
membership.
G
We
have
a
very
active
and
engaged
membership,
and
many
of
the
planners
on
staff
are
also
very
dedicated
volunteers
with
our
own
organization
and
with
our
sister
charitable
organization,
the
planning
student
trust
fund
and
we're
so
appreciative.
All
of
the
work
that's
now
being
put
into
the
upcoming
conference
would
not
be
possible
without
the
support
of
our
members
and
planners,
the
City
of
Ottawa,
and
so
I
just
want
to
mention
that
and
then
you
know,
as
chair
hardier
was
mentioning
our
first.
G
The
inaugural
meeting
of
the
canadian
institute
of
planners
actually
took
place
at
the
chateau
laurier
May
31st
1919.
When
there
was
then
13
founding
members
and
the
population
of
Ottawa
was
about
a
hundred
thousand
people.
So
now
to
think
a
hundred
years
later,
you're
at
a
million
we're
at
seven
thousand
I,
can't
help
but
think
about
how
we've
grown
together
and
continue
to
grow
this
great
city
with
the
work
of
planners.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
having
us
here
today,
Thank
You,
chair
harder,
thank
you.
Steve
Thank,
You,
America,.
A
So,
just
before
we
get
back
to
the
planning
committee
agenda,
I
want
to
point
out
that
there's
an
exhibit
of
photos
and
planning
documents
outside
the
champagne
room.
I
take
it
it's
that
way.
Yeah
I
came
in
this
store,
so
I'm
not
sure,
but
we'd
like
to
offer
a
big
thanks
to
the
City
of
Ottawa
archives
for
their
hard
work,
putting
together
to
display
which
explores
how
the
vision
for
Ottawa
has
evolved
over
the
years
and
the
historic
documents
and
photos
show
a
fraction
of
the
work.
A
Professional
planners
have
been
involved
in
in
Ottawa
for
many
many
years
well,
100
years,
it
will
only
be
in
place
for
a
few
days,
so
I
encourage
you
to
visit
after
planning
committee
to
see
how
planners
have
helped
shape
the
Ottawa
of
today
and
continue
to
I
mean
we're
starting
the
official
plan.
It's
the
most
important
I
think
it's
the
most
important
piece
of
work
that
we
will
do
in
this
term
of
council.
It's
important.
A
A
A
Just
wanted
to
say
that
it's
also
a
perfect
day.
It's
the
second
last
day
before
mr.
Smith,
one
of
the
best
planners
I,
certainly
have
had
the
pleasure
to
work
with
and
know,
and
just
a
just
a
great
guy
and
I
know
many.
Many
of
you
would
say
the
same
thing
if
it
was
if
you
were
sitting
up
here,
but
tomorrow
is
his
final
day
as
an
employee
of
the
City
of
Ottawa
34
years.
A
I
find
it
amazing
just
to
think
about
the
amount
of
time
and
the
amount
of
input
that
he's
provided
and
people
who
have
worked
for
this
city
for
that
length
of
time,
how
much
it's
involved
and
he
was
with
the
original
City
of
Ottawa.
So,
of
course,
as
you
know,
I
didn't
come
here
willingly
I
came
from
Nepean
and
that
we
wanted
no
part
of
Ottawa
ever
we've
kind
of
grown
from
that.
A
So
it's
our
relationship
as
evolved
over
the
time
too,
but
we
had
a
party
for
John
at
his
horticultural
building
at
Lansdowne
on
Friday
afternoon.
A
lot
of
friends
came
together
in
John's
family
and
every
single
person
that
talked
and
who
talked
was
mr.
Moser
duck
James
Allen,
as
used
to
Harry
lamb,
eggless,
Steve
Willis,
of
course,
and
myself.
A
F
You
achieve
the
goals
and
the
aspirations
that
you
had
set
for
yourself
way
back.
When
is
truly
remarkable
and
incredible.
The
heartwarming
I've
had
a
fantastic,
a
ride.
I've
really
enjoyed
sort
of
being
in
the
public
sector.
I
really
enjoyed
working
with
numerous
planning
committees.
Numerous
councils,
this
planning
committee
discount
so
absolutely
no
exception.
F
You
all
have
phenomenal
work
that
you
have
in
front
of
you,
but
the
one
thing
that
I
do
have
to
say
is
that
the
incredible
support,
that's
being
provided
by
the
politicians
to
those
of
us
that
appear
to
you
on
a
regular
basis
with
our
recommendations
and
yes,
we'll
get
challenged
from
time
to
time.
And,
yes,
you
might
try
to
put
us
in
certain
places,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
as
I
mentioned
on
Friday,
the
game
of
city
building
is
a
collective
effort.
F
So
it's
it's
been
an
incredible
journey.
I've
really
enjoyed
my
time
and
I
I
definitely
do
plan
to
participate
in
the
city,
building
game
on
the
other
side
of
the
fence
and
we'll
see
about
this
five
minute
rule
Jam,
whether
or
not
we
stick
to
it
or
not,
but
anyways.
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
everybody.
That's
been
here
today
really
very
much
appreciate
lots
of
well
wishes
and,
like
I
said,
it's
been
a
lot
of
fun.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Thanks:
John,
okay,
so
anyone
that's
not
here
for
business,
you
can
go
back
to
your
desk,
get
that
whip
out.
Mr.
Willis
thanks
everyone,
it's
great
having
you
here
today,
okay,
so
we'll
get
to
the
agenda
now!
I
I
do
have
regrets.
I
have
I,
have
lots
of
regrets,
but
in
regard
to
them
it's
just
like.
With
regard
to
the
meeting.
However,
a
councilor
Brockington
is
in
Toronto
today
at
an
emergency,
a
MoU
meeting,
so
he
sends
his
regrets
he's
way
on
steady
business.
Councillor
Moffitt
is
had
intended
to
be
here.
A
Okay,
the
first
item:
zoning
bylaw
amendment
cannabis
production
facility.
We
have
a
oh,
we
don't
oh
okay!
Well,
we
did
have
some
correspondence
and
we
were
going
to
have
a
speaker
from
the
urban
edge
farm.
I'm
sure
you
all
read
the
submission
that
we
received
earlier
this
week.
Does
anyone
need
to
hold
this
item
or
is
it
carried
carried?
A
Item
number
three:
is
zoning
bylaw
amendment
in
councilor,
gaurs,
Ward,
56,
15
and
56:21
Fernbank
Road.
If
needed,
we
have
Taylor
Markey
from
the
regional
group
and
Ellen
pots
from
Nova
Tech.
Are
you
yeah?
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
them
on
the
item
at
56,
15
and
56:21
Fernbank
Road?
No,
and
so
you
don't
need
to
speak.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
it's
this
item
carried.
Thank
you.
Oh
I
know
what
I
forgot
to
do.
A
Yes
show
that
shaking
of
heads
means
carried.
Thank
you,
okay
and
the
and
the
fourth
item
we
have
is
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
1850
Walkley
Road.
We
don't
have
any
we're,
not
having
a
presentation.
The
only
speaker
we
have
is
Jonah
bond
from
Holtzman
consultants.
Jonah.
Do
you
need
to
speak?
If
we
don't
have
questions?
Okay,
does
anyone
have
questions?
Okay,
thank
you
for
coming.
This
item
carried.
I
A
H
K
You
hello
all
right.
Thank
you
very
much
good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
committee.
My
name
is
anne
o'connor
and
I'm
the
file
lead
planner
for
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
applications
submitted
by
Claridge
at
383
albert
and
340
Queen
Street.
The
applications
were
similar
to
facilitate
the
redevelopment
of
the
site
to
permit
to
27
story
apartment
buildings
with
ground-floor
commercial
and
a
parking
garage.
K
The
subject
property
is
located
in
the
central
area
and
is
an
l-shaped
slopped,
with
frontage
on
three
streets:
Queen
Street
to
the
north
line
street
to
the
east
and
Albert
Street
to
the
south.
The
site
is
just
under
4,000
square
meters
in
area
and
is
currently
occupied
primarily
by
a
surface
parking
lot.
There
is
also
a
two-story
mixed-use
building
fronting
on
Queen
Street,
as
well
as
the
lion
LRT
station
located
at
the
corner
of
lion
and
queen.
K
The
surrounding
area
includes
a
mix
of
uses
in
a
predominantly
high-rise
built
form
directly
west
of
the
property
is
a
13
story.
Condominium
development
in
May
2011,
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board,
issued
a
decision
that
allowed
this
site
to
be
developed
with
three
high-rise
towers
that
contained
Heights
similar
to
those
proposed
through
this
application.
This
development
was
put
on
hold
to
allow
for
the
City
of
Ottawa
to
develop
the
LRT
station
on
site
planning.
K
The
property
is
designated
central
area
in
Schedule
B
of
the
Official
Plan
and
is
identified
as
being
within
the
upper
town
character
area
in
the
central
area
secondary
plan.
The
proposal
adheres
to
these
policies
by
increasing
the
supply
of
inner-city
housing.
With
the
addition
of
two
high-rise
apartment
buildings
with
582
dwelling
units,
it
also
introduces
upgrade
commercial
space
to
contribute
to
the
pedestrian
environment.
K
The
site
is
located
along
the
Albert
Street
transit
corridor,
which
was
recently
subject
to
a
post,
LRT,
repurposing,
functional
design
study
and,
as
a
result
of
this
study,
the
applicant
has
designed
the
site
access
to
be
located
outside
of
a
33
meter.
Emergency
bus
platform,
long
Albert
Street,
and
it
also
accommodates
a
future
cycle
trap
on
the
north
side
of
Albert.
The
proposal
is
developed
around
the
Alliant.
Our
T
station,
illustrated
by
the
red
star
on
the
screen.
K
359
parking
spaces
are
proposed,
130
of
which
will
be
for
the
parking
garage
use,
in
other
words,
rented
to
people
who
don't
live
in
the
building.
130
spaces
is
the
same
amount
of
parking
provided
on-site
today
at
grade,
the
remaining
229
spaces
will
be
used
for
the
588
dwelling
units,
visitors
and
commercial
tenants.
The
proposal
provides
520
spaces
less
than
they
are
permitted
to
next
to
a
transit
station.
There
are
a
total
of
359
bicycle
parking
spaces,
nine
of
which
are
external
to
the
building
for
visitors
and
shoppers
on
the
screen.
K
Now
is
the
landscape
plan
and
the
proposed
zoning
schedule.
The
landscape
plan
illustrates
the
building
envelope
and
the
2nd
and
10th
floor.
Rooftop
terraces,
there
are
two
zones
that
currently
apply
to
the
subject
site.
Both
zones
are
residential,
fifth
density,
with
a
height
limit
of
64
meters
and
permit
apartment
buildings,
high-rise
with
limited
Norma's
natural
uses.
The
proposed
zone
retains
that
r5
designation
and
adds
a
parking
garage
as
a
permitted
use,
as
well
as
an
exception
in
a
zoning
schedule.
K
The
schedule
permits
to
towers
at
81
meters
or
27
storeys
in
height,
and
these
towers
are
required
to
be
separated
by
a
minimum
of
15
metres.
The
exception
permits
a
reduction
in
landscaped
area
at
grade
permits
commercial
uses
to
occupy
100%
of
the
ground
floor
area
and
permits
the
site
to
be
considered
one
law
for
zoning
purposes.
K
This
slide
illustrates
two
before-and-after
shots.
The
proposal
was
subject
to
the
urban
design
review
panel
process
and
improved
the
project
with
an
interior
connection
to
LRT
station
and
improved
facade
and
a
larger
amount
of
sidewalk
space.
Seven
residents
provide
feedback
with
concerns
primarily
related
to
the
proximity
to
the
abutting
condominium
development
to
the
west
traffic
and
streetscape.
The
proposal
replaces
of
vehicle
centric
low
density,
use
a
surface
parking
lot
with
a
high
density
development
that
has
a
mix
of
uses
and
supports
a
range
of
transportation
options.
K
The
development
contributes
to
the
available
housing
within
the
central
area
and
connects
directly
with
the
LRT,
creating
street-level
activity
upgrade
with
commercial
uses
that
serve
local
residents.
Such
the
requested
zoning
bylaw
amendment
represents
good
planning
and
the
Department
recommends
the
requested
amendments
be
approved.
Thank
you,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
If
you
didn't
see
it
and
he's
a
must,
live
in
that
condo
because
he's
talking
about
the
lack
of
sunlight
that
he
has
so
we'll
work,
those
responses,
maybe
into
it,
since
both
of
them
had
plan
I
had
wanted
to
come,
but
the
first
speaker
up
is
Jack
Davis
who's
on
the
board
of
CCC,
one
four
or
five
parks.
We're
welcome.
Mr.
Davis
come
on
forward
sit
in
that
last
chair
right
there
and
push
the
button
on
the
mic
and
when
it
turns
red,
you're
good
to
go
and
as
I
told
mr.
L
L
Just
in
response
to
what
I
just
heard,
I'm
appalled
that
there
was
no
mention
that
there's
actually
140
units
of
condominium
building
on
this
on
the
same
site
with
no
mention
of
it
and
that's
kind
of
the
feeling
of
the
the
residents
of
our
building
were
sort
of
being
ignored
in
the
in
the
in
the
process.
In
the
planning
process,
I'm
Jack,
Davis
I'm
on
the
condominium
board
and
I
represent
the
residents
of
CCC
145
can.
A
L
The
in
the
five
minutes,
it
will
be
impossible
to
substantiate
all
of
my
remarks,
but
we
have
a
hard
copy
that
flushes
out
a
number
of
the
details
that
are
impossible
to
speak
to
at
this
time,
and
please
committee
refer
to
the
handout
because
it
does
detail
a
lot
of
the
important
points
simply
put.
We
want
what
everyone
in
Ottawa
wants,
and
indeed
everyone
in
the
country
we're
talking
about
our
our
capital
city
and
we're
thinking
that
mediocre
mediocrity
is
not
good
enough.
L
We're
literally
steps
away
from
the
nation's
Parliament
Buildings
a
legitimate
source
of
national
pride,
and
this
is
where
we
live
literally.
This
is
where
we
live.
We
want
attractive
buildings
and
and
MS
harder
I
hear
you
speak
of
enhancements
to
to
the
city
core
into
our
city.
We
want
buildings
that
inspire
setbacks
that
allow
for
the
comfortable
movement
of
pedestrian
traffic.
We
we
have
a
public
library,
that's
going
down
the
street
very
visible
from
the
Albert
Street
portion
of
our
of
our
block,
increasing
the
amount
of
pedestrian
traffic.
L
That's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
accumulating
there.
We
want
buildings
that
meet
LEED
standards
for
green
certification,
entranceways
that
maximize
the
safety
for
cyclists
and
pedestrians.
We
want
visible
landscaping
that
is
when
you're
walking
about.
We
want
to
be
able
to
see
the
landscaping
that
that
has
been
put
in
place,
ground-level
amenities
to
complement
our
neighborhood
and
an
increase
in
public
parking
with
an
exceptional
facility,
an
exceptional
facility
for
servicing
electric
vehicles,
specifically
in
regards
to
intensification,
the
city
of
Ottawa's
official
plan,
acid
intensification
and
redevelopment
must
be
considered.
L
Recognizing
quote:
moderate
increases
in
density,
going
from
64
meters
to
81
meters
is
not
moderate.
The
plan
calls
for
sensitivity
regarding
height
transitions
of
adjacent
buildings.
There's
no
quote
easy
transition,
unquote
with
the
27th
story,
monster,
that's
being
erected
beside
our
13
story
condominium
in
terms
of
setbacks,
the
reduced
setbacks
on
Albert
Street
need
to
be
shown
to
be
quote
reasonable
and
to
avoid
the
Canyon
effect
and
wind
tunnel
effects
that
ensue
as
a
result
of
the
improper
placement
of
buildings,
we've
gone
from
three
to
two
I
understand
from
your
presentation
this
morning,
but
I.
L
Don't
know
how
that
Orient's
itself
in
relation
to
the
effect
of
wind
and
and
weather
on
our
on
our
situation
in
terms
of
the
environment,
will
the
city
require
Claridge
to
meet
the
LEED
certification
standard?
It's
healthier,
it's
more
efficient
and
we
know
it's
cheaper.
In
the
long
run,
it's
an
in-your-face
indication
that
the
city
and
Claridge
really
care
about
the
impact
of
climate
change.
L
L
The
proposed
structure
totally
blocked
sunlight
as
you've
already
mentioned,
from
our
south-facing
central
hall
windows,
3-bedroom
windows
on
all
13
floors
and
the
skylight
over
our
pool
in
terms
of
safety.
Recent
cyclists
and
pedestrians
have
surely
alerted
the
city
to
the
need
for
the
utmost
vigilance
in
this
regard.
L
Cyclists
and
pedestrians
on
Albert
Street
will
have
to
cross
what
will
be
a
very
busy
dangerous
parking
entrance
that
will
see
many
more
cars,
delivery,
trucks
and
even
moving
vans
were
not
convinced
that
any
site
control
plan
any
site
control
plan
can
accommodate
this
onslaught
in
terms
of
landscaping.
Our
condominium
over
the
last
several
years
has
worked
very
closely
and
cooperatively
with
the
city
to
support
the
Green
Street
beautification
project.
All
of
this,
while
the
LRT
construction
was
and
is
taking
place
right
at
our
you're.
L
L
A
A
J
M
3D
you
talking
about
here,
I'm,
looking
at
your
facade
on
Queen,
so
a
legitimate
question
that
I
struggle
with
is
you're.
The
face
of
your
building
on
Queen
is:
is
an
interruption
in
this
street
fabric.
It
is
it's
not
necessarily
safe
feeling,
it's
just
a
blank
brick
wall.
Is
this:
what
you're
proposing
this
building
should
have
or
or
how
would
you
see
the
setbacks
done
differently
in
order
to
satisfy
the
concerns
that
you
have
I?
Don't.
L
M
M
It's
got
balconies,
but
at
the
ground
floor,
there's
no
activation
at
all
right,
I'm,
trying
to
understand
what
you
would
prefer
to
see
by
way
of
activating
the
street
fund
house.
How
could
this
building
be
improved
with
setbacks
with
landscaping
with
activation,
compared
to
what
they're
proposing
when,
when
you're
building
on
Queen
is
sort
of
a
blank
spot
in
the
in
the
street
fabric?.
D
A
N
A
N
N
Our
building
you're
saying
that
it's
a
brick
wall,
it's
not
a
brick
wall,
it's
the
building
and
about
six
meters
of
landscaping
in
front
of
us.
Now
we're
going
so
you're
going
to
lose
that
line
of
sight
in
that
Street
by
having
a
building.
That's
six.
You
know
six
meters
like
way
beyond,
where
our
property
lines,
and
and
on
top
of
that
we're
trying
to
maintain
a
visual,
the
visual,
the
visual
prominence
of
LRT
in
that
corner.
N
So
for
all
intents
and
purposes,
I
the
protocol
is
that
the
LRT
station
should
be
quite
visible
from
the
street
right.
If
you
have
a
building,
that's
going
to
be
protruding,
you
know
beyond
our
building
and
and
then
slightly
covering
the
LRT.
That's
exactly
not!
You
know,
I
mean
from
a
very
unprofessional
point
of
view.
I
should
say-
and
we
have
the
same
concerns
about
Albert
Street
they're-
going
to
be
going
well
beyond
the
property
lines
of
our
building.
Our
building
is
not
built
exactly
our
wall.
N
N
All
kinds
of
reasons:
for
aesthetic
reasons,
for
safety
reasons,
for
transportation
reasons,
for
traffic,
we're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
traffic
in
that
area,
with
the
LRT
with
the
routing
of
the
buses,
and
you
know
we'll-
have
two
major
bus
stations
on
Alliance
Street
and
one
bus
station
on
Queen
and
one
on
Bay
immediately
across
the
street,
from
us
on
Albert,
Street
and
Bay.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
major
hub
and
it's
going
to
be
on
in
a
major
intensity
project.
There
I,
don't
know
how
many
residents
eventually.
A
A
N
E
E
So,
with
regards
to
the
zoning
bylaw
before
the
community
today,
the
purpose
of
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
is
really
to
accomplish
a
couple
things.
One
is
to
enshrine
those
variances
with
a
couple
of
very
minor
tweaks,
one
being,
for
example,
the
setback
because
of
the
location
of
the
LRT,
where
it
was
constructed
to
being
addition
of
the
parking
garage
and
three
to
reconfigure
the
density
on
the
site,
such
that
it's
actually
a
lower
density
than
was
originally
approved
and
what
they
have
as
of
right.
E
E
D
O
Claridge
has
received
approval
from
CMHC
to
submit
the
I
guess,
I'll
call
the
South
Tower
into
the
rental
rental
rental
financing
initiative
program,
which
is
which
is
an
affordable
program,
targeted
I'm,
bringing
new
rental
streams
into
Canada
status,
rental
markets.
So
in
that
program,
there's
approximately
we'll
be
putting
in
approximate
wente
units
the
criteria.
The
program
essentially
is
twofold:
first,
is
it's
targeted
at
the
50th
income
percentile
ensuring
rents
are
a
percentage
of
the
units,
have
friends
that
are
30,
affordable
to
30%
of
the
50th
percentile
in
that
target
market?
O
There's
a
second
measure
which
requires
the
property
to
collect
essentially
10%
less
than
the
potential
rent
it
could
achieve
in
the
marketplace
in
that
criteria.
So
in
that
program
we
would
be
in
a
unit
project
of
320
units.
We
would
need
to
supply
approximately
75
units
that
met
the
first
criteria
and
then
another
61
units
that
would
be
70%
of
the
first
criteria.
O
They
don't
make
it
simple,
it's
the
federal
government,
so
in
the
case
of
this
particular
project,
actually
all
320
units
would
meet
the
first
criteria
of
the
project
and
then
approximately
a
hundred
eighty
units
will
meet
the
second
criteria.
A
couple
of
a
couple
other
items
we
can
dress
sort
of
in
that
in
that
program.
There's
also
social
outcomes,
are
a
critical
factor
of
that
program.
So
I
think
there
was
a
question
regarding
whether
we
were
doing
lead.
O
We
don't
do
lead
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
mostly
its
its
bureaucratic,
but
as
part
of
that
part
of
the
program
is
with
CMHC
we're
required
to
do
15
percent
below
15
percent
improvement
over
the
2015
energy
code,
which
is
about
a
10
15
percent
improvement
to
the
code.
That
was
five
years
previous
to
that,
this
project
has
been
tested,
will
come
out
at
about
27%
above
the
energy
code
and
about
35
percent
carbon
cut
compared
to
model
buildings
in
today's
code.
D
Thank
you
so
the
we
know
that
you
know
deep
affordability
is,
you
know,
actually
the
30th
and
20th
percentile
the
50th
is
not
deeply
affordable.
Certainly,
but
can
you
just
explain
in
terms
of
average
market
rent,
what
the
50th
percentile
means
Syed?
Is
that
just
so
that
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
what
we're
talking
about
here
in
terms
of
forward
ability
I
get
that
it's
the
CMHC's
rental
initiative,
private
rental
initiative,
but
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
that
we're
not
talking
about
deep
affordability,
right,
I'm,
like
I,
might
have
wrecked.
P
Yep:
okay,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
yet
to
enter
the
question.
So
CMHC's
program
is
based
on
the
the
median
income
percent
oz
for
the
City
of
Ottawa,
so
the
median
income
percentile
for
Ottawa
right
now
is
sorry.
The
yeah
the
median
come
presenters
about
105
thousand
now
the
rents
that
I
think
mr.
Malhotra
is
talking
about,
would
be
around
between
1600
and
1355
a
month.
I
would.
O
P
Say
she'll
be
able
to
afford
between
1,400
to
1,500
dollars
a
month
in
rent.
Now,
that's
that's.
The
official
plan
requirement
for
affordable
housing
on
the
rental
side,
with
respect
to
housing
services
in
the
programs
that
we
provide
under
action,
auto
on
other,
affordable
housing
programs.
We
tend
to
use
the
average
market,
rent
and
percentages
of
that,
so
a
one-bedroom
unit
right
now
goes
for
1088
and
eighty
percent
of
that
would
be.
You
know,
eight
hundred
and
some
dollars,
for
example,
or
or
less
so
we're
dealing
with
two
different
sets
of
affordability
requirements.
P
So
the
the
the
affordability
under
CMHC
would
be
what
we
will
call
middle
market.
You
know
rents,
for
you
know,
for
you,
know
typical
households
or
or
lower
two
meeting,
an
income
households
in
the
city
of
Ottawa
and
then
when
we
talk
about
the
deeper
affordability,
we're
really
talking
about
subsidized
housing
at
the
average
market,
rent
or
less
okay,.
O
O
So
if
I
was
building
this,
this
full
private
market
project,
what
did
I
charge?
I
can't
charge
that
much
so
that
affects
the
entirety
of
the
building.
The
180
units
are
meeting
to
come
back
to
that
definition,
30%
of
the
50th
percentile
you
take
that
number
and
multiply
it
by
70%.
That
is,
180
units
are
meeting
that
criteria.
Okay,.
O
A
K
Thank
you
for
the
question,
madam
chair.
It
should
be
important
to
note
here
that
there
are
actually
two
road
windings
and
three
pedestrian
easements
that
were
taking
through
the
site
plan
control
process.
That's
associated
with
this
rezoning.
So
on
Albert
the
city
is
appropriating
1.25
metres,
that's
going
to
be
dedicated
toward
city
land
and
point
nine
meters
along
Lion
and
then
further
to
that.
Beyond
that
distance
there
are
pedestrian
easement,
so
there's
0.25
along
Albert
1.25
along
Lion
and
2.5
along
Queen.
K
One
meters
and
that's
a
result
of
the
LRT
stations
actually
built
1.5
1.1
meters
and
the
building
just
builds
on
top
of
it,
which
is
what
our
real
estate
department
actually
desired
for
protection
of
the
LRT
spot,
but
that
2.5
meters
is
a
pedestrian
easement,
so
so
keeps
old,
and
so
that
will
be
protected
for
pedestrians
wandering
around
the
downtown
and
those
hatch
lines
along
Queen
and
all
along
Albert
are
road,
widening
x'.
So
it
does
seem
like
we're,
taking
more
we're
taking
a
less
of
a
setback
along
those
two
streets.
K
D
K
D
D
That
we're,
on
top
of
a
light
rail
station
I'm,
assuming
that
a
lot
of
the
visitors
will
be
coming
via
our
new
train,
and
you
know
they
they
can.
Actually,
you
know,
bring
bikes
with
them
and
be
able
to
move
around
in
that.
You
know
in
the
downtown
once
they're
here
so
certainly
to
have
more
bike.
Parking
is
always
encourages,
alternate
modes
of
transfer.
You
know
transportation.
A
O
Well,
there
is
in
the
in
the
design,
there's
a
level
on
the
first
floor
that
I
think
is
meant
to
be
a
little
bit
more
flexible.
On
the
sorry
on
the
p1
floor,
that's
some
flexibility.
You
know
we
can
work
I'm
happy
to
work
with
the
city,
I
mean
what
we're
dealing
with
here
and
we're
not
just
dealing
with
the
LRT,
but
then
we're
also
dealing
with
three
bus
stations
around
the
LRT
station,
and
that's
that's
become
more
the
constraint
of
what
you're
putting
in
terms
of
sidewalk
furniture.
O
E
E
E
O
E
Question
sure
the
reason
this
is
so
important
is
because
this
is
transit
oriented
it's
going
near
transit
and
we've
talked
about
affordability
as
a
key
component
of
these
types
of
developments,
and
so
I
don't
want
to
say
that
we're
just
gonna
get
away
with
saying.
There's
gonna
be
affordability
here,
because
you
have
the
potential
to
have
a
project
agreement
with
the
federal
government.
What
what
I
want
to
know
is,
do
you
have
a
project
agreement
in
place
right
now
with
the
federal
government
for
this
program?
The.
A
What
we're
talking
about
is
this
application
and
how
the
affordable
housing
part
came
up.
Is
the
question
that
came
from
the
local
counselor,
who
raises
it
at
every
application,
quite
frankly,
and
she
will
at
every
other
one
that
comes
along
to
this
is
not
a
meeting
to
discuss
that
in
your
free
judge.
Have
that
greater
discussion
at
community
Protective,
Services,
Committee
I'm
sure
that
counselors
sides
would
be
interested
in
this.
E
So
I'm
just
gonna
finished
if
I
can
chair
the
the
reason
why
this
is
important
is
because
sometimes
these
applications
hinge
on
things
like
affordability
and
so
I
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
it
right
that
it's
not
going
to
come
back
and
say:
actually
we
don't
have
a
project
room
with
them
at
the
end
of
the
day
and
so
and
because
I
helped
implement
this
program.
I
know
about
the
eligibility
criteria
and
their
most
recent
2019
program
that
exists
out
there.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
on
what
it
is.
E
O
E
Loan
commitment
is
a
10
year
commitment
and
there
are
other
social
outcomes
that
we're
trying
to
meet
here:
energy
efficiency
requirements
as
well,
absolutely
and
then
the
accessibility
requirements
yeah
those
those
are
the
three
pieces
of
the
affordability,
the
accessibility
and
the
energy
efficiency.
Yes,
so
I,
just
just
I,
think
it's
important
that
we.
If,
if
we're
going
to
approve
applications,
we
should
have
project
agreements
in
hand.
E
If
we're
talking
about
affordability
in
these
types
of
buildings
and
how
important
it
is
to
the
city
going
forward,
so
I
just
I
you
that
you're
working
with
the
federal
government
on
this
and
that
there
could
be
affordable
housing,
but
there's
no
there's
no
guarantee
of
that
in
this
project.
At
this
point,
can
we
just
get
clarification,
there's
no
guarantee
of
affordable
housing
and
in
the
project?
Well,.
A
P
K
Thank
you
for
the
question,
madam
chair
right
now:
the
parking
it's
a
surface
majority
surface
parking
lot
and
they're
approximately
130
spaces
there
now
and
through
this
rezoning.
One
of
the
asks
is
to
add
a
parking
garage
used
to
the
zone
and
that
allows
the
owner
to
rent
spaces
to
people
who
don't
live
there
and
they.
My
understanding
from
talking
to
the
applicant,
is
that
they
anticipate
to
rent
about
the
equivalent
amount
so
130
spaces
underground.
Okay,.
O
I'll
just
add
something
I
guess
antidotal
to
that.
It's
most
of
the
parking
lot
has
been
out
of
commission
for
fewers
during
the
construction
of
the
LRT
station,
about
half
of
it
I
would
say:
I
don't
know
if
I
have
an
exact
number,
but
I
would
guess.
The
half
of
the
remaining
lot
has
been
LRT
labor,
so
it's
sort
of
its
dissipated
into
the
marketplace
anyways,
because
the
LRT
kind
of
took
over
a
good
chunk
of
the
state.
Well,.
A
A
A
You
know
now
that
we
passed
it
I
just
want
to
say
that
I'm
very
excited
is
when
we
opened
the
Confederation
line.
You
know
we
the
more.
We
can
populate
the
areas
where
people
will
be
using
this
I
mean
you
know
we
we've
lost
well.
We
haven't
started
on
the
lebreton
piece
that
we
were
really
counting
on
so
I'm
I'm
I'm
pleased
about
this,
but
thank
you
so
now
we're
going
to
go
to
our
added
item,
which
is
that
bill
won
wait.
So
mr.
A
A
J
J
Like
to
introduce
mr.
Garrett
Shrum
from
our
legal
services
group,
he
works
with
mr.
Marc
he's
recently
joined
the
city,
I'm,
not
sure
all
members
of
committee
have
met,
and
yet
you
will
see
him
involved
in
in
planning
application
files
with
the
rest
of
the
legal
services
team.
He's
worked
directly
with
me
in
the
development
of
this
response
to
the
province,
as
have
staff
from
other
parts
of
the
department
and
other
departments
to
provide
an
input
into
it.
E
J
Mr.
vice
chair
in
the
council
report
recommending
we're
asking
councils
authority
to
send
a
delegation
to
a
standing
committee
of
the
legislature.
Should
the
province
actually
hold
that
we're
not
a
hundred
percent
sure
they
will,
but
should
they
hold
it?
We
through
this
report,
seek
Authority.
The
recommendation
of
is
is
that
they
to
be
the
chair
planning
committee,
the
chair
of
Iraq,
because
they
also
have
a
planning
component
of
responsibility
with
support
from
legal
services
and
myself.
Should
the
delegation
go
forward
to
represent
the
city's
Commission?
Okay.
A
M
There
are
a
couple
of
areas,
though,
where
I'm
gonna
be
looking
for
some
further
color.
The
key
one
for
me
is
section
37,
I,
think
mister
Willis.
You
probably
saw
the
the
op-ed
that
I
published
in
the
paper.
Recently
staff
doesn't
seem
to
be
addressing
the
elimination
of
section
37
in
this
letter.
What
what
is
staffs
position
if
it
were
up
to
me,
we'd,
be
addressing
it
very
forcefully.
But
what
is
staff
thinking
in
focusing
on
development
charge,
Act
changes
and
cash
in
new
changes
and
not
section
37,
so.
J
On
the
one
hand,
the
new
legislation
offers
a
very
transparent,
very
clear
process
about
how
community
benefits
would
be
determined
and
applied
to
a
project.
So
in
one
sense
the
met
I
actually
think
there's
some
benefits
to
what
they're
proposing
I.
We
do
not
like
that
in
doing
so,
they're
attacking
so
many
other
areas
that
we
think
have
benefit
in
the
city.
So
if
we
would
have
a
community
benefits
charge
and
still
had
parkland
dedication
and
cash
in
lieu
that
might
actually
be
better
system
than
we
have
today.
That's
why
staff
didn't
feel
that
was.
J
M
You
you
know
my
argument
around
section
37,
which
is
that
in
fact,
it
has
done
I
think
a
great
deal
of
good
in
the
city
I've
spoken
about.
You
know
the
the
the
very
nimble
way
in
which
I
can
respect
the
intention
of
section
37
I
understand
absolutely.
It
can
only
be
spent
on
capital.
I,
absolutely
understand
the
OMB
s,
insistence
on
the
geographic
nexus
between
the
benefit
and
the
the
intensification
that
it's
intended
to
mitigate
I.
M
Don't
like
the
notion
of
simply
throwing
some
unspecified
amount
of
money
into
a
very
tightly
defined,
parameter
program
that
eliminates
the
potential
to
put
new
water
infrastructure
into
a
public
square.
So
we
can
flood
a
rink
put
money
into
an
affordable
housing
fund.
Do
the
things
very
nimbly
at
the
local
level
that
helped
to
mitigate
the
worst
effects
of
intensification
I
can't
help
but
think
that
the
section
30
sir,
the
community
benefit
fund
is
going
to
see
the
city
collect
less
money.
It's
going
to
centralize
decision-making.
J
Reiterate
that,
if
that's
committees
will
we
are
quite
prepared
to
do
so.
As
I
said
this,
this
is
a
double-edged
sword
on
this
particular
issue.
One
comment
I
failed
to
make
which
I
should
have
made
is
one
of
the
parts.
That's
not
explicit
in
the
legislation,
but
it
is.
There
is
the
underlying
ability
of
the
province
to
force
us
to
deal
with
discrepancies
between
the
Official
Plan
and
the
zoning
bylaws,
so
they
in
doing
so
may
eliminate
our
ability
use
a
section
37.
Should
they
do
that?
J
So
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
considerations
we
had
in
mind
is:
if
they
go
ahead
and
say:
if
the
intention
is
you
up,
Zone
in
around
transit
stations,
for
example,
and
you're
required
to
have
your
zoning
in
conformity
with
your
zoning
bylaw
with
your
official
planner
right
away
right,
we
won't
even
be
able
to
use
section
37
in
that
instance.
So
it's
sort
of
a
double-edged
on
that
one.
But
again
we
will
take
committees
will
on
that
I.
M
To
this
point,
we've
been
holding
off
up
zoning
in
areas
where
we
know
that
secondary
plans
contemplate
up
zoning,
but
it
is
going
to
be
quite
a
while
before
we
have
everything
properly
up
zone
2
what
we
actually
anticipate
Heights
are
going
to
be,
and
in
the
meantime,
the
the
section
37
section
of
the
Planning
Act
has
made
a
measurable
difference
in
the
quality
of
life
of
the
residents
who
live
in
the
most
rapidly
intensifying
areas
and
I.
Don't
know
how
to
proceed
with
asking
you
to
do
more.
Of
that
with
me.
A
E
A
M
Know
yeah
you've
heard
my
concerns
and
I
received
yeah
if
others
agree
great
they'll
weigh
and
obviously
I
think
staff
have
taken
the
appropriate
direction
in
not
objecting
to
the
resurrection
of
de
novo
hearings,
but
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
on
the
record
of
this
committee
that
I
and
colleagues
absolutely
object
to
the
return
of
de
novo
hearings.
I
think
that
they,
the
government,
has
very
deliberately
removed
the
deference
that
the
previous
government
was
giving
to
locally
of
elected
officials.
I
also
understand
I
brought
that
motion
to
Council
in
the
last
term.
M
It
failed
and
so
I
get
that
you
don't
think
that
there's
going
to
be
consensus,
if
we
try
to
push
back
at
that,
but
going
back
to
de
novo
hearings
simply
introduces
a
whole
new
level
of
time
and
expense,
particularly
to
community
members,
and
it's.
It
is
an
inappropriate
clawback
of
input
by
the
province
into
into
local
planning
matters.
So
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that's
on
the
radar.
M
J
J
There
are
certain
applications
that
come
through
today
and
we
don't
meet
timelines
because
there
are
technical
issues
that
come
up
engineering
issues,
community
consultation
issues
the
like,
and
it's
very
rare
in
the
city
of
auto
right
now
that
any
one
appeals
us
for
lack
of
decision
on
the
timeline
and,
frankly,
any
developer
who
chooses
to
do
so,
gets
in
a
very
long
line
at
the
local
planning.
Appeals
Tribunal
in
order
to
get
a
decision
out
of
them
and
they'd
be
far
better
served
to
work
to
work
with
us
to
get
through
council's
decision.
M
Lastly,
with
the
chairs
indulgence,
the
there
are
several
components
to
the
document
there's
the
draft
letter,
and
then
we
have
the
very
specific
comments
in
behind
there's
a
bullet
list.
In
the
main
letter
below
our
ottawa's
main
concerns,
you
haven't
included
the
changes
to
the
inclusionary
zoning
regime.
M
The
bill
108
proposes
limiting
inclusionary
zoning
to
areas
around
transit.
The
city
has
made
mention
in
the
the
detailed
portion
that
we
would
prefer
to
have
the
flexibility
to
implement
inclusionary
zoning
wherever
we
think
it
would
do
the
most
good.
Can
you
highlight
that
in
the
main
letter
included
in
that
bullet
list,
chair.
J
Just
clarify
one
quick
thing:
first
of
all,
yes,
we
absolutely
can
add
that,
to
the
main
letter
very
comfortable,
to
reiterate
that
comment
in
it
one
of
the
things
the
legislation
allows.
It
does
allow
us
to
apply
inclusionary
zoning
in
areas
not
around
transit
stations,
but
we
have
to
accept
a
development
permit
rule
and
it
has
to
go
through
an
approval
of
the
minister.
So
our
approach
within
the
letter
is
saying:
okay,
that's!
J
If
we
have
to
do
it,
we'll
go
there,
but
we
would
prefer
they
actually
simplified
it
for
us
or
be
open-minded,
but
we
would
based
on
our
initial
analysis,
of
where
we
would
have
to
apply
inclusionary
zoning
right
now.
It
tends
to
cluster
in
the
areas
of
transit
stations.
To
begin
with,
so
I
think
our
approach,
wise
will
start
there
and
if
we
want
to
go
further
council
will
ask
the
ministry
for
the
appropriate
approvals
later
on
to
go
further.
We
just
would
rather
not
it,
be
tied
to
develop
a
permit
system
absolutely.
M
M
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
My
question.
Mr.
Willis
is
around
the
park
the
building
of
the
parks.
It
seems
that
that's
one
area
of
this
bill
that
it's
not
clear
what
we're
going
to
do
with
it
now
under
the
work
of
the
the
chair
on
building
better
suburbs
and
the
last
tournament
council.
One
of
the
things
we
did
was
we
heard
from
people
around
the
city
that
it
was
an
issue
that,
in
new
developments,
parks
were
sometimes
10
years
behind
the
people
moving
into
their
houses.
I
And
so
we
worked
with
the
sponsor
group
and
advanced
the
building
of
the
parks
too,
before
people
move
into
the
homes
by
having
the
developers
build
them
themselves
to
the
city
standards
and
then
the
city
and
comes
in
and
inspects
afterwards
to
make
sure
those
standards
are
achieved.
But
we've
had
very
good
results
with
that,
and
so,
when
I
first
read
this
legislation,
I
thought,
maybe
they
were
applying
not
across
the
province
that
building
the
parks
would
still
be.
The
city
would
set
the
standard
and
follow
it
up,
but
now
the
full
responsibility,
the
developer.
J
Cherries
we
review
the
legislation
and
it
may
be
one
of
those
things
that
we
won't
know.
Until
we
see
the
regulations,
we
don't
see
the
province
reflecting
the
good
work
we've
been
doing
in
that
area.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
we
see
a
jeopardy
to
the
development
of
parks
citywide,
whether
it
be
suburban
or
urban,
and
and
also
community
centers
and
community
facilities,
for
example.
Under
this
model,
I
cannot
imagine
the
rich
craft
Center
being
built
under
this
model.
We
would
not
be
able
to
do
what
we
did
in
that
version.
I
I'm
wondering
Madame
sheriff.
Maybe
we
should
send
a
copy
of
the
building
better
suburbs
report
to
the
Minister
for
comments
on
bill.
108
that
you
know
exactly
what
mr.
Willis
just
said.
We
did
a
lot
of
advancements
with
that
project
that
you
and
I
and
councilor
Blay
have
seen
it
in
our
suburban
wards,
especially
the
difference
at
as
me
to
get
these
parks
built
up
front
has
been
a
big
improvement
and
clarification
around
that,
because
there's
mr.
Wilson
say
I
can't
believe
that
any
government
would
be
proposing
stop
building
parks.
I
A
And
we
spend
about
five
years
on
that
too,
and
it
has
many
difference
and
you
know
valuing
the
land
more
using
it
better.
Those
basic
concepts
and
having
people
being
bringing
people
back
to
shared
space
I
think
that
that's
very
worthwhile,
it
probably
would
be
best
to
go
through
the
ministry
staff
I
would
think
to
have
that
before
them
and,
as
mr.
Willis
said,
he's
looking
for
a
meeting
and
that's
something
for
sure.
We
will
include.
I
A
I
think
I
think
that
that
let's
face
it,
you
know
if
we
go
to.
If
you
go
to
any
Minister
I
mean
they
have
a
chief
of
staff,
it
goes
down
to
the
people.
He
has
the
context
that
he's
working
with
at
his
level.
It
just
gets
it
where
you
want
it
to
go
faster
and
then
he
can
have
that
conversation
and
then
we
take
it
politically.
J
Jerry
as
I
agree
with
the
chairs
position
on
this,
that
that
we
can
absolutely
provide
this
to
ministry
staff
as
part
of
the
backup
to
our
comments
and
should
part
of
the
report
recommends
that
we
ask
the
minister
for
a
meeting
with
much
the
same
group.
Even
if
we
don't
get
the
chance
to
do
it
before
the
legislature,
and
we
can
absolutely
bring
that
to
that
meeting
as
well.
It's.
I
A
matter
I'm
just
thinking
and
I'll
wrap
up
here.
The
other
part
of
what
we
did
was
to
deal
with
the
stormwater
management,
and
there
was
significant
savings
for
the
city
as
well
as
towards
the
cost
of
development,
but
the
changes
we
put
in
there,
so
it's
more
than
just
putting
in
place
structures
in
a
park,
it's
a
whole
use
of
the
public
peace.
A
J
Chair
I,
just
just
just
from
a
process
perspective
to
advise
you
so
we're
looking
for
committee
to
adopt
the
staff
recommendations.
The
the
four
parts
is
to
receive
the
letter.
Allow
the
mayor
to
sign
this
letter.
Should
council
agree
along
with
the
table,
ask
for
a
chance
to
depute
in
front
of
the
standing
committee.
Should
there
be
the
opportunity
asks
for
a
delegation
to
meet
with
the
minister
if
possible
as
well?
So
that's
the
elements
of
the
recommendation.
A
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Therefore,
it
be
resolved
that
staff
be
directed
to
review
the
comments
and
additional
proposed
amendments
of
document,
one
and
two
made
by
Planning
Committee
members
at
the
meeting
on
May
23rd
2019,
and
that
the
staff
advise
council
by
way
of
memorandum
prior
to
the
June
12th
council
meeting
on
the
implications
of
each.
If
any
and
prepare
a
revised
document,
one
and
two
for
councils,
consideration
and
recommendations
and
endorsement.
M
J
So,
just
quickly,
just
that
the
recap.
So
before
the
main
letter
and
the
table
we've
been
asked
to
toughen
the
language
on
section
37,
the
current
version
of
section
37
we've
been
asked
to
relay
the
comments
from
the
table
into
the
main
letter
about
the
inclusionary
zoning
we
have
I,
don't
believe
we
received
I
believe
that
committee
was
satisfied
with
my
response
on
timelines.
I
A
Thank
you
I
think,
that's
it.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
on
so
we're
adjourned.
There's
no
other
business.
Any
inquiry
such
of
that,
let's
be
formal
here.
Any
inquiries
notices
a
motion,
other
business,
okay,
we're
adjourned
and
we'll
be
back
here
on
Thursday
June.
The
13th
almost
feels
like
a
holiday.
A
It's
like
three
three
weeks
well,
you're
getting
a
big
break
because
after
the
27th
we're
not
having
another
planning
meeting
until
wait
for
it
the
end
of
August,
because
your
chair
looked
at
the
schedule
and
said
you
know
what
like
council
last
meetings,
July
the
10th
we're
we're
scheduled
to
meet
July
11th,
so
July
11th.
None
of
that
would
go
to
council
until
the
end
of
August,
and
we
have
a
planning
meeting
before
that
the
week
before
that
last
council
meeting
in
August,
so
bonus
I
know:
oh
yeah,
yes,
it'll
be.