►
From YouTube: Planning Committee - April 14, 2022
Description
Planning Committee - April 14, 2022
Agenda and supporting documents available at www.ottawa.ca/agendas
A
Well,
should
we
should
we
get
started
it's
just
after
9
30.
good
morning,
everyone
I'll
start
with
our
land
acknowledgement.
We
acknowledge
that
ottawa
is
located
on
the
unseated
territory
of
the
algonquin
anishinaabe
nation,
whose
culture
and
presence
have
nurtured
and
continued
to
nurture
this
land.
D
A
A
Thanks
kelly
and
counselor,
curry
is
advised
that
she
is
at
a
hydro
ottawa
board
meeting
this
morning,
so
she
may
join
us
in
progress
if
she
can.
This
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
items
two
to
ten
on
today's
agenda.
A
For
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
oral
submissions
today
or
written
permissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
ontario
land
tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
ontario
land
tribunal.
If
council
does
not
adopt
an
amendment
within
90
days
of
receipt
of
the
application
for
a
zoning
by-law
amendment
and
120
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment
to
submit
written
comments
on
these
amendments
prior
to
their
consideration
by
city
council
on
april
27,
2022,
please
email
or
call
the
committee
or
council
coordinator.
A
A
A
Item
number
two
is
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
3713,
boris
o'kane
road
in
rito,
goldburn
councilor
moffatt
has
a
technical
amendment.
There
are
no
delegations
registered
for
this
item.
Are
there
any
any
committee
members
want
to
hold
this
one
so
counselor
moffat?
Why
don't
you
introduce
your
technical
amendment
to
start
with.
E
Thank
you
aware,
as
staff
identified
further
reviewed,
that's
right
that
makes
no
sense
staff
identified
and
further
reviewed
the
asset
management
applications
of
report
acs.
E
It
has
been
confirmed
that
there
is
sufficient
capacity
in
the
existing
water
wastewater
storm
infrastructure
systems
to
accommodate
the
proposed
development
assets
acquired
through
development
of
these
lands
will
add
to
the
city's
inventory
for
operations
and
maintenance,
as
well
as
life
cycle,
renewal
and
replacement
in
the
long
term,
in
order
to
maintain
stormwater
recharge
in
the
car's
esker.
A
local
geological
feature
that
contributes
to
base
flow
in
the
jock
river.
This
subdivision
will
use
a
unique
stormwater
management
system
within
the
road
right
away,
commonly
referred
to
as
the
etobicoke
ex
filtration
system.
E
A
Now
I
see
eric
pillow
from
the
clerk's
office
with
the
handout
eric
did
you
have
a
comment
or
something
to
raise?
E
A
Okay,
thank
you
eric.
So
there's
a
representative
from
the
applicant
lisa
dela
rosa
from
fo
10,
is
here
lisa.
We
have
no
delegations
and
there's
no
questions
from
committee
members.
If
we're
prepared
to
carry
this
item,
do
you
wish
to
speak
today.
A
A
Item
number
three
we
will
hold
because
there
is
a
delegation
registered
item.
Number
four
is
official
plan
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
335
and
339,
roosevelt
avenue,
344,
wilson
avenue
and
379
and
389
wilmont
avenue.
There's
a
motion
for
deferral
from
councillor
leeper.
D
Thanks
there
are
some
administrative
issues
that
require
this
to
be
deferred.
I
note
the
344
wilson
avenue
is
actually
344
winston
avenue
so
there's
so,
rather
than
read
everything
I'm
just
going
to
say
therefore
be
resolved.
The
planning
committee
defer
the
item
until
the
april
28
2022
planning
committee
and
authorize
a
revised
report
to
be
submitted
to
committee,
with
notice
being
provided.
A
Thanks
jeff,
yes,
the
corner
of
winston
and
wilmot
is
the
deferral
motion
carried
then
very,
very
varied,
so
we'll
consider
that
at
the
next
meeting
number
five
is
a
zoning
pilot
amendment
for
841
845
and
855
grenin
avenue
in
bayward.
There
are
no
delegations
registered,
I
see
counselor
kavanaugh
is
here.
G
I'll
just
put
in
comments
since
there's
no
delegations,
I
spoke
to
residents
and
they
did
express
their
concern
on
the
loss
of
parking.
This
is
a
street
that
does
not
have
very
much
parking
and
they
have
big
concerns
about
the
fact
that
the
parking
is
being
reduced
because
there
is
very
little
in
the
neighborhood
and
the
bus
service
is
not
beside
a
transit
station,
so
it
will
require
connecting
to
a
transit
station.
So
therefore,
it's
not
transit
oriented
development.
There.
G
Therefore,
it
should
have
had
more
parking
in
in
relation
to
to
this
site.
However,
I
I
do
understand
that
we're
trying
to
encourage
people
to
use
transit-
and
I
hope
that
we'll
have
improved
transit
in
that
area,
because
at
the
moment
it's
it
it
it's
its
concern.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thanks
counselor,
so
we
do
have
representatives
from
the
applicant
here,
james
ireland
and
murray
chown.
If
the
committee
is
prepared
to
carry
this,
do
you
wish
to
speak
on
the
item.
B
A
Carried
thank
you
item
number
six:
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
1300
nick
waters,
road
in
college
ward.
Again
we
have
no
delegations
registered.
I
don't
see
the
ward
counselor
on
the
call
we
do
have
representatives
from
the
applicant
here:
gadi
zaki,
paul
black
from
foten
and
rod
leahy
from
leahy
architects.
A
Okay,
thank
you
so,
on
the
zoning
buy
amendment
for
1300
mcwaters
wrote
are
the
report
recommendations
carried
carried
carried?
Thank
you.
A
E
Thank
you.
Whereas
document
one
of
report-
dcs
2022,
pi
eps-0032,
amends
the
city
of
ottawa
zoning
by
law
and
whereas
the
proposed
staff
recommendation
were
intended
to
reflect
the
proposed
zoning
as
contained
document.
One
therefore
be
resolved
that,
with
respect
to
report,
acs
2022
ieps-0032
planning
committee
recommends
council
approve
the
following
revised
recommendation:
one
that
planning
committee
recommend
council
approve
an
amendment
to
zoning
by
law.
2008-250-4775-4875.
E
To
residential
fourth
density,
sub-zone,
zed,
residential
fourth
density
sub
zone
z,
with
an
exception
and
maximum
permitted
height
of
14
meters,
open
space,
minor
institutional
and
mixed
use
to
permit
a
new
residential
subdivision,
as
detailed
document
two
therefore
be
further
resolved,
then
there'll
be
no
further
notice.
Pursuant
to
section
3417
of
the
planning
act,.
A
Okay,
so
we
do
have
representatives
from
the
applicant
nadia
desanti
from
wsp
and
marcel
denomay
from
riverside
south
development
corp.
If
the
committee's
prepared
to
carry
this
item,
do
you
wish
to
speak
on
it.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
So,
let's
deal
with
the
technical
amendment
for
chair
moffett's
technical
amendment
is
that
carried
carried
out
carried
and
then
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
4775
and
4875
sprat
road,
as
amended
as
the
report
recommendations
carried
as
amended.
I
G
A
A
A
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Co-Chair
item
number.
Nine
is
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
745,
sir
john,
a
macdonald
parkway
and
234
atlantis
avenue
for
the
reconstruction
of
westborough
beach.
We
have
no
delegations
on
this
item.
There
are
two
representatives
from
the
applicant
any
did
you
have
any
comments,
counselor
leaper
or
we
could.
D
No,
I
just
I
mean.
Obviously
the
entire
community
is
extremely
excited
by
this.
It
offers
the
opportunity
for
the
whole
city
to
get
to
know
westboro
beach,
as
the
facility
is
upgraded
to
include
better
amenity,
restaurant
and
and
facilities
like
that.
So
I
am
looking
forward
to
welcoming
everyone
in
ottawa
to
westboro
beach
when
this
reopens
and
to
the
residents
of
westboro
beach.
Thank
you
for
your
patience
this
summer.
While
the
beach
is
closed,.
A
Thanks
councilor
leeper,
so
from
the
ncc
we
have
patricia
mccann
macmillan
and
andrew
sacret
from
the
national
capital
commission.
If
the
committee
is
ready
to
carry
this
item,
do
either
of
you
wish
to
speak
on
it
today,.
A
F
A
Carried
thank
you
item
number
10
is
a
city
of
ottawa,
zoning
bylaw,
2008-250,
omnibus
amendments,
q2
2022.,
any
questions
or
requests
to
hold
for
this
one.
A
All
right,
then,
is
the
are
these
report
recommendations
carried.
K
A
Married
okay,
I
think
we
could
deal
with
number
12
as
well,
but
it's
a
motion
that
I
introduce
so
I'll
hand
the
chair
to
councillor
moffat.
This
is
the
motion
changes
to
the
development
charges
act,
which
was
initiated
by
staff.
E
All
right
thanks
councillor
gower
did
you
want
to
introduce
your
motion.
A
Well,
the
report
recommendations
it's
around
the
development
charge,
deferral
rates
so
that
the
2022
developer,
charge
development
charge
deferral
rate,
be
an
average
of
the
2020
in
2021
inclusive,
representing
a
rate
of
point,
eight
three
percent
plus
the
standard,
zero
point:
five
percent
administrative
adjustment
for
a
total
rate
of
six
point,
three
three
percent
and
that
this
rate
be
effective,
beginning
on
may,
first,
twenty
twenty
two
through
to
march
thirty,
first,
twenty
twenty
three
inclusive
and
that
these
rates
be
applied
for
the
duration
of
the
deferral
installments
over
five
or
20
years,
and
any
locked
in
development
charge
rates
over
this
time
frame
and
staff
are
available
for
questions.
E
E
A
All
right
thanks
thanks
coach,
moffitt,
okay,
let's
go
that's
all
the
items
so
we'll
go
back
to
the
bidding
beginning
we've
held
three
items
then
the
first
one
we
held
was
the
planning
real
estate
and
economic
development
department.
2021
year
end
report.
We
do
have
a
staff
presentation,
I
believe
it's
charmaine
forgi
who's,
doing
the
presentation
and
steve
willis
is
here
as
well.
Actually
chair.
L
I'll
be
doing
the
presentation
quickly
and
happy
to
answer
some
questions
related
to
this.
Xiaomi
will
be
assisting
me
with
any
comments
on
this,
and
certainly
our
her
team
helped
prepare
the
statistics
that
are
the
backbone
of
this
presentation.
L
So
there
are
a
few
references
to
infrastructure
services
in
this
presentation,
but
as
councils
aware,
that's
no
longer
part
of
our
department
in
2022
next
slide.
Please,
I
think
the
most
important
thing
I
can
say
to
committee
and
to
express
very
publicly
my
thanks
to
the
team
of
planning
real
estate
and
economic
development
is
that
our
department
managed
to
maintain
business
continuity
through
the
pandemic,
which
was
no
mean
feat.
It
was
a
very,
very
significant
operational
shift
for
us
in
a
number
of
ways.
L
We
continued
to
improve
on
what
we
learned
in
2020
and
it
was
in
it.
It
was
almost
a
record
year
for
all
application
types,
so
layering
those
two
things
together.
It
was
an
absolutely
unbelievable
year.
We
kept
all
of
our
service
centers
running
with
safety
measures
in
place,
including
supply
supplies,
barriers
and
scheduled
appointments.
L
In
many
instances,
staff
did
leave
the
department
to
support
functions
of
ottawa,
public
health,
where
we
were
able
to
help
out
on
that
and
our
infrastructure
services
team
was
able
to
react
very
quickly
for
a
need
for
an
additional
kogit
testing
site
at
rail.
Free
arena,
which
was
a
you
know,
put
dental
work
and
make
that
a
top
priority
right
away.
L
So
I
want
to
express
my
personal
thanks
to
each
and
every
employee
of
the
department
in
building
code
services,
planning
services,
right
away,
heritage
and
urban
design,
economic
development,
long
range
planning,
transportation,
planning,
business
and
technical
support,
services
and
infrastructure
services
for
the
dedication
and
commitment
to
providing
services
to
the
city,
continuing
our
business
of
city
building
during
the
pandemic.
Next
slide,
please,
as
I
indicated
it,
was
a
near
record
year
in
many
areas,
and
it
was
a
record
year
in
certain
types
of
applications
building
inspections.
L
We
did
over
77
almost
77
000
inspections
over
the
course
of
the
year,
which
showed
the
intense
level
of
construction
activity
in
ottawa.
We
broke.
We
hit
our
record
10
000
permit
level
much
earlier
in
the
year
than
we
normally
hit,
and
that
also
includes
a
number
of
very
technical
inspections,
including
almost
20
000
mechanical
inspections
and
24.5
000
plumbing
inspections
next
slide.
Please.
L
They
helped
us
produce
251
committee
reports
to
various
committees
and
councils
over
the
year,
which
I
think
is
probably
adds
to
other
that's
the
most
of
any
department
in
the
organization.
L
We
ran
644
stakeholder
engagement
activities
and,
if
you
think
about
that,
that's
like
that
is
effectively
two
plus
every
business
day
of
the
year
running
stakeholder
engagement
activities
and
we
handled
922
formal
inquiries
as
a
result
of
requesting
information
from
the
community.
Thank
you
next
slide.
L
Please
economic
development
and
long-range
planning,
in
addition
to
completing
the
new
official
plan,
which
is
a
very
significant
achievement
for
the
department
and
for
the
city
and
we're
very
pleased
that
that
near
unanimous
support
of
council
at
the
end
of
a
very
extensive
and
intense
process,
we
also
did
175
bylaws
drafted
to
provide
the
back
bone
support
of
zoning
approvals
in
the
city.
We
also
managed
grants
and
several
grant
programs.
So
we
had
two
grant
programs
and
we
had
a
number
of
retail
applications
as
well.
L
58
of
those
through
the
community
improvement
planning
process
planning
services
which
handles
all
the
development
approvals
had
almost
1400
applications
coming
in
the
door.
1191
of
them
were
approved
through
delegated
authority
and
there's
more
information
on
the
report
on
those
delegate.
Authority
used
and
184
items
came
through
comedian
council
for
approval,
because
they're
outside
of
delegated
authority
next
slide,
please
right
away
heritage
and
urban
design.
L
It
was
a
very,
very
busy
year
for
construction
activity
in
the
city,
so
there
were
almost
15
000
right-of-way
permits
issued
and
126
heritage
permits
issued
as
well,
which
is
it's
a
healthy
indication
that
our
heritage
stocks
being
taken
care
of
in
the
city
and
being
added
to
and
adapted
appropriately,
and
they
also
managed
the
development
review
process
handling
just
over
193
million
dollars
in
letters
of
credit
where
the
securities
we
take
through
the
process
to
ensure
the
conditions
that
we
impose
are
actually
executed
on
and
the
infrastructure
is
turned
over
in
adequate
shape
to
the
city
at
the
end
of
the
process,
and
so
that's
always
a
an
interesting
indicator
of
a
level
of
development
activity
every
year
and
that's
why
we
track
it.
L
Next
slide,
please,
so
we
have
a
number
of
initiatives
for
further
improvement.
You
will
see
information
in
the
report
on
our
timelines.
There
are
some
of
those
numbers
are
in
good
shape,
and
some
of
them
are
still
need
improvement.
Some
of
that
has
to
do
with
the
challenges
of
continuing
to
operate
in
in
an
adapted
mode
away
from
normal
operations
during
a
pandemic.
Some
of
it
has
to
do
with
the
high
volume
of
applications
we
received.
Some
of
it
has
to
do
with
the
complexity
of
the
applications
we
were
dealing
with.
L
So
the
department
has
a
program
of
continuous
improvement.
We
tackle
different
areas
every
year
to
try
to
improve
the
processes,
so
we
are
looking
at
our
fees
and
staffing
again,
and
I
think
the
bill
109
in
particular
is
going
to
mean
it's
absolutely
necessary
that
I'll
be
back
in
front
of
this
committee
with
a
look
at
both
of
those
issues
and
for
committee's
information.
L
I
was
informed
by
mr
mark
this
morning
that
bill
109
is
getting
likely
to
have
third
reading
today
in
the
legislation
ontario,
so
we
expect
it
to
imminently
be
law
in
ontario,
we're
also
doing
a
business
process
review
regarding
applications.
One
of
the
complex
engineering
questions
we
have
is
when
applicants
have
no
legal
outlet
for
storm
water
drainage
and
how
we
handle
that,
so
we're
reviewing
our
processes
in
tandem
with
infrastructure
and
water
services.
L
On
that
we
are
doing
various
pilot
projects
to
see
if
we
can
shorten
review
timelines
in
anticipation
of
bill
109,
we
feel
that
online
meetings
have
been
incredibly
successful.
Certainly
the
participation
rates
have
been
much
higher.
We've
had
a
high
degree
of
satisfaction
that
people
feel
it's
more
convenient
and
easy
to
participate
in
consultation
because
they
can
do
it
from
their
home
if
they
have
child
care
issues
or,
if
they're
busy,
trying
to
make
time
to
go
for
work.
L
It's
actually
quite
simple
to
get
online
in
a
meeting
wherever
they're
at
and
participate
in
it,
and
so
we
would
high
levels
of
satisfaction
on
you.
The
we
have
been
working
on
new
techniques
for
people
to
make
payment
to
us
to
move
away
from
traditional
checks
at
counters,
so
we're
working
on
digital
uploads
for
planning,
submissions
and
rolling
out
various
forms
of
e-payment.
L
Some
significant
changes
to
building
code
services
in
the
last
year
and
that
which
will
make
it
easier
for
anybody
applying
for
a
permit
and
we've
been
exploring
the
tool
the
province
has
had
in
place
for
a
number
of
years
and
wanting
us
to
look
at,
which
is
a
community
planning
permit
pilot
to
see
how
it
would
best
be
used
in
the
city
in
areas
where
what's
the
right
type
of
application.
L
L
So
I
just
at
this
point
happy
to
take
any
questions
from
committee
members
and
again
the
full
delegated
authority
report
that
people
are
interested
will
be
available
later
today,
and
the
department
publishes
just
some
user-friendly
annual
statistics
for
people
if
they're
interested.
A
Thank
you,
steve,
co-chair
moffitt
has
a
question.
E
Yeah
thanks,
I
just
just
touched
on
this.
I
know
it's,
it's
a
year-end
report
and
it's
focused
on
last
year,
but
it's
hard
not
to
to
look
ahead
to
what
that
means
and
what's
to
come
with
everything
going
on,
and
all
the
discussion
about
housing
and
planning
and
file
timelines,
the
province
and
the
federal
level
who
seem
to
want
to
give
us
money,
but
not
actually,
for
you
know
anything,
that's
operational,
but
you
know
some
undetermined
money
for
undetermined
things,
but
I
look
at
2021.
E
You
have
a
record
total
of
of
applications
and
we
have
we've
been
constantly
hitting
records
on
building
code
services
and
there's
a
lot
of
talk
about
processing
and
how
do
we
get
through
this
now?
I
personally
don't
necessarily
believe
that
money
has
been
our
issue.
You
know
we
have.
We
have
a
surplus
in
planning,
we
have
a
surplus
in
building
code
services.
E
E
So
just
curious,
you
know
what
what
we
can
do
here,
what
we
can
talk
about
here
to
sort
of
try
to
prepare
for
the
future.
I
I
don't
expect
with
with
bill
109,
it's
implementation
being
january
1st.
I
I'm
not
sure
I
expect
a
lot
of
site
plan
control
applications
over
the
next
several
months,
because
I
imagine
they'll
wait
until
a
bill.
109
is
in
effect,
but
if
we're
we're
planning
for
a
future,
if
we're
planning
for
reduced
timelines,
what
what
can
we
do
in
terms
of
a
staff,
the
staff
position?
L
L
Code
services-
I
remember
at
council-
I
think
it
was
two
years
ago-
counselor
al
shantiri,
directly
asked
me
at
the
time
if
I
was
asking
for
enough
in
terms
of
new
staffing
positions
and
building
code
services,
and
my
response
at
the
time
was
well,
we
still
had
a
lot
of
vacancies.
It
didn't
seem
appropriate
to
ask
for
more
until
we
at
least
filled
those
and
saw
where
we're
at.
L
It's
still
difficult
to
recruit
and
we
are
looking
at
our
competitiveness
as
a
as
an
employer
in
that
area
and
then
working
closely
with
hr
on
that
issue
and
the
chief
building
official,
we
will
be
coming
back
and
asking
for
some
additional
resources,
because
in
reflection
on
now
that
we
have
those
positions
in
place,
we
will
be
coming
back
and,
as
as
committee
is
aware,
building
code
is
funded.
It's
entirely
self-funded
from
the
planet,
the
building
code,
application
fees.
It
goes
into
a
dedicated
reserve.
It's
managed
entirely.
L
It's
self-contained
there's
no
impact
on
the
taxpayer
and
we
believe
that
we
can
provide
a
better
service
to
applicants
if
we
do
beef
up
that
service,
so
I
will
be
coming
with
a
report
to
committee
with
the
chief
building
official
for
some
additional
resources
in
that
area.
As
I
said,
I
didn't
want
to
do
it
until
we
filled
the
ones
we
already
had
approved.
Now
we're
asking
for
some
more
on
the
planning
timelines.
L
I
I
must
say
it's
we're
still
trying
to
assess
the
implications,
and
I
do
feel
that
we're
going
to
need
to
come
to
committee
and
talk
about
this
more
fully.
Looking
quickly
at
our
2021
report
and
our
timelines,
approximately
70
of
our
zoning
applications.
We
under
the
new
provincial
bill
109,
we
would
have
had
to
refund
the
fees
over
80
percent
of
our
site
plan
applications.
L
We
would
have
to
refund
fees.
So
this
new
formula
for
the
province.
It
puts
us
in
a
difficult
position
because
in
one
hand,
we're
project
we
always
have
to
project
how
many
applications
we
think
we're
going
to
get
and
set
the
revenue
part
of
the
budget
based
on
projections
and
then
the
actuals
come
in
later
and
then
we
set
staffing
levels
to
match
the
budget
to
keep
itself
contained
and
not
a
draw
on
the
taxpayers,
but
it's
very
difficult
to
project.
L
And
now,
if
we
have
an
in
money
in
and
then
money
back
out,
I
at
this
stage
of
the
game
we're
going
to
have
to
bring
forward
a
strategy
for
house
council
going
to
handle
this.
How
we're
going
to
analysis
higher
rates?
Is
this
tax
dollars
to
backstop
the
department?
Is
there
a
reserve
that
should
be
set
up
to
buffer
us
in
these
situations?
These
are
all
things
we're
going
to
need
to
explore.
L
You
know
get
people
in
positions
and
actually
do
work
and
contract
positions
have
been
very
difficult
because
the
staff
turnover
is
very
high
on
those
positions
we're
in
a
very
hot
labor
market.
Someone
taking
a
contract
position
will
not
stay
in
that
job
when
there's
a
permanent
job
opportunity
available
to
them
weeks
months
afterwards.
L
So
it's
been
very
difficult
for
the
department
to
create
stability
with
those
positions,
so
we'd
like
to
convert
some
of
those
contract
positions
to
permanent
positions,
to
reduce
the
churn
from
that
so
chair,
there's
so
much
more
that
I
could
say-
and
I
do
believe
it's
our
responsibility
to
bring
reports
back
to
you.
But
those
are
the
immediate
measures
that
we're
trying
to
take
to
adapt
to
the
new
legislation.
E
Well,
thanks
for
that
I
mean
I've.
Obviously
you
know
respecting
that
your
department
is
busy
with
everything
else
and
and
and
not
wanting
to
you
know,
put
you
on
the
spot
as
to
when
you
can
come
back
to
us,
but
I
think
this
committee
would
enjoy
a
conversation
about
that
about
how
we
can
address
the
the
contract
positions
and
look
at
more
permanent
positions
to
make
sure
that
we're
filling
those
roles
and
maintaining
the
staff
in
place.
There's
no
question
that
we
have
great
staff
at
our
planning
group.
E
I
think
we
all
work
with
them.
We
also
know
that
there's
been
a
number
of
departures,
retirements
and
whatnot,
which
which
creates
more
gaps,
and
it's
tough
if
you're,
constantly
filling
those
with
with
contract
roles
and
lower
spots.
So
you
know,
I
think,
with
the
will
of
committee.
I
would
I
wouldn't
mind
you
know
providing
that
direction
to
you
to
come
back
to
us
with
a
staffing
plan
as
to
how
we
can
address
the
needs
of
the
planning
department
with
respect
to
you
know,
bill
109,
other
things.
E
This
isn't
the
only
we're
not
the
only
municipality.
That's
talking
about
staffing
and
the
the
impact
on
taxpayers
when
it
comes
to
some
of
the
regulation
we're
seeing
in
bill
109
and
some
of
the
the
punitive
measures
that
we're
seeing
from
from
the
taxpayer
perspective
in
terms
of
covering
costs
of
applications
that
don't
meet
the
timelines.
E
It's
tough
because
you
know
we
all
understand
that
it's
not
always
the
city
that
makes
an
application,
not
meet
a
timeline,
there's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth,
and
sometimes
we
don't
get
the
the
back
to
our
fourth.
E
When
we're
when
we're
having
those
negotiations
and
those
put
us
off
and
then,
if
I'm,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
if
we
provide
comments
back
on,
let's
say
day
59
and
we
had
60
days,
they
could
take
six
seven
eight
months
to
get
back
to
us,
but
our
60-day
clock
still
ticks
so
once
they
come
back
to
us,
we
have
one
day
now.
E
So
that's
that's
quite
significant
in
terms
of
being
able
to
you
know,
drop
everything
that
you're
doing,
which
might
be
you
know,
maybe
you're,
maybe
you're,
working
on
day,
57
or
day
58
of
another
file.
Now
you
got
day
d59
rolls
back
in
and
you
got
to
drop
everything
on
that
one
to
get
back
to
this
one.
It's
it's
it's
near
impossible
to
actually
satisfy
both
of
those
files
and
then
you're
paying
back
the
fees
on
both
which
isn't
necessarily
an
issue
that
we
created,
but
it's
an
issue
that
bill
109
creates.
E
L
So
chair
again,
the
game
plan
is,
I
think,
we're
going
to
bring
a
quick
win
plan
back
to
you
in
the
short
term.
My
hope
is
june
or
july
on
that
I'm
just
trying
to
compile
the
business
case.
That's
appropriate
for
canadian
council
to
consider
those
are
the
areas
where
we
know
today.
We
have
pinch
points
and
can
have
some
remedies
that
would
have
some
meaningful
impact
on
what
we're
already
doing.
L
Those
were
things
we
were
working
on,
pre-bunk
bill,
109
and
then,
as
I
said
when
I
have
the
team,
do
a
full
assessment
on
our
business
practices
and
operations
as
a
result
of
bill.
109
we'll
need
support
from
legal
because
there
will
be
bylaws
that
need
to
be
changed
as
a
result
of
bill
109
such
as
the
site
plan
controlled
by
law
and
the
delegation
of
authority
by
law.
E
All
right,
thanks
for
that,
and
then
just
lastly,
too.
I
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
we
often
hear
about.
At
least
I
hear
probably
more
from
applicants
than
anything
else
is
the
the
registration
process
so
after
it
leaves
your
department
and
then
it
requires
that
legal
sign
off.
Is
that
something
we
would
look
at
too
as
to
how
we
could
advance
those
or
I'm
not
sure,
if
those,
I
think,
if
those
fit
in
with
the
timeline
issues.
L
A
Thanks
chair
moffatt
councillor
brockington.
K
Good
morning,
the
one
of
the
challenges
with
bill
109
is
it's
more
about
optics
than
building
affordable
housing
going
into
an
election.
The
government
wants
to
appear
to
be
doing
something
with
this
bill
and,
in
fact,
when
mr
willis
says
70
of
our
zoning
applications
and
80
of
our
site
plan
applications
won't
make
these
timelines.
It's
very
concerning
particularly
what
the
ramifications
will
be
to
offset
this.
This
revenue
loss
should
that
remain,
and
this
legislation
pass.
L
Sure
that
that's
what
the
intent
is
when
I
started
with
the
city
five
years
ago,
we
weren't
at
a
good
cost
recovery
level
and
we've
been
working
progressively
to
get
closer
and
closer
to
that
line.
There
are
still
some
work
to
do
in
terms
of
overhead
charges
to
to
make
it
equivalent
to
building
code
building
code
is
fully
cost
recovery
and
fully
self-contained.
L
We
do
need
to
do
some
further
adjustments
on
that,
but
we've
also
been
trying
to
manage
various
changes
in
an
orderly
way,
so
there
there's
a
we're
much
closer
than
we
were
five
years
ago.
K
But
it's,
I
think,
it's
fair
to
say
the
revenues
that
these
applications
bring
in
health,
offset
staffing
costs,
and
if
that
is
no
longer
the
case
because
they
have
to
be
refunded,
then
I
think
you
mentioned
this.
The
city
has
to
come
up
with
a
strategy
as
to
how
we're
going
to
address
that,
but
I
hope
the
legislation
is
further
refined
bill.
109
or
not.
K
The
city's
ability
to
close
applications
is
longer
than
I
guess
the
average
that
we're
aiming
towards.
So
can
you
give
us
a
sense
a
year
from
now
when
we're
talking
about
the
2022
annual
report,
will
you
have
made
gains
in
shortening
the
processing
time
for
applications,
and
many
people
think
when
I
or
others
advocate
for
processing
the
applications
quicker?
We're
just
doing
this
in
the
interests
of
developers?
K
Nothing
could
be
further
from
the
truth.
We're
trying
to
get
housing
built
in
the
city
and
the
longer
we
wait,
the
more
expensive
it
becomes
developers
don't
pay
for
that
new
homeowners
pay
for
those
those
added
costs.
So
you
said
you'd
be
coming
back
in
a
couple
months.
Will
that
include
a
strategy
to
help
reduce
the
timelines
associated
with
file
approvals?
Knowing
and
acknowledging
many
of
the
reasons
for
processing
delays
aren't
due
to
city
staff
or
issues
within
your
shop.
K
L
So
jared's
certainly
been
the
department's
goal
to
to
streamline
timelines
in
as
many
areas
as
possible.
That's
always
been
the
case.
We
we've
done
a
very
good
diagnosis
of
various
things
that
slow
down
the
process,
and
you
know
some
of
it
has
to
do
with
you
know
we're
gonna
have
no
choice
but
be
stricter
with
applicants
on
applications
that
are
incomplete
or
poor
quality
coming
in
they
may
be,
refuting
we
can
refuse
to
accept
them
if
they're
incomplete,
but
if
they're
poor
quality
we
may
be
before
committee
with
a
rapid
refusal.
L
L
We
do
know
we
have
choke
points
in
around
some
of
the
engineering
details,
and
some
of
that
has
to
do
with
updating
engineering
standards,
and
some
of
it
has
to
do
with
having
a
process
internally
for
review.
For
that
that's
more
acute
in
certain
parts
of
the
city
than
others.
Particularly,
there
are
complex
drainage
issues
such
as
in
the
rural
area
or
in
areas.
L
L
And
frankly,
I
think
you
know
we
have
a
we're
losing
a
lot
of
years
of
experience
out
the
door
with
people
who
are
retiring,
and
so
we
need
to
provide
enough
support
to
a
younger,
less
experienced
but
highly
professional
and
motivated
team,
and
I
frankly
think
one
of
the
things
I
need
to
sell
is:
I
don't
have
enough
line
level
managers
in
the
system
for
a
younger
team.
L
You
know,
I
use
the
analogy
a
little
bit
that
we're
like
the
67s,
where
you
can
have
a
great
high-performing
team
and
then
a
bunch
of
them
graduate
to
the
nhl
and
we've
got
to
start
again
and
coach
a
new
team
of
really
great
prospects.
So
I
will
be
bringing
recommendations
for
beefing
up
even
at
that
layer
as
well.
We
also
in
our
existing
technology,
which
we're
in
the
process
of
replacing
don't
have
a
good
metric
of
starting
and
stopping
the
clock
with
an
application.
L
L
K
Thank
you
and
I'll,
just
close
by,
can
you
remind
the
committee?
I
have
a
lot
on
my
mind
lately
remind
the
committee
of
the
city's
reaction
to
bill
109
we,
but,
prior
to
the
bill
coming
out
you
we
submitted
a
very
detailed
and
comprehensive
analysis
and
our
feedback
on
that.
Now
that
the
legislation's
come
out,
it's
a
very
tight
timeline.
Maybe
you
could
speak
to
that
real
quick.
They
want
this
legislation
approved
before
the
election.
K
L
So
chair
with
no
time
on
the
clock,
you
appreciate
we're
in
the
third
reading
today
and
today's
the
first
committee
I
could
have
come
to
for
for
comments.
So
what
staff
did
is
we
prepared
a
stop
level
technical
summary
to
the
province
and
for
submitted
it
through
the
ebr
registry?
L
I
also
went
to
the
co-chairs
of
planning
and
the
chair
of
iraq,
who
also
has
a
planning
responsibility
and
asked
them
to
submit
a
specific
request
to
the
standing
committee,
reviewing
the
legislation
to
ask
them
to
delay
the
implementation
of
the
zoning
penalties
for
fees
by
a
year
to
give
us
time
to
at
least
adapt
site
plan
and
then
tackle
zoning.
L
The
chairs,
the
strategy
we
discussed
with
the
chairs.
If
we
were
going
to
ask
for
one
thing
and
get
one
thing
that
would
actually
help
us.
That
was
the
one
thing.
Unfortunately,
neither
the
government
nor
the
opposition
moved
any
amendment
subcommittee
on
that
regard,
despite
the
request
that
we
made-
and
I
can
tell
you
that
in
talking
to
my
counterparts
around
the
province,
people
in
comparable
positions,
many
other
municipalities
made
a
similar
request.
K
D
Thank
you
very
much
chair
and
steve.
Thanks
to
you
and
your
department,
you
know
with
whom
it's
always
a
a
good
productive,
professional
relationship.
I
am
always
happy
to
be
working
with
the
planning
department.
I
won't
touch
too
much
on
bill
109
because
I
know
that's
been
well
hashed
out
here,
but
I
do
have
one
question
and
I'm
anticipating
that
it
will
pass
site
plan
will
no
longer
be
delegated
or
sorry
a
site
plan
will
no
longer
go
to
council
if
the
local
council
desires
it
or
planning
committee.
D
Rather,
what
is
your
anticipation
with
respect
to
letting
counselors
know
that
site
plan
applications
have
been
filed
and
getting
materials
in
the
counselor's
hands
so
that
we
can
do
whatever
kind
of
rapid
lightning
round
of
consultation
with
our
communities
that
we
feel
is
going
to
be
appropriate.
L
So
chair
council
raises
a
very
good
question
and
we
do
not
have
this
worked
out
yet
because,
as
I
said,
I
need
to
get
someone
in
place
and
hack
these
processes
for
us,
but
I
would
imagine
we'd
take
the
same
approach
as
other
delegated
authority
applications.
We
have
a
number
under
a
right-of-way
and
in
other
permits,
where
there's
a
counselor
heads
up
on
an
application.
L
Counselor
is
given
an
opportunity
to
provide
us
comments
into
the
process
and
if
the
counselor
gathers
some
additional
public
feedback
that
can
come
into
the
process
as
well,
I
mean
I
think
we
will
do
that.
I
mean
ultimately
site
plans
will
be
a
in
effect.
There
will
be
a
person
in
the
department
who
is
a
statutory
officer
delegated
with
the
authority
to
issue
those
approvals
under
sight
plan,
because
the
province
of
use
sightline
is
a
very
technical
exercise.
D
For
approval
yeah,
I
know
residents
will
sometimes
look
to
us
to
use
site
plans.
A
second
kick
at
the
can
of
an
unpopular
development,
but
there
is
often
from
some
of
our
more
sophisticated
community
associations
and
neighbors,
very
technical
tweaks
that
are
helpful
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
continuing
to
try
to
get
those
materials
into
residence
hands.
So.
D
The
questions
maybe
for
charmaine
is
around
the
public
consultations
and
I
am
really
pleased
to
hear
that
you're
considering
keeping
those
online.
D
D
The
environment
is
a
safer
place
for
developer
staff,
my
staff
city
staff,
who
are
attending
the
we
get
through
dozens
and
dozens
of
questions,
because
it's
moderated,
as
opposed
to
you
know
one
question
that
oftentimes
in
a
physical
environment
might
take
10
minutes
to
ask-
and
you
know
the
the
timing
is
fantastic:
we're
seeing
younger
participants
in
our
development
open
houses,
because
if
you
have
two
parents
with
young
kids,
one
can
continue
to
clean
the
kitchen.
D
One
can
get
the
kid
in
a
bath
and
you
can
have
the
development
open
house
open
on
your
ipad
and
then
we
can
also
record
it
and
make
it
available
to
the
entire
community.
Is
there
a
way,
though,
to
try
to
create
the
same
kind
of
hybrid
consultation
that
we
are
working
on?
Doing,
for
example,
for
for
our
committees.
B
It
gets
to
be
very
expensive
when
you're
looking
at
the
different
pieces-
and
also,
I
think,
would
be
very
difficult
when
you're
in
person
to
have
the
con,
the
conversation
would
be
in
person
and
then
people
are
so
I'm
willing
to
try
it
out.
But
when
I
looked
at
it
from
expense,
it
is
expensive.
Ideally,
what
I
would
like
is
that
we
have
some
art
will
have
to
continue
to
be
in
person
because
of
connectivity
or
the
sensitivity
of
the
topic
we
did
even
during
covet
heron
gate
we
did
offer
in
person.
B
Obviously
we
took
all
the
necessary
precautions,
so
there's
some
that
we
will
have
to
do
hybrid,
I'm
looking
forward
to
trying
that
out,
but
there
is
a
a
significant
cost
to
that
for
the
technology.
D
I'll
be
following
that,
because
the
the
open
houses
that
I
do,
I,
I
don't
think
I
have
the
staff
or
the
financial
resources
to
try
to
do
hybrid.
I
think
I'm
gonna
have
to
pick
one
or
the
other,
and
right
now,
I'm
leaning
very
very
strongly
towards
my
consultations
continuing
to
be
to
be
online
and
I
think
the
developers
have
have
pivoted
really
well
to
that
as
well.
So
steve
with
respect
to
the
refusal
you
touched
on
it
a
moment
ago.
D
L
So
chairs,
I
think
the
most
likely
scenario
where
I
could
see
this
playing
out
is:
you
know
we
often
see
you
know,
there's
a
whole
set
of
studies
that
come
in
with
a
planning
application,
and
sometimes
there
could
be
15
different
studies,
and
some
of
them
are
the
types
that
we
can
work
through
quickly
and
resolve
them.
But
if
somebody
came
in
with
a
proposal
where
there
was
significant
engineering
issues,
it
was
very
obvious
right
up
front.
We
could
refuse
the
application
saying,
there's
no
way
we're
going
to
get
this
sorted
out
in
60
days.
L
We're
refusing
you
effectively
without
prejudice
from
you
filing
a
new
application.
Once
you
have
a
better
report,
but
it'll
be
a
quick,
you
know
we're
not.
You
know.
We
make
a
quick
decision
that
we're
not
going
to
get
this
fixed
within
the
timeline,
and
you
know
mr
mark-
and
I
have
not
talked
about
this
as
far
as
the
appeals
are
concerned.
L
There's
no
such
thing
as
a
without
prejudice
refusal,
it's
of
refusals
or
refusals
refusal,
but
I
do
think
that
it
might
send
a
message
to
an
applicant
that
their
best
strategy
is
to
refile
the
application
and
if
we
threaten
it,
maybe
they'll
withdraw
the
application,
fix
it
and
refile
it
with
a
better
chance
of
success.
So
you
know
I
want
to
talk
to
the
industry
about
how
this
plays
out
as
well,
because
it's
not
in
their
interest
to
tie
everybody
up
in
legal
proceedings
with
olt.
L
L
It's
not
the
department's
practice
to
issue
rapid
refusal.
We
just
basically
say
that
it's
a
deficient
report
fix
it
and
we'll
get
back
to
you
when
you
fix
it,
you
know
it's
it's.
We
don't
take
a
refusal
request
for
it
in
a
situation
where
the
applicant
has
a
reasonable
chance
to
correct
the
matter
or
address
our
concerns.
L
It
will
vary
on
on
on
the
type
of
application
situation.
I
raised
the
issue
of
legal
outlet,
for
example,
where
you
know
we
have
to
sort
out
through
a
drainage
engineer
process.
You
know
this
is
dave.
Bryan's
team
does
formal
drainage
engineers
reports.
Those
things
can
take
two
years
plus
to
resolve,
so
the
application
would
be
yes,
the
chair,
moffett's
correct.
There
are
instances
of
five.
So
in
those
situations,
what
hope
do
we
have
of
meeting
the
timeline?
L
L
L
You
know
another
thing:
we're
exploring
I'm
sorry
chair
for
taking
so
much
time,
but
this
is
important
the
in
the
heritage
act.
You
know
we
have
firm
timelines
where
we
must
make
a
decision
or
something
is
deemed
approved.
We
have
used
the
technique
where
we've
asked
applicants
for
a
waiver
of
that
right
to
have
their
file
approved.
L
If
we're
you
know
or
close
them
are
going
to
get
there
in
a
couple
more
weeks,
so
we
might
explore
that
technique
as
well,
and
that's
a
you
know
in
the
world
of
having
a
constructive
relationship
with
everybody
in
the
process.
If
people
are
willing,
that
might
be
a
valid
technique,
but
again
none
of
these
have
been
explored
legally
yet
because
this
is
all
on
the
ground.
D
But
you
know
not,
everyone
is,
is
a
large
and
sophisticated
builder
who
can
afford
to
be
patient.
So
I
I
appreciate
the
the
care
that
you're
taking
with
this
issue.
One
final
issue:
I
want
to
raise
steve
you
and
I
have
had
numerous
discussions
over
the
past
several
years
about
infill
construction
and
building
code
services.
D
I
was
out
sunday
night
to
another
location,
infield
location.
Where
you
know
property
damages
is
being
done.
It
was
resurgent
as
an
issue
last
summer
after
a
couple
of
quiet
summers
and
I'm
just
wondering
what
kind
of
resources
or
or
what
is
your
outlook
for
resources
that
can
be
brought
to
bear
on
infill
construction
projects
that
are
going
south.
L
B
L
Just
introduced
their
they're
caught
off
the
press,
new
requirements
for
geotechnical
engineering-
and
you
know,
foundation
engineering
reports
when
properties
are
being
constructed
very
close
to
the
lot
line
in
an
infill
situation
very
very
concerned
about
this.
We've
had
multiple
instances
of
this,
so
these
are
new
engineering
requirements
that
are
now
being
implemented.
If
the.
If
the
program
was
issued
last
year,
they
wouldn't
have
been
subject
to
that,
because
this
is
this
is
brand
new.
L
We
are
also
issuing
shortly
a
updated
best
practices
for
good
neighbor
construction
practices
and
infill
situations.
I
know
that
that's
close
to
council
lieber's
heart-
I
I
promised
him
several
years
ago.
We
can
get
this
done.
He
asked
for
it
coming
out
of
a
community
meeting
and
we're
very
we're
on
the
verge
of
releasing
that
as
well
and
again,
we
are
chief
building
official
and
I
are
looking
at
our
engineering
staffing
to
assess
whether
or
not
we
have
sufficient
engineering
support
and
building
food
services
in
these
matters.
D
Yeah,
please
please
ask
for
those,
because
we
are,
we
are
intensifying.
The
low-rise
neighborhoods
are
going
to
intensify
the
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
review
next
from
a
council
is
going
to
introduce
the
potential
for
more
infill
in
our
low-rise
neighborhoods
and
when
relationships
between
infill
builders
and
their
immediate
neighbors
become
fraught,
and
when
there
are
property
damage
issues
it
it
damages
trust
in
the
city.
It
damages
trust
in
the
counselors
and
and
those
residents
have
to
deal
with
a
lot
of
stress.
D
B
B
If
you
don't
mind,
I
think
we
understand
the
intent
of
bill
109
and
but
I'm
wondering
after
everything
that
I'm
hearing
about
it,
it
seems
to
me
that
there's
some
unintended
consequences,
especially
to
the
city
of
ottawa
and
you
know,
impacting
planning
staff,
we're
not
sure
if
we
can
meet
the
deadlines
or
the
timelines
that
it
sets
out.
B
Have
we
given
have
we
given
any
thought
to
perhaps
writing
the
minister
to
spell
out
the
consequences
of
of
this
bill,
and
you
know
I,
I
question
whether
or
not
we're
the
targets
that
we
that
we've
set
you
know
hoping
to
expediate
the
planning
process
and
get
more
houses
built
is
actually
realistic.
B
L
This
legislation
has
gone
through
it
at
lightning
speed
through
the
province
and
the
we
contacted
ministry
staff
on
a
staff
to
stop
level
level
to
raise
some
smaller
technical
issues
that
we
thought
some
amendments
could
clarify
matters
we
submitted
through
the
ebr
registry
to
the
legislature,
comments
on
behalf
of
council,
where
we
indicated
council
had
no
time
to
comment.
This
is
staff
generating
rated
comment.
L
Council
will
circulate
those
to
planning
committee
members
that
what
we
sent
and
I
asked
the
the
co-chairs
of
planning
the
chair
of
iraq
to
send
the
most
urgent
requests
to
the
province
directly
to
the
standing
committee.
That
was
reviewing
the
bill.
L
The
government
was
determined
to
do
this
and
I'm
not
going
to
it's
not
appropriate
for
me
to
comment
on
a
political
way,
but
the
council
makes
an
interesting
suggestion
that,
with
the
bill
having
been
adopted,
when
staff
reports
back
on
what
might
be
intended
unintended
consequences,
we
may
be
able
to
qualify,
quantify
and
qualify
what
they
might
be
and
then
offer
committee.
At
the
point
we
bring
our
report
back
some
suggestions
on
what
to
ask
the
ministry
for
in
some
further
changes
in
the
future.
B
I
I
think
that
might
be
a
good
consideration.
Given
you
know
what
we're
seeing
here
I
mean
we
have.
We
have
a
good
staff
that
are
working
as
as
fast
as
possible.
B
Of
course,
yeah
some
of
the
applications
are,
are
not
you
know,
all
the
eyes
are
not
dotted
and
the
t's
aren't
crossed,
and
we
see
that,
but
I
mean
the
impact
of
not
meeting.
Some
of
the
deadlines
is
going
to
it's
going
to
blow
back
on
all
of
us,
and
I
don't
think
that
that's
going
to
expediate
or
streamline
the
process
in
any
way
and
I'm
sure
that
other
municipalities
are
facing
the
same
thing.
B
So
if
we
got
together,
as
you
know,
as
a
team
that
we
reached
out
to
other
municipalities
who
could
express
the
same
concerns
or
the
same,
you
know
list
the
consequences
that
maybe
the
the
minister
would
be
more
apt
or
more
willing
to
consider
some
amendments.
That
would,
you
know,
wouldn't
penalize
us
for
trying
to
do
that.
The
best
job
possible
you
know
a
given
given
the
new
new
bill
and
and
what
it's
intended
to
do.
That's
anyway.
L
So
chairs,
in
the
last
two
weeks,
I've
been
in
regular
communications
with
the
planning
leads
in
hamilton
in
toronto
to
coordinate
where
we
have
common
interests,
our
responses
to
the
province,
and
that
has
been
done.
L
I
am
part
of
a
group
of
senior
planning
officials
across
ontario,
and
that
group
is
submitted.
The
the
big
city
mayor's
coalition
has
also
submitted
comments
to
the
province
on
the
legislation
and
the
we've
contributed
ideas
through
that
process
and
amo
association.
Minister
ontario
has
also
submitted,
so
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
under
inter-municipal
dialogue
going
on.
I
just
we
have
to
accept
the
reality
that,
where
we're
at
in
the
cycle
of
things
province
is
clearly
going
to
get
this
done.
L
I
think
the
counselor's
suggestion
about
a
after
after
the
fact
report
on
implications
to
the
ministry
and
asking
for
some
refinements
down
the
road
is
actually
a
good
suggestion
and
I'd
like
to
take
the
counselor's
suggestion
to
the
department
and
see
if
we
can
bring
some
suggestions
forward
to
the
committee.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you
very
much,
mr
bullets.
Yeah.
We
don't
we
don't
want.
We
don't
want
to
stymie
the
process.
You
know
if
every
anything
we
we
want
it
streamlined,
but
if
it's,
if
the
it's
too
strict,
if
it
penalizes
us,
you
know
too
much,
I
can't
see
it
benefiting
anyone
so
anyway,
that's
it
for
me.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you
very
much,
thank
you
for
the
report.
Listening
to
I'm
sorry,
I've
been
in
and
out,
but
because
I've
been
dealing
with
other
things
too,
but
just
listening
to
the
comments
from
counselor
leeper
and
on
infill
and
the
the
the
whole
good
neighbor
policy.
I
understand.
Toronto
has
one
and,
and
I've
looked
at
it
and
I
think
that
that's
definitely
a
way
to
go
the
more
conversations
with
neighbors
the
better.
G
Sometimes
we
as
counselors
have
to
force
the
situation,
but
there's
no
real
process
for
it,
and
it
would
be
helpful
to
have
that
process
and
I
can
give
lots
of
examples
already
and
phil
is
coming
to
bayward
and
we're
we're
seeing
it.
So
I
I
appreciate
any
work.
That's
done
on
that
and
it's
I
I
don't
know
if
this
fits
in,
but
one
of
the
things
I've
discovered
is
in
some
of
these
info
is
the
lack
of
observation
of
of
how
it
reflects
to
the
neighbors
adjoining
such
as
privacy.
G
G
If
that's
you
know
how
that
can
be
dealt
with,
but
that's
another
issue
that
has
come
up
because
you
have
houses
that
face
the
front,
face
the
back
and
they're
they're,
that's
their
front
window,
but
they're
looking
into
someone's
backyard,
and
that
just
came
about
when
I
see
these
new
designs
of
trying
to
have
more
units
on
us
on
a
smaller
lot
and
getting
four
units
on
something
that
had
a
single
family
home,
and
I
appreciate
the
the
efforts
to
do
that.
G
But
that
was
one
of
the
consequences
and
I
saw
it
myself
and
it's
like
unintended.
So
it's
another
thing
to
look
at
in
terms
of
the
consultations.
I
hope
we
can
work
towards
hybrid.
I
think
there's
has
been
a
lot
of
efficiency
in
having
consultations
with
the
community
relatively
quickly
study
to
set
up
by
by
zoom
virtual
and
there's
efficiencies
in
being
able
to
have
people
write
out
their
questions
and
chat.
G
When
you
have
a
meeting
with
185
people
and
most
of
them
have
the
same
questions
but
writing
them
out
and
presenting
them
so
that
we
can
read
them
and
get
answers
and
get
lots
of
information
to
them
has
been
very
efficient
and
it's
you
know
if
they
don't
like
it:
they're
not
gonna
like
it,
but
but
they're
getting
their
answers,
and
that's
that's
been
very
helpful,
so
I
would
hate
to
lose
that,
and
I
know
the
city
is
you
know
when
they
do
their
consultations.
G
I've
there's
been
efficiencies
there
too,
so
I
hope
we
can
have
that
and
in
terms
of
the
expense
of
hybrid.
I
think
we
still
have
to
look
at
it.
It's
got
to
come
it.
It
just
has
to
even
before
it's
funny
before
covet
hit.
I
had
people
asking
me:
can
I
come
to
the
meeting,
even
though
I'm
not
going
to
be
there
and
we
put
them
on
facetime,
so
that
was
in
2019
before
the
pandemic,
and
we
were
using
facetime
to
invite
people
into
a
meeting
to
ask
questions.
G
So
I
don't
believe
it
can't
be
done.
I
believe
that
we
just
need
to
work
through
it
and
make
it
a
priority.
The
pandemic
has
taught
us
a
lot
in
terms
of
that.
We
can
move
faster
on
things
if
we
have
to
so.
I
hope
we
do
look
at
that,
because
there
there's
definitely
going
to
be
a
need
for
hybrid
is
going
to
be
everywhere.
L
So
so
sheriff,
I
can
break
down
a
couple
things,
so
the
counselor
reminded
me
just
for
comments
that
going
back
in
time.
I
think
I
can't
recall
council
lieber
can
correct
me,
but
I
think
it
was
three
years
ago,
council
libra
can
convene
a
panel
with
goba
and
fca
to
talk
about
how
we
can
get
better
information
out
on
good
neighbor
practices
and
we
committed
as
a
department
to
update
some
old
material.
That
really
did
do
that.
L
But
hadn't
been
touched
in
about
a
decade
and-
and
we
did
do
that-
and
I
do
remember
now
that
councilor
cavanaugh
did
forward
me.
The
toronto
example
about
a
year
ago
as
well,
which
helped
us
because
we've
adapted
ours
and
I
believe,
charmaine's
indicating
to
me
that
we're
we're
probably
a
week
away
from
issuing
the
new
document,
which
is
the
new
best
practices
for
infill.
I
think
it's
just
in
translation.
We're
resolving
that
right
now
and
we'll
have
it
out
very
shortly
and
we
think
it'll
be
a
new
tool.
L
It'll
be
handed
out
to
people
who
are
doing
infill
projects
and
that
addresses
many
of
the
issues
to
deal
with
the
issue
of
just
to
clarify
for
the
counselor's
benefit
when
we
talk
about
hybrid
hybrid,
are
online
plus
in-person
meetings,
and
there
are
situations
where
that's
really
important,
especially
in
communities
that
may
not
have
access
to
internet
as
well
as
others
and
we've
had
in
certain
very
specific
files
such
as
herongate.
L
It
was
very
appropriate
to
run
both
and
we
would
do
it
in
those
situations,
but
the
department's
leaning
very
heavily
towards
retaining
online,
because
our
participation
rates
are
much
higher.
The
diversity
of
participation
is
much
higher
and
we're
having
a
high
level
of
satisfaction
in
that.
So
I
think
what
the
counselor
is
interpreting
about
retaining
the
online.
We
absolutely
want
to
retain
that
element.
L
I
think
it's
easier
on
people
and
we
want
to
do
that
on
and
I
think
the
council
made
a
comment
on
privacy,
which
is
always
a
challenging
issue,
because
we
really
don't
have
regulatory
powers
to
regulate
for
privacy
in
ontario
that
that
doesn't
actually
exist.
It's
not
a
it's,
not
a
position.
G
Thank
you.
The
committee
of
adjustment
is
is
just
mentioned
in
in
this
report,
yet
for
the
average
person
who's
dealing
with
stuff
happening
in
their
community
committee
of
adjustments,
a
big
deal
and
I
understand
they're
reviewing
themselves.
Do
you
have
any
further
comments?
I
know
we're
supposed
to
be
arm's
length
from
committee
of
adjustment,
but
but
it
does
affect
in
communities
and
and
they
want
to
see
a
better
process
for
their
involvement.
L
So
chairs
the
community
adjustment
does
not
report
through
the
department
they
report
through
the
city
clerk's
office
as
an
outside.
You
know,
regulatory
body,
the
committee
of
adjustment
is
independent
and
arm's
length
and
our
role
as
a
department
is
is
how
we
provide
comments
to
committee,
and
there
have
been
several
comments
through
counselors
and
even
committee
members
about
you
know,
is
the
department
prepared
for
a
shift
in
time
to
more
planning
applications
actually
coming
through
committee
of
adjustment?
L
You
know
if
you
look
at
the
city
of
toronto,
for
example,
the
vast
majority
of
big
development
projects
only
go
through
the
committee
of
adjustment,
so
there
actually
are
some.
You
know
they
don't
have
as
many
situations
where
it's
resuming
so
we
could
see
as
the
city
becomes
more
urban
a
shift
so
as
part
of
the
department's
longer
term
review
of
it's
how
we're
deploying
our
resources?
L
Where
we're
looking
at
how
we
comment
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
more
effectively,
I'm
not
going
to
comment
on
the
committee's
own
review
of
their
own
operations
and
not
a
position
to
comment
on
that.
That's
the
secretary
treasurer's
position
to
to
do
that
and
that
any
further
matters
should
be
matters
council
considers
under
the
governance
review.
G
That's
very
interesting
that
you
mentioned
that
under
the
the
transition
to
more
we're,
gonna,
see
more
committee
of
adjustments
or
that's
what's
happening
in
toronto
under
our
new
official
plan.
Is
that
something
that
could
happen?
And
where
is
that?
I
apologize
if
you've
answered
this
question
already.
L
No
chairs
chairs
it,
it
made
me
clarify
it's
just
the
nature
of
the
bigger
city
situations
where
a
lot
of
development
approvals
end
up
going
through
the
committee
of
adjustments
through
some
revisions,
you
know
once
we
have
a
modernized
zoning
bylaw.
That
is
not
leaving
a
lot
of
questions
on
the
table
like
we
did
before
to
capture
section
37,
once
it's
actually
more
clear
and
it
matches
the
official
plan,
there'll
be
fewer
and
fewer
rezoning
applications.
L
Naturally,
and
more
matters
will
be
resolved
through
the
committee
of
adjustments,
so
there'll
be
a
shift
to
that
in
time.
That's
that's
the
natural
evolution
as
the
city
becomes
bigger,
and
so
again
the
department's
looking
at
how
we
respond
to
that.
How
are
we
prepared
for
that
shift?
That
is
likely
to
happen,
and
so
it
is
about
you
know:
are
we
putting
the
same
level
over?
Should
we
up
our
level
of
review?
Should
you
know
you
know,
do
we
need
more
senior
people
involved
in
certain
files?
G
Thank
you.
Where
is
the
new
official
plan?
Are
we
getting
any
information
back
of
when
it
will
be
approved.
L
So
chairs,
as
a
result
of
bill
109,
the
approval
of
the
plan
is
on
hold
pending
bill
109,
the
province
decided
to
put
our
plan
in
multiple
plans
in
ontario.
The
group
of
five
different
plans
on
hold
until
after
bill
109,
because
bill
109
introduces
new
powers
to
the
minister
with
respect
to
seeking
the
opportunity
to
refer
all
a
part
of
the
plan
to
the
tribunal
for
hearing.
L
So
the
province
made
a
as
a
as
we
understand
it
made
a
decision
not
to
comment
on
anybody's
plan,
but
they're
treating
everybody
the
same,
so
we're
all
put
on
hold
until
the
new
legislation's
in
place,
and
then
we
have
a
provincial
election
immediately
afterwards.
So
I
would
not.
L
I
would
be
very
surprised
if
ottawa
saw
an
approval,
that's
a
new
official
plan
before
a
new
cabinet
sworn
in
provincially
after
an
election.
I
believe
I
believe
we
will
have
to
wait
for
that.
A
Thank
you
counselor.
I
want
to
just
add
on
the
benefits
of
the
online
meeting
two
things
that
I've
really
appreciated
over
the
last
couple
years.
One
is
the
ability
to
have
an
archive
of
those
and
go
back.
A
You
know
I
was
prepping
before
it
was
deferred
prepping
for
the
roosevelt
item
and
were
able
to
go
back
and
check
out
an
early
public
meeting
to
clarify
something
and
I've
been
able
to
tune
in
myself
to
some
other
counselor-led
meetings
over
the
last
couple
years
that
I
would
probably
not
make
the
trip
and
drive
across
to
other
wards
to
attend,
but
I
could
tune
in
online
and
the
other
thing.
I've
appreciated
is
just
the
more
constructive
tone
that
I
found
the
online
meetings
take.
A
Sometimes
the
in-person
meetings
can
really
almost
turn
into
a
bit
of
an
angry
mob,
and
I
don't
see
that
happening
in
the
online
meetings,
which
is
a
positive,
and
I
mention
that,
because
we
had
a
meeting
just
before
the
pandemic
and
a
resident
came
up
to
me
afterwards
and
said,
I
wanted
to
participate
and
share
some
feedback,
but
I
was
really
afraid
that
that
I'd
be
shouted
down
by
my
neighbors
and
despite
our
best
efforts
to
make
it
a
constructive
and
safe
space,
there
are
people
who
do
feel
rightly
so,
very
uncomfortable
in
a
some
of
the
public
situations.
A
So
online
gives
a,
I
think,
a
more
constructive
and
positive
tone
to
community
meetings
on
the
conditions.
Well,
the
the
idea
of
removing
our
ability
to
lift
delegated
authority
on
site
plan
or
plan
a
subdivision,
so
I
guess
site
plan.
I
do
want
to
build
on
what
counselor
lieber
was
saying.
We
still
need
to
have
his
counselors,
a
role
in
that
and
not
just
submitting
comments
at
the
get-go.
A
I
can
think
of
several
recent
site
plan
lists
of
conditions
where
we
have
found
small
things
that
were
missed,
that
you
know.
I
don't
think
would
have
been
caught
unless
we
had
those
local
eyes
of
the
counselor
and
the
counselor's
team
on
it.
So
it's
really
important
to
still
have
a
a
strong
role
for
the
council
in
that
process.
A
I
have
a
question,
though
steve
one
of
minister
clark's
statements
and
reasons
for
bill
109
and
the
site
plan
issues,
and
the
approval
issues
was
to
take
some
of
the
politics
out
of
the
site
plan
process.
In
your
experience,
how
much
time
do
counselors
add
to
the
site
plan
approval
process
in
ottawa.
L
Jerry,
you
put
me
in
a
very
difficult
position
with
that
question,
as
you
can
imagine,
it
varies
depending
on
the
site
and
the
circumstances.
I'm
I'm
not
going
to
answer
that
question.
I'm
going
to
just
give
you
another
example.
I'm
going
to
deliberately
avoid
your
question.
Listen.
The
department
has
good
relationships
with
all
counselors.
I
believe-
and
I
believe,
when
counselors
raise
legitimate
issues,
we
find
a
way
to
work
with
those
issues
that
the
counselors
are
raising
and
I
think
it's
a
very
collaborative
process.
L
The
london
ontario
has
a
very
different
approach.
London
in
london,
ontario
site
plans
are
approved
for
the
building
code
services
branch.
They
treat
it
as
a
totally
technical
exercise,
just
like
a
building
permit,
and
it
is
nowhere
near
the
process
that
ottawa
has
and
ottawa's
has
been
one
of
the
only
municipalities
in
ontario
that
even
has
public
consultation
inside
plans.
L
Most
municipalities
don't
involve
it
at
all.
So
you
know
we're.
We
are
the
anomaly
in
ontario,
I
would
venture
to
say
we
would
have
some
of
the
poorest
performing
timelines
in
ontario
on
site
plan
because
of
what
we've
chosen
to
do
as
a
process
and
those
were
conscious
decisions,
councils
councils,
several
councils
have
made
about
the
process
we
have.
The
province
clearly
wants
us
to
look
a
lot
more
like
london
and
that's
what
we're
evolving
to
so
you
know
I.
L
I
can't
I
can't
comment
really
on
the
advantages
or
disadvantages
of
the
of
the
involvement.
If
council
wishes,
a
role
will
find
a
way
to
get
counselors
input
into
the
process.
That's
my
commitment.
However.
We
have
to
respect
the
new
legislation
because
those
are
the
rules
we're
working
under.
A
Okay,
thank
you
steve
councillor,
cavanaugh.
G
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
add
the
other
benefit
about
the
online
meetings.
Is
that
we've
recorded
all
our
meetings
and
we
distribute
them
for
those
that
can't
even
make
it
on
online
people
are
always
asking
for
it,
and
so
we
publish
it
on
our
in
our
website
newsletter
and
that's
been
a
big
bonus
too.
So
that's
and
I
suppose
you
could
do
that
with
an
in-person
meeting.
In
fact,
I
think
we
did
do
some
back
in
2019,
but
just
another
point
of
just
trying
to
keep
the
information
so
that
it's
available
for
everyone.
A
All
right
we'll
move
to
item
three
on
the
agenda.
This
is
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
30
to
285
and
3305,
boris
okay
road
in
bar
haven.
We
will
have
a
presentation
from
the
planner
melanie
gervais.
We
will
have
a
presentation
from
the
applicants
and
then
we'll
go
to
our
delegation
so
good
morning,
melanie.
C
C
C
Next
slide.
Please
a
cut
and
fill
permission
was
issued
by
the
rbca
on
november
8
2019
to
remove
the
majority
of
the
subdivision
lands
from
the
floodplain
works
were
completed
and
in
july
2020
the
rbc
updated
their
regulatory
mapping,
which
was
then
followed
by
an
update
to
the
city's
floodplain
overlay
through
an
omnibus
bylaw
in
2021.
C
Additional
works
have
now
been
completed
to
the
limit
of
the
2019
cut
and
fill
permission,
so
these
works
have
been
reviewed
and
approved
by
the
rvca.
The
rbca
provided
the
city
with
the
data
set
reflecting
their
updated
regulatory
floodplain
and
in
accordance
with
section
481
of
the
current
official
plan
and
section
101
of
the
neop.
C
It's
important
to
note
that,
while
the
provincial
policy
statements
do
not
permit
development
within
the
floodplain,
this
does
not
account
for
the
ability
of
the
conservation
authority
to
update
mapping
and
approve,
cut
and
fill
permits
as
part
of
their
programs
and
services
under
the
conservation
authorities
act.
And,
furthermore,
the
city
has
a
memorandum
of
understanding
with
the
local
conservation
authorities,
whereby
the
city
commits
to
requesting
the
conservation
authorities
to
participate
in
a
variety
of
planning
act.
Applications
in
turn,
the
conservation
authorities
commit
to
provide
a
review
of
planning
act.
C
A
Thanks
very
much
melanie
just
before
you
started,
I
saw
counselor
lee
burr's
hand
up
just
at
the
very
last
moment.
Counselor
leaper.
D
Thanks
chair
and
I
I
don't
want
to
catch
the
applicant
off
guard,
I
am
contemplating
bringing
a
motion
as
part
of
this
we're
going
to
be
hearing,
I
believe,
from
a
delegation
who
has
provided
his
comments
to
the
committee
in
writing
and
as
part
of
those
comments,
he
is
making
two
recommendations
to
committee,
and
so,
as
we
continue
to
hear
from
the
applicant,
I
just
want
to
put
it
on
the
table
that
I'm
thinking
about
emotion
that
would
formalize
his
recommendations
to
put
a
holding
zone
on
the
zoning
with
respect
to
the
floodplain
overlay.
D
Until
such
time
as
an
interagency
meeting
can
be
convened
with
staff
from
the
city,
the
conservation
authorities,
the
ministries
to
clarify
responsibilities
with
the
results
of
that
meeting
to
be
reported
back
to
planning
committee
and
another
hold
that
an
ongoing
rita
valley
conservation,
update
of
jock
river
sub
watershed
plan
be
completed
prior
to
the
zoning
bylaw
approval,
so
that
findings
can
be
factored
in
land
use
to
be
approved
in
the
zoning
bylaw
to
provide
required
flood
and
erosion
controls.
D
A
A
Welcome,
and
I
believe
you
have
a
presentation.
So
when
that's
up
on
screen,
you
can
start.
F
So,
thank
you
very
much
coach
here,
gower
and
members
of
planning
committee.
We
appreciate
the
time
today
to
to
hear
from
us
I'll
jump
right
in
there
will
be
some
technical
questions,
I'm
sure
and
following
the
presentation
today,
I
have
some
supplementary
slides
that
might
help
address
some
historic
technical
questions
that
might
might
arise
first
slide,
please
so
the
subject
lands
we've
all
seen
these
just
to
point
out
quickly
are
the
phase
two
lands.
F
F
Next
slide
the
conservancy
lands
where
this
running
wild
amendment
is
taking
place,
form
a
vital
connection
point
between
the
town
center,
plus
rapid
transit
and
employment
areas,
both
north
and
south
of
the
site
and
the
site
is
fully
serviced
with
all
the
external
servicing
in
place,
and
is
it
completely
inconsistent
with
the
both
provincial
policy
statement,
but
also
the
city
of
autosop
next
slide,
we're
very
excited
about
our
opportunity
to
improve
the
restoration
corridor,
restore
and
improve
the
riparian
quarter
of
the
jock
river
and
activate
recreational
opportunities
within
the
flood
plain
in
areas
not
on
the
floodplain.
F
It
will
be
part
of
the
planet
subdivision.
A
variety
of
activities
will
be
part
of
this
overall
program
which
will
connect
to
the
rideau
river
and
actually
right
up
into
downtown
through
the
auto
river.
Next
slide,
we'll
just
quickly
flip
flip
through
so
that
you
know,
many
members
of
community
can
get
a
sense.
This
slide
the
next
one
and
the
following
one.
F
Just
for
how
this
activate
activation
of
of
space
and
place
with
the
new
residents
and
neighborhood
with
these
existing
environmental
areas
will
serve
a
community
benefit
beyond
just
for
those
that
live
in
this
neighborhood.
Next
slide.
F
Just
south
of
this
site
is
actually
a
facility
called
the
advanced
building
innovation
company
facility
that
we
had
brought
forward
for
approval
in
past
years,
which
is
now
fully
operating.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
there's
400
jobs
that
we've
located
here
that
are
immediately
approximately
the
site
next
slide,
where
we
will
be
manufacturing
all
of
the
homes
in
this
community
at
this
location,
to
create
a
carbon
neutral
production
pipeline
for
all
homes
on
site
and
we're
doing
that
also
with
waste
being
zero
recycled.
F
Waste
products
are
all
part
of
our
facility.
The
facility
is
up
and
operational
and
I'd
love
to
tour
any
member
of
planning
committee
that
would
be
interested
in
seeing
this
on
site
next
slide,
and
so
some
key
facts
in.
In
closing.
I
don't
have
a
ton
of
time
to
go
through
a
full
description
of
context
or
provincial
policy
related
to
floodplain
modifications
that
we
had
previously
done
in
2019.
F
That's
been
done.
No
development
here
is
being
proposed
in
the
flood
plain.
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
a
lot
of
policy
concerns
that
have
been
raised
in
the
past
and
we'll
probably
hear
from
today
relate
to
policies
surrounding
homes
that
exist
in
flood
plains.
I
just
want
to
be
clear:
there
is
no
flood
plain
where
homes
are
being
proposed.
F
F
We
also
have
members
of
the
team,
both
from
gfsa
the
technical
side,
but
also
you
know
legal
expert.
If
there's
questions,
we
also
don't
have
to
go
much
further,
unless
there's
anything
specific
that
any
member
of
committee
would.
A
A
Okay,
thank
you
yeah.
We
will
be
coming
back
to
you
after
the
delegation
for
questions
and
there
may
be
issues
raised.
That
committee
will
want
to
get
some
clarification
on.
So
thank
you
for
the
presentation
we'll
go
now
to
our
delegation.
It's
ted
cooper.
A
M
Thank
you.
I
work
for
the
city,
but
my
comments
made
here
and
reflect
my
personal
opinions.
Last
floodplain,
storage
and
inadequate
flood
and
erosion,
storm
water
controls
and
the
conservancy
development
will
nullify
the
public
benefit
of
my
successful
appeal
of
rezoning
at
3500
jockvale
road
that
was
intended
to
allow
development
of
flood
plain.
I
am
particularly
concerned
about
aggravation
of
existing
flood
levels
and
erosion
conditions
in
the
area
of
the
hearts
desire
community
next
slide.
Please
next
slide.
M
M
Rbca
is
currently
updating
the
jock
river
sub-watershed
plan,
which
could
identify
the
need
for
flood
and
erosion
controls,
as
mr
mark
is
quoted
in
a
cbc
story.
Following
my
appeal
of
the
downstream
bylaw
amendment,
rbca
identified
the
need
for
additional
land
to
be
zoned
green
space.
Rezoning
approvals
should
be
deferred
until
rbc's
sub-watershed
study
is
completed
next
slide.
M
Yeah,
okay,
opa212
approved
council,
approved
by
council
in
2018,
removed
the
use
of
two
zone
policy
in
reach.
One
and
directed
flood
plain
mapping
be
updated
so
that
all
landowners
could
benefit
equally
from
lower
flood
levels.
Instead,
alterations
of
the
floodplain
occurred
in
ward
3,
which
will
aggravate
existing
flood
levels
and
erosion
conditions
in
ward
22.
next
slide.
Please,
the
conservancy
development
involves
about
2
000
lots
to
be
created
on
reclaimed
floodplain,
because
rbca
approved
the
fill
permit,
where
pps
policy
does
not
permit
site
alteration.
M
Contrast,
rbca,
planner,
glenn,
mcdonald's
remarks
about
the
outcome
of
my
omb
appeal
to
what
our
rbca
just
approved
there
in
2019
next
slide.
Please
fill
permit
included
conditions,
flood
levels
and
velocities
are
to
be
monitored
for
10
years
and
if,
when
impacts
occur,
additional
earthworks
are
to
be
completed
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
rbca.
The
rvca
takes
no
responsibility
for
any
impacts.
M
Next
slide,
please
what
the
phil
permanent
has
done
is
rewarded
the
developer
in
ward
3,
with
an
unprecedented
floodplain
development
opportunity,
while
placing
residents
and
and
their
properties
in
ward
22
at
unknown
risk
without
any
consultation
or
notice,
and
if,
when
impacted
tax
occurs,
the
rbca
will
decide
what
mitigation
will
be
done.
Is
it
acceptable
that
residents
and
colombians
would
in
a
position
of
servitude
to
the
upstream
developer
and
rvca
next
slide?
M
Please
rbca
has
two
incomplete
contracts
underway,
as
committee
is
being
asked
to
approve
zoning,
a
reclaimed
flood
plain
with
no
land
for
storm
water
ponds
to
provide
flood
or
rotation
control.
This
process
is
inconsistent
with
op
policy
4.7.6,
which
requires
storm
water
management
to
be
informed
by
sub-watershed
plants.
The
conservancy
development
was
enabled
by
rbca's
fill
permit.
Why
shouldn't
its
stormwater
plan
be
informed
by
rbc's
watershed
plant
next
slide?
M
Please,
the
city
has
an
moa
with
the
rbca
note,
the
commitment
rvca
made
to
taxpayers
and
hearts
desire
that
it
would
review
technical
studies
in
the
context
of
province
of
ontario
policies
and
guidelines.
Next
slide,
please,
the
2002
m
r
technical
guide
and
the
moa
are
two
key
documents
that
should
inform
decisions
for
the
conservancy
development
next
slide.
Please,
the
guiding
principles
behind
the
pps
listed
in
the
m
r
technical
guide
are
presented
verbatim.
The
rvca
phil
permit
approved
for
the
conservancy
development
is
inconsistent
with
all
guiding
principles.
M
Next
slide,
please,
the
province
has
created
flowcharts
to
assist
conservation
authorities
with
coordinating
their
review
of
plans
of
subdivision
and
processing
bill
permanent
applications.
The
process
requires
the
fill
permit
approval
to
occur
after
the
planning
act
process
has
been
completed
next
slide.
Please.
M
The
moa
includes
coordination
of
stormwater
management
between
the
city
and
the
rbca.
During
the
review
of
development
applications,
the
rbca's
responsibility
is
to
establish
the
flood
and
erosion
control
criteria.
The
city's
responsibility
is
to
ensure
stormwater
infrastructure
performs
to
the
criteria
set
by
the
rbca
text.
At
page,
19
of
the
committee
report
indicates
only
the
city
has
was
satisfied
with
the
stormwater
plan
likely
because
rbc's
watershed
study
remains
incomplete
next
slide.
Please.
M
D
Thank
you
very
much
so
ted
I've
taken
your
recommendations
and
I've
written
them
up.
As
as
a
motion
that
could
be
voted
on
by
this
committee.
D
Can
you
unpack
for
me?
What
would
you
hope
the
outcome
of
those
recommendations
would
be,
and
I,
if
I
may,
obviously
this
is
pretty
technical
and
it's
outside
of
the
immediate
experience
of
many
of
the
counselors
around
this
table?
What
is
your
fear
about
what
may
transpire
if
we
approve
today's
staff
recommendations
and
how
would
your
recommendations
mitigate
against
the
outcomes
that
you
are
concerned
about.
M
It's
my
primary
concern
is,
I
would
say,
of
of
the
two
issues
between
floodplain
management
and
stormwater
management.
My
primary
concern
is
erosion,
impacts
that
are
likely
to
occur
without
any
controls.
The
council
and
the
national
capital
commission
in
2020
adopted.
M
The
climate
change
projections
and
what
they
reveal
is
that
there
will
be
an
increase
in
in
rainfall
in
the
shoulder
seasons.
So
what
what's?
What
I
am
most
concerned
about
is
you
know
an
inch
or
two
of
rain
occurring
when
you
have
the
spring
for
shet
and
in
the
jock
river,
the
spring
for
shed
can
last
for
one
or
two
weeks,
and
so
what
we'll
be
seeing
in
the
future
is
uncontrolled
urban
runoff
adding
to
the
spring
frischette,
and
it's
at
that
time
of
year.
M
The
banks
of
the
rivers
system
are
most
vulnerable
to
erosion,
and
unless
there
are
controls
put
in
place,
we
will
see
an
acceleration
of
the
erosion
and
there
are
parts
of
the
the
river
system
where
the
what's
called
the
meander
belt
encompass
parts
of
the
hearts
desire
community.
M
So
if
we
do
not
get
on
top
of
this
issue
over
the
long
term,
it
will
become
a
major
financial
burden
on
city
taxpayers
to
prevent
a
serious
problem.
M
Yeah
normally,
when
you'd
see
a
plan,
a
subdivision
you'll
go
through
a
plan
of
subdivision
process.
There'll
be
land
set
aside
for
storm
water
blocks,
where
you
construct
the
storm
water
pond
and
what
you
need
to
do
is
hold
back
the
runoff
from
the
development
area
and
slowly
release
it
at
what
you'd
say
is
pre-development
late
rates.
M
Now,
normally
this
type
of
planning
occurs
at
a
sub-watershed
level,
so
you
have
to
identify
you
know
proper
controls
to
release
into
the
river
so
that
you
don't
aggravate
runoff
conditions
in
the
river
such
that
you'll
lead
to
additional
flood
and
erosion
issues.
So
you
know
we've
seen
that
that
the
rbca
has
a
sub-watershed
study
underway
and
and
it's
to
include
public
consultation
and
it's,
I
think
it's
important.
M
You
know,
because
the
fill
permit
process
doesn't
allow
any
involvement
of
third
parties,
and
this
is
why
normally
the
fill
permit
process
comes
at
the
end
of
the
planning
act
process,
not
at
the
not
not
before
the
planning
act
process
starts.
So
I
I
think
it's
important
that
rbca
presents
its
findings
to
the
public,
just
so
that
we
know
that
we're
not
going
to
be
dealing
with
any
lasting
erosion
and
flooding
issues
downstream.
M
D
M
Shouldn't
no,
I
would
I
wouldn't,
if
I
could
just
interject,
that's
not
in
fact
what
they
said.
There
are
conditions
attached
to
the
fellow
permit
that
require
monitoring,
and
if
the
conditions
show
that
there's
an
impact,
they
have
the
the
one
of
the
conditions
that
they
have
to
do.
Additional
earth
works.
So
you
know
how
like,
without
the
monitoring
program
completed,
how
do
we
know
how
much
of
the
land
can
safely
proceed,
because
one
of
the
conditions
says
that
the
applicant
would
have
to
do
additional
earth
works.
D
So
is
it
premature
to
approve
a
rezoning
today
without
understanding
without
understanding
what
effect
the
fill
and
cut
may
have,
as
observed
over
time
now
that
it's
actually
in
place.
M
That's
correct
and
if
you
look
back
to
the
guiding
principles
in
the
m
r
technical
guideline
which
state
is
you
know
that
that's
the
guideline
they
and
it
says
that
you
have
to
defend
your
decisions
on
the
basis
of
what's
in
that
guideline,
you
know
the
the
proper
sequence
here
is
to
sort
all
of
these
things
out
before
the
the
fill
would
have
been
placed.
D
Okay,
okay,
I'm
going
to
leave
it
there
for
the
for
the
time
being
I
see
counselor
ian
has
questions
as
well.
Thank
you,
ted.
A
Thanks
council
libra
worth
noting
too,
we
do
have
a
representative
from
rito
valley
conservation
authority
with
us
when
we
get
the
questions
for
staff,
they'll
be
able
to
answer
any
specific
questions
if
they
arise.
Counselor
meehan.
B
Thank
you
very
much
chair
and
thank
you
committee
and
and
thank
you
ted
for
the
for
the
presentation.
Yes,
I
do
represent
some
of
the
communities
downstream
from
the
the
bar
haven
conservancy
and
I
am
concerned
about
the
impact
of
of
what
we're
doing
here
just
first
off
mr
cooper.
Can
you
explain
just
briefly
your
credentials
in
this?
I
would
assume
that
I
I
I
believe
you
to
be
an
expert
in
the
floodplain
and
drainage.
Can
you
just
explain
your
credentials.
M
Yes,
I
have
a
master's
degree
in
civil
engineering
specializing
in
water
resources,
engineering
and
I've
been
working
in
this
area
since
1988.
B
So
what
you're
doing
as
as
a
member
of
the
city
staff,
is
it's
pretty
brave,
actually
you're
coming
out
and
challenging
the
staff
reports?
Why
are
you
doing
that.
M
Well,
as
I
explained
this
is
these
are
my
pri.
This
is
a
private
or
personal
submission.
I
er
appealed
a
previous
zoning
and
I
had
success
at
the
interior
municipal
board
and
I
think
it's
only
fair
that
I
should
have
had
an
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
decision
making
system
before
the
the
fill
was
placed,
and
I
I
was
never
afforded
that
opportunity
and
I
think,
if
any
developer
you
know
downstream
would
have
been
impacted
by
such
a
decision.
B
It
is,
it
is
very
complicated
when
it
comes
to
the
approvals,
whether
it's
the
ritual
valley,
conservation
or
the
city
of
ottawa,
whether
it
falls
within
the
provincial
policy
statements.
But
your
belief
is
that
the
decision
making
was
actually
flawed
here
and
from
what
end
do
you
believe.
M
Well,
I
don't
know
about
vote
for
what
end
I'm,
I'm
I
like
from
a
technical
and
planning
per
perspective.
The
issue
here
really
is
that
the
provincial
policy
statement
does
not
allow
like
with
when
council
said
that
they're
you're
not
allowed
to
apply
to
zone
policy.
That
means
the
entire
floodplain
is
considered
flood
way
and
and
you're
not
allowed
it's.
Not
only
are
you
not
allowed
to
develop
it
you're
not
allowed
to
alter
it
to
change
the
landform.
M
So
somehow
what
happened
was
that
the
conservation
authority
processed
the
fill
permit
application
as
if
it
was
two
zone,
but
but
the
council
said,
you're
not
allowed
to
use
two
zone,
and-
and
this
in
here
is-
is
how
the
process
sort
of
went
off
the
rails,
and
this
all
occurred
without
any
public
consultation.
B
Which,
which
brings
us
back
to
what
happened
in
july
of
last
year
july
of
last
year?
We
dealt
with
this
same
issue
but
on
a
different
application,
and
we
came
to
the
conclusion
that
communities
downstream
should
be
apprised
or
informed
when
anything
upstream
is
altered
and
are
we
are
we
are
we
fulfilling
the
the
intent
of
what
we
decided
last
year
when
it
comes
to
this
per
this
application?
Today,.
M
In
this
application,
what
you
see
is
a
second
fill
permit
which
just
sort
of
fills
around
in
around
the
edges,
and
I
would
say
that
unless
the
downstream
residents
were
were
pre-consulted
about
that,
I
would
say
no
that
doesn't
meet
the
intent
of
the
direction
given.
Last
last
year,
yeah.
B
We
haven't,
we
haven't
done
that
so.
Mr
mr
cairo
says
you
know
that
part
of
his
presentation
is
that
none
of
the
barham
conservatory
will
be
built
on
floodplain.
But
that's
because
we've
reclaimed
the
land
is
that
correct.
M
Yeah,
like
I'm
not
disputing
that
the
conservancy
lands,
you
know
they
won't
be
subject
to
flooding,
but
that's
because
they
brought
in
and
lots
of
fill
to
keep
the
water
off
their
property.
B
So
as
an
expert
in
this,
we
cannot
guarantee
that
the
communities
downstream
won't
be
flooded.
At
some
point,
I
I
live
near
the
jock
river.
I
walk
by
the
jock
river
every
day,
we're
seeing
the
jock
river,
the
jock
river
is
impacted
by
a
lot
of
decisions
and
it's
up
and
down
several
times
a
year.
B
M
Yeah
well
right
now,
like
I
believe,
the
hearts
desire
community
dates
back
to,
I
think
1970s
it
was
built,
so
it
sort
of
was
constructed
before
this
the
province
adopted.
You
know
a
policy
based
system
and
likely
parts
of
that
development
wouldn't
have
been
allowed
to
be
developed
because
it
it.
In
fact
there
are
some
lots
and
good
would
drive
that
are
within
the
100
year
floodplain,
so
flood
levels
are
increased.
M
Those
residents
had
a
right
to
object
to
having
to
take
on
water
that
that
once
occupied
the
lands
upstream.
So
but
as
I
say,
I,
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
impact.
Well,
I
don't
know
I
don't
I
don't
know.
M
I
have
all
the
details,
but
if
it's
going
to
be
occupying
more
people's
property
as
opposed
to
getting
into
their
basements,
but
it's
it
does
occupy
goodwood
drive
and
if
it
gets
to
a
depth
you
know
often
when
you
have
flooding
and
things
everything
goes
wrong
and
if
the
depths
are
too
high,
emergency
vehicles
cannot
travel,
wouldn't
be
able
to
travel
on
goodwood
drive.
B
M
Well,
if
I
look
at
the
fill
permit,
the
the
conservation
authority
is
taking
no
responsibility
and
if
you
look
in
the
zoning
by
amendment
earned
in
the
committee
report,
the
city
didn't
identify
any
liability
or
risks.
So
you
know
it'll
be
the
landowner
down
there
having
to
sue
somebody.
B
G
Yeah,
thank
you
very
much,
I'm
interested
in
this,
and
especially
this
time
of
year,
when
we're
in
fresher
season-
and
I
live
near
the
ottawa
river
and
of
course
in
2019,
we
experienced
flooding
and
that
was
supposed
to
be
the
one
in
100
year
flood.
G
I
can't
help
but
think
about
climate
change
and
and
how
things
what
standards
we
had
before
of
what
we
thought
was
flood
zones
may
have
changed,
and
we
take
it
very
seriously
here
in
this
area,
and
I
just
wanted
to
know
what
your
opinion
is
on
that,
because
it
seems
that
flooding
could
even
be
worse
with
with
climate
change,
and
so
we
really
need
to
watch
those.
Those
rules
and
regulations
that
are
are
put
in
place.
M
On
the
jock
river,
it's
a
little
bit
different.
It's
not
the
same
size
as
system
as
the
ottawa
river.
There's
some
debate
on
whether
or
not
with
climate
change,
whether
or
not
you'll
see
less
snow
accumulation
in
its
headwaters
so
depending
on
there.
You
know,
I
think,
there's
been
some
arguments
in
fact,
in
the
original
official
plan,
amendment
application
back
in
2017
that
because
there
could
be
less
no,
in
fact,
flood
levels,
the
hundred
year
flow
could
be
lower
in
the
future
and
therefore
climate
change
might
actually
improve
things.
M
The
problem
is
that
you
don't
have
any
certainty,
because
you
know
if
you
get
a
polar
vortex
for
a
certain
length
of
time,
despite
the
fact
that
it
being
a
warmer
on
average.
You
know
in
that
particular
year.
You
could
see
a
lot
more
snowfall,
so
so
there
isn't
any
certainty
so
the
way
that
the
the
the
preferred
approach
to
floodplain
management
management
ontario
is
a
preventative
approach.
M
So
if
you
don't
know
what
the
future
holds
your
best
to
proceed
cautiously
and
but
in
terms
of
climate
change,
what
the
report
from
the
city
and
the
national
capital
region
indicated
was
that
you're
going
to
see
more
precipitation
over
the
winter
period
and
and
more
of
it
you
know,
could
be
in
the
form
of
rainfall
during
the
shoulder
seasons.
So
that
means
that
when
the
flood
level
is
elevated,
you'll
have
more
rainfall
occurring.
M
So
if
you
don't
have
storm
water
controls,
you'll
see
higher
flood
stages
and
and
that's
the
period
when
you've
got
no
vegetation,
protecting
the
banks
and
that's
where
you'll
see
more
erosion.
M
M
Yes,
what
the
conservation
authority
is
currently
updating
its
sub-watershed
plan,
because
the
there
was
a
sub
sub-watershed
plan
approved
in
2007,
but
it
didn't
contemplate
the
development
of
the
floodplain
or,
I
should
say,
the
filling
and
development
of
the
floodplain
in
the
area
of
the
conservancy
lands.
So
there
is
no
plan
available
to
inform
stormwater
management
requirements,
as
is
required
by
official
plan
policy.
M
I
believe
that
in
2016
the
rvca
undertook
a,
I
think
they
call
it
a
a
sub
catchment
report
and
they
identified
a
number
of
locations
within
reach.
One
of
the
jock
river
that
have
erosion
problems
and
you
know
they've
identified
the
need,
for
you
know,
future
works
in
those
areas.
J
Thank
you
I'll,
be
quick,
because
my
colleagues
have
asked
very
good
questions.
The
sub
watershed
report.
Do
you
know
when
that's
supposed
to
come
out?
I'm
sorry
if
you've
already
mentioned
it,
but
I
just
want
to
be
clear:
the
date
that
that's
supposed
to
be
finalized.
M
J
I'll
ask
the
rbca
official
we
have
this
later
thanks.
A
Okay,
thanks
counselor,
I
am
seeing
no
more
questions
from
committee
members,
so
thank
you,
mr
cooper,
for
your
presentation
today
welcome.
We
will
move
back
to
the
applicants,
and
so,
if
any
counselors
have
a
question
for
the
applicants
in
this,
now
is
the
time
counselor
hubli
is
first.
H
Thank
you
very
much
co-chair
sorry.
My
voice
is
bad
today.
The
couple
questions.
If
I
may
one
the
presentation
you
gave
mr
cairo
very
impressive
about
the
building
material
and
everything
and
that
you're
going
to
do
it
very
close
to
on
site.
H
F
The
short
answer
is
we've
made
a
very
concerted
effort
over
the
last
number
of
years
to
address
our
carbon
footprint
as
an
organization,
whether
that
goes
into
the
homes
when
they're
delivered
to
customers
or
in
the
production
cycle
of
getting
the
homes
built,
and
our
efforts
to
date
have
been
really
front
end
to
try
to
look
at
the
the
whole
environmental
and
ecological
footprints
of
our
activities
and
so
focusing
on
the
actual
production
of
homes.
F
We
felt
was
the
number
one
priority
once
a
home
is
closed
and
is
an
environmentally
energy
efficient
product
it
has
a
smart,
small
or
marginal.
You
know
uptick
in
environmental
gain
by
making
it
more
energy
efficient,
but
really
as
an
industry.
Our
big
environmental
gain
is
changing
the
way
that
homes
are
built,
how
the
consumable
products
that
go
into
a
home
are
procured
and
how
homes
are
assembled
and
how
carbon
can
be
mitigated
in
the
production
process.
F
So
I'd
say
that,
coming
back
to
your
question
about
the
high
performance
development
standards,
we
look
at
every
neighborhood
from
an
overall
ecological
footprint
approach.
We're
of
the
opinion
that
the
neighborhoods
footprint
is
more
relevant
than
a
home
by
home
metric
on
energy
efficiency.
All
homes
in
ontario,
built
into
the
new
building
code
will
be
energy
efficient.
F
What
makes
our
approach
I
think
important
to
consider
is
that
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
can
get
done
in
a
neighborhood
scale
and
through
production
that
go
even
further
than
than
just
whether
or
not
a
home
once
it's
closed
will
perform
energy
efficiently
over
time.
H
Okay,
thank
you.
The
other
thing
I
see
similarities
here
to
your
development.
That's
in
my
area,
known
as
the
monahan
landing
and
the
amount
of
work
that
you
did
there
along
the
the
spillway
and
everything
and
as
counselor
kavanaugh
was
saying
about
greenery
planted
in
there
there's
quite
a
bit
of
vegetation
around
there
and
so
on,
and
it's
become.
B
H
A
major
attraction
for
nearby
residents
because
you
included
a
pathway
around
it.
So
if
anything,
it's
working
to
educate
people
on
storm,
water
and
and
nature
and
protect
nature
within
our
community
is
this
looks
to
me,
but
I'd
like
to
hear
it
from
you.
It
looks
to
me
that
you're
building
on
what
you
did
there
and
the
work
you
did
with
city
staff
to
enhance
the
performance
of
the
monahan
drain
so
that
there
there
were
no
real
runoff
concerns
to
that
development.
Would
that
be
a
fair
statement.
F
Yeah
so
counselor
hugh
lee
to
you,
mr
mr
chair,
I
I'm
very
disappointed
and
and
quite
honestly,
heartbroken
by
a
lot
of
the
comments
that
have
been
raised
in
this
in
this
committee
meeting
by
mr
cooper.
To
allege
that
we
haven't
considered
erosion
to
allege
that
we
haven't
considered
storm
water
management
to
allege
that
we
don't
have
a
sub-watershed
study.
Those
are
all
complete,
factually
incorrect
statements.
F
We
do
have
a
subwater
study.
That's
been
updated
as
part
of
our
development
program
with
a
master
servicing
study,
that's
been
filed.
The
fill
permit.
That
was
the
result
of
many
years
worth
of
work
with
over
42
independent
experts
included
a
very,
very
deep
level
of
learned
understanding
on
the
status
of
the
jock
river,
the
future
state
of
the
jock
river
erosion,
conveyance
capacity,
flood
resilience,
climate
change
and
adaptation,
one
in
350
one
in
500
year.
F
Storm
events,
the
fact
that
it's
being
reduced
to
a
statement
as
if
we
haven't
considered
those
facts
is
a
travesty
and
it's
embarrassing,
and
it's
a
disrespectful
remark
to
make
when
the
conservation
authority
in
the
city
of
ottawa
worked
so
hard
to
develop.
A
subdivision
here
that
meets
all
provincial
prerequisites
is
consistent
with
the
official
plan
and
should
be
a
good
news
story
for
all
of
us
to
go
directly
into
your
question
about
the
money
and
drain
and
the
work
that
was
done.
F
There
there's
a
lot
of
similarities,
but
I'll
say
that
the
jock
river
corridor,
that's
now
being
established
as
part
of
this
development,
is
one
of
the
biggest
restoration
projects
that
exists
in
this
region.
We
are
replanting,
an
agricultural
edge,
that's
an
erosive
state,
we're
improving
the
setback
to
the
river
and
we're
enhancing
it,
improving
the
campaign
conveyance
capacity.
We
have
storm
water
facilities
within
this
complex
of
wetland
framework
they're
all
benefiting
not
only
this
neighborhood,
but
everyone
downstream.
F
F
I
apologize
we're
very
passionate
about
storm
water
management,
flood
plains
and
drainage
within
my
organization,
but
also
the
experts
I
brought
with
me
today
that
could
field
questions
if
there
are
any
jfsa
who's
a
you
know,
world-renowned
expert
and
firm
that
conservation
authorities
use
across
ontario
for
guidance
in
these
matters
has
been
involved.
I
I'm
not
sure
why
there's
there's
confusion
that
still
persists,
but
every
time
there
seems
to
be
a
planning
application
in
this
area
we're
back
to
talking
about
issues
from
2019..
H
And
I
would
agree
with
you,
mr
cairo,
in
that
I'm
looking
forward
to
what
the
rvca
is
going
to
respond
to
the
attacks
on
their
credibility
here,
but
just
to
be
clear,
city
staff
are
supporting
your
application
right.
The
the
city
engineers
responsible
for
reviewing
this
project
are
supportive
of
your
application,
which
is
maybe
why
mr
cooper
is
doing
this
on
his
own,
because
he's
not
here
representing
the
city.
So
can
you
confirm
that
city
staff
are
supportive
of
the
application.
F
So
the
application
before
committee
today
is
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
to
implement
a
plan
of
subdivision
and
to
reconcile
a
floodplain
boundary
line
that
needs
to
correspond
with
the
rvca's
boundary
line.
Rvca
determines
floodplain
limits
and,
in
particular,
there's
been
reference
to
the
second
cut
fill
permit.
There
is
no
second
permit
all
the
work
that's
been
done
in
the
floodplain
boundary
adjustment.
We're
talking
about
today
is
all
part
of
that
2019
permit.
F
So,
with
respect
to
today's
matter,
city
staff
is
in
support
and
is
recommending
approval
of
the
zoning
bylaw
we're
not
relitigating
the
2019
permit.
Today,
ted
cooper's
resource,
or
I
should
say
recourse
if
you
would
like
to
litigate
that
and
we
reached
out
to
ted,
and
he
has
not
determined
that
it
would
be
worthwhile
meeting
or
reviewing
the
technical
merits
of
the
application
or
even
the
policy
framework
on
this
file.
Even
though
the
concerns
go
back
many
years
he
hasn't
met
with
us.
F
Are
the
doors
still
open
to
meet
with
him,
but
his
recourse
would
be
an
appeal
of
his
owning
bottle
off.
He
saw
jesus.
H
D
Thank
you
very
much
frank
thank
you
for
being
here
today.
My
question
is
around
waiting
for
the
rideau
valley
conservation
authority
to
complete
a
sorry,
a
subwatershed,
a
watershed.
Sorry,
this
sub
watershed
plan,
that's
ongoing.
D
F
Thank
you
for
the
the
question
council
leaper
and
to
you,
chairs
delay
would
be
very
problematic.
We've
been
rushing
to
bring
very
needed
and
time-sensitive
housing
to
market
there's
over
100
families.
Waiting
to
move
into
this
community
that
bought
homes,
a
delay
would
create,
obviously
a
lot
of
impact
not
only
for
us
producing
the
homes,
but
also
for
people
that
are
desperately
waiting
to
move
in.
F
F
The
the
work
that
is
being
referred
to
as
an
update
to
the
subwatershed
study
in
the
area
is
is
actually
in
harmony
with
our
approved
subdivision
plan.
It
takes
into
account
our
master
servicing
that
was
reviewed
and
approved
as
part
of
our
subdivision.
So
there
is
no
lack
of
information
that
we're
waiting
on.
It's
just
simply
an
update
to
take
into
account
all
of
the
development
that
has
occurred
in
the
area.
F
D
Okay,
no
and
that's
that's
helpful.
I
I
haven't
determined
whether
to
move
ahead
with
that
or
not,
unless
you
know
counselor
me
and
may
want
me
to
to
pull
the
trigger
on
that,
in
which
case
I
will,
but
I
appreciate
that
answer
and
then
yeah.
I
would
love
to
come
down
and
see
that
facility.
Let's
it
looks
like
a
fascinating
spot.
So
thank
you
very
much
and
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
the
chairs.
J
Thank
you
very
much
chair,
I'm
just.
I
want
to
go
back
to
some
of
the
history
of
this
because
you
had
previously
applied
with
our
vca
and
they
had
rejected
that
application
at
that
time,
and
then
they
came
back
later
on
and
was
approved
by
by
the
board.
I'm
sure
counselor,
moffatt
and
others
would
know
more
about
that
process.
J
F
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
question
councillor
I'm
in
arden
and
to
you
co-chairs
there.
There
was
not
a
refusal
of
any
application
by
the
rbca,
the
section
28
permit
that
was
filed.
After
all,
you
know
years
actually
free
consultation
and
study
with
data
sets
and
modeling
work
was
approved.
Following
a
series
of
rounds
of
comments
between
us
and
the
rvca,
you
may
be
referring
to
floodplain
mapping,
updates
that
we
originally
requested
get
made
without
a
section
28
permit.
F
F
That
suggested
that,
as
as
ted
cooper
noted
in
today's
call
that
the
snow
melt
on
rainfall
events
in
the
spring
which
govern
the
100
year,
flood
plains
in
in
the
jock
river,
or
this
reach
had
become
less
severe
and
therefore
flow
rates
in
the
spring
were
reduced
from
the
previous
floodplain
mapping
and
those
reduction
in
flow
rates
would,
by
default
lower
one
and
one
hundred
year,
water
elevations,
which
we've
actually
monitored
on
site.
F
F
That
doesn't
mean
that
the
floodplain
mapping
won't
be
updated
again
in
the
future.
As
climate
climate
data
flow
rate
data
and
other
data
is
used
to
update
floodplain
mapping.
So
I
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
confusion
about
the
history
on
that,
but
there
was
never
a
refusal
of
any
application
by
the
rbca.
There
was
back
and
forth
and
comments,
but
you
know
there's
never
even
been
a
concern
about
whether
or
not
the
application
in
its
latest
form.
F
After
addressing
comments,
met
provincial
policy
or
official
plan
policy,
it
was
determined
that
it
did
and
that's
why
the
permit
was
issued.
J
Thank
you
for
that
in
terms
of
the
rvca's
process.
Now
that
they're
undergoing,
do
you
have
any
idea
when
that's
supposed
to
finish
up
again
I'll
talk
to
the
rbc
official?
But
have
you
been
part
of
that
process
and
do
you
know
when
it's
going
to
be
wrapping
up.
F
So,
thank
you
again,
councilman
arden,
and
to
your
co-chairs.
We
actually
have
asked
for
an
update.
We
are
not
part
of
the
process.
It's
an
independent
process
being
carried
out
by
the
rbca,
we're
aware
of
it.
We
are
aware
of
the
data
set,
that's
moving
for
it,
but
the
latest
update
we
got
this
week
was
that
there
is
no
date
when
they
are
they.
They
don't
have
a
horizon
date
as
to
when
that
study
will
be
completed
in
part,
because
it's
not
really
a
prerequisite
for
any
development
application.
F
F
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I'm
seeing
no
additional
questions
from
committee
members.
So
thank
you
to
frank
and
your
team
for
answering
questions
today,
we'll
go
now
to
questions
for
staff
and
we
do
have
rita
valley
conservation
authority
representatives
here
as
well
able
to
answer
questions
so
councillor
meehan
you're,
the
first
with
your
hand
up
so
please
go
ahead.
B
Thank
you
chair.
I
guess
my
question
to
rbca
is:
did
they
impose
any
conditions
on
kaivan
for
this
application.
N
You,
yes,
the
permit
application
was
approved
with
some
conditions,
counselor.
N
The
the
applicant
is
has
satisfied
most
of
the
conditions.
The
there
was
a
condition
for
a
monitoring
plan
to
be
developed
and
implemented,
so
that
is
in
process
and
a
lot
of
the
other
conditions
were
standard
conditions
that
are
implemented
as
the
as
the
works
proceed.
Things
like
sediment
erosion
control,
providing
as
built
grading
plans
and
and
similar
items.
N
Well,
the
monitoring
plan
is
is
intended
to
be
in
place
for
for
10
years.
We
we
spread
it
out
over
10
years,
because
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
could
capture
events
that
well
basically
higher
higher
flow
events.
That
would
confirm
that
the
the
modeling
is
is
accurate,.
B
We've
we've
we've
heard
allegations
today
that
rideau
valley
conservation
is
not
adhering
to
provincial
policy
that
it
is
not
up
to
the
rital
valley
conservation
to
come
up
with
policy
on
this.
Can
you
address
that?
B
The
authority
doesn't
have
the
the
conservation
authority,
doesn't
have
the
authority
to
allow
this
cut
and
fill.
N
Well,
it's
important
to
remember
that
the
the
application
kaiden
submitted
to
the
conservation
authority
was
an
application
under
section
28
of
the
conservation
authorities
act.
It
was
not.
It
was
not
a
planning
act
application,
so
the
the
applicant
didn't
require
a
planning
act,
approval
to
undertake
the
the
site
alterations
that
were
associated
with
the
cut
and
fill
so
it
wasn't.
It
wasn't
a
planning
matter.
They
weren't
making
a
decision
on
a
on
a
planning
matter
that
was
that
was
guided
by
the
would
otherwise
be
guided
by
the
pps.
B
Okay,
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
exactly
what
that
means.
Who's
got
the
who,
who
has
the
ultimate
authority
on
this.
N
Well,
the
floodplain,
the
floodplain
of
the
jock
river,
is,
is
regulated
by
the
conservation
authority
under
the
under
section
28..
So
it
is
the
conservation
authority's
purview
through
the
through
our
executive
committee,
who
heard
the
application
to
decide
whether
or
not
that
application
was
approvable
and
the
the
executive
committee
accepted
the
the
engineering
analysis
prepared
by
the
the
proponent
as
reviewed
by
conservation
authority
staff,
and
they
were
satisfied
that
the
application
was
approvable,
because
there
was
no
adverse
impact
with
respect
to
with
respect
to
flooding,
control,
flood
and
erosion
control.
N
They
put
the
monitoring
condition
on
as
a
you
know,
as
a
as
a
conservative
measure
to
you
know,
monitor
the
situation
over
the
10
years,
but
the
application
itself
stood
on
its
own
on
its
own
marriage.
They
they
didn't
like
the
the
condition
for
the
monitoring
was,
was
I
guess
I
would
describe
it
more
as
a
as
an
add-on.
It
was
out
of
an
abundance
of
of
caution.
B
It
wasn't
it
wasn't,
it
wasn't
prompted
by
doubt
that.
N
Far
from
the
truth,
I
mean
there
was
a
considerable
amount
of
staff,
time
and
effort,
and
back
and
forth
between
professional
engineers
and
other
professional
staff
to
to
get
the
application
to
the
point
where
there
was
a
high
degree
of
confidence
that
there
would
be
no
adverse
impact
with
respect
to
the
cut
and
fill.
B
Is
there
not,
you
know
I
I
profess,
I
am
not
an
expert
on
this
at
all,
but
I
I
I
think
of
you
know
a
science
experiment
where
you
are.
You
have
a
flood
plain
and
you
take
part
portions
out
of
it
and
you
fill
them.
The
water's
got
to
go
somewhere.
So
where
is
it
going
to
go
in
terms
of
of
this
in
this
particular
area?.
N
Absolutely
that
that's
that's,
that's
a
good
analogy
and
that's
why
they
hyped
the
applicant's
hydrodynamic
analysis
that
was
done
had
to
account
for
how
that
water
was
going
to
be
accommodated
in
in
the
system
and
through
the
the
fill
and
and
the
the
cut
that
was
done.
They
demonstrated
that
that
water
would
be
accommodated
within
the
within
the
channel
and
not
have
any
adverse
impacts
downstream.
N
So
there
were,
there
were
alterations
undertaken
to
the
landscape
to
to
accommodate
the
the
the
flow
of
the
of
the
water
that
would
normally
be
held
back
in
the
in
the
flood
plain.
B
It
seems
well,
I
mean
I
guess,
we're
going
to
keep
our
fingers
crossed,
but.
N
Well,
I
will.
I
will
say
that
that,
like
I
said
earlier,
that
the
our
our
executive
committee
would
never
have
approved
the
application
if
they
didn't
have
a
high
degree
of
confidence
that
the
that
the
tests
under
the
conservation
authorities
act
had
been
had
been
met.
B
J
Thank
you
very
much
chair
and
thank
you,
mr
mcdonald,
for
being
here
as
well.
I
have
a
lot
of
faith
and
you
know
trust
in
the
rvca
and
that's
why
I
just
want
to
go
through
some
of
the
history,
so
that
I
fully
understand
where
we've
come
to
back
in
back
in
2017
kaivan
had
approached
you,
the
rbca
and
the
city
and
then
had
a
proposal
to
to
fill
the
flood
plain
with
enough
soil
to
to
raise
the
land
above
the
flood
levels.
J
N
Well,
as
mr
cairo
said,
there
wasn't
a
it
wasn't
an
application
that
was
rejected.
It
was
a
discussion
more
like
a
pre-consultation
in
terms
of
how
the
approach
how
they
wanted
to
to
approach
it,
but
the
the
the
thinking
back
in
2017
was
that
the
the
101-year
flows
on
the
jock
river
were
were
somewhat
less
than
what
the
2005
mapping
was
was
based
on.
N
So
there
was,
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
what
that
one
in
100
year
flow
should
be
the
proponent
did
their
own
analysis,
the
the
conservation
authorities,
engineering
staff
looked
at
that
we
weren't
comfortable
with
it.
We
had
our
own
independent
assessment
done
to
to
look
at
the
the
years
of
record
for
for
the
gauges.
N
Sorry,
the
gauge
on
the
jock
river
compared
to
the
records
of
of
rainfall,
and
we
and
our
our
all
through
our
engineering
consultant,
concluded
that
the
flows
used
during
the
or
for
the
2005
floodplain
mapping
were
still
relevant
today.
So
we
we,
we
took
the
position
that
we,
if,
if
the
application
was
to
move
forward
or
their
proposal,
was
to
move
forward,
it
had
to
be
based
on
the
the
flows
that
were
used
for
the
2005
mapping.
J
Okay
very
helpful
and
clear.
Thank
you
for
that
kevin,
followed
up
that
first
discussion
with
you
with
the
eop
amendment.
J
And
this
was
to
allow
that
future
residential
development
in
what
was
currently
the
flood
plain
and
so
because
the
modeling
that
they
were
showing
that
kevin
was
showing.
J
It
was
indicating
that
the
the
flood
line
was
lower
than
currently
identified
by
the
rbca,
and
at
that
time
they
were
asking
for
the
the
floodplain
mapping
study
to
be
done,
but
the
rvca
had
reviewed
their
their
technical
information
and
then
concluded
that
the
as
you
were
saying,
the
existing
2005
map
was
still
valid.
So
you
didn't
support,
lowering
the
flood
elevation
or
revising
the
mapping,
and
I'm
just.
Can
you
go
into
a
little
bit
more
on
on
that
decision?.
N
Yes,
so
I
I
think
you're
you're
referring
to
opa
212.
yeah,
so
right.
So
when
that
official
plan
amendment
was
was
put
forward,
it
was
done
so
with
the.
N
I
think
the
assumption
that
at
that
time
was
that
the
there
would
be
an
updated,
floodplain
mapping
study,
so
it
it
simply
that
opa
simply
stated
that
you
know
the
the
kind
of
the
dividing
line
between
the
the
hazard
land,
that
being
the
flood
plain
and
what
was
to
be
developed
as
as
future
residential
would
be
determined
by
that
updated
mapping,
study
and
like
there
were
no.
N
There
were
no
changes
to
any
lines
or
anything
as
a
result
of
that
of
that
amendment,
because
we
we
didn't,
we
didn't
have
an
updated,
floodplain
mapping
study
so
but
after
after
that,
opa
was
was
adopted.
N
That's
when
it
was
determined
that
there
was
really
no
from
the
conservation
authority's
perspective
that
there
was
no
value
in
undertaking
an
updated,
floodplain
mapping
study,
because
we
were
comfortable
that
the
1
100-year
flow
that
was
used
in
the
2
2005
mapping
study
was
was
still
valid
and
we
didn't
you
know
we
didn't
want
to
spend,
didn't
make
sense
to
spend.
N
You
know
150,
000
or
whatever,
to
do
a
new
floodplain
mapping
study
that
wasn't
going
to
result
in
any
significant
change
to
to
the
flow
or
to
the
to
the
the
lines
on
the
map.
J
Understood
and
appreciate
again
that
clarity,
the
the
that
was
followed
by
the
cut
and
fill
permit
in
2019,
and
that
was
a
very
large
cut
and
fill
being
discussed.
J
N
The
the
the
volume
my
recollection
is,
the
volume
was
around
400
000
cubic
meters.
I
believe
I
think
my
colleague
erica
land
is
in
the
meeting
as
well.
He
might
be
able
to
answer
that
question
a
little
more
accurately
than
what
I
can
at
this
point.
A
J
Great
to
see
you
or
hear
you
eric,
no,
I
think
I
think
yeah
around
the
400
000
is
is
correct
from
what
I
recall
as
well,
and-
and
I
just
on
that
amount
like
the
the
scale
of
that
amount.
Can
you
just
go
into
is
that
is
that
normal
is
it?
Is
that
a
very
high
amount
in
terms
of
that
amount
is
there?
Are
there
concerns
with
that
that
amount
of
of
a
cut
and
fill
in
in
this
regard
from
rbca
in
general,
or
how?
N
Yeah,
I
just
actually
I
just
pulled
up
the
permit
yeah,
so
the
the
number
was
about
407
000
cubic
meters,
and-
and
yes
it-
I
would
say
this-
is
not
a
standard
application
that
we
would
receive
for
for
fill
for
a
cut
and
fill
just
given
the
volume.
I
can
say
that
it,
it
is
the
largest
cut
and
fill
volume
that
we
have
ever
had
to
have
to
had
to
consider.
So
it's
not
this
volume
of
fill
is
is
not
what
I
would
call
a
common
request.
J
Okay,
I
appreciate
that,
in
terms
of
you
know
where
we
are
now
the
the
sub
watershed
study,
that's
being
going,
that's
that
is
happening
concurrently.
I
mentioned
I'd.
Ask
about
the
date
that
that
is
expected
to
to
wrap
up
and
have
results
from.
Do
you
have
that.
N
Yeah,
I
can't
give
you
a
firm
date,
but
I
can
give
you
an
update
as
to
the
status,
so
the
the
report
is
is
draft.
There
is
a
draft
report
that
we
have
that
our
staff
are
reviewing
that
city
staff
are
reviewing
as
as
well.
We
are
awaiting
comments
from
from
the
city
on
on
the
report
before
those
go
back
to
the
to
the
consultant,
but
you
know
the
study
has
been
underway
for
some
time.
N
We
had
a
couple
of
delays
because
we
were
looking
for
some
land
use
information
from
the
city
and
that
that
kind
of
got
caught
up
with
the
with
the
new
official
plan,
and
so
there
were.
There
were
some
some
delays
that
we
didn't
anticipate,
but
it's
certainly
our
intent
to
wrap
this
up
as
expeditiously
as
possible.
N
We
know
it's,
you
know
it's
important
and
just
a
matter
of
clarification
or
point
of
clarification.
The
subwatershed
study
we're
referring
to
is
the
jock
river
reach
one
sub
watershed
study.
That
is
actually
a
study
that
was
led
by
the
city
of
ottawa
and
certainly
the
conservation
authority
partnered
with
the
city
on
that
and
participated
in
in
the
study.
But
it
was
the
ritual
valley
conservation
authority
that
identified
the
need
to
update
the
the
I
guess,
the
section
of
the
report
that
dealt
with
the
current
criteria
for
no
quality.
N
Sorry,
no
quantity
control
for
storm
water
management
on
the
lower
reach
of
the
jock.
So
it's
basically
the
conservation
authority
kind
of
investigating,
further
or
updating.
I
guess
a
report
that
the
city
had
already
had
in
place.
J
Okay,
understood
that's
helpful
as
well
when
this
came
for
the
the
the
reports
that
had
been
submitted,
and
I
guess
peer
reviewed
by
by
kaivan
you
had
you
had
listed
several
cautions
about
developing
within
that
that
what
existed
as
the
flood
plain,
can
you
just?
Can
you
highlight
what
those
those
cautions
were
and
what
I'm
getting
to
here
is
the
level
of
risk
that
we're
faced
with.
I
I,
if
there's
a
significant
risk,
then
I
want
to
make
sure
we
take
the
time.
N
Well,
the
I
mean
the
the
risks
were
were
certainly
pointed
out
to
the
to
the
developer
in
terms
of
making
sure
that
you
know.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
the
conservation
authority
had
to
be
satisfied
before
we
issued
the
permit
that
there
was
not
going
to
be
any
adverse
impact
with
respect
to
flood
levels
or
erosion
control
and,
as
I
said
earlier,
the
the
the
authorities
executive
committee,
you
know
accepted
the
the
the
applicants,
engineering
studies
and
the
conclusions
that
there
would
be
that
there
would
be
no
no
adverse
impact.
N
But
we're
also
talking
today
about
adverse
impact
with
respect
to
storm
water
management
and
the
the
the
plan
of
subdivision
has
been
draft
approved,
with
a
condition
that
will
require
the
applicant
to
adhere
to
whatever
storm
water
management
criteria
are
in
place
at
the
time
they
make
the
the
application
for
approval
of
their
stormwater
management
works.
So
that
is
the
condition
in
the
in
the
plan
of
subdivision
that
will
speak
to
the
the
the
quality.
Sorry,
the
the
quantity
control
issue
so
and
and
that's
gonna.
J
Very
good,
very
clear
again,
thank
you
for
for
that.
I
appreciate
that
I
mean
I'm
taking
your
view
of
this
very
seriously
because,
as
I
say,
I
trust
the
rbca
and
you
do
fantastic
work.
J
I
deal
with
you
folks,
a
lot
because
of
my
ward,
so
in
rita,
rita
river
running
right
through
it,
and
so
you
know,
I
always
have
very
good
dialogue
with
you
and
that's
why
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
considering
all
the
risks
here
and
and
you're
the
trusted
voice
that
I
hear
on
this.
J
So
the
more
you
can
give
me
the
the
better
on
this
to
to
feel
like
we're
mitigating
risks
appropriately,
given
that
you're,
given
your
expertise
and
that
the
last
point
I'll
just
read
that
sub
watershed
study,
do
you
see
any
reason
to
to
wait
and
see
the
results
there
given?
I
guess
they'll
come
later
in
terms
of
your
application.
J
The
application
for
when
the
build
out
occurs
is
that,
if
that's
the
process
yeah,
I
mean
a
reason
to
wait
for
that
at
this
time
and
and
see
what
that
says
before
moving
ahead.
N
It
was
never
the
conservation
authority's
intent
to
kind
of
change
the
rules
of
the
game
midway
through
a
development
process.
We
know
you
know
we
never
thought
that
would
be
fair
to
to
to
any
applicant,
but
I
think
we've
you
know
through
through
the
the
working
with
the
city
on
the
conditions
of
draft
approval
that
we
we
have
built
in
accountability
to
whatever
comes
forward
in
in
the
sub-watershed
study,
in
terms
of
what
the
the
the
criteria
might
be
for
for
storm
water
management.
N
So,
like
I
said
we're
trying
to
move
forward
with
that
as
expeditiously
as
possible,
but
no
it
wasn't
the
conservation
authority's
intent
to
have
the
subdivision
held
up.
While
that
subwatershed
study
was
was
being
was
being
completed.
J
Okay,
okay,
but
if
it
reveals
something
that
needs
to
change
with
the
development
that'll
be
built
in
or
are
we
going
to
be
at
a
later
stage
at
that
time?
That's
my
question
is:
is:
can
you
easily
yeah
right.
N
I
think
I
think
the
the
the
onus
will
be
on
the
developer
to
demonstrate
how
they're
going
to
make
the
criteria
work
and
if,
if
that
requires,
you
know
an
amendment
to
the
plan
of
of
subdivision
or
how
the
you
know,
the
lots
are
laid
out
or
whatever.
Then
then,
that's
something
that
the
developer
is
going
to
have
to
deal
with.
N
J
D
D
Is
it
fair
to
say
that
the
sub-watershed
study
that
you're
currently
undertaking
is
unlikely
to
suggest
that
the
fill-in
cut
would
need
to
be
modified?
That's
done.
The
sub-watershed
study,
however,
might
suggest
mitigations
for
stormwater
that
will
need
to
be
implemented
in
the
course
of
creating
some
of
these
subdivisions
and
that
there
is
a
process
in
place
whereby
the
developer
is
going
to
have
to
develop
a
stormwater
management
plan
to
the
city's.
The
city,
satisfaction
that
can
be
that
will
support
the
findings
of
the
sub
watershed
study.
D
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
that
the
which,
which
relates
directly
to
my
thoughts
around
holding
up
the
zoning
approval
until
that
sub
watershed
study
is
done,
but
that
doesn't
sound
like
a
productive
path
to
take
at
this
point
now
that
I
have
a
better
understanding
of
what
that
is,
I
did
want
to
double
check
on
the
original
section,
28
cut
and
fill
approval.
D
N
The
the
I
mean
any
any
landowner.
Any
applicant
has
the
the
opportunity
to
make
an
application
under
section
28
of
the
conservation
authorities
act.
They
don't
have
to
have
any
like
there's
no
prerequisite
in
the
legislation
for
them
to
have
a
planning
approval
in
in
in
place
before
we
consider
an
application
under
section
28.
But
I
will
reiterate
that
the
the
the
the
application
for
the
for
the
cut
and
fill
that
was
an
application
to
undertake
site
alteration.
N
There
was
no
equivalent
process
under
the
planning
act
that
the
that
the
applicant
was
required
to
to
follow
in
order
for
them
to
to
do
that.
To
do
that,
work,
if
I
mean
if
they
had
required
an
approval
under
the
planning
act,
then
you
know
the
city
would
have
required
that,
but
there
was
no
requirement
for
it.
D
N
And
we
I
mean
as
much
as
we
we
certainly
encourage.
You
know
landowners
to
follow.
You
know
a
planning
process.
First,
I
mean
we
receive
many
many
applications
for
say
like
redevelopment
or
you
know,
development
on
vacant,
lots
of
record
that
fall
within
the
regulated
area
and
in
the
in
those
cases.
You
know
we
we,
if
an
application,
requires
a
rezoning
or
some
sort
of
some
sort
of
planning
act
approval.
We
certainly
encourage
the
applicant
to
do
that
first,
but
it's
not
a
prerequisite
under
the
conservation
authorities.
Act.
D
And
then
my
my
third
and
last
question
is
around
liability.
If
the,
if
the
cut
and
fill
permits,
analysis
that
you
did
turns
out
to
be
wrong,
who
to
whom
can
the
landowners
turn
if
there
is
flooding
for
restitution
and
compensation.
D
N
Right,
the
conservation
authority-
you
know
when
we're
when
we're
processing
an
application
under
section
28,
we
exercise
our
due
diligence.
There's
a
very
rigorous
engineering
review
is
is
undertaken.
Sometimes
peer
reviews
are
involved.
So,
yes,
absolutely
the
the
the
authority
and
the
executive
committee
don't
take
that
job
lightly.
D
Okay,
today's
zoning
bylaw
application
proposes,
as
I
understand
it,
updating
the
floodplain
overlay
to
reflect
the
work
that
has
been
done
through
the
site
alteration.
N
There
was
a
a
previous
application
as
as
melanie
described,
to
to
modify
the
floodplain
overlay,
but
this
is
this
is
a
further
amendment
to
the
floodplain
overlay
to
better
match
the
the
as
built
drawings
that
we
have
that
we've
used
to
modify
our
floodplain
mapping.
So
it's
simply
bringing
in
we're
sorry
modifying
the
floodplain
overlay
in
accordance
with
the
conservation
authorities,
updated
floodlines
for
that
site.
D
And
the
city
council's
role,
this
planning
committee's
role,
as
as
you
understand
it
is,
is
not
to
second-guess
the
rvca's
authority
and
telling
us
that
a
floodplain
modification
is
is
appropriate.
N
That's
correct:
we
we
have,
we
have
vetted
the
the
the
as
built
drawings
and
the
and
the
lines
and
it's
gone
through
a
again
a
rigorous
kind
of
gis
exercise
and
we
are,
as
as
the
producers
of
the
floodplain
mapping.
We
have
a
high
degree
of
confidence
that
those
lines
are
correct.
We
pass
that
information
on
to
the
city
and
then
the
city
modifies
its
zoning
accordingly.
N
D
This
has
been
a
fascinating
morning,
actually
glenn.
Thank
you
for
your
help.
A
Okay,
councillor
hubley.
H
Thank
you
very
much
co-chair.
Thank
you,
mr
mcdonald,
for
your
frank
answers
here.
I'm
going
to
put
you
on
a
bit
of
a
spot
here,
because
I
I
appreciate
the
answers
you've
just
given
to
my
colleagues
here,
and
I
think,
what's
pointing
out
to
me
anyway,
is
that
a
number
of
mr
cooper's
assertions
may
not
quite
be
accurate
or
not
nuanced
properly.
H
One
of
the
statements
he
made
was
that
rvca
is
taking
no
responsibility
and
I'm
going
to
tell
you.
I've
worked
with
a
south
asian
conservation
authority,
the
mississippi
conservation
authority
and,
to
a
lesser
degree,
the
rideau
conservation
authority
on
different
files,
and
I
find
you
have
some
of
the
best
staff
in
the
industry.
H
I
I
like
the
idea
that
we
have
the
conservation
authorities
to
be
specialists
in
the
field
that
you're
responsible
for
so
I
found
that
a
rather
shocking
comment
by
mr
cooper
to
suggest
that
the
rvca
was
not
asking
for
certain
documents,
as
councillor
weber,
just
clarified
for
us
and
but
other
statements
in
there.
So
I'd
like
to
give
you
this
opportunity
to
respond
in
any
way,
you'd
like
to
the
assertions
that
mr
cooper
made
about
your
organization.
N
Thank
you
councillor.
Well,
I
mean
mr
cooper
is
certainly
entitled
to
to
his
opinions
and
it's
it's
pretty
clear
from
from
his
presentations
today
and
obviously
the
correspondence
that
we've
had
with
him
previously
that
he
he
disagrees
with
the
decision
that
was
made
and
and
the
process
that
was
followed
to
to
arrive
at
those
at
those
decisions.
But
again
he's
certainly
entitled
to
those
to
those
opinions,
and
you
know
nobody
has
to
to
like.
I
guess
the
decision.
N
That
was
what
that
was
made,
but
it
doesn't
in
any
way
diminish
the
you
know
the
amount
of
of
of
effort
and
and
technical
review
that
went
into
the
the
processing
of
the
of
the
application
and
again
the
you
know,
the
executive
committee,
the
authorities,
executive
committee
and
staff.
N
N
So
again,
you
know
there
may
be
disagreement
about
the
decision,
but
but
it
doesn't
take
away
from
the
the
due
diligence
that
went
into
reviewing
it
and
and
getting
us
to
this
point.
H
Thank
you.
Could
you
also
mentioned
like
there's
some
concern
over
downstream
flooding
later
on
and
and
concerns
with
the
the
I
think,
cooper's
words
were
on
controlled
runoffs.
H
Could
you
talk
about
some
of
the
options
that
are
available
to
mitigate
that
so
that
counselors
can
have
a
and
the
public
that
are
listing
can
have
more
confidence
in
the
fact
that
you
know,
for
example,
there's
icds
intellect
control
devices,
there's
constrictor
pipes,
there's
all
kinds
of
things
that
we
can
do
in
a
situation
like
this
that
controls
that
runoff.
So
I
I
take
great
objection
to
the
suggestion.
That's
on
control.
H
Could
you
address
that,
because
you,
you
would
have
even
more
examples
as
to
what
can
be
done
and
reasonably
done
when
we
get
further
down
the
road
like
when
we
have
your
watershed
report
and
when
we
actually
have
the
the
mitigation
plan
in
place
can
can
you
touch
on
some
of
the
options
that
we
would
have
available
there.
N
It
goes
back
to
one
of
the
original
studies
that
were
done
for
the
I
guess
what
was
referred
to
at
that
time
as
the
the
south
urban
communities,
both
on
the
gloucester
and
nepean
sides,
and
so
that
recommendation
was
brought
forward
again
in
the
in
the
in
the
most
recent
version
of
the
jock
river
reach,
one
subwatershed
study,
and
if,
if
the
update
to
that
study
concludes
that
that
assumption
is
no
longer
valid
and
there
has
to
be
or
there
should
be
quantity
control,
then
there
there
will
be
options
to
to
to
deal
with
that.
N
I
think
the
the
concern
that
has
been
expressed
is
that
the
current
plan
of
subdivision
does
not
contain
any
blocks
of
land
that
have
been
set
aside
for
kind
of
our
conventional
stormwater
management
facilities.
But
again,
if
the.
If
the
study
does
indeed
recommend
that
quantity
control
is
required,
then
the
onus
will
be
on
the
developer
to
demonstrate
how
that's
going
to
be
done,
and
there
are
a
large
range
of
options
available
to
do
that.
N
I'm
not
a
professional
engineer
myself,
I'm
a
professional
planner,
but
not
an
engineer,
but
I'm
certainly
familiar
with
a
lot
of
the
the
approaches
that
that
can
be
taken,
and
certainly
you
know,
with
the
focus
on
low
impact
development,
led
techniques
for
storm
water
management.
Those
are
all
things
that
can
be
that
can
be
explored.
So
again,
I'm
not
an
engineer,
but
I
I
do
understand
that
there
are
plenty
of
options
available
to
deal
with
it,
but
that
will
rest
with
the
with
the
developer.
H
One
I'll
add
one,
and
then
I'm
going
to
be
done,
mr
cochair,
but
one
such
option
that
comes
in
it
can
come
in
after
the
fact
and
and
we've
done
it
across
the
city
in
a
number
of
locations
is
take
a
soccer
pitch,
for
example,
and
recess
it
like
drop
it
down,
12,
inches
or
or
more,
and
it
becomes
a
basically
storm
water
pond
for
six
to
12
hours
after
a
major
storm
and
then
through
a
almost
like
a
weeping
tile
network
that
water
is
dispersed
under
the
ground
in
that
time
and
and
you're
back
playing
soccer
within
hours.
H
So
there's
lots
of
things
here.
I
I
would
urge
my
colleagues
to
not
think
that
we're
going
to
leave
anybody
in
a
big
puddle
here
at
the
end
of
this
there's,
there's
ways
that
things
can
be
done.
I've
seen
it
in
my
own
area,
I'm
more
than
happy
to
take
anybody
around
a
tour
of
monahan
drain
to
see
the
work
that
frank
and
ryan
pokenhorn
from
the
city,
the
work
that
they
put
into
that
area
and
it's
just
an
actual
gem
in
my
neighborhood.
H
So
if
you
want
to
see
it
I'll,
take
you
through
it,
but
I
certainly
have
confidence
in
this
application.
So
I'm
going
to
thank
mr
mcdonald
for
his
his
frank
comments
and
I'll
be
done
now
co-chair
thanks.
Thank
you.
Counselor.
E
E
You
know,
as
someone
who
sat
on
the
rvca,
really
the
only
member
of
council
who's
been
on
the
rbc
and
regularly
attended
meetings
for
the
last
10
years.
It's
it's
it's
nice
to
to
have
your
your
frank
approach
here
and
the
work
of
the
rvca.
E
I
have
you
know
the
reason
why
the
ward
that
I
represent
is
being
renamed.
The
rito
jock
is
because
the
jock
river
runs
from
ashton
down
through
richmond
and
eventually
ends
at
the
ward
boundary
at
the
416,
which
then
leads
directly
into
the
conservancy
lands.
So
it's
a
huge
part
of
our
award.
The
jock
river
is
always
the
rito
and
the
work
of
the
rbca
to
ensure
the
management
that
of
that
of
that
water
shed
is
done
with
with
the
utmost
respect
for
for
the
properties
and
the
residents
that
are
in
it.
E
I
mean
half
of
the
village
of
richmond
is
built
in
the
floodplain,
because
the
village
of
richmond
predates
floodplain
mapping.
So
it's
it's.
It's
a
it's
a
huge
concern
for
anyone
downstream
as
to
what
happens
upstream,
and
it's
because
of
the
rvca
that
I
have
trust
in
the
process
to
be
able
to
support
files
like
this
and
and
similar
to
when
it
was
actually
kaivan
as
part
of
the
western
development
lands
in
richmond.
E
That
went
through
a
similar
process
involving
the
a
couple
municipal
drains
in
the
area
and
some
low-lying
undeveloped
lands
that
are
now
being
developed
with
no
impacts
upstream
or
downstream
to
residents
in
richmond
because
of
the
work
that
the
applicant
did
with
city
staff
and
our
drainage
department
and
the
rpca.
So
glenn
eric
just
appreciate
your
time
here
today.
Thank
you.
A
Thanks
chairman
well
said:
I'm
not
seeing
any
other
questions.
This
has
been
a
good
discussion
thanks
to
colleagues
for
the
excellent
questions
and
it's
kind
of
interesting.
It's
almost
like
a
workshop.
We
spent
the
first
part
of
this
meeting
talking
about
bill
109
and
approval
times.
This,
I
think,
has
been
a
good
look
into
workshop
into
why
sometimes
planning
applications
do
take
a
while
to
review
and
approve
there's
some
very
good
reasons
for
that.
So
thank
you
to
to
staff
and
to
rbca.
D
Sorry
is
there
a
question,
questions
for
staff,
city
staff.
A
D
Thanks,
I
I
think
the
last
couple
of
questions
I
have
are,
for
mr
mark
sure,
go
for
it.
So,
mr
mark,
it's
we've
heard
from
the
rvca
that
they
expect
the
city
to
respect
their
determinations
with
respect
to
where
the
floodplain
overlays
should
be
mapped.
L
D
N
D
Highly
okay
and
then
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
as
well.
Some
of
this
discussion
has
revolved
around
when
it
is
appropriate
or
not
to
apply
for
a
cut
and
fill
permit
under
section.
28
of
the
act
is
a
is
a
planning
application
at
the
city,
a
requirement
to
apply
for
a
section,
28
cut
and
fill.
No.
Mr,
I
appreciate
your
confirmation
on
all
of
those.
Thank
you,
mr
mark.
A
A
The
next
item
that
was
held.
The
last
item
that
was
held
was
that
motion
on
changes
to
the
development
charges
act.
That
was
my
motion
so
I'll
cede
the
chair
to
chair
moffat.
There
were
a
couple
questions
I
believe,
from
counselor
leaper
and
counselor
menard.
E
Yeah,
it
was
council,
menard
had
his
hand
up
first
and
then
counselor
leaper,
but
if
councilman
are
stepped
nope
there
is
sean
go
ahead.
You
had
a
question
on.
E
J
Yep
occasionally,
I
turn
my
screen
off
for
those
types
of
reasons,
but
the
question
I
had
around
development
charges.
It
wasn't
so
much
on
the
motion.
Is
it
just
a
general
discussion,
one
that
I
hope
comes
back
to
planning
soon
and
that's
just
around
how
we,
how
we
charge
wow,
what
we
charge
for?
What
and
I
wanted
to
raise
it
with
staff,
because
we
we
do
have
differing
charges
for
different
types
of
properties.
So
our
new
official
plan
is
targeting
many
more
multi-units
and
trying
to
have
less.
J
We
are
extremely
low
and
so-
and
I
just
wonder
about
the
incentivization
of
of
multi-family
units
versus
the
incentivization
for
development
charges
around
single
families,
for
example,
single-family
homes
or
single
unit
homes,
and
so
I
I
guess
I
just
put
it
to
staff
about.
When
is
the
appropriate
time
to
start
talking
about
that.
I
recognize
city
staff
also
recently
brought
forward
a
report
on
the
tax
rates
for
multi-residential
versus
versus
a
single
unit
and
or
yeah
multi-residential
versus
residential
and
the
multi-residential
is
still
still
higher.
J
B
Chair
I
have
gary.
G
Baker
he's
in
on
this
meeting.
Perhaps
he
can
respond
to
the
question
about
the
dc's.
I
Sure
so
so
the
I
guess,
your
first
question
there's
a
built-in
incentive
or
there's
a
bit
built-in
differentiation
when
calculating
development
charges
that,
if
you're,
applying
a
development
charge
to
a
single
family
or
semi-detached
in
ottawa,
you,
the
persons
per
unit,
is
assumed
to
be
higher
right.
I
So
it's
soon
to
be
like
three
3.5
3.4,
whereas
if
you're
building
a
a
stacked
town
home
or
a
back-to-back
town
home,
it's
classified
as
an
apartment,
so
those
apartment
units
have
persons
per
unit
of
say
1.8
to
1.82,
so
they
would
pay
a
lower
development
charge
based
on
that
person's
per
unit
calculation.
So
more
persons
per
unit
in
single
semis,
fewer
in
town
homes
and
since
2008
we've
we've
been
applying
a
department
persons
per
unit
to
all
back
to
back
and
stacked
town
homes.
So
that's
kind
of
the
the
built-in.
I
Of
of
development
charges
for
those
types
of
units.
J
I
appreciate
part
the
part
partial
answer
on
on
one
piece
of
that,
but
but
the
bigger
question
is
around:
where
are
standing
in
ontario?
I
understand
that
we
are
exceedingly
low,
if
not
the
second
lowest,
the
lowest
for
development
charges
on
that
type
of
build
on
the
single
unit
build
and-
and
I
just
I'm
trying
to
get
at
that
fact
in
terms
of
what
we're
trying
to
build
here
into
the
future.
J
I
totally
take
the
point
around
person
per
per
unit,
but
it's
not
so
much
it's
our
comparison
for
other
cities
is
what
I'm
getting
at
and
the
the
numbers
I've
seen.
We
are
very,
very
low.
So
perhaps
you
could
comment
on
on
that
and
when
this
might
come
back
to
us
for
consideration
of
of
how
we
set
dc's
on
these
on
these
types
of
properties,.
I
Yeah
the
so
the
I've
looked
at
recently,
just
maybe
a
month
or
two
ago
I
looked
at
the
2021
bma
study,
which
kind
of
what
looks
at
various
fees
and
development
charges
and
tax
rates
in
the
province.
So
if
you
look
at
that
particular
document,
it
lists
it
does
a
survey
of
development
charge
rates
throughout
the
province
so
for
single
family
dwellings.
I
Right
now
and
in
part
it's
because
in
the
2019
we
just
did
an
interim
update,
but
we're
ranked
45th
in
the
province
so
out
of
the
200
or
so
or
or
how
many
responded
to
that
survey.
We're
45th
for
single-family
dwelling
rates
and
I
believe,
we're
around
21st
or
22nd
when
it
comes
to
non-residential
development
charge
rates
based
on
the
2021
bma
study.
So,
relatively
speaking,
we
are.
J
Big
cities
in
there
that
are
like
anywhere
close
to
us,
because
I
looked
at
that
too.
That's
what
I'm
referring
to
is
that
exact
study,
and
so
when
I
look
at
cities
our
size
or
even
just
big
cities
classified
in
ontario,
I
think
we're
last
of
the
big
cities.
I
Yeah
I
mean
it's
it's
like
because
yeah,
if
we,
if
you
can
you
can
differentiate
you,
can
you
can
kind
of
parse
we're
we're
kind
of
more
close
to
the
top
we'd
look
at
single
tier,
but
when
you,
when
you
look
at
as
the
bma
does,
both
upper
and
lower
tier
jurisdictions
say
up
in
the
gta
like
york,
peel,
durham
halton,
they
have
the
the
lower
and
upwards
here
together
and
and
their
rates
tend
to
be
closer
to
the
90
100
thousand
hundred
and
ten
thousand
for
single
family
dwelling,
where
ours
is
around
in
around
the
40
35
40
45
000
dollar
range.
J
Sorry,
all
right
I
lagged
there,
I
did
not
mean
to
cut
you
off
at
all.
If
I
did,
I
was
just
lagging
so
I
guess
this
is
just
a
flag
for
the
future
that
it's
something
we
need
to
consider
the
the
charges
that
we
put
on
to,
for
example,
multi-family
whether
we
can
lower
some
of
those
in
compensation
for
a
higher
rate
on
our
single
families.
To
to,
I
guess,
evoke
what
the
official
plan
says
we're
trying
to
do.
J
We
need
to
align
some
policies
and
particularly
around
around
land
as
well.
The
way
we
pricing
land
I've
been
having
lots
of
conversations
with
people
about
affordability
and
I'd
love
to
bring
that
in
to
this
to
this
council
about,
you
know
some
innovative
moves
we
can
make
on
that
end
of
things
and
development
charges
are
certainly
one
of
them.
I
think
we
need
to
review
and
take
a
look
at,
but
gary
thank
you
so
much
for
for
that
information
and
very
appreciative.
I
There's
one
other
I've
kind
of
back
a
number
of
years
ago.
I
I've
asked
about
kind
of
sort
of
what
you're
asking
as
well,
because
I
noticed
that
some
municipalities
have
attempted
to
do
what
you're
talking
about,
and
the
challenge
that
was
identified
to
me
by
our
consultant
at
the
time
is
that
development
charges
almost
is
a
very
prescriptive
type
of
process,
so
that
person's
per
unit
is
is
kind
of
the
driver
and,
as
he
said,
and
I
I
can
send
you
the
his
response,
when
I
asked
about
that
and
it's
it's
difficult
to
apply
them
on
the
basis
of
ability
to
pay.
I
It's
it's
more
of
a
here.
Here's
the
formulaic
application
and
you
this
is
what
we've
calculated
and
versus
say,
trying
to
differentiate
on
a
on
a
basis
that
would
draw
in
the
ability
to
pay
or
affordability
or
whatever
right.
So
that's
kind
of
that.
That's
that
conundrum
of
development
charges
that,
but
I
can
send
you
like
that.
That's
something
I
asked
him
about.
I
Maybe
10
years
ago
there
was
a
municipality
that
was
kind
of
contemplating
what
you're
we're
discussing
and-
and
I
thought
it
was
intriguing
at
the
time
so,
like
I
said,
let
me
give
you
some
additional
background
information.
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you,
chair.
E
Thank
you
and
thank
you
gary
canceleeper,
do
you
have
a
question
or
did
it
get
asked
by?
I.
E
B
E
D
Thank
you,
I'm
sorry
sure,
with
no
disrespect
to
coach
gower,
it's
a
this
is
a
counselor
motion.
I
just
would
like
to
hear
what
gary
has
to
say
gary.
Do
you
consider
that
moving
down
this
path
is
advisable
and
prudent.
I
Yes,
sorry
and
I
guess
it's
through
the
chair
yeah,
I
mean
with
the
the
motion
that's
coming
for
today.
It's
it's
in
referencing
the
changes
that
were
introduced
by
the
province
back
in
the
fall
of
2019
that
came
into
effect
as
of
january
1st
2020
under
bill
138.
I
So
if
and
that
that
interest
rate
is
is
applicable
to
deferral
of
development
charges
and
frozen
dc
rates,
so
I
think
the
the
rate
that
we're
proposing
is
kind
of
a
compromise
between
various
options
that
we
looked
at
so,
but
I
think
it's
it's
frankly,
it's
relatively
higher
than
other
municipalities
are
charging,
so
we'll
see
what
the
reaction
will
be
as
of
after
may.
I
First,
but
like
I
said
it
was
a
compromise
between
extremes,
and
so
we
we
thought,
with
in
consultation
with
planning,
of
course,
and
with
finance.
I
thought
that
was
the
best
option
to
go
with
that
particular
rate
right
now
and
and
see
what
happens
type
of
thing
right,
but
it's
it
is
slightly
higher
than
what
what's
being
charged
a
lot
of
this
palliative
charge
of
five
percent
flat
fee
flat
interest
rate
and
but
we're
going.
I
We
ours
is
more,
it
has
two
different
determinants,
and
one
of
them
was
would
have
resulted
in
a
interest
rate
of
17.7
percent,
which
is
very,
very,
very,
very
high,
and
I
don't
know
if
the
to
be
frankly,
I
don't
know
if
the
province
would
have
allowed
us
to
do
that,
because
the,
although
we
had
the
flexibility
to
determine
a
rate,
the
minister
has
the
powers
to
step
in
and
say
that
that's
not
reasonable,
and
I
I
have
a
funny
feeling
that
they
would
have
said
that
17.7
percent
would
have
been
deemed
to
be
unreasonable.
I
D
Okay,
so
the
the
rate
is,
is
a
staff
supported
rate
that's
being
proposed,
and
the
risk
it
sounds
like
is
that
the
developers
may
chafe
and
view
that
as
too
high,
rather
than
anyone
considering
this
to
be
too
low.
I
Yes-
and
I
think
the
minister
I
mean,
like
I
said
they-
they
didn't
prescribe
a
rate
when
they
introduced
bill
138.
They
left
it
up
to
municipalities
to
make
the
determination,
but
I
I
like
I
said
instinctively
I
mean
17.7
seems
to
be.
I
don't
know
if
they
would.
I
think
someone
might
complain
about
that
or
or
say
that
that's
that's
way
too
high,
plus
the
the
the
bill
138.
It's
it's
supposed
to
incentivize
the
provision
of
of
rental
housing,
affordable
housing,
institutional.
I
So
it
does
have
a
benefit
that
the
province
wants
to
promote
those
particular
uses
so
charging
a
rate
that
it
would
be
extremely
high.
We
would
definitely
defer
that
or
deter
that
from
happening.
E
Great,
thank
you.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
questions
just
to
account
for
menard
when
he
was
there,
and
you
know
his
kids
were
there.
I
just
want
to
let
everyone
know
for
those
who
who
may
not
have
kids
they're,
not
always
like
that.
In
fact,
they're
quite
often
only
like
that
when
you
as
a
parent,
are
trying
to
come
off
as
being
serious
and
usually
they
they
lie
dormant
when
you're
not
needed
and
when
you're
not
important.
E
Here
they
lay
dormant
somewhere
in
the
house
and
then
only
then
at
that
moment,
when
you
need
to
be
serious,
do
they
awaken
like
monsters
in
the
night
and
they
take
over
and
control,
and
that's
what
you
get
is
what
happened
when
councilman
was
speaking.
I
once
had
one
who
was
super
quiet.
I
think
he
was.
He
was
faking
sleep
for
half
an
hour
and
then
I
started
a
20-minute
meeting
with
which
he
screamed
the
entire
20
minutes
only
to
fall
asleep
right
after
the
meeting
was
over.
E
They
do
it
on
purpose.
They
know
they
have
an
evil.
Sixth
sense
among
them.
Kids,
I
tell
you
the
bright
side.
Is
you
only
have
two,
but
you
know
I
was
I
used
to
only
have
two
as
well
and
then
with
every
election
came
another
kid.
It's
the
secret
reason
why
I'm
not
running
again,
but
that's
okay,
okay!
So
I'm
off
topic,
which
is
why
I
don't
regularly
share
this
meeting.