►
From YouTube: Planning and Housing Committee - August 16, 2023
Description
Planning and Housing Committee
Meeting #: 13
Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2023
Time: 9:30 am
Location: Champlain Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West, and by electronic participation
A
C
D
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
just
want
to
recognize
that
counselors,
Menard
and
devine
are
with
us
as
well.
I
know,
there's
a
couple
of
items
on
the
agenda
of
interest
to
them,
with
the
Committees
permission,
I'm
just
going
to
move
the
order
of
some
of
these
around
a
bit
so
that
we
deal
with
development
reviews
that
have
public
delegations
ahead
of
some
of
the
policy
work.
That's
a
little
bit
later
on.
So
I'll
make
a
note
of
that
as
we
go
through.
A
This
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
and
Zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
items
6.1
to
6.7
on
today's
agenda.
For
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
oral
submissions
today
or
written
submissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted.
May
appeal,
the
matter
to
the
Ontario
land
tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
May
appeal
the
matter
to
the
Ontario
land
tribunal.
A
If
Council
does
not
adopt
an
amendment
within
90
days
of
receipt
of
the
application
for
a
zoning,
bylaw,
Amendment
and
120
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment
to
submit
written
comments
on
these
amendments
prior
to
their
consideration
by
City
Council
on
August
23rd.
2023,
please
email
or
call
the
committee
or
Council
coordinator
where's,
my
the
chair
of
the
following
statement,
where's
my
statement.
A
A
Do
anyone
want
those
lifted
not
seen
so
the
item?
There's
a
referral
motion:
bhc
2023,
rockcliffe,
Park,
Heritage,
Conservation
District.
This
is
really
an
information
item
and
I'm
going
to
ask
that
we
move
that
until
after
the
development
review,
there
is
a
presentation
from
staff
on
that
item,
but
I
will
deal
with
that
after
our
development
review
items.
If
that's
okay
with
the
committee,
there
is
an
item
official
plan
Amendment
and
Zoning
bylaw
Amendment
for
245
to
263,
Rochester
and
27
Balsam.
We
do
have
a
presentation
from
staff.
A
A
At
30
40
and
3044
Innis
Road
in
Orleans,
West
Innes,
that
is,
to
change
the
density
of
that
property
from
residential
second
density
to
residential
fourth
density.
There
are
no
delegations
on
this
item.
We've
received
a
bit
of
Correspondence.
Does
anyone
want
this
item
held
nope?
Is
that
item
carry
oh
sorry,
Ryan,
poulton
and
Murray
chowner
here
from
the
developer?
If
the
committee
is
prepared
to
carry
this,
would
you
still
like
to
speak
nope?
Thank
you
still
getting
used
to
the
zoom.
So
is
that
uncarried
married?
Thank
you.
A
There's
a
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
for
901
and
700
Solarium
Avenue,
as
well
as
on
showcase
and
parts
of
Sprat
Road.
There
is
no
presentation
that
have
asked
for
no
delegations,
no
correspondence,
Marcel,
denom
and
Nadia
desanti
at
wsp
are
on
behalf
of
the
applicants.
If
committee's
prepared
to
carry
this,
do
you
still
need
to
speak.
A
F
A
A
D
Whereas
the
online
version
of
the
report
was
posted
with
the
incorrect
counselor
comments
embedded
and
whereas
it
has
been
determined
that
the
discrepancies
are
minor
in
nature
and
the
Amendments
required
have
no
impact
on
the
report.
Recommendations
and
whereas
notification
with
the
correct
report,
content
and
recommendations
was
provided
accordingly
to
interested
parties.
Therefore,
be
it
resolved
that
respect.
D
With
respect
to
the
report,
a
revised
report
attached
be
accepted
by
planning
and
housing
committee
to
reflect
the
following:
minor
discrepancies:
correcting
all
references
of
373,
tweedsmere
Avenue
to
372
tweedsmere
Avenue,
adding
the
full
counselor
comments
and
replacing
document
3
schedule.
Why?
Why,
with
the
correct
version
of
the
schedule
and
be
it
further
resolve
that,
pursuant
to
subsection
3417
of
the
planning
act,
no
further
notice
be
given.
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
and
just
for
folks
information.
My
comments
on
the
file
were
omitted
from
the
the
report
that
went
online,
so
those
are
now
in
I
am
in
support
of
the
staff
recommendation.
While
I
would
like
to
see
Richmond
Road
kept
to
six
I
understand.
The
new
official
plan
makes
that
extremely
challenging
to
try
to
adhere
to
so
the
presenters
tomorrow.
On
behalf
of
the
developer.
A
A
We
have
an
item
at
393,
Macarthur
Avenue.
There
is
no
presentation,
I'm,
not
anticipating
a
sorry,
no
delegations
I'm,
not
anticipating
a
presentation,
Ryan
Portland
and
Murray
Chown.
If
the
committee
is
prepared
to
carry
this,
did
you
still
wish
to
speak?
Thank
you.
Do
members
of
the
committee
want
this
held?
A
A
There
is
an
item
future
neighborhoods,
Urban
expansion
areas,
process.
I've
asked
the
staff
to
give
us
a
presentation
on
that
item.
So
we'll
get
that
after
the
development
review
items
there
is
an
Omnibus
official
plan,
Amendment
there's
a
motion
to
defer
on
that
for
two
weeks.
So
while
we
all
get
up
to
better
speed
on
exactly
what's
in
there,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
Vice
chair
Gower
to
make
a
motion.
Yes,.
A
Thank
you.
I
will
just
make
quick
note
groups
that
this
item
is
also
going
to
the
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
committee
on
September
7th.
So
we're
not
delaying
the
passage
of
this
particular
item.
I.
Think
there's
a
few
things
in
there
that
some
of
us
are
hearing
about
that.
We
want
to
explore
in
Greater
depth.
So
is
that
deferral
carried?
A
Thank
you.
There
is
a
front-ending
report,
design
and
construction
of
Palladium
Drive
widening
and
realignment
Derek
Howe
at
West.
Ottawa
is
here
to
present,
if
required
on
behalf
of
the
applicant.
It
wasn't
anticipating
a
presentation
Mr
how
if
the
committee
is
prepared
to
carry
this,
do
you
still
wish
to
address
the
item.
A
The
first
item,
then,
is
the
official
plan
amendment
in
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
for
245
249,
261,
263,
Rochester
and
27
Balsam
Street.
We
have
public
delegations
we're
going
to
proceed
with
a
presentation
from
staff
outlining
the
report,
recommendations,
at
which
point
we'll
move
into
a
presentation
from
the
delegations.
They'll
have
five
minutes
to
address
the
report,
recommendations
at
which
point
we'll
move
into
the
public
delegations
for
the
committee's
information
I
believe
we
have
three
public
delegations
before
we
move
into
debate.
G
G
G
The
proposed
official
plan
Amendment
seeks
to
permit
Heights
up
to
Nine
Stories.
Currently
the
neighborhood
designation
policies
of
section
6312
limit,
building
Heights
to
those
of
a
low-rise
building
typology
I.E
up
to
four
stories,
there's
also
a
need
for
an
amendment
to
the
volume,
2C
area,
specific
policies
which
we'll
see
which
will
seek
to
add
the
discussed,
increased
height,
specifically
to
the
property
being
discussed
today
next
slide.
G
The
proposed
zoning
is
that
of
an
R5
with
a
site-specific
exception,
as
well
as
a
site-specific
zoning
schedule
and
the
commercial
residential
commercial
suffix,
what's
proposed
in
the
site-specific
exception,
as
well
as
zoning
schedule
includes
increased
height,
reduced
setbacks,
reduce
vehicular
parking,
increased
bicycle
parking,
released
to
a
relief,
sorry
to
driveway
widths
and
bicycle
parking
locations.
Increased
area
for
non-residential
use
commercial
patio,
as
well
as
a
relief
to
the
projection
of
a
Pergola
structure
on
the
roof
for
amenity
purposes
next
slide.
G
So
this
is
a
snapshot
of
the
proposed
zoning
schedule.
As
you'll
see,
it
really
outlines.
All
of
these
setbacks
step
backs
Heights
to
a
degree
to
ensure
that
the
transition
mechanism
incorporated
into
the
development
live
on
beyond
the
zoning,
bylaw
and
official
plan
to
the
site
plan
and
building
permit
station
just
a
brief
overview
of
the
official
plan.
So
the
properties
are
located
within
the
downtown
Core
Transit
policy
area,
which
is
an
area
that
intends
on
maintaining
and
enhancing
an
urban
pattern
of
build
form.
G
Oh
sorry,
next
slide
forgot
to
mention
that
sorry,
so
enhancing
an
urban
pattern
of
build
form
and
site
design
in
an
attempt
to
Foster
the
development
of
the
15-minute
neighborhood.
Also,
it
states
that
residential
density
is
sufficient
to
supporting
a
full
range
of
service.
Services
needed
in
these
neighborhoods
is
key
to
achieving
this.
G
G
It's
also
intended
to
provide
opportunities
that
allow
the
city
to
reach
its
intensification
goals,
by
providing
guidance
for
a
gradual
change
in
character
based
on
proximity
to
Hubs
and
corridors,
by
allowing
new
building
forms
and
typologies
and
by
providing
directions
to
build
form
and
site
design
that
support
an
evolution.
Awards
more
urban-built
form
patterns
and
I
also
want
to
mention
that
the
properties
located
in
close
proximity
to
other
more
dense
designations,
like
the
Hub
designation
to
the
South.
G
G
These
next
few
slides
are
just
to
elaborate
on
the
unique
context
of
this
property.
So
the
intent
of
the
height
policies
within
the
neighborhood
designation
is
for
these
areas
already
characterized
by
taller
buildings,
to
be
observed
only
within
the
neighborhood
designation,
as
opposed
to
taller
buildings
with
its
other
designations,
which
is
why
there
is
a
need
for
an
Opa.
Today.
G
The
property
is
located
on
the
edge
of
the
neighborhood
designation
and
it's
surrounded
in
very
close
proximity
on
all
sides.
By
other,
more
dense,
designation,
Hub
Corridor,
like
I
just
mentioned,
it's
also
important
to
note
that
a
seven-story
mid-rise
building
currently
exists
within
the
same
block
at
90,
Willow
Street,
as
well
as
a
21,
stormy
high-rise
building
on
the
property
kitty
corner
to
the
subject
property
to
the
Southwest.
G
The
proposed
development
supports
the
official
plan
goals
by
allowing
higher
densities
in
area
closer
to
Transit
stations,
corridors,
major
neighborhood
amenities
and
in
an
area
contributing
to
a
15-minute
neighborhood
next
slide.
Please
just
a
few
images
that
show
the
context.
This
one
is
at
the
intersection
of
Rochester
and
Balsam
Street
looking
Northeast,
and
we
can
see
the
seven
story,
building
that
I
mentioned
in
the
previous
slide.
G
Next
slide.
Sorry,
the
property
is
just
at
the
corner
right
there,
okay,
so
the
next
slide
is
on
Rochester
again
with
the
property
on
our
left,
looking
Southeast
on
Rochester
Street
and
on
this
prop
on
this
image.
We
see
the
21
story,
high-rise
building
mentioned
earlier
next
slide,
and
this
is
just
an
excerpt
from
the
official
plan
showing
the
different
designations
and
the
property
location
in
proxy
within
the
evolving
neighborhood
overlay,
but
also
in
close
proximity
to
the
hub
designation
to
the
South.
G
That's
purple
color,
the
Red
Dot
would
be
the
train
station
and
we
also
see
boot
Street
and
Gladstone
Avenue
as
minor
corridors
next
slide
and
just
a
brief
policy
review.
The
proposal
is
consistent
with
the
official
plan
policies,
downtown
core
transect
policy
area,
evolving
neighborhoods
and
Urban
Design,
and
just
to
underline
Urban
Design,
the
reason
being
that
a
proposal
consists
of
high
quality
architecture
that
integrates
strategic
material
choices,
setbacks
and
step-backs
in
order
to
properly
introduce
itself
within
the
existing
context.
G
The
proposed
official
plan
Amendment
supports
the
intent
of
the
official
plan,
so
intensification
targets,
15,
minute,
neighborhood,
high
quality,
Urban
Design,
higher
densities,
close
to
Hubs
corridors
and
Transit
stations,
and
the
proposed
by
law.
Zoning
by
law,
Amendment
sorry
supports
the
intent
of
the
zoning
bylaw
being
housing
makes
compatible
and
sensitive
built
form.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Steph
we'll
have
an
opportunity
to
pose
questions
staff
after
delegations.
My
understanding
is
that
the
developer
does
not
have
a
formal
presentation
to
provide
to
us
is
that
right
and
the
ward
counselor
doesn't
have
any
questions
for
the
developer?
Does
the
applicant
team
still
wish
to
speak.
H
J
J
J
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
know.
There
is
again
we'll
hear
from
delegations,
but
there
was
some
concerns
about
the
massing
and
I
know
that
there
was
some
back
and
forth,
and
you
made
some
changes
to
the
design
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
just
speak
to
any
changes
you
made
in
in
response
to
community
feedback.
Yeah.
H
Significant
changes
are
actually
done
to
the
build
form
to
reduce
the
massing
appearance
of
it.
So
really,
what
we're
doing
is
they're
creating
from
someone
with
a
Podium
effect
by
having
a
more
restore
four-story
covering
majority
of
the
lot
and
then
using
these
step
backs.
The
appearance
from
street
level
is
actually
being
reduced
by
increasing
the
heights.
As
you
step
back
into
the
site,
keeping
in
mind
the
site
is
still
incredibly
narrow.
H
It
is
a
consolidation,
but
in
order
to
achieve
the
intensification
that
we're
looking
to
do
on
this
property,
the
big
majority
of
the
changes
are
based
on
these,
these
step
backs
which
had
the
effect
of
actually
reducing
the
number
of
units
by
shrinking
the
building
footprint.
So
that's
why
some
of
the
some
of
the
number
of
units
from
the
initial
proposal
and
the
mass
and
from
the
initial
proposal
was
shrunk
to
meet
these.
These
increased
step
backs.
H
Oh
I,
don't
have
the
exact
number
and
the
Landscape
Architect's
not
on
the
call,
but
I
know
in
speaking
with
the
landscape.
Architect,
majority
of
the
trees
that
are
being
removed
are
actually
not
in
the
healthy
state
right
now
and
there's
a
significant
Landscaping
plan
being
proposed
not
only
at
street
level
but
also
with
the
rooftop
amenity.
Understanding
with
top
amenity
is
on
the
rooftop,
but
it
is
also
adding
to
the
the
tree
coverage,
but
there
are
I'm
not
too
sure
if
we
do
have
the
landscape
plan
available.
H
Don't
have
that
number
I'm,
not
too
sure
Connor.
If
you
have
that
I
have
another
staff
person
on
the
call
here
right
now,
I
don't
have
the
split
in
front
of
me.
I
just
have
the
report.
It
is
a
mix
of
Studios
one
bedrooms
and
two
bedrooms
and
some
have
dance
I'm,
not
sure.
If
the
architect
is
on
the
call
or
not
I,
don't
see,
I
don't
see
Scott
here
or
Carl.
H
Actual
mix,
but
it
is
a
mix
of
of
Studios
one
bedrooms
and
two
bedrooms.
There
was
an
increase
in
the
number
of
smaller
units
as
a
result
of
having
to
shrink
the
building.
The
client
still
had
a
number
of
units
that
had
to
be
met
for
this
property
to
be
able
to
be
developed.
So
there
are
some
of
the
larger
units
that
were
unfortunately
had
to
be
removed,
but
there
is
still
a
good
mix
of
the
studios.
One
bedroom,
the
two
bedrooms
and
Tents
okay.
A
L
The
reason
I
asked
to
participate
as
a
speaker
is
because
I
did
submit
detailed
written
feedback,
but
I
don't
feel
that
the
details
of
that
feedback
were
accurately
captured
in
the
report
that
was
shared
a
few
weeks
ago.
So
I'd
just
like
to
elaborate
on
those
I'm,
not
in
opposition
to
the
development
and
I
I,
think
it
would
be
a
wonderful
addition
to
the
neighborhood
Nine
Stories
is
quite
suitable
for
the
area.
L
My
only
minor
concern
is
about
parking
for
which
I
feel
there
are
maybe
not
enough
spaces,
because,
as
a
neighbor
I
do
experience
cars
zipping
around
blocks,
looking
for
a
parking
spot,
it
happens
all
the
time
and
it
may
be
increased
because
of
this.
But,
as
I
said,
a
minor
concern
the
main
concerns
that
I
would
like
to
have
made
known
to
the
committee
and
the
developer
and
have
those
addressed
and
clarified.
L
F
L
St
Anthony's
Child
Care,
Center,
Dalhousie
parents,
daycare
center
and
St
Anthony's
Elementary
School
I
have
a
child
who
attends
St
Anthony's
Child
Care
Center.
So
here
is
what
I
wrote
in
my
detailed
feedback.
I
said.
First,
it
is
common
knowledge
that
this
neighborhood
sits
on
bedrock
and
as
such,
any
large
buildings
such
as
this
that
would
require
deep
underground
digging
will
inevitably
require
blasting
directly
adjacent
to
the
proposed
building
site
are
two
large
daycare
centers
and
one
primary
school
that
hold
hundreds
of
children.
L
Residents
of
this
neighborhood,
including
myself,
have
a
child
who
attends
Devonshire,
Community
public
school,
who
were
terrorized
by
the
development
company,
Claridge
blasting
and
Sheet
piling
at
10
40
Somerset
Street,
which
is
directly
adjacent
to
the
school
to
that
school.
Despite
protests
from
parents,
administrators
elected
officials,
the
company
conducted
blasting
and
tree
piling
during
the
school
day
that
produce
noise
in
excess
of
110
decibels,
which
is
mind-numbingly
loud.
That's
my
aside
for
months
children
had
to
in
school
where
noise
canceling
headphones
to
sit
in
their
classrooms
and
they
were
not
allowed
on
the
playground.
L
This
and
I
cannot
stress
this
enough
cannot
happen
again
to
babies
and
children
nearby.
So
please
should
this
project
be
approved.
I
implore
you
to
find
Creative
Solutions
to
allow
children
to
sit
at
their
desks
and
learn
to
play
outside
to
nap
without
encouraging
without
incurring
I'm
sorry
permanent
hearing
damage.
So
that's
the
end
of
my
of
what
I
had
input
by
email.
So
please
understand
there
will
be
hundreds
of
children
meters
away
literally
meters
of
the
way
across
the
street
every
day,
respecting
children-
and
this
is
a
radical
concept
to
Claridge.
L
Apparently
respecting
children
should
not
be
a
radical
concept.
What
sort
of
noise
mitigation
measures
can
you
put
in
place?
How
can
you
ensure
that
children
can
play
outside
nap,
learn
and
not
be
terrorized
by
Drilling
and
Blasting
all
day
long
Claridge
was,
and
you
may
have
seen
it
in
the
news
media,
no
pun
intended.
They
were
blasted
by
news,
media
parents,
elected
officials,
and
they
did
nothing
and
said
there
was
nothing
they
could
do
to
respect
the
children
and
Educators
that
were
nearby.
So
please
be
different.
Please
be
different
and
respect
our
children.
L
Allow
them
to
nap
work
with
the
daycare
centers
work
with
the
school
speak
with
them
in
advance
and
ask
yourself:
how
can
this
be
a
good
news
story,
I'm
willing
to
make
it
one
and
reach
out
to
the
news
media?
Should
we
be
able
to
find
common
ground
and
solutions
to
allow
everyone
to
work
together?
So,
let's
start
off
on
a
good
foot
as
good
neighbors.
We
want
you
to
be
here.
We
want
you
to
be
around
so
so.
L
Please,
please,
please
think
of
your
own
children
who
you
may
or
may
not
have
you
know,
I
hope.
If
you
have
children,
you
can
think
about
how
difficult
it
would
be
for
them
to
play
or
to
nap
or
to
learn
next
door
and
think
of
Creative
Solutions
and
then
the
last
point
I
would
like
to
make
on
on
the
noise,
and
the
building
aspect
is
with
regards
to
the
decontamination
of
the
site
and
should
any
contaminated
Earth
or
particles
be
airborne.
L
Please
consider
that
there
are
hundreds
of
children
nearby
all
day
long,
every
weekday.
So
the
other
point
that
I
made
in
my
comments
and
I'll
read
again
verbatim
is
if
the
project
is
approved,
traffic
safety
measures
must
be
put
in
place
and
assigned
heavy
truck
traffic
routes
must
be
proactively
implemented
before
ground
is
broken
during
the
excavation
of
the
Mosaic
building
on
Gladstone
in
Rochester,
Dump,
Trucks
tractor
trailers
and
other
heavy
equipment
regularly
barreled
up
and
down
Poplar
Street,
which
is
a
very
popular
route,
seemingly
for
all
traffic.
L
Without
going
into
major
detail,
navigation
programs
send
cars
and
trucks
and
all
types
of
vehicle
up
our
street.
So
whether
or
not
there
was
a
traffic
plan
put
in
place
for
the
Mosaic
building,
it
was
not
followed
because
it
was
constant
for
months
trucks
going
up
and
down
full
of
gravel
or
not
to
excavate,
to
move
the
gravel,
and
so
please
ensure
that
those
measures
are
put
in
place.
Sorry
I've
gone
off
my
comments
so.
L
Meters
away
at
my
home,
it
was
deafening
so
my
child
sitting,
my
four-year-old
sitting,
50
meters
away
in
the
school
it
was
you
know,
kids
were
screaming.
I
know
you
heard
this
all
from
many
of
us.
It
was
unbelievable,
and
so
please
I,
just
begged
you
to
be
different.
To
think
about.
Kids
who
are
just
trying
to
you
know,
be
kids
as
they
go
about
their
day.
J
Hi
Jane
I
just
wanted
to
say
thank
you
and
I
hear
you.
I
lived
through
four
years
of
sewer
reconstruction
on
my
street
when
my
daughter
was
baby
and
there
was
a
large
development
beside
my
daughter's
middle
school
that
will
be
beginning
when
she
starts
school,
so
I
feel
very
strongly
and
I
know
that
cancer,
Lieber
and
I,
because
I
received
many
of
the
messages
about
that.
J
You
know
we're
also
looking
to
try
to
figure
out
through
our
zoning
bylaw
review
through
through
you
know,
if
there
is
some
measure
that
we
can
think
about
some
requirements
to
help
dampen
noise
for
certain
kinds
of
blasting
during
school
hours.
So
that's
an
ongoing
conversation
with
Lessons
Learned
From,
that
particular
development.
Okay,
the
other
thing
I
just
wanted
to
mention
is
I'm
sure.
J
L
A
There's
if
this
passes
there
is
a
site
plan
process
that
will
have
to
take
place
and
they'll
develop
a
transportation
plans
for
the
for
the
staging
come
up
with
some
of
the
the
technical
details.
So
there's
more
process,
more
consultation
to
come,
Mr
robillard
come
on
up.
You
have
five
minutes
to
make
a
presentation.
M
Thank
you
you're
in
GC.
This
should
not
happen
at
nine
story.
Building
two
feet
from
my
house.
Like
you,
you
said
that
there's
a
seven
story
behind
me:
yeah
20
story,
building
there
what
the
City
built
across
the
street
from
my
house
is
very
nice.
It's
I
believe
it's
a
basement
apartment
in
three
levels:
very
nice!
Let's
do
that
next
door,
it
would
be
like
it
would.
Look
nice
for
the
neighborhood.
I
was
understood
that
they
had
Townhomes
already
approved
to
do.
M
M
No,
that's
one
thing,
but
you
know
the
old
age
buildings
got
50
feet
of
grass
all
around
it.
Where
is
there
grass
for
this
place?
Okay,
underground
stream
coming
under
my
house,
it's
coming
from
Up
further.
How
are
they
going
to
stop
that
stream
from
going
into
the
building
that
you
are
proposed
to
build?
M
M
Sir
I
see
50
kids
running
up
and
down
the
street
because
across
the
street
there
are
lots
of
kids
in
that
project.
That's
nice!
It's
nice
to
see
that.
But
now,
if
you're
gonna
have
another
nine-story
building,
there
I'm
sure
there's
going
to
be
another
50
kids
running
around.
You
know:
I've
asked
for
six
months
to
have
a
local
traffic
sign,
because
what
they
do
is
the
people
coming
down
Rochester
off
the
Queensway,
mostly
Quebec
people.
They
run
up
our
street
instead
of
hitting
the
booth
in
Gladstone
lights.
They
go
up
my
street
now.
M
There's
lots
of
people
trying
to
pull
out
lots
of
people.
Lots
of
kids
crossing
someone's
going
to
get
killed,
I
mean
it.
There's!
No!
No
speed
bump
I
asked
for
that.
No
speed
bump
lots
of
things
going
around
there
that
this
place
should
not
be
built.
It's
going
to
be
an
eyesore
for
the
neighborhood.
M
Now
I
was
told
that
green
space
is
going
to
be
on
the
roof,
and
it's
more
efficient
DC
told
me
this
that
he
was
more
efficient
on
the
roof.
Green
Space
when
I
spoke
to
you
in
the
office
and
I,
don't
understand
how
it's
more
efficient
I
thought
my
lawn
was
more
efficient.
You
know
the
water
goes
into
the
lawn,
it's
absorbed.
It
doesn't
go
into
your
sewers
there's
another
thing:
is
there
sewers
big
enough
to
take
a
nine-story
building?
M
M
M
Geez
I
wish
there's
so
many
yeah
I
know
two
minutes.
I
got
so
many
things
to
say
that
this
is
not
right.
This
is
not
right,
your
house,
do
you,
have
a
nine-story
building
want
to
be
built
two
feet
from
you.
It's
too
the
space
between
my
house
and
the
fence
is
about
30
inches.
Sorry,
two
and
a
half
feet.
It's
not
right
to
put
a
nine-story
building
up
two
feet:
two
three
feet
from
my
house:
it's
not
right,
put
the
town
houses
or
build
what
the
City
built
there
they're
very
attractive,
I!
M
Think
it's
three
stories,
but
a
basement
apartment.
So
it's
I,
guess
it's
called
the
four
story
very
attractive,
which
is
did
and
you
put
20
feet
of
grass
from
the
sidewalk
to
the
building.
Where
is
this
20
feet
of
grass
surrounding
this
proposed
site?
There
isn't?
You
know,
I
got
lots
to
say,
but
I
was
also
told
no
matter
what
I
say,
I'm
out
of
luck,
because
it's
going
ahead,
there's
nothing
counselor!
You
or
anybody
going
to
do
to
help
me,
because
this
is
what
I
need
to
call
it.
M
People
need
to
live
somewhere
or
overpopulated.
Put
this
building
somewhere,
where
you're
not
going
to
interfere
with
a
nice
neighborhood
and
if
you're
going
to
put
a
store
down
below
a
confectionary
or
something
you're
going
to
put
the
guy
out
of
business.
That's
been
there
for
50
years.
He
won't
be
able
to
compete.
M
A
J
Hi
I'm
Ariel
troster
I'm,
a
counselor
for
the
awards,
so
I
just
want
to
say
hello
and
thank
you
for
coming.
There's
two
things:
I
wanted
to
say.
First
of
all,
you're
always
welcome
to
reach
out
to
my
office
when
it
comes
to
issues
around
traffic
calming
and
safety
for
kids
in
the
neighborhood,
because
we
actually
do
have
a
lot
that
we
can
do
in
the
surrounding
area.
J
M
J
I
J
J
Tribunal
there's
got
to
be
really
good
justification
for
the
committee
to
reject
it,
and
what
we're
also
seeing
from
the
province
is
an
increased
number
of
what
are
called
ministerial
zoning
orders,
where
they
will
just
come
in
and
say
you're
building
this,
and
it
won't
even
go
through
the
committee
process,
so
it
does
constrain
Us
in
what
we
can
accept
and
what
we
can
reject
it
does.
It
puts
us
in
a
very
tough
legal
position
and
so
situation.
J
It's
actually
it's
unusual
for
planning
and
housing
to
completely
rejective
development,
and
then
there
have
also
been
cases
where
they
have
gone
to.
There
was
a
recent
case
where
it
went
to
the
land
tribunal
and
we
couldn't
find
a
lawyer
that
was
willing
to
defend
the
city's
position
because
they
knew
it
would
lose.
That
is
the
legal
position
that
we're
in
so
we
try
to
do
as
much
work
as
possible
through
the
zoning
process
to
make
improvements
to
ensure
that
Community
feedback
is
incorporated,
but
I
do
understand.
J
M
Yeah
I
have
a
dog,
the
kids
come
the
kids.
Come
sorry,
sorry,
you
know,
I
have
a
dog
and
the
kids
come
and
try
to
talk
to
the
dog.
Well,
he
may
bark
and
when
he
does,
the
kids
jump
back
and
I've
seen
them
jump
onto
the
road
cars
coming
by
they
can
get
hit.
But
one
thing
I'd
like
to
know
sorry
John
one
one
question
and
you
answer
me:
if
you
can
the
scream
under
the
house,
how
do
you
propose
to
stop
it?
Yeah.
A
So
I
will
ask
City
staff,
because
one
of
the
studies
that
they
would
have
required
is
a
a
servicing
study
in
nurse
hydraulic
studies
as
well.
That
would
have
been
put
into
this
so
I'll
ask
them
that
question
as
soon
as
we
get
to
our
questions
and
stuff.
It's
a
it's
a
legitimate
and
valid
question
for
sure
John.
Thank
you
for
being
here
today.
Oh
you're,
not
going
to
answer
the
question
for
me,
so
I
I'm
going
to
ask
staff
to
answer
the
question:
could.
A
A
N
K
Okay,
my
name
is
Jeffrey
Meyer
and
I
speak
to
you
on
behalf
of
my
multi-generational
family
that
has
owned
and
lived
at
233
and
235
Rochester
Street
since
1955
until
death
to
us
part.
We
forever
intend
to
remain
here.
This
is
not
hyperbolic.
Our
oldest
member
is
93.
Our
youngest
is
two
and
I'm
in
the
middle.
At
45.,
my
living
room
windows
and
kitchen
directly
face
this
place,
while
the
city
of
Ottawa,
much
like
the
other
lady,
and
this
gentleman
here,
has
sought
our
input.
K
We
do
not
feel
heard
and
represented
and
recommendations
submitted
to
you
by
City
staff
for
greater
Clarity.
My
family
is
neither
a
NIMBY
nor
a
banana
Zealot.
We
share
the
same
interests
as
you.
We
all
want
to
see
these
Parcels
of
land
develop
because,
frankly,
they've
been
a
blight
for
the
better
pass
of
the
past
decade.
We
know
personally
to
the
extent
we
have
a
family
housing
crisis
in
the
city.
It's
not
because
we
have
constructed
far
too
few
mid
and
high-rise
buildings.
K
It's
precisely
because
the
low
rise
homes
that
ought
to
have
been
there
present
on
Rochester,
Street
and
along
there
have
literally
been
missing
in
action
period.
What
you
need
to
know
is
that
my
family,
backed
by
other
petitioners,
does
not
view
this
nine-story
proposal
to
be
fitting
and
aren't
mature,
but
evolving
neighborhood
with
law,
reasonableness
and
live
life.
Experience
I
do
not
agree
with
the
policy
interpretation.
City
staff
have
provided
to
you
to
advance
their
recommendations
and,
most
critically
their
application
of
section
6.3.1.2
point
A
and
B,
which
I
must
confess.
K
I
simply
cannot
unpack
for
you
in
five
minutes,
but
I
will
try
and
say
this
and
I'm
willing
to
donate
my
analytical
past
to
help
you
and
your
lawyers.
If
you
need
that
because
it
sounds
like
you
do
with
humility,
I
implore,
you
in
your
city,
public
servants
to
see
big
policy
move
one
as
the
most
Paramount
call
for
action
for
protecting
and
promoting
and
I
quote
low-rise
housing
options
and
zones
for
residents
within
existing
neighborhoods,
close
to
Hubs
and
corridors
case
in
point,
as
per
schedule.
K
B1
downtown
Core
Transit
clearly
shows
that
these
properties,
like
the
gentleman
said,
fall
within
an
urban
designation
of
a
neighborhood
and
none
of
these
five
Parcels
of
land
here,
but
roadways
that
will
functionally
serve
a
main
street
or
a
minor
Corridor
within
the
next
25
years.
However,
these
privacy,
these
properties,
are
obviously
close
to
Hubs
and
corridors
and
being
in
the
downtown
core
transect.
By
definition,
taller
buildings
will
always
be
obviously.
K
The
case
here
so
with
humility,
I,
also
implore
you
in
the
city's
public
servants
to
see
big
policy
move
three
as
a
rally
cry
to
improve
our
sensification,
improve
our
sophistication
in
urban
and
design
new
design
by
recognizing
that
application
of
section
6.3.1.2
b
in
a
downtown
court.
Contra
transact
will
always
need
extra
sensitivity
and
sophistication,
but
without
it
in
my
neighborhood,
if
we
face
it,
a
real
existential
threat
from
two
polarizing
and
crushing
its
Force
this
year.
K
K
There
is
most
certainly
a
place
and
case
for
them
in
our
city
and
our
West
downtown
core
secondary
plan
precisely
shows
us
where
and
why,
in
this
neighborhood
and
frankly,
it's
not
here
on
this
part
of
Rochester
Street
and,
on
the
other
hand,
and
but
just
as
equally
important
I
need
you
to
protect
my
neighborhood
from
the
harsh
and
under
sophisticated
mindset
that
families
with
children
and
seniors
can
only
Thrive
outside
of
downtown
core
transact,
and
thus
they
are
when
sprawl.
We
appeal.
We
also
see
today
pushing
us
to
improve
the
ever
growing
and
missing.
K
Middle
families
can
thrive
in
a
downtown
for
I
have,
but
we
can
only
do
so
more
sustainably
today
and
moving
forward
through
low-rise
middle
housing,
options
and
zones,
while
Rochester
Street
still
has
single
detached
homes.
Mine
since
1921
has
not
been
one
of
them
and
moving
forward.
The
vision
was
and
remains
to
always
have
had
these
single
detached
homes
becoming
low-rise
options,
not
mid-rise
options
case
in
point
and
for
argument's
sake.
K
You
obviously
I
do
not
wish
to
be
facetious
and
flippant
here,
but
I
critically
raise
these
points,
because
we
are
already
seeing
the
logic
snowballing
down
a
slippery
slope
in
your
report.
Yes,
under
document
5
consultation
details
when
a
citizen
essentially
told
you
in
the
city's
Public
Service.
Why
stop
here
all
Rochester
Street
should
be
increased
in
density
and
height
if
I
may,
with
your
mercy
in
90
seconds
more
I
have
three
pointed
questions.
K
Question
one:
may
this
committee,
please
explain
to
me
and
my
community
why
none
of
my
family's
extensive
and
thoughtful
comments
submitted
to
the
city
on
time
were
raised
and
responded
to
undocumented
five
consultation
details.
How
many
other
dissenting
voices
in
my
neighborhood
have
been
left,
unpaid
and
said
question
to
maybe
this
week.
K
Maybe
please
explain
why,
with
anyone,
and
especially
an
incorporated
company
knowingly
purchase
five
adjacent
Parcels
of
land
in
a
designated
neighborhood,
that
is
explicitly
zoned
for
R4
use
and
intensification
purposes
to
support
low
rise,
mental
housing
functions
conducive
for
family
living
arrangements
and
downtown
core
and
think
they
could
use
them
otherwise,
Yeah
question
I'm.
Sorry,
if
I
made
just
one
more
last
Point
real
fast
may
this
committee,
please
explain
why
our
City's
public
servants
are
so
confidently
recommending
to
you
that
a
nine-story
building
currently
not
permitted,
now
be
permitted.
K
When
three
points,
the
number
of
people
who
voice
valid
points
of
opposition
is
three
times
more
than
those
in
favor
two.
When
the
city's
policy
and
Zoning
interpretations
can
and
have
challenged
by
citizens,
their
valid
points
of
opposition
and
three
important
to
me,
mostly,
is
when
citizens
are
saying
to
you
that
they
respect
the
official
plans
established
for
the
neighborhood
and
immediate
surrounding
and
expect
them
to
be
implemented
in
good
faith.
K
Two
last
points
because
there
is
an
ethical
Integrity,
because
where
is
the
ethical
Integrity
in
the
city's
decision
making
what
citizens
are
saying
to
you
and
say
other
developments
on
Balsam
Street
were
able
to
meet
zoning
bylaw
requirements.
Therefore,
this
perfect,
this
proposal
should
as
well
what
makes
this
application
so
uniquely
special
that
it's
above
others,
where
is
the
ethical
Integrity
here,
when
citizenship.
K
Yes,
I
have
put
forth
building
plans
to
the
city
of
Ottawa
on
the
expectation
that
the
zoning
immediately
around
us
would
not
be
changing.
Why
would
I
have
invested
my
entire
life
savings
into
building
a
modern,
two-story
family,
duplex
and
rooftop
solar
panels
with
self-facing
Windows?
If
I
had
known
that,
it
would
be
eclipsed
by
a
nine-story
building
when
one
was
not
reasonably
the
first
thing
to
entry
in
the
process
of
a
process
of
our
building
our
building
plans.
Sorry.
A
A
See
none.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
intervention.
Sure
and
I
know.
I've
got
a
couple
of
questions
planned
for
staff
based
on
the
the
presentation
that
you've
made.
Are
there
so
we'll
move
to
the
questions
for
staff?
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
staff
just
to
make
sure
I'm?
Looking
at
the
front
page
of
I
have
a
question
Sheriff.
Thank
you
very
much.
Counselor
Kelly!
Please
go
ahead.
C
Just
just
in
general,
I
think
I've
heard
a
couple
times
today
from
some
delegates
who
had
submitted
comments
or
questions
that
perhaps
were
not
included
in
the
report.
So
I
just
wanted
to
get
an
understanding
from
staff
as
to
what
that
process
looks
like
how
you
decide
which
questions
or
comments
are
addressed
in
the
report,
and
you
know
I
I
realize
that
you
get
a
lot
of
comments
and
you
can't
include
all
of
them.
Perhaps
that
would
be
a
daunting
task,
but
I
just
want
to
know
how.
N
G
Mr
chair,
we
do
receive
a
lot
of
comments
and
we
do
include
all
the
topics
that
we've
received.
We
don't
include
the
comments
verbatim
and
we
keep
them
Anonymous.
However,
we
summarize
them
by
topic
of
of
concern
and
I
did
double
check,
because
I
did
see
those
those
types
of
comments
being
made
in
today's
submissions,
so
just
to
double
check
that
I
had
receive
the
comments
that
I
did
and
and
that
the
the
topics
covered
in
those
con
concerns
were
included
in
the
status
report.
C
J
J
This
this,
you
know
on
its
surface,
meets
good
planning
guidelines
as
far
as
I'm
concerned
density
is
coming
and
it's
coming
closer
to
Transit
stations
and
I
I
think
that's,
ultimately
a
good
thing,
but
it
is
a
very
it
can
be
a
tough
thing,
so
I'm
just
interested
to
hear
from
staff
how
you
worked
with
the
applicant
to
address
Community
concerns
and
to
explain
the
ways
that
the
proposal
may
have
changed
to
address.
Some
of
the
feedback
you
received.
G
G
G
It
actually
starts
off
as
a
four-story
element
near
the
properties
closest
to
this
one,
and
then
steps
back
and
gradually
makes
it
up
to
Nine
Stories
at
the
top.
Additionally,
we
required
that
the
bicycle
parking
rates
proposed
of
one
to
one
space
per
unit
be
solidify
and
confirmed
in
the
details
of
zoning.
G
If
you
look
at
the
the
Landscaping
plan,
you'll
see
I
believe
it's
Rochester
Street
has
a
full
a
lot
of
of
trees
and
on
Balsam
Street
there's
some
planters
there,
but
also
noting
that
the
Balsam
Street
has
the
the
underground
garage
access
as
well
and
and
perhaps
on
the
topic
of
Landscaping.
Another
Improvement
that
was
made
was
at
the
rear
of
the
property.
J
That's
great
I
have
a
direction
to
staff.
It's
now
a
good
time
to
bring
It
Forward,
so
I'm
I'm
convinced
that
there
has
been
significant
change
in
regard
to
community
there's.
Some
people
who
just
won't
want
a
building
and
they
won't
be
happy
about
it.
But
I
do
think
that
Community
feedback
really
did
make
a
difference
in
terms
of
the
built
form
and
some
of
the
setbacks,
and
it
is
a
dramatic
change.
I
mean
there
are
tall
buildings
in
Rochester,
but
they
have
very
generous
graphs
in
front
of
them.
J
Just
as
this,
the
last
delegate
was
saying
was
saying
so
my
direction
to
staff
is
that
staff
pursue
significant
improvements
to
the
streetscapes
of
Rochester,
Street
and
Balsam
Street
through
the
site
plan,
approval
process
with
focus
on
elements
including
soil
cells
for
trees,
planter
boxes
and
other
soft
Landscaping
elements.
Further
preference
should
be
given
to
Native
and
pollinator
plants.
As
you've
probably
heard
me
say
many
times.
We
have
the
lowest
three
coverage
in
Somerset
word
we're
at
20
percent
when
the
the
goal
is
40.
J
O
P
Thank
you
chair
the
the
delegation
about
the
construction
noise
that
may
come
from
this
developments.
Quite
quite
interesting
and
I
do
remember
quite
vividly
the
news
stories
I
think
that
came
out
about
the
the
pile
driving
near
that's
the
school
by
Claridge.
So
is
there
any
idea
right
now
or
or
will
that
come
during
site
plan
about
how
that
foundation
will
be
dug?
Will
it
be
blasted?
Will
it
be
pal
driven.
G
G
P
No,
ultimately,
it's
not
going
to
benefit
me
like
it
benefits
the
local
residents
and
the
local
counselor,
but
yeah
the
the
so
further
to
that
than
the
construction
noise
bylaw.
What
what
are?
What
are
the
hours?
Is
it
11
pm
like
the
regular
noise
bylaw
or
is
it?
Is
the
window
a
little
smaller
like
nine
to
five
or
something.
O
Chair
we'd
have
to
confirm
and
get
back
to
you
I
just
hesitating
because
there's
a
section
of
the
noise
that
talks
to
infill
construction
and
I'm,
not
sure
if
it
would
fall
in
that
category
or
the
broader
construction.
It's
11
pm.
Otherwise,
if
it's
part
of
that
infill
I
believe
there's
some
reduced
hours
like
9
pm
and
7
A.M
starts
and
8
PM
changes
on
Sunday
for
reduced
hours
as
well.
P
And
then
last
follow-up
question
too,
that
is,
you
know,
has
has
that
ever
been
done?
Where
you
know
school
hours
are
what
eight
to
two
eight
to
three.
Maybe
it's
been
a
while,
but
School
school
hours
are
something
like
eight
to
three,
maybe
nine
four
or
something
so
Is
it
feasible
or
do
you
do
you
think
it's
feasible
that
this
is
probably
a
question
for
the
developer?
O
O
Fair
construction
activity
is
not
something
that
we
can
enforce
and
require
outside
our
already
approved
Council
bylaws,
such
as
noise
and
construction.
We're
happy
to
bring
this
conversation
to
the
developer,
to
see
if
they
have
any
thoughts
on
additional
mitigation
or
or
strategies,
but
ultimately
it's
some
not
something.
We
have
in
hand
to
enforce
if
they're
constructing,
in
accordance
with
our
bylaws.
To
go
back
to
your
first
question
on
their
construction
activity.
There
we
do
have
a
Geotech
study
that
we've
already
been
reviewing
as
part
of
this
site
plan
application.
O
There
is
possibility
that
they
would
be
doing
a
combination
of
ho,
ramming
and
or
blasting,
depending
on
the
type
and
size
of
rocks
that
they
find
as
they
start
to
excavate.
So
blasting
is
likely
to
occur
on
this
site
and
we
do
have
standard
conditions
to
regulate
a
blasting
according
and
surrounding
properties
have
to
go
through
pre-blast
surveys
to
make
sure
that
there's
no
pre
and
post
changes
to
those
conditions.
A
You
thank
you
very
much.
I'll
I'll
just
add
on.
Let's
start
for
you
on
the
a
few
of
us
are
talking
to
Biola
about
a
potential
modification
to
deal
with
this
Shore
piling
situation.
It
was
a
noise,
unlike
any
that
I've
experienced
and
I've
got
Tower
upon
Tower
going
up
in
the
award
120
decibels
at
point
of
reception.
A
D
G
That
being
said,
any
potential
cause
for
concern
might
be
towards
the
contamination
on
site,
but
that
would
be
covered
at
the
site
plan
stage
through
the
records
of
site
conditions
and
and
all
of
those
exercises
put
in
place
to
to
monitor
that.
So
there's
all
that
to
say
there
is
no
immediate
staff
concern
regarding
an
underground
stream.
R
A
A
Are
there
any
other
questions,
staff
from
members
I
don't
see
any,
but
I
will
pose
pose
my
own.
This
is
an
official
plan
amendment
in
addition
to
a
zoning
bylaw
Amendment.
The
report
runs
through
the
justification
for
your
recommendation
that
we
modify
the
official
plan
that
we
modify.
The
zoning
as
as
the
applicant
has
has
asked,
but
can
I
just
ask.
We
had
a
comprehensive
presentation
at
the
beginning.
There
is
a
report
on
the
table,
but
can
you
summarize
for
us?
O
Thank
you
chair
for
the
question,
so
to
start
off
under
the
planning
act,
anyone
has
a
right
to
make
an
application
to
the
city,
whether
it
be
a
zoning,
bylaw,
Amendment
official
plan,
Amendment
site
plan,
it's
our
role
as
City
staff
to
assess
that
application
against
our
policies
and
our
official
plan
supporting
guidelines.
Provincial
policy
statement
as
well,
and
we
review
each
application
on
its
own
Merit
in
this
particular
case,
site
context
and
location
is
key.
O
We
viewed
this
neighborhood
designation
as
being
uniquely
situated
compared
to
other
neighborhoods
that
have
the
same
designation,
limiting
height
to
four
stories
whereby
a
merely
south
of
this
property
along
the
south
end
of
Balsam.
You
see
Heights
permitted
up
to
55
meters
consistent
with
18
to
20
stories,
but
Booth
Street
is
you
know
very
close
proximity,
which
is
a
corridor
where
we
see
permission
for
Nine.
O
Stories
Preston
is
also
two
blocks
to
the
West,
with
another
permission
for
Nine
Stories
and
then
the
Corso
Italia
station,
of
course,
is
within
400
meter,
walking
distance,
so
I'll
be
the
layering
of
policy
framework
starts
off
as
suggesting
four
stories
from
a
policy
point
of
view.
It
is
in
an
area
characterized
by
taller
buildings,
albeit
when
we
interpret
that
policy.
A
H
A
A
I
am
expecting
a
deferral
motion
on
this
item,
but
I
don't
expect
that
we're
going
to
have
that
on
the
table
until
delegations
have
had
a
chance
to
delegate
I'll
just
remind
members
and
the
public
as
soon
as
a
deferral
motion
to
defer
is
made.
Our
debate
will
move
immediately
into
the
merits
of
deferral
rather
than
the
merits
of
the
application,
and
that
will
be
put
to
a
vote
at
the
conclusion
of
that
debate
on
deferral.
A
So
we
don't
have
that
motion
in
front
of
us
right
now,
so
we'll
move
ahead
with
the
the
standard
debate.
Format:
I,
not
I.
There
is
a
motion,
however,
that
I
would
like
to
put
on
the
table
now
before
there
are
delegations
with
respect
to
putting
adding
to
the
holding
Zone
provision
of
the
application
such
that
hold
the
or
the
zoning
would
not
be
the
hold
on
the
zoning.
Would
not
be
lifted
until
a
revised
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
is
provided
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
general
manager.
D
Yes
got
it
there.
Thank
you
so,
whereas
the
report
recommends
approval
for
two
high-rise
buildings
and
whereas
the
details
of
recommended
zoning
include
adding
a
folding
symbol
to
the
property
and
whereas
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
submitted
in
support
of
the
application
currently
omits
an
assessment
on
current
shadowing
analysis
and
whereas
agriculture,
Canada
and
members
of
the
community
have
raised
concerns
regarding
the
shadowing
impacts
on
the
Agriculture
and
research
lands
on
the
adjacent
Central.
D
Experimental
Farm,
therefore,
be
it
resolved
that,
with
respect
to
the
report,
document
2
details
of
recommended
zoning
be
amended
to
add
the
following
provision
under
three
C.
Six,
as
it
relates
to
the
holding
symbol,
an
updated
cultural
heritage.
Impact
statement
is
provided
to
the
satisfaction
of
program
manager.
Heritage
planning
that
assesses
the
shadowing
impacts
and
any
recommendations
or
mitigation
shall
be
incorporated
into
the
site
plan,
control
application
as
appropriate
and
be
it
further
resolved
that,
pursuant
to
subsection
3417
of
the
planning
act,
no
further
notice
be
given.
S
S
There's
also
the
Civic
Ottawa
Civic
Hospital
campus,
which
includes
a
15-story
building
to
the
east,
a
six-story
retirement
residence
and
low-rise
dwellings
to
the
west
and
the
central
experimental
experimental
Farm
is
located
to
the
south
of
the
site
across
Carling
Avenue.
The
site
is
currently
split
zoned.
It
has
an
am2
Zone,
with
a
height
restriction
of
11
meters
along
the
northern
portion
and
along
Carling
Avenue.
It
has
an
am10
Zone,
with
an
urban
exception.
A
A
N
S
So
a
quick
policy
overview,
so
the
subject
is
designated
Main
Street
Corridor
on
schedule,
B2
the
Interurban
transect
of
the
official
plan,
as
you
can
see
on
the
image
of
the
screen,
it's
also
located
in
very
close
proximity
to
a
planned
O
train
station
at
the
intersection
of
Parkdale,
Avenue
and
Carling
Avenue,
and
just
to
point
out
within
the
urban,
the
inner
urban
transfect
along
Main
Street
Corridor
designations.
It's
permitted
up
to
40
stories,
subject
to
appropriate
High
transitions,
angular
planes
and
building
stuff
next
slide.
S
So
a
quick
overview
of
the
reverse
development.
It
includes
two
towers.
The
towered
on
the
west
side
of
the
site
is
about
where
the
buds
Hamilton
Avenue
South
is
16
stores
and
the
East
Tower
abutting
Parkdale
Avenue
is
proposed
at
27
stories.
These
two
buildings
contain
a
combined
total
of
410
dwelling
units
and
those
units
include
a
mix
of
different
types
from
Studios
to
two
bedroom
plus
Den.
A
public
park
is
also
proposed
at
the
rear
of
the
site.
S
And
so
this
is
just
an
image
of
the
heights,
so
you
can
get
a
sense.
The
this,
the
West
Tower,
is
16
stories
and
it
has
a
four-story
Podium,
and
there
are
step
backs
at
the
fifth
and
13th
stories
where
it
abuts
the
existing
low-rise
residential
neighborhood
to
the
North,
and
then
the
East
Tower,
which
is
27
stories,
also
has
a
four-story
Podium
with
setbacks
at
the
fifth
Story
and
the
tenth
story,
where
at
a
low-rise
residential
neighborhood
to
the
north.
S
It's
also
noted
that
a
a
20
meter
setback
has
been
proposed
from
all
portions
of
these
towers,
specifically
with
the
East
Tower.
There's
a
been
a
notch
placed
in
the
building,
which
provides
a
minimum
20
meter
setback
from
the
nearest
low-rise
Residential
Building,
located
at
425,
Hamilton
New
South.
S
So
just
some
general
overview
of
the
changes
in
response
to
the
consultation
that
took
place
throughout
the
development
review
process
and
with
regards
to
consultation,
we're
referring
to
both
public
feedback
and
Technical
comments
from
members
of
staff
and
public
agencies.
So
building
heights
were
reduced
from
from
22
and
28
stories
to
16
and
27
stories
respectively.
S
Podium
bytes
were
reduced
from
six
stories
to
four
stories
for
both
Towers
rear
yard.
Setbacks
have
been
increased
and
adjusted.
The
East
Tower
has
been
shifted
closer
to
Carling
Avenue
and,
as
I
previously
mentioned,
we've
achieved
a
minimum
20
meter,
Tower
setback
from
the
tower
portion
of
both
buildings
to
the
abutting
low-rise
properties
to
the
north.
Next
slide.
S
And
then
just
some
further
changes
that
were
made
in
response
to
comments
received
the
tower
floor.
Plates
have
been
reduced
to
meet
our
high-rise
provision,
requirements
of
being
less
than
750
square
meters.
Power
separation
has
also
been
increased
from
the
originally
proposed
20
meters
to
21
meters,
which
also
meets
our
high-rise.
Provisions
bicycle
parking
has
been
increased
and
we've
also
reconfigured
the
garbage
slash
move-in
Lane,
that's
proposed
at
the
rear
of
the
site
next
slide.
S
So
the
proposed
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
would
have
the
effect
of
Permitting
apartment
dwelling
high-rise
as
a
use
on
the
site.
It
would
also,
through
the
site-specific
schedule,
established
setbacks,
step
backs
and
maximum
building
Heights
there's
also
Provisions
included
to
permit
a
minimum
Drive
aisle
of
six
meters,
whereas
7.6.7
meters
is
required
and
there
are
also
Provisions
included
to
permit
an
indoor,
rooftop
amenity
space
in
the
mechanical
house,
but
size
and
height
has
been
Limited
next
slide.
S
Yeah,
so
just
to
give
a
quick
overview
of
our
our
planning
rationale
for
this
site:
So
within
the
urban,
the
inner
urban
transect.
The
op
does
direct
that
building
Heights
up
to
40
stories
are
permitted
along
Main
Street
corridors,
where
the
budding
right-of-way
is
30
meters
or
greater
after
Road
windings
are
taken
and
subject
to
appropriate
building,
Heights
and
Transitions
and
stepbacks
in
angular
plans.
In
this
case,
they're
protected
right
away.
Along
Carling
Avenue
is
44.5
meters,
so
this
would
apply.
S
We've
also
looked
at
the
four-story
podium
and
have
determined
that
it
is
appropriate
and
provides
for
transition
to
the
low-rise
neighborhood
as
well
as
Carling
Avenue
to
the
South.
The
step
backs
have
been
utilized
in
the
design
of
both
buildings
to
create
a
gradual
change
in
height
the
West
Tower.
It
does
generally
conform
to
the
angular
plane
outlined
in
the
urban
or
the
high-rise
design
guidelines,
but
also
does
meet
that
20
meter
Tower
setback
that
is
also
aligned.
S
S
As
a
result,
staff
have
taken
a
closer
look
at
the
shadowing
impacts
to
the
experimental
Farm
through
a
policy
review
of
our
official
plan,
as
well
as
reviewing
the
shadowing
impacts
based
on
the
city
of
Ottawa.
In
terms
of
reference
for
shadow
analysis,
so
the
central
experimental
Farm
is
designated
as
green
space
in
the
new
official
plan,
with
a
sub-designation
of
open
space
and
Direction
with
how
we
deal
with
it.
Within
this
green
space
destination
is
identified
mainly
through
policy
7.17c.
S
As
noted
in
the
presentation-
and
this
direction
is
generally
that
this
open
space
is
not
intended
for
natural
hair
detection
of
the
environmental
features
or
for
recreation,
but
is
reserved
for
scientific,
educational
and
cultural
purposes
as
part
of
the
capital
Green
Space
Network,
and
through
using
this
designation
and
the
palsy
direction.
We
reviewed
the
shadowing
impacts
that
were
evaluated
through
both
the
applicant's
shadow
study,
which
was
prepared
by
home
and
architecture,
as
well
as
the
shadow
studies
provided
in
the
Agriculture
and
agri-food
Canada
comments
to
staff,
and
we
did
it
our
analysis.
S
As
a
result,
staff
did
not
have
any
con
or
do
not
have
major
concerns
with
the
shadowing
impact
as
it
as
it
stands,
with
the
applicable
policy
framework
and
the
tools
available
to
us,
such
as
the
terms
of
Shadow
or
the
terms
of
reference
for
shadow
analysis.
It
was
determined
that
it
was
not
creating
and
undo
adverse
impact
on
the
farm
next
slide.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
but
the
the
applicant
team
is
here
we'll
turn
to
a
presentation
from
them
and
again
I'll
just
remind
the
applicants.
They
have
five
minutes
to
make
the
presentation
before
we,
and
then
members
of
the
committee
and
non-members
who
are
here
too,
will
have
the
opportunity
to
post
questions.
W
Ready
to
go.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Members
of
committee,
I,
will
be
very
brief.
My
name
is
Miguel
Trombley
I'm,
a
partner
at
Photon
consultant
I'm
here
with
Patrick
vison,
Derek
Howe
from
Taggart
and
Braden
Walker
from
Taggart
as
usual.
My
intention
is
not
to
revisit
the
staff
report
in
the
staff
presentation
other
than
voice
star
support
for
the
recommendations
and
also,
in
this
case
I
think
I'll
make
a
few
more
General
comments
and
then
Patrick
will
provide
an
overview
of
the
the
building
design
and
how
we
got
here.
W
The
410
unit
project
varying
unit
sizes
is
a
significant
and
necessary
injection
of
residential
density
in
the
inner
urban
area
and
transect
and
along
Carling
Avenue
defined
as
a
Main
Street
Corridor.
These
units
are
in
line
with
provincial
and
Municipal
commitments
to
address
ottawa's
housing
shortage.
The
site
is
well
no
located
near
existing
Transit
routes
and
a
proposed
transit
station
at
Parkdale
and
is
in
proximity
to
other
residential
uses,
commercial
plazas
employment
areas
and
institutional
uses,
including
the
farm
and
the
Civic
Hospital.
W
The
area
and
corridors
along
the
perimeter
of
the
427
hectare,
Central
experimental
Farm,
are
intended
to
intensify
over
time
in
response
to
these
policies
and
Transit,
Investments
and
studies.
These
studies
include
the
TMP,
the
Baseline
brt
EA
study
in
the
2017
Carling
Avenue
Transit
priority
measures
study,
as
you
will
hear,
from
Patrick.
W
The
building
demonstrates
a
sensitive
and
effective
transition
to
the
neighborhood
to
the
north,
with
building
placement
closest
to
Carling
Avenue,
appropriate
Tower
separation,
appropriate
Podium
height
and
Tower
setbacks
and
setbacks
in
the
20
meter
and
27
meter
range
enhanced
by
a
new
public
park
in
an
East-West
laneway,
providing
a
buffer
to
the
properties
to
the
north.
The
site
also
makes
an
important
and
positive
contribution
to
the
public
realm
with
a
new
public
park
and
a
Carling
Avenue
oriented
pops
with
that
grade
building
animations.
W
X
Thank
you
if
we
can
skip
ahead.
One
slide
please
so
the
proposed
development
proposes
Two
Towers
organized
around
a
central
space.
Next
slide,
please,
the
two
buildings,
as
previously
mentioned
yields
roughly
410
units
ranging
from
Bachelor
units
to
two
two
bedrooms
and
den
units.
The
active
pedestrian
access
points
are
along
Parkdale
for
the
East
Building
and
at
the
South
West
corner
for
the
west.
Building
at
the
corner
of
Hamilton
and
Carling.
X
X
So
both
Towers
sit
on
the
distinct
four-story
Podium.
These
were
developed
to
enrich
The
Pedestrian
experience
along
Carling
and
Parkdale
and
Hamilton,
while
also
considering
the
various
Urban
Edge
conditions
that
they
interact
with
the
material.
The
materiality
of
the
podium
was
selected
to
further
complement
the
neighboring
Urban
fabric,
while
the
articulation
of
the
podium
served
to
create
an
appropriate
Rhythm
and
scale
to
the
base
of
the
buildings.
As
for
the
main
body
of
the
towers,
the
architectural
language
seeks
to
seeks
a
simple,
a
yet
elegant,
aesthetic
that
will
complement
the
Ottawa
skylines
next
slide.
X
Please,
as
previously
mentioned,
our
current
proposal
has
revised
the
podium
Heights
to
four
story
instead
of
six
one
that
is
more
consistent
with
the
existing
datum
along
Carling
Avenue
and
more
sensitive
to
the
low-rise
fabric
to
the
north.
We've
also
increased
the
building
separation
between
both
Towers
to
21
meters,
rather
than
20
meters.
X
The
central
landscape
area
between
both
buildings
provides
an
at-grade
exterior
space
which
creates
an
outdoor
living
room
for
the
proposal
valve
development.
The
central
open
space
provides
a
balanced,
landscaped
approach
through
a
variety
of
hard
and
soft
landscape
elements,
while
contributing
to
the
Urban
Tree
canopy.
This
unique
space
provides
pedestrians
and
residents
an
opportunity
to
wander,
to
pause
and
to
interact
with
each
other
as
they
flow
through
this
poorest
site.
X
X
Last
slide
next
slide,
please
this
view
is
looking
from
Parkdale
and
is
helpful
in
capturing
various
setbacks
that
have
been
incorporated
into
the
building
massing
to
improve
the
building
transition
to
the
north,
and
one
last
slide
just
to
finish.
I
think
I
need
to
cut
you
off
there.
Okay!
Well,
we'll
leave
it
there.
It's
fine
thanks!
Thank
you.
A
W
There's
no
direct
me
to
the
chair.
There
was
no
direct
meetings
but
and
I'm.
Actually
not
the
file
lead,
but
I
I
have
reviewed
all
the
correspondence.
There
was
direct
correspondence
with
representatives
of
the
farm.
There
was
an
exchange
in
terms
of
the
Shadow
studies,
so
there
was
a
dialogue
just
more
in
terms
of
Correspondence
and
and
submitted
letters.
R
So
just
so
I'm
clear
that
was
what
was
the
intent
that
that
Taggart
or
yourself
was
in
receipt
of
communication
from
Representatives
speaking
on
behalf
of
Agriculture
Canada,
yes,
okay,
many
members
of
this
committee
have
been
in
receipt
of
communications
as
well
from
representatives
of
agam
and,
to
paraphrase
their
concerns,
they're
concerned
about
the
impacts
that
the
shadowing
from
your
Eastern
Tower
will
have
on
those
lands.
They
do
believe
there
will
be
detrimental
impacts
to
those
lands
and
I
just
wanted
to
get
tigard's.
Take
on
those
concerns.
Y
N
P
Thank
you
chair
quick
question.
Well,
two
questions.
First,
one
is
on
on
your
third
slide
in
your
presentation
there.
It
shows
a
kind
of
Outlet
on
to
Hamilton,
Avenue
South
north
of
the
traffic
barrier.
Is
that
the
move-in
Lane
that
staff
had
alluded
to
okay
and
then
out
of
context.
This
question
will
seem
weird,
but
when
do
you
intend
on
submitting
the
site
plan
if
the
rezoning
was
approved
today,
it'll.
Y
Council,
do
you
want
me
to
answer
your
first
question
about
the
traffic
sure
so,
as
part
of
our
discussion
with
the
counselor
of
the
ward,
we
did
some
time
invest.
We
spent
some
time
investigating
the
Legacy
history
of
what
I
would
call
the
traffic
calming
measure
on
Hamilton
Avenue
much
to
the
surprise
of
everybody.
It
was
not
just.
We
could
not
find
out
the
original
intent
of
how
and
when
that
traffic
calming
measure
was
installed.
Y
So
in
consultation
with
planning
staff
and
the
ward
council,
we
decided
that
we
would
park
this
issue
until
the
site
plan
stayed
simply
because
we
said
we
are
agnostic
in
terms
of
where
this
traffic
calming
measure
is
ultimately
located.
We
did
take
the
design
consideration
that
the
traffic
would
be
exiting
the
parking
garage
counselor
from
the
Southward
Direction
on
Hamilton
and
not
going
through
the
Civic
Hospital
area,
but
in
terms
of
the
future.
Currently
we
have
least
commitments
in
this
building
until
2028,
so
our
intent
would
be
that
I
would
suggest
you.
Y
P
A
W
Can
start
off
if
you
want,
but
I
I,
wouldn't
I
wouldn't
use
the
word
inaccurate.
There
was
two
versions
of
that
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
There
are
ongoing
comments
from
the
central
experimental
farm,
so
we
are
happy
to
take
the
opportunity
to
update
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
in
response
to
those
if
it
gives
the
committee
and
and
staff
additional
Comfort
I'd
like
to
speak
to
your
motion.
Just
very
briefly,
if
you'll
entertain
my
comments,
yeah.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
I'm,
going
to
give
that
some
consideration.
I
expect
that
I
will
continue
to
ask
my
colleagues
to
support
the
motion.
That's
on
the
table
to
maintain
a
holding
Zone
pending
the
submission
of
a
updated
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
But
if,
by
a
council
we
have
hutches
that
has
been
broadly
available
for
public
for
public
input.
We
can
reverse
that
motion
just
as
easily
as
we
do
it
here
today.
A
So
I
anticipate
asking
my
colleagues
to
continue
to
or
to
support
that
motion
so
that-
and
that
was
where
my
my
question
areas
for
you
was
was
with
respect
to
that
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
you
if
I
understand
properly,
you
accept
that
the
there
are
Shadow
impacts
on
the
farm,
but
that
your
heritage
expert
continues
to
feel
that
those
are
not
undue
impacts
to
the
the
cultural
value
of
that
Heritage.
That's.
A
A
Z
You
very
much
chair
so
in
the
course
of
this
time
ourselves
and
the
developer
applicant
has
come
to
conclusion
on
it.
Based
on
the
motion
that
was
circulated
to
committee.
So
there's
an
agreement
there
that
staff
have
agreed
to
put
into
the
site
plan
considerations,
and
so,
if,
with
the
will
of
committee,
happy
to
pull
that
item
off
the
agenda
because
that
agreement
has
been
reached.
A
A
A
U
Thank
you
very
much
chair
Lieber
and
thank
you
counselors
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
today.
I'm
speaking
to
you
on
behalf
of
Heritage
Ottawa
and
I
will
be
speaking
about
the
impacts
of
this
development
on
the
central
experimental
Farm
National
Historic
Site
of
Canada
Heritage
Ottawa
would
like
to
make
two
recommendations
which
in
fact,
I
think
align
very
well
with
what
I
judge
to
be
the
mood
at
the
moment.
U
We
would
like
to
ask
that
approval
of
this
development
be
deferred
until
the
city
can
sit
down
with
agriculture
Canada
and
determine
what
how
impacts
to
the
farm
can
be
medicated,
whether
their
Shadow
impacts,
wind
impacts
going
forward.
Certainly
they
they
and
certainly
Heritage
Ottawa,
recognizes
that
development
is
going
to
go
forward.
We
ask
for
this
deferral
for
two
reasons:
one
for
the
impact
to
the
Heritage
resources
of
the
farm.
U
The
experimental
plots
which
are
exactly
across
the
street
are
a
significant
reason
for
the
designation
of
the
farm
as
a
National
Historic
Site,
and
if
these
experimental
plots
are
rendered
useless,
then
you
have
to
say
well
what
was
the
point
of
the
designation?
The
other
reason
we
would
like
to
see
this
deferred
is
this
designation.
This
National
Historic
Site
is
one
of
those
unique
places.
It
is
unique
where
Heritage
values
align
very
closely
with
social
and
cultural
and
environmental
values.
U
In
the
staff
report,
there
was
understandably
an
emphasis
on
this
site
as
a
green
space.
Green
Space
in
our
understanding
of
the
city
of
ottawa's
understanding,
is
a
place
that
is
open
to
public
access
and
use,
while
that
is
true
of
much
of
the
farm.
This
is
not
true
of
the
experimental
fields
which
are
meant
to
be
off
limits
to
public
engagement,
and
no
people
are
not
supposed
to
be
walking
their
dogs
through
the
experimental
fields.
U
I
would
encourage
the
city
of
Ottawa
to
follow
its
own
Direction
and
use
the
climate
change
master
plan
of
the
city
of
Ottawa
in
a
more
robust
manner.
The
city
of
Ottawa
master
plan
refers
to,
and
I
quote,
mitigating
the
effects
of
growth
on
land
consumption,
protect
lands
having
Agriculture
and
ecological
importance.
Please
use
your
own
metric
for
judging
impacts
and
I.
Think
after
this
summer
we
can
all
Embrace
that
fact
in
our
lives,
it.
U
The
staff
report-
our
second
recommendation,
touches
on
going
forward
that
the
official
plan
statement
with
respect
to
the
farm
tends
to
focus
on
it
as
a
green
space,
as
we've
just
discussed
and
also
as
at
a
heritage
site,
but
I
hope
I've
made
the
point
that
as
a
heritage
site,
it
also
is
a
site
of
scientific
and
environmental
value.
So
I
would
ask
also
that
there
be
an
amendment
to
the
statement
in
the
official
plan
that
identifies
the
research
value
of
the
Farm
as
an
important
element
that
must
be
protected
from
any
development
index.
U
Proximity
going
forward.
Yes,
Heritage
Ottawa
is
very
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
we
do
need
more
housing.
This
isn't
an
either
or
we
need
both
and
in
the
case
of
the
farm
I,
the
central
experimental
farm.
Specifically,
these
research
Fields
have
been
used
to
study
impact
of
climate
change
on
agriculture
for
the
last
40
years.
Yes,
indeed,
they
saw
this
coming
and
we
weren't
listening
so
going
forward.
All
Canadians
need
the
research
that
is
being
done
at
the
central
experimental
farm
and
I.
A
A
I'm,
sorry
I'm,
not
a
lawyer,
Tim,
the
clergy,
principal
I,
believe
means
that
the
developer
has
an
expectation
that
we
will
evaluate
the
application.
That's
in
front
of
us.
According
to
the
regulatory
framework,
that's
in
place
of
time
the
application
is
deemed
complete,
so
we
can't
amend
the
official
plan
in
such
a
way
as
to
provide
grounds
but
I'm.
A
U
Subsequently,
agriculture
Canada
provided
an
updated
impact
study,
updated
Shadow
impact
study
that
appeared
in
April
2023,
even
based
upon
the
statement
made
in
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
of
2022,
there
was
not
an
appreciation
that
there
was
impact.
This
is
a
professional
disagreement.
I
will
be
frank
about
that
that
the
impact
of
the
on
the
research
lands
was
significant.
A
A
Yes,
those
air
Heritage
Ottawa
then
sees
that
a
shadow
impact
to
the
scientific
value
of
the
farm
is
an
impact
to
the
and
forgive
me
I
always
get
lost
in
some
of
the
terminology,
but
there
is
a
value
that
has
been
described
in
the
cultural
heritage.
Designation
that
you
feel
has
been
impacted
because.
U
A
AA
Council
leader,
if
there
be
an
opportunity
to
have
a
few
moments
to
address
the
recent
motion
that
was
proposed
or
suggestion
of
or
maybe
the
question
could
be
asked
of
us
what
our
views
are
of
the
recent
notion
to
file
a
revised
cultural
heritage.
Impact
statement
by
the
applicant
by
Friday
I
would
like
to
have
a
moment.
AA
AA
This
is
a
unique
site.
This
is
not
a
site
like
you'll,
see
everywhere
it's
a
unique
site
because
it
is
across
from
nationally
designated
heritage
site.
So
this
is
a
unique
spot
and
there's
two
problems
with
this
current
proposal
that
make
it
so
that
it
doesn't
fall
the
framework
or
the
spirit
of
the
official
plan.
The
first
issue
is
that
it
lacks
adequate
transition
to
the
adjacent
low-rise
community
and
number
two.
It
has
serious
negative
impact
on
the
central
experimental
Farm.
AA
Now
this
was
established
by
a
recent
Shadow
study
and
a
letter
that
was
produced
by
Agriculture
and
agrofucana,
which
we're
all
been
here
hearing
about.
This
is
the
only
official
statement
that
it's
out
there
and
it
clearly
suggests
that
there
is
impact.
We
take
the
position
that
this
comprehensive
study
has
not
been
fully
or
properly
examined,
and
it
must
be-
and
we
also
take
the
position
that
any
motion
must
take
into
consideration
that
it
has
any
cultural
heritage.
Impact
statement
will
have
to
be
evaluated.
It's
not
just
a
merely
a
procedure
filing
an
amended
version.
AA
It
will
have
to
have
the
time
to
be
properly
evaluated
and
evaluated
against
what
was
produced
by
scientists
from
the
Agriculture
and
agri-food
candidate.
So
it's
not
merely
a
step
of
here's
another
version.
It
has
to
be
properly
evaluated
against,
what's
in
stated
by
the
farm,
which
is
the
official
spokesperson
for
the
farm
next
slide,
please
so
moving
on
to
the
first
issue
as
to
why
the
proposal
does
not
achieve
adequate
transition.
AA
There's
two
key
policy
policies
within
the
new
official
plan
that
are
triggered
section
5.2.32a
requires
three
three
ways
in
which
adequate
transition
is
met.
My
height
sets
transition,
setbacks
and
angular
plane,
and
it's
where
the
parcel
of
land
is
sufficient
to
allow
such
of
a
size
of
a
building
and
number
two
policy.
4.6.1
states
that
transition
and
building
Heights
shall
be
designed
in
accordance
with
applicable
design
guidelines.
So
where
do
we
find
the
design
guidelines
next
slide?
AA
Please
figure
15
here
depicts
and
is
pulled
directly
from
the
new
official
plan,
and
it
provides
graphic
explanation
as
to
what
is
meant
by
angular
plane
and
it
states
and
depicts
45
degrees.
We're
not
suggesting
never
have
that.
This
is
a
strict
mandated
number
that
has
to
be
achieved.
What
we're
saying
is
it's
a
guideline
next
slide.
Please.
AA
If
we
look
at
the
next
slide,
here
is
an
actual
depiction
of
the
1081
Carlene
site,
East
Tower,
the
red
line
indicates
where
the
angular
plane
is,
and
the
green
line
indicates
where
that
45
degree
guideline
is
you'll
notice,
a
huge
discrepancy.
The
huge
discrepancy
is
because
the
proposed
East
Tower
is,
at
a
70
degree,
angular
plane.
This
is
nowhere
near
a
45
degree,
angular
plane,
it's
nowhere
near
the
framework
or
the
guidelines
proposed
simply
put.
AA
The
proposal
is
too
big
for
the
site,
and
this
is
consistent
with
what
was
found
by
the
Urban
Design
review
panel.
That
was
their
suggestion.
They
said
this
is
a
more
appropriate
for
a
one
Tower
site.
However,
if
it
is
two
towers,
it
has
to
be
lowered
next
size
next
slide,
please
the
next
slide.
This
is
this
is
a
graphic
depiction
and
it's
for
three
comparable
sites
comparable
sites
that
are
current
proposals
or
proposals
that
you'll
see
coming
down
the
line.
AA
We
have
1705
Carling,
that's
found
in
the
top
left
hand
corner,
and
this
has
a
floor
space
index
of
2.4.
We
have
1655
Carling
and
has
a
four
space
of
3.6
and
we
have
the
wreath
in
Montreal
Road
development,
and
it
has
a
floor
of
space
index
of
4.9.
So
where
does
this
current
1081
Car
Lane
Forest
price
index
land
at
eight
eight?
That's
nearly
double
the
size
of
these
comparable
lots
and
comparable
types
of
neighborhoods.
So
what
does
this
mean?
Is
this
site
is
over
built?
This?
This
proposal
is
overbuilt
next
slide.
Please
I!
AA
Think
the
what
I'm
just
going
to
briefly
touch
is
what
we
can
say
about.
The
Montreal
Olt
decision
is
it's
very
different.
There
was
one
Tower
and
we
have
two
towers
and
the
force
FSI
was
lower
and
it
encourages
the
planning
committee
and
planners
to
look
at
different
tools
in
the
toolkit.
Next
slide.
Please,
with
the
conclusion
on
on
the
issue
of
transition,
is
that
this
current
proposal
does
not
meet
adequate
transition.
A
tower
height
of
27
stories
on
this
small
lot
cannot
adequately
transition
into
a
residential
community.
AA
No
degree
of
step
back
or
step
back
can
overcome
an
angular
plane
of
70
degrees
in
order
for
it
to
fit
into
this
small
lot.
So,
yes,
we've
seen
there
has
been
a
20
meter
setback.
However,
however,
let's
keep
in
mind
that
it
has
not
impacted
the
angular
plane
in
two
small
points
in
the
third
submission.
The
ground
floor
area
went
up
by
468
meters
and
the
applicant
increased
the
Tower
of
these
by
two
stories
so
yeah
there
were
some
changes,
but
there
was
also
a
huge
there's:
an
increase
to
flares
FSI
and
height.
A
A
AB
Okay,
thank
you.
The
next
slide
please.
So.
Our
second
major
issue
is,
of
course,
the
negative
impact
on
the
central
experimental
Farm
which
we've
been
talking
about
this
morning.
So,
as
you
know,
the
CEF
is
a
National
Historic,
Site
and
cultural
landscape.
Next
slide,
please,
as
was
required.
The
applicant
provided
a
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
in
October
of
2022,
and
the
conclusion
was
there
was
no
impact
on
the
potential
experimental
Farm.
AB
However,
in
April
of
this
year,
the
agricultural
Niagara
Food
Canada
sent
a
formal
letter
of
concern,
referencing
their
extensive
Shadow
study,
saying
that
it
has
a
a
significant
risk
for
the
field
and
jeopardizes
the
agricultural
science.
Excuse
me
into
Integrity,
following
that
they
did
provide
some
additional
studies
which
we'll
talk
about
a
bit
later,
but
in
that
it
shows
that,
as
you
reduce
tower
height,
the
obviously
the
negative
impact
does
get
reduced
next
slide.
Please
actually
I'm
going
to
skip
this
slide
and
move
on
to
the
one
following.
AB
So
this
is
a
clip
from
the
Heritage
impact
statement
provided
by
the
applicant
and
the
first
point
they
are
looking
at.
Does
it
protect
the
historic
and
ongoing
agricultural
research
functions
are
safeguarded
and
maintained
on
the
right
hand,
side
it
says
no
impacts
later
you'll
see
also
highlighted
a
sufficiently
large
area
to
carry
out
and
support.
The
scientific
research
function
is
maintained
again,
no
impact
we'll
talk
about
that
in
a
moment.
I
also
want
to
point
out
in
the
upper
right
hand,
corner.
AB
This
statement
refers
to
a
16
and
25
story,
application,
which
was
the
second
version
of
this
application,
not
the
one
that
is
before
you
that
is
27
stories,
so
they
don't
match
this
application
next
slide,
please.
This
is
just
a
copy
I
think
at
this
point.
Hopefully,
you
all
have
one
of
the
letter
of
a
formal
concern
from
Agriculture
and
agri-food
Canada,
saying:
there's
significant
risk
to
their
research
Fields.
AB
The
next
page,
please
it's
just
an
excerpt
from
a
letter
we
received
recently
from
our
Member
of
Parliament
for
Ottawa
center
MP,
yes
or
nakvi,
stating
that
the
shadow
study
clearly
demonstrates
the
construction
of
high-rise
buildings
at
this
address
will
lead
to
more
than
100
000
minutes
of
sunlight
lost
per
year
and
will
make
the
research
lands
southeast
of
the
towers
unusable
for
most
field
experiments
next
page,
please!
So
why
the
discrepancy.
AB
So
the
applicant's
study
was
for
shadow
study,
followed
five
dates:
five
different
times,
maxing
out
at
8
pm
from
May
to
September
of
2021..
The
Agricultural
study
was
more
robust,
doing
one
minute
intervals,
sunrise
to
sunset
F
over
a
full
year.
So
it's
more
comprehensive
and
more
accurately
shows
the
impact
on
Research
Fields.
So
research
Fields,
as
Heritage
Ottawa
has
said,
are
not
public
spaces.
So
the
term
of
reference
for
shadow
analysis
for
public
spaces
is
not
adequate
for
this
special
location.
AB
Next
slide,
please!
So
in
the
letter
of
concern,
the
shadow
impacts
were
articulated
by
Agriculture
and
agri-food
Canada.
The
lands
within
200
meters
of
the
apartments
will
have
their
yearly
Sun
reduced
by
12
percent,
which
is
astounding
according
to
them.
It
also
impacts
the
greenhouse
located
within
400
meters
and
will
have
reduced
efficiency
and
the
most
devastating
effect
is
the
increased
variability
in
sunlight
caused
by
differential
shading
of
the
fields
throughout
the
growing
season.
Next
page,
please-
and
they
actually
want
you
to
know
what
part
of
the
farm
is
impacted.
AB
So
this
is
a
picture
of
the
farm
and
the
research
fields
are
all
in
yellow
and
if
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
I've
highlighted
the
area
that
will
be
impacted
and
will
be
considered,
unusable,
no
longer
viable
for
research
and
that's
approximately
28
hectares.
This
is
more
or
less
the
same
location
and
size
of
property
that
was
going
to
be
negative,
negatively
impacted
when
the
Civic
Hospital
was
being
considered
to
move
to
the
agricultural
lands.
AB
So
you
really
are
Guided
by
the
official
plan
and
the
provincial
policy
when
it
comes
to
Heritage,
so
the
official
plan
section
4.5.2
and
the
provincial
policy
statements
2020..
So
in
the
official
plan
the
requirements
are
to
conserve
cultural
heritage,
value
and
attributes
of
Heritage
properties
and
on
page
14,
16
of
our
written
application.
You'll
see
that
the
provincial
policy
statement
2020
requires
protection
for
cultural
heritage
Landscapes
and
says
developments
must
be
demonstrated
that
Heritage
attributes
are
conserved
and
the
final
page
please,
for
my
part,
the
proposed.
Oh
sorry,
you're.
T
Karen's
last
slide
on
this
important
issue
that
the
firm
report
directly
contradicts
the
findings
of
the
cultural
impact
study
which,
as
we
said
several
times,
is
incorrect,
the
shadow
studies.
Sorry,
the
cultural
impact
considers
only
the
value
of
the
buildings,
but
not
the
cultural
heritage.
Landscape
per
se,
which
the
provincial
policy
statement
provides,
must
be
conserved
by
planning
decisions.
So
should
the
city
disagree,
that
more
analysis
is
required?
T
So
the
currently
the
proposal
does
not
achieve
the
balance
since,
as
we've
said,
it
lacks
adequate
transition
and
it
impacts
the
farm.
So
we
are,
we
are
requesting
that
the
the
application
be
in
its
current
form,
be
refused.
The
application
lacks
adequate
transition.
The
official
plan
provides
for
this
step,
back
setbacks
and
an
angular
plane
approaching
45
degrees,
but
that
can
create
adequate
transition.
However,
on
this
site,
at
the
height
of
27
stories
that
angular
plane,
it
cannot
be
respected.
It's
too,
too
close
to
70
degrees
versus
closer
to
45
degrees.
T
The
site
is
simply
not
large
enough,
and
so
you've
heard
that
the
research
lands
at
the
southeast
part
must
of
of
the
farm
will
be
at
risk
for
over
a
hundred
thousand
minutes
of
deprived
sunlight.
It's
the
actual,
the
devastating
effect
more
so
is
the
increased
variability
in
the
sunlight
caused
by
the
differential
shading
of
the
fields
alternate.
T
T
And
thirdly,
alternatively,
as
we've
heard
many
times
today,
chna
requests
a
pause
for
the
same
reasons
you've
been
hearing
over
and
over
the
timeline
depicted
briefly
in
slide.
10
we'll
share
our
slides
with.
You
illustrates
a
disconnect
between
the
cultural
impact
statement
and
the
agriculture
a
report
so
as
this
is
the
first
application
on
Carling
that
overlooks
the
farm.
This
approval
will
set
a
precedent,
if
approved
at
27
stories,
it'll
be
the
standard
that
other
developers
will
look
to.
T
R
Thanks
so
much
chair
and
thank
you
to
the
three
of
you,
a
plus
presentation.
You've
certainly
done
your
homework.
We're
not
just
talking
really
today
we're
not
just
talking
about
this
proposal.
1081
Carling,
with
respect
to
shadowing
there's
another
big
development
in
counselor,
divine's
Ward
bordering
River
Ward
on
the
South
Side,
that's
going
to
come
up
in
River,
Ward
I,
look
at
the
Baseline
Corridor,
all
the
homes
on
the
south
side
and
riverward,
and
then
on
the
other
side
of
Fisher.
R
All
the
homes
in
in
councilor
divine's
word
that
we
know
over
time
will
be
developed.
We
know
in
The,
Carling
Corridor
itself.
This
is
won't,
be
the
only
development
when
the
Civic
Hospital
gets
torn
down.
There
are
going
to
be
Towers
there
that
are
going
to
have
Shadow
impacts
when
the
final
phase
of
the
Central
Park
development
between
the
two
Central
Park
drives,
get
built,
they're
going
to
be
towers
that
have
shadowing
impacts.
So
today
is
the
first
test
for
this
committee
to
wrestle
with
shadowing
on
the
experimental
firm
lens.
R
Yes,
there
are
some
Towers
on
Fisher
now
that
were
built
decades
ago,
but
since
I've
been
here
for
nine
years,
we've
never
had
a
development
application.
That's
put
us
in
this
position.
We've
talked
about
seeding
land,
but
we
haven't
talked
about
shadowing,
so
it's
very
important
so
I'm
going
to
ask
you.
Why
is
it
so
important
you've
touched
upon
this
you've
quoted
the
experts
at
agriculture
Canada,
but
why
does
the
Community
Association
believe
Council
needs
to
wrestle
with
the
question
of
shadowing
on
agriculture
and
research
lands.
AB
Well,
certainly,
there's
a
responsibility
due
to
the
official
plan
and
the
provincial
policy
statement
to
conserve
a
special
Heritage
location
and
Landscape,
such
as
the
central
experimental
farm
and
additionally,
it
is
a
unique
aspect
and
be
loved
in
Ottawa.
It's
what
makes
Ottawa
Ottawa.
So
if
we
chip
away
at
this
special
property
and
render
it
useless,
will
the
federal
government
simply
have
to
fold
their
tents?
And
you
know
Death
By,
A,
Thousand
Cuts,
the
farm
will
slowly
disappear
and
in
10
years
from
now
everyone
will
say
what
happened.
Why
are
they
leaving?
AB
AA
And
if
I
could
just
my
only
add
to
that,
this
is
an
opportunity
for
city
council
to
have
a
vision.
It's
a
vision
of
what
you
want
for
this
Farm,
what
you
want
for
around
this
farm-
and
this
is
the
start
as
as
councilor
Brockington
correctly
noted.
This
is
the
first
of
many
to
come,
so
this
isn't
an
isolated.
This
is
a
unique
proposal.
This
impacts
broadly-
and
this
allows
you
to
have
an
impact
on
your
vision
for
your
city
and
for
what
you
want
to
see
of
the
farm
and
around
it.
AA
Intensification
will
happen,
and
it
should
happen,
but,
as
we'll
see
later
on
and
by
some
other
presentations,
there's
ways
to
ensure
that
the
farm
is
protected
and
you
still
have
intensification
around
it.
This
is
your
opportunity,
your
chances,
counselors
and
As
Cities
really
really
impact
and
protect
at
the
same
time,
while
respecting
the
push
for
intensification.
A
AA
No
I
I,
don't
I
think
that
that's
exactly
the
concern
that
we've
raised
and
that
we've
indicated
it
it's
not
just
about
a
filing
and
that's
the
same
concern
I
would
have
both
on
motion
I
just
push
this
to
site
as
well.
It's
not
simply
an
administrative
process
of
a
reaffiling
of
an
amended
c-h-I-s
which
is
pushed
through
and
handed
to
the
city
and
a
box
is
clicked.
That's
the
concern
that
we've
had
from
the
beginning.
AA
There
has
to
be
a
proper
evaluation,
a
proper
evaluation,
that's
engaging
the
right,
Department
such
as
Heritage
with
within
the
city,
scientists
and
experts
and
I'm,
not
a
PhD
scientist.
The
people
that
did
the
study
for
agriculture
Canada
are
and
that
that
it
needs
to
be
properly
evaluated.
So
you
know
that's
what
I
want
to
ensure
is
it's
clear
is
that
this
isn't
just
an
administrative
box
where
the
applicant
just
gets
another
study
and
files
it?
Oh,
they
filed
another
study.
AA
It
has
to
be
properly
evaluated
against
what
was
produced
by
the
stakeholder,
particularly
the
Agriculture
and
agri-food
Canada,
and
time
needs.
Time
needs
to
be
allowed
for
that
to
happen
properly,
and
as
are
my
counterpart
is
mentioned.
Engagement
with
stakeholders
such
as
our
community
I
think,
is
very
important
and
and
valid
in
that
process
of
evaluation.
Okay
and.
Q
A
Back
up,
oh
okay,
so
I
also
have
questions
about
the
numbers,
so
you
you
indicated
in
the
presentation
that
you
put
forward
that
there
was
something
like
a
12,
100
000,
minute
reduction
of
light,
and
thus
we
should
reduce
the
height
of
the
towers.
I.
Don't
know
how
many
members
of
the
committee
have
read
in
full.
My
analysis
of
the
Shadow
study
but
I
wanted
to
see.
If
we're
on
the
same
page
with
what
the
impacts
are.
A
A
There
are
260
000
minutes
of
sunshine
in
Ottawa
during
the
growing
season
and
that's
I'm,
taking
those
numbers
I
don't
know
that
off
the
top
of
my
head,
the
agriculture
Canada
letter
put
that
in
there
Two
16-story
Towers,
so
that's
26,
187
minutes
according
to
agriculture,
to
Canada's
study
out
of
260
000.
That
would
be
in
Shadow
as
a
result
of
putting
the
26
or
the
27
Story
Tower.
In
there,
if
you
drop
those
to
two
16
story
Towers,
you
gain
883
minutes
of
sun.
A
AB
I
suspect,
my
colleague
and
I
are
going
to
say,
say
the
same
thing.
None
of
us
we're
lay
people,
and
you
know
you're
a
smart
fellow
Jeff,
however,
with
respect
I
think
this
really
is
something
that
we
need
the
experts
in
the
room
talking
to
each
other,
rather
than
us,
as
lay
people
trying
to
do
the
best
to
understand
this.
This
is
pretty
heady
stuff
and
those
reports
are
very
deep
and
so
I
wouldn't
want
us
to
comment
on
it
and
I.
AB
AA
Right
and
just
to
add
to
Karen
I
think
those
are
good
questions,
and
this
is
exactly
the
point
of
why
we
want
to
pause,
to
evaluate
those
exact
questions
and
have
the
experts
analyze
that
as
a
farmer's
daughter,
I
do
know
that
certain
crops
need
less
less
sunlight.
Some
do
you
need
more
I,
don't
know
what
they're
growing
they're,
neither
no.
We
have
to
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
it
has
to
be
properly
evaluated
by
people
who
are
the
who
are
trained
to
to
do
that.
A
N
N
Q
I'm
concerned
about
this
in
a
more
global
fashion
or
Municipal
fashion.
So
the
first
thing
is:
why
is
the
zoning
location
important
to
Ottawa
and
we've
heard
a
number
of
things
things
already,
but
the
East
End
Carling
Avenue
is
significant
to
the
character
of
the
city
and
should
be
considered
in
a
broader
context.
Individual
approval
set
precedencies
and
are
cumulative,
sometimes
providing
unintended
consequences
and
thoroughly
applied
and
balanced.
Urban,
Design
and
planning
refines
the
character
of
a
city
defines
the
character
of
the
city
and
its
memorable
places.
Next,
please
next
slide.
Q
The
Eastern
portion
of
caroling
Avenue
is
primarily
open,
one-sided,
non-commercial
and
characterized
by
national
and
Civic
institutional
uses.
The
Open,
Fields
research
lands,
proximity
to
Scenic,
driveways
in
historic
locations
are
strong
influences.
The
built
form
along
the
northern
Edge
reinforces
the
street
Edge
divide
with
mid-rise
buildings
parallel
to
Carling.
Next.
Q
The
projected
trance
way
along
Carling
Avenue
Redevelopment
of
the
existing
Civic
Hospital
campus,
as
shown
in
Orange
and
several
Lots,
similar
in
size
and
used
to
1081
Carling
shown
in
purple
on
the
north
side
of
the
street,
are
locations
for
change.
Obviously,
a
street
Edge
in
flux
next
is
an
aerial
view
of
the
site
nor
the
northern
Carling
Avenue
Edge
today
as
it
exists
next.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
In
conclusion,
this
is
a
special
location
in
our
city,
a
National
Historic
Site,
a
central
experimental
Farm,
an
arboretum
Parkways
Etc,
with
both
development
pressures
and
opportunities
with
the
Redevelopment
of
the
Civic
Hospital,
and
the
projected
Transit
way.
New
buildings
should
be
scaled
to
their
context.
The
streetscape,
which
defines
this
Edge,
should
benefit
both
the
municipality,
its
inhabitants
and
reinforce
our
National
Treasures.
Q
Q
York
City
Central
Park,
making
individual
decisions.
It
looks
like
a
bunch
of
people
hanging
over
a
green
space
next
slide.
This
is
Hyde
Park
in
London,
which
I
think
is
more
appropriate.
The
Edge
the
scale
of
the
street
is
harmonizes
with
the
the
open
space
it's
a
balance
between
transition,
open
space
and
density.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
Bill
I
have
to
say
we
receive
a
lot
of
renderings
and
illustrations
from
a
lot
of
community
associations,
and-
and
yours
are
always
spectacular
and
credible-
I
really
enjoy
receiving
I.
I
trust
the
diagrams
that
you're
showing
us
do.
Members
of
the
committee
have
any
questions
for
Mr
Greg
see
none
Bill.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
today.
Thank
you.
AC
Okay,
hello,
I'm,
Carolyn,
Brown
I
live
near
the
proposal
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
I
just
want
to
acquaint
the
committee
with
some
of
the
traffic
issues
that
we
as
residents
deal
with
every
day,
how
the
proposal
will
affect
them
in
the
fond
hope
that
some
of
these
will
be
addressed
during
the
site
plan.
AC
Currently
next
slide,
please
there's
a
busy
parking
lot
at
1081
Carling,
which
has
a
steady
stream
of
traffic
throughout
the
day
via
a
small
side,
Street
Hamilton,
but
almost
no
traffic
after
5
PM
and
on
weekends.
The
Proposal
includes
340
residents
Vehicles,
which
would
lead
to
traffic
at
all
times
and
mainly
at
rush
hour.
So
it's
a
change
in
the
traffic
pattern.
Next
slide,
please
The
Proposal
will
add
to
a
congestion
problem
on
Parkdale,
curling
and
side
streets.
Why
is
there
a
current
problem?
AC
AC
AC
F
AC
AC
The
Proposal
includes
a
tuck,
a
truck
route
that
would
go
through
these
streets
to
a
service
line
on
the
north
side
of
the
barrier
on
Hamilton
Avenue,
and
there
was
a
question
earlier
about
the
history
of
that
barrier.
On
Hamilton
Avenue
I
have
a
neighbor
who
could
address
that
for
you.
He
was
involved
in
it
in
the
80s,
currently
you'll
notice
that
the
side
streets
are
narrow
and
during
the
winter
are
often
effectively
one
lane.
AC
AC
Now
you
get
to
the
corner
of
Inglewood
and
Parkdale,
and
you
will
notice
there
is
a
stop
sign
in
One,
Direction
and
traffic
lights
in
the
other
direction,
which
creates
confusion
for
pedestrians
and
drivers.
That
is
also
the
ambulance
entrance
for
the
Civic
Hospital.
The
Civic
Hospital
will
be
moving,
but
it's
still
an
ambulance
route
along
Carling
and
Parkdale,
and
then
you
can
get
East
your
left.
AC
Your
eastbound
turn
on
on
curling
now
I'm
not
going
to
play
the
other
video
because
I'm
running
out
of
time
it
ran
about
half
twice
as
long
as
it
should
have.
Okay,
but
Vehicles
going
to
1081
Carling
from
Carling
eastbound
must
then
either
turn
left
on
Holland
and
take
the
route
shown
in
the
previous
video
or
make
a
u-turn
on
Parkdale.
There
is
a
neighborhood
management
strategy
for
the
new
Civic
Hospital,
which
is
intended
to
reduce
traffic
cutting
through
the
neighborhood,
but
this
proposal
goes
in
the
opposite
direction.
Next
slide.
Please.
AC
AC
In
the
official
plan,
curling
is
a
main
street
Corridor
and
the
plan
says
development
should
provide
easy
pedestrian
access
to
rapid
transit
station
or
a
frequent
bus
route
leading
to
a
station
now
or
in
the
future.
An
LRT
on
Carling
is
planned,
as
we
saw
with
a
station
at
Parkdale
and
Carling,
but
the
date
for
this
is
unclear
currently
for
Transit
residents
can
take
buses
to
the
tunnies
pasture
or
the
Dows
Lake
LRT
stations,
but
outside
of
Rush
Hour.
These
buses
are
infrequent
next
slide.
Y
AC
Must
admit:
I'm,
I'm,
big
on
problems
and
short
on
Solutions
today
there
needs
to
be
a
look
at
the
entire
traffic
flow
situation
and
what
the
best
way
would
be
to
get
the
traffic
in
and
out
of
that
of
both
the
access
road
for
the
trucks
and
the
underground
parking
garage
for
the
residences
and
I
and
I.
Don't
think
the
traffic
barrier
alone
is
part
of
the
issue.
Is
the
issue?
AC
A
A
A
A
AD
Thank
you
chair,
thank
you
for
having
me
today
on
this
topic
I'm
here,
to
represent
the
Green
Space
Alliance
of
Canada's
capital,
we're
very
concerned
with
the
long-term
preservation
of
the
farm.
The
central
experimental
Farm
is
valued
as
green
space
for
sure
it's
a
major
Urban
green
space,
but
it's
also
valued
for
its
its
history,
its
Heritage,
it's
been
around
since
1886.,
it's
the
second
oldest
experimental
Farm
in
the
world
and
the
Green
Space
it
provides
to
a
local
residents
to
a
city
residents
overall
and
the
equal
system.
AD
Services
it
provides
to
the
community,
are
very
valuable
and
and
bonus
in
the
way
all
of
it.
It's
also
a
workplace.
It's
a
research
station,
it's
a
place
where
scientists
perform
scientific
experiments
on
fields
which
is
their
lab
basically,
and
so
it
combines
all
those
things.
That's
why
such
a
unique
package
of
things
and
it's
worth
preserving
in
our
opinion
in
the
long
term,
it
really
should
be
part
of
ottawa's
future
in
as
much
as
as
it's
been
part
of
ottawa's
past.
AD
So
this
is,
you
know
the
reason
we
still
have
the
family.
The
reason
it's
still
been
you
know
it's
been
preserved
all
this
time.
Yeah
Green
Space
is
great,
but
it's
not
because
if
we
were
defending
it
as
Green
Space,
we
it
had
been
lost
a
long
time
ago.
Heritage
is
very
important,
but
if
it
was
only
the
Heritage
again,
I
think
it
would
be
much
less
than
what
it
is
today.
The
reason
we
still
have
it
is
because
of
the
research
program
is
because
of
its
research
mission.
AD
You
know,
10
years
ago
we
were
fighting
the
hospital
issue.
They
were
going
to
be
building
the
new
Campus
of
these
Ottawa
Hospital
right
there
on
those
research,
Fields
and-
and
we
fought
that
in
the
community
fought
that
and
basically
it
was
moved
because
it
did
threaten
the
long
term
preservation
of
the
farm.
AD
Today,
we're
we're
faced
with
another
threat,
something
that
we
really
hadn't
really
anticipated.
I
have
to
admit
when
I
first
looked
at
the
reports,
I
was
going
through
it,
but
I'm
shadowing.
Oh
well,
you
know
shadowing
that
happens
all
the
time
with
high
rises.
What
what
what's
this
about?
But
looking
into
the
reports
more
deeply,
then
you
kind
of
realize
well
wait.
A
second.
AD
This
shadowing
is
in
fact
going
to
be
taking
basically
the
same
chunk
of
land
out
of
research,
use
it'll,
make
it
unusable
for
research
purposes
and
basically,
you
know
incur
as
much
damage
to
the
research
program
of
the
farm
as
if
the
hospital
of
Campus
had
been
built
right
there.
So
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
huge
issue.
It's
it's!
It's
it's!
It's
a
and
you
know
it's
important
to
clearly
understand
that
impact,
because
it's
not
it's!
It's
not
immediately
apparent.
AD
You
know,
but
if
you're
running
scientific
experiments
on
the
field
you're
comparing
say
something
you've
done
here
to
something
you've
done
there.
You
want
to
control
all
the
variables
around
your
scientific.
You
know
around
your
experiment
and
right
now,
you're
doing
it
and
you've
got
full
sun
all
the
time,
so
that's
controlled
for
with
the
shadowing
that's
being
produced
by
this
project.
AD
What
happens
is
that
there's
variable
Shadow
at
different
times
at
different
all
throughout
the
day,
and
so
it
it
now
you're
no
longer
controlling
for
that
important
variable
in
your
experiment.
That's
what
makes
them
unusable.
So
it's
not
really
the
extent
it's
not
the
hundred
thousand
minutes,
ten
thousand
minutes,
whatever
that's
already
our
math.
It's
just
this
issue
that
you
can't
control
for
this
most
important
input
to
your
experiment,
which
is
the
amount
of
sunlight
that
your
plots
are
getting
and
actually
I.
Think
we'll
have
other
scientists.
AD
You
know
I'm,
not
a
scientist,
I'm
sure
scientists
will
speak
to
that
yeah
if
they're
given
the
opportunity.
So
so
it
is
a
big
problem.
It's
a
huge
problem
and
you
know
it
comes
down
to
the
shadowing
and
it's
compounded
really.
If
we
have
projects
happening
elsewhere,
all
around
the
perimeter
of
the
farm
it'll
need
to
be
dealt
with.
The
big
problem
we
have
with
this
situate
particular
application
is
that
the
shadowing
was
evaluated
based
on
the
terms
of
reference
for
shadow
analysis
of
the
city
of
Ottawa.
AD
This
is
something
that's
used
in
assessing
Shadow
impacts,
but
it's
really
for
public
places.
It
applies
a
test
that
applies
to
places
where
the
people
gather
like
main
streets
like
amenities
like
Parks,
like
so
that
none
of
those
are
provided.
You
know
which
are
Shadow
for
longer
than
certain
set
amounts
of
time
during
the
day,
but
it's
not
applicable
in
a
case
like
this.
This
is
an
operation
that
requires
full-time
sunlight,
all
the
time
for
it
to
work.
What
if
it
was
like
a
privately
owned
solar
farm?
AD
What
if
it
was
a
privately
owned
Greenhouse
of
operation,
you're
you're
over
time,
I'm,
sorry
I'm,
just
saying
if
we
could
get
at
that
issue
that
we
just
don't
have
the
right
protocol
for
assessing
the
impact
we're
using
a
protocol.
That's
not
appropriate
under
that
protocol.
Yeah
there's
the
impact
is
acceptable,
but
it's
just
not
the
right
protocol.
So
that's.
My
main
point
really
is
that
we
need
to
address
that
very
specific
issue.
A
Thank
you
very
much
Paul.
Are
there
any
questions
from
members
Paul?
Are
you
see
none
I'll
post,
my
own
Paul?
Are
you
aware
of
any
opportunities,
I
I
again,
I
keep
coming
back
to
the
fact
that
we
have
to
consider
this
application
under
the
framework
that's
in
place
today
and
we
can't
go
retroactive
on
it.
But
are
you
aware
of
any
opportunities
to
modify
that
protocol
that
are
coming
up.
AD
That's
in
front
of
you,
you
know,
and
so
whatever
it
is,
that
you
need
to
do
to
to
get
yourself
a
tool
is,
is
the
step
is
the
next
step
that
needs
to
be
done
or
if
you
conclude
that
no
there,
the
tool
doesn't
apply,
but
we
don't
have
a
tool,
and
so
shadows
will
just
be
what
they
are
I
guess.
Then
it's
just
left
up
to
the
courts
to
decide.
I
guess
landowners
can
complain
when
their
operation
is
being
affected
by
actions
of
others
that
create
damage
to
their
economic
activity.
AD
So
I,
I,
I,
I,
guess
that's.
You
know,
that's
kind
of
the
other
question.
Is
there
a
legal
question
in
this
particular
case
I?
Are
we
aware
not
from
the
report?
The
report
says
no
legal
implications,
but
are
there
any
legal
implications
here
of
not
having
the
right
tool
in
place
to
assess
the
impact
of
the
shadowing
that
will
be
occurring
on
the
land
of
the
central
experimental,
Health
Plan.
A
Okay,
no,
it's
a
good
question
and
something
that
so
I
haven't
really
talked
to
the
the
committee
about,
but
I
assume
there's
going
to
be
some
strong
agreements
around
the
table
is
we.
We
do
need
to
make
sure
that
the
city
is
sitting
down
with
agriculture,
Canada
and
and
determining
what
the
ground
rules
are
going
to
be
moving
forward
and
having
an
appropriate
in
terms
of
reference
for
shadow
studies.
A
Moving
forward
is
going
to
be
a
key
part
of
that
so
I'm,
assuming
that
we're
going
to
come
out
of
today's
meeting.
If
we
wind
up
approving
this
rezoning
application
with
some
sort
of
direction
to
staff
to
get
ahead
of
this
issue,
I
I
was
particularly
interested
in
Bill
Griggs
diagram.
There
is
the
one
property
I
can't
remember:
440
Carling.
A
It
would
be
interesting
to
have
I'm
sorry,
oh
all
at
440,
Holland
I
think
it
would
be.
It
would
be
worthwhile
us
taking
a
look
at
that.
So
I'm,
assuming
someone
on
committee
will
want
to
provide
some
broad
direction
to
staff
in
terms
of
a
process
moving
forward
I'm
looking
at
Riley
the
thank
you
Paul.
Thank
you
very
much
for
thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentation
today.
We're
going
to
move
on
to
Felipe
McDonald.
A
A
AE
Okay,
I'll
do
my
best
hello,
my
name
is
Susan
Susan
Paul
and
while
we
have
does
not
negate
the
climate
crisis
or
other
emergencies
that
have
been
proclaimed,
the
central,
experimental,
Farm
or
farm
for
short
is
one
very
tiny
area
in
the
whole
of
Ottawa.
This
is
not
a
binary
decision
of
no
building
or
just
build
skyscrapers.
AE
Ottawa
is
not
hurting
for
land
available
to
build
skyscrapers
on,
and
special
consideration
should
be
made
for
select
sites
such
as
the
farm.
There
is
currently
a
bill
in
Parliament
that
will
protect
this
property
once
fully
passed
within
the
next
sitting.
Bill
c-23
historical
places
of
Canada's
act,
which
will
affect
how
surrounding
development
to
these
lands
will
be
allowed
to
impact
them.
You
said
you
want
participation
from
the
public,
but
then
individuals
are
forced
to
hunt
and
scour
various
documents.
AE
The
city
has
created
to
find
definitions
and
terminologies
referenced
throughout
the
proposal,
materials
without
proper
references
in
that
documentation,
and
these
documents
are
not
included
with
the
proposal
materials.
It
is
up
to
the
individuals
to
try
and
find
them
to
get
the
full
details,
and,
while
developers
and
the
city
have
paid
teams
of
personnel
and
experts
that
work
regularly
on
these
proposals
and
are
familiar
with
the
key
documents
needed
to
support
their
argument.
AE
Much
of
the
other
materials
that
work
against
the
proposal
are
hidden
and
not
included
in
the
proposal
materials
presented
to
this
committee
and
Council.
This
gives
developers
an
edge
against
the
community
who
have
limited
means
to
complete
the
research
to
find
all
relevant
materials
for
our
development.
It
also
means
this
committee
and
the
council
get
selective
information
to
rely
on
for
their
decision,
which
is
being
slanted
toward
one
side.
Only.
This
has
been
shown
in
several
AG
reports,
where
biased
information
has
been
provided
by
City
personnel.
AE
To
ensure
a
particular
agenda
is
promoted
instead
of
an
unbiased
report,
and
just
because
more
public
have
not
come
forward
to
speak
does
not
mean
they
are
okay.
With
this
proposal,
it
only
means
that
they
cannot
do
all
the
work
necessary
to
amount
a
defense
for
their
position,
because
the
of
the
level
of
effort
involved
is
too
great
and
discourages
participation.
AE
Now
some
individuals
do
take
on
this
massive
task
themselves
to
find
what
is
hidden
and
present
the
missing
details
from
the
development
materials
they
produce.
Reports
of
the
flaws
in
the
documentation
and
the
discrepancies
in
the
details
for
traffic
flow,
shadowing
urban
planning,
Wastewater
management
and
various
other
fields
of
study,
so
that
city
planners
do
not
misrepresent
the
full
planning
policies
and
guidelines
created
for
planning
decision.
AE
That
said,
I'm
here
to
speak,
to
flaws
I've
discovered
that
skew
the
information
present
The
Firm
has
been
mislabeled
as
Green
Space
by
the
city
and
developers,
even
though
it
does
not
fit
into
the
defined
categories.
This
is
done
on
purpose
to
downplay
the
significance
of
this
important
site
in
the
green
space
master
plan
under
Section
1.3.
What
is
Green
Space?
AE
The
city
has
clearly
defined
Green
Space
in
its
simplest
form
to
be
land
that
serves
one
of
two
purposes:
provision
of
recreation
and
Leisure
opportunities
for
the
use
and
benefit
of
the
public
and
preservation
of
the
natural
environment
and
environmental
systems.
Neither
of
these
definitions
fit
the
firm
because
it
is
a
research
facility
that
includes
educating
the
public
on
agricultural
activities,
but
mostly
doing
research
to
improve
crops
grown
in
Canada
and
the
world.
AE
The
farm
is
completely
a
workspace,
including
the
fields
and
while
some
of
the
area
may
be
accessible
for
restricted
purposes,
the
farm
is
not
fully
accessible
to
the
public
for
either
of
those
stated
purposes,
and
while
there
is
a
housing
crisis,
Ottawa
is
not
a
place
without
land.
To
build
on
that,
the
city
must
approve
tall
skyscrapers
on
every
open
space
they
can
find.
AE
We
do
not
need
to
build
large,
condo
Towers
on
Parliament
Hills
front
lawn
or
in
major
Hill
Park
or
any
other
choice
pieces
of
property
to
solve
the
housing
crisis
next
door
to
1081
Carling
is
a
non-story
seniors
resident.
The
other
side
has
the
Civic
Hospital.
We
have
a
nurse's
resident
at
751
Parkdale.
Both
of
those
properties
are
set
back
from
Carling
to
lessen
shadowing
on
the
farm,
and
the
properties
along
Fisher
Avenue
that
have
been
mentioned
are
also
set
back
from
the
farm
to
lessen
the
impacts
against
the
farm.
AE
1081
is
using
the
housing
crisis
to
propose
Heights
far
above
these
buildings
and
placement
as
close
to
the
farm
which
would
cause
the
highest
level
of
impact
to
the
Farm's
research
city.
Workers
are
presented
a
biased
report
in
favor
of
the
development,
while
minimizing
all
all
other
arguments
presented
by
the
community
experts
affected
research,
scientists
and
Community
groups.
What
I'm
asking
of
the
committee
is
to
reduce
the
heights
of
this
development
to
protect
the
farm
but
still
provide
homes.
AE
This
is
one
of
many
proposals
that
will
be
coming
forward
very
soon
to
develop
the
peripheral
of
the
form.
The
importance
of
This
research
facility
is
clearly
being
downplayed
by
city
workers.
The
farm
is
the
only
one
of
its
kind
in
all
of
Eastern
Canada.
The
research
supports
one
in
nine
jobs
in
Canada.
We
cannot
have
tunnel
vision
and
only
worry
about
the
housing
crisis.
To
approve
skyscrapers
everywhere,
especially
after
several
Summers
of
climate
disasters,
we
will
need
the
research
from
the.
AE
I
am
saying
no
to
development,
I
I'm,
not
saying
no
to
development.
What
I'm
saying
is
appropriate
development
in
a
lower
height
around
the
river
of
the
farm
bill,
told
skyscrapers,
but
in
the
way
that
is
designed
through
the
Urban
Design
guidelines
for
high-rise
buildings,
which
shows
the
45
degree
plane
from
surrounding
communities.
Please
reduce
the
heights
of
the
towers
proposed
for
this
application.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Thank
you,
Susan.
Do
any
members
of
the
committee
have
questions
for
Ms
Paul
seen
none
Susan.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation.
Today,
Felipe
McDonald
has
been
able
to
join
us
I'm
assuming
online
so
Felipe
as
soon
as
we
get
you
on
board.
You'll
have
five
minutes
to
make
a
presentation
to
the
committee.
AF
Excellent
everyone
can
hear
me.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today.
My
name
is
Philippa
I'm
a
fourth
year
Environmental
Studies
student
and
I
felt
compelled
to
do
a
public
delegation
similar
to
a
lot
of
the
delegates
before
now.
I,
don't
really
understand
why
this
proposal
is
going
through,
given
the
recommendations
by
key
stakeholders
as
well
as
outcry
Community
next
slide,
please
just
very
briefly.
AF
It
poses
a
significant
risk,
as
it
impacts
the
research
fields
and
jeopardizes
Agricultural
Science
Integrity
next
slide.
Please
yeah
I
also
want
to
reiterate
some
of
what
heritage
Ottawa
was
mentioning
earlier,
but
that
the
recommendation
again
is
that
the
planning
and
housing
committee
not
recommend
for
approval.
The
proposed
development,
as
the
excessive
height
will
significantly
impact
Heritage
integrity
and
research.
Capacity
of
central
experimental
firm
next
slide.
Please.
AF
So,
instead
I'm
going
to
focus
more
on
a
bigger
picture
item
that
I
think
I
want
to
make
sure
is
considered
or
included
in
your
consideration
and
that
as
an
environmental
study,
student
I
look
a
lot
at
climate
and
the
farm
is
already
under
threat.
A
lot
just
as
an
example
in
2016
five
hectares
of
the
firm
was
unusable
due
to
road
cell
contamination
and
I
believe
that
was
for
the
entire
growing
period.
AF
And
then,
if
we
look
at
climate
change,
especially
this
summer,
we've
had
I
live
at
the
corner
of
Fisher
and
Baseline.
So
I
know
this
is
in
the
Farm's
jurisdiction
that
there's
been
four
or
five
tornado
warnings.
Some
really
intense
sheet
rainfall,
which
I
can
only
imagine,
is
impacting
soil
erosion.
AF
The
farm
is
very
vulnerable
to
these
changing
seasons
that
we're
inevitably
going
to
face
heat
waves,
droughts,
extreme
weather
and
the
farm
is
no
stranger
to
invasive
species.
So
taking
away
any
section
of
the
farm
is
just
leaving
even
less
to
work
with
so
I
think.
That's
a
really
significant
issue
to
consider
and
then
next
slide.
Please
I
also
want
to
highlight
the
significance
of
the
farm
as
a
community
member.
AF
AF
This
is
a
significant
place
for
my
community
I'm
in
there
almost
every
other
day,
either
jogging
or
cycling,
and
so
I
found
it
quite
disturbing
that
tagar
earlier
in
this
meeting,
said
there's
a
lot
to
be
gained
for
the
citizens
involved,
because
I
don't
I,
don't
see
that
I
think
we'll
have
a
nice
Brown
grassy
feel
to
look
at
after
this.
If
this
proposal
is
going
to
go
forward,
I'll
carry
on
with
that
later,
but
it
again
a
valuable
agricultural
research
site
next
slide.
Please.
AF
I
just
want
to
hammer
down
that
we
don't
need
more
unaffordable,
housing
and
I
want
to
bring
out
the
question
of
what
who
who
stands
to
gain
from
this
proposal
and
I
when
I'm
thinking
about
it.
I'm
thinking
that
there's
some
middle
to
Upper
tax
bracket
citizens
that'll
be
able
to
afford
to
live
there
and
I'll
have
a
million
dollar
view
of
the
firm
the
developers
are
going
to
benefit,
of
course,
and
yes,
we
do
need
more
housing.
We
certainly
do
especially
considering
that
the
shelters
downtown
are
flowing.
AF
We've
got
a
housing
crisis
on
our
hands,
but
we
don't
need
more
unaffordable
housing,
especially
if
it's
going
to
impact
the
very
precious
Green
Space
that
we
have
I
mean
the
research
that's
being
done
on
experimental
firm
as
mentioned
is
research.
That's
hopefully
going
to
ensure
a
sustainable
food
system
for
us
going
forward
in
the
face
of
climate
change.
So
I
just
think.
There's
a
lot
at
stake
here
and
I
really
hope
that
the
previous
delegations,
as
well
as
some
of
what
I
said
today,
will
be
considered
in
your
decision,
so
I'll
stop
there.
E
You
thank
you
very
much.
Thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
today.
My
name
is
Corey
Peabody
and
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
the
Fisher
Heights
in
area
Community
Association
for
those
of
you
that
are
not
familiar
with
our
neighborhood,
we're
directly
south
of
the
experimental
Farm,
so
the
Baseline
between
Fisher
and
Maryville,
so
we're
in
ward
9.,
Sean
Devine
is
our
counselor.
E
We
have
a
shared
concern
with
the
Civic
Hospital
neighborhood
association,
in
that
we
have
a
proposal
in
our
neighborhood
for
three
high-rise
Towers
at
the
corner
of
Baseline
and
Fisher
at
780,
and
that
have
similar
concerns
to
what
the
Civic
Hospital
neighborhood
association
has
raised
in
terms
of
transition
to
neighbors
and
shadowing
on
the
farm.
So.
F
E
Just
I'm
not
going
to
go
over
and
repeat
what
everybody
else
has
said,
but
I
I
do
agree
that
this
decision
on
this
development
is
really
precedent.
Setting
1081
is
going
to
set
the
standard
for
other
developments
along
the
perimeter
of
the
experimental
Farm,
so
I
just
want
a
voice
from
Fisher
Heights
in
area.
Community
Association
are
really
strong
support
for
the
Civic
Hospital
neighborhood
association.
E
You
know
we
agree
with
their
transition
comments.
We
don't
think
that
the
developers
complied
with
section.
4.66
of
the
official
plan
were
concerned
with
the
shadowing
analysis
that
agriculture
Canada
has
raised.
We
certainly
support
their
assessment
of
the
cumulative
shading
on
the
farm,
which
I
think
is
very
important
versus
the
city's
terms
of
reference
with
which
seemed
to
be
like
one
day,
one
time
to
determine
Shadow
and
I.
Don't
even
know
if
those
terms
of
reference
apply
because
the
Farm's
land
is
private,
it's
not
public
anyway.
E
You
know
we're
really
fearful
to
think
what
might
happen
to
that
land.
So
I
would
really
like
to
encourage
the
city
to
you,
know:
sit
down
with
agriculture,
Canada,
create
a
buffer
zone
or
something
to
protect
the
farm
lands.
Well,
at
the
same
time,
you
can
still
build
additional
housing
units.
You
have
to
understand
that
we
do
support
responsible
and
sustainable
intensification.
We
understand
it,
we
get
it.
There
just
has
to
be
a
way
that
we
can.
You
know,
sort
of,
have
a
meeting
of
the
minds
and
get
everyone
on
the
same
page.
E
So
my
final
suggestion
would
be
that
I
feel
that
the
designation
of
the
farm
in
the
new
official
plan-
currently
it
is
designated
Green,
Space
and
I
I-
don't
think
that's
correct.
I
think
it
should
be
designated
as
agricultural
land,
because
that's
what
it
is.
It's
a
working
farm
so
in
closing
I
just
would
like
you
to
please
reconsider
this
proposal
in
light
of
its
precedent
setting
nature
and
we
need
to
get
transitions
between
neighborhoods
and
new
development.
E
We
have
to
get
it
done
right
and
we
have
to
have
clear
guidance
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
on
about
the
45
degree
angular
plane,
but
that's
what
I'm,
thinking
and
I
said,
and
we
need
to
work
together
to
preserve
the
farm,
both
as
a
research
area
and
a
National,
Historic,
Site
I
think
we're
close,
but
we're
not
quite
there.
Thank
you.
Thank.
AG
It's
a
conversation
that
has
been
spurred
by
Development
coming
to
us,
rather
than
us
initiating
the
conversation
ahead
of
time,
but
I'm
grateful
that
we're
having
the
conversation,
because
I
think
the
impacts
are
quite
significant.
So
Corey
thank
you
for
being
here
and
for
and
for
throwing
another
lens
onto
this.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Counselor
Devine,
Corey
I,
don't
see
any
other
questions.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
your
intervention
today
and
we'll
move
on
to
Melissa.
Black
is
Melissa
in
the
room,
or
is
she
online
and
Melissa?
Ms
Black
also
has
a
presentation
to
make
so
Melissa
as
soon
as
you're
able
to
join
us
I
think
we're
getting
your
presentation
up
on
screen
and
you'll
have
five
minutes
to
make
a
presentation
to
the
committee
perfect.
Thank.
AH
AH
Also
I
I've
lived
in
the
area
for
for
many
years
over
20
years,
I
actually
moved
into
the
area
as
a
renter
in
one
of
the
many
semi-detached
duplex
homes
in
in
the
area
and
I
love
love
the
area
so
I'm.
Speaking
from
my
heart,
when
I'm
addressing
you
but
the
objective
of
my
presentation,
it's
really
to
amplify
some
of
the
community
input
that
we've
received
over
the
course
of
the
the
application.
AH
So
these
have
been
received
through
public
consultations
by
the
Civic
Hospital
neighborhood
association
and
also
I
also
want
to
present
to
you.
The
petition
highlights
the
petition
that
we
that
we
launched
so
on
so
yeah,
so
moving
on
to
slide
three.
The
purpose
of
this
slide
is
just
to
to
give
you
an
overview
of
the
timeline
of
the
application
and
also
to
to
show
that
to
comments
and
concerns
from
the
community
have
been
coming
in
really
since
the
beginning.
AH
AH
More
written
submissions
were
were
made
at
that
point
to
the
to
the
planning
Department
and
our
counselor
at
least
18,
that
we're
aware
of
and
then
the
as
you,
as
you
know,
Agriculture
and
agri-food
issued
its
letter
in
in
April
on
the
shade
analysis
and
following
that,
we
launched
a
a
petition,
and
that
was
another
opportunity
for
for
input
on
on
the
issue
and
I'll
go
into
that
a
little
bit
later
in
the
presentation.
But
we
did
receive
801
signatures
on
on
that
petition.
AH
AH
Okay,
thank
you,
so
just
a
quickly
a
summary
of
the
next
four
slides
just
talk
about
it's
a
summary
of
the
comments.
I
won't
go
into
those
because
the
other
delegates
have
gone
into
them
very,
very
well,
but
height
transition
density
was
was
a
main
theme.
Also
traffic,
as
Carolyn's
video
showed
you.
Traffic
was
a
big
concern,
in
particular
the
u-turns
and
securities
Roots.
Also
the
Heritage
impact
was
was
mentioned
by
several
community
members
and
and
members
of
the
public.
AH
Just
at
the
heritor,
there
is
Heritage
character
in
the
neighborhood
as
well.
That
should
be
taken
into
account
and
and
the
Urban
Design
guidelines
actually
require
that
as
well.
So
so
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
also
the
shadow
impact
I
won't
go
into
that
any
further,
because
I
know
we've
we're
lots
of
discussion
is
happening
on
the
shadow
impact,
but
that
was
one
of
the
main
themes.
That's
been
consistent
throughout
this
process
as
well.
AH
Finally,
slide:
eight,
we
talk
about
the
petition,
so
this
was
launched
in
June
on
June
12th,
two
main
areas,
two
main
concerns
one
was
transition
to
the
community
and
the
other
one
was
the
shadow
impact
on
the
on
the
central
experimental
farm.
So
as
of
August
15th,
this
petition
is
received
almost
34
000
views
over
800
signatures
and
32
comments
and
from
change.org.
This
is
considered
great
in
terms
of
strength.
AH
So
so
we're
very
you
know
we're
pleased
with
with
the
amount
of
visibility
that
that
our
petition
got
and
then
just
to
conclude
the
presentation
just
to
highlight
some
of
the
comments
that
that
people
made
on
on
from
the
petition.
This
is
not
just
from
our
neighborhood.
These
are
comments
that
came
from
from
across
Ottawa
and
and
and
further,
but
a
range
of
them.
AH
A
AI
Hi
I'm
not
going
to
take
up
too
much
time
because
there's
been
amazing
presentations
made
here.
I
just
want
to
reiterate
some
of
the
things.
Some.
There
are
many
good
reasons
for
auto
law
to
protect
the
Integrity
of
this
Central
experimental
Farm.
You
could
write
a
huge
book
on
it.
Just
to
the
few
of
the
headings
that
are
important.
AI
Locally
are
mitigation
of
climate
change,
impacts,
environmental
sustainability,
Cutting,
Edge,
agriculture,
research,
that's
actually,
National
Heritage
is
National
accessible
outdoor,
open
classrooms,
tourism
people
come
here
now,
Carling
Avenue
is
currently
hosting
or
single
host
high-rise
development
in
numerous
locations.
Many
are
multi-tower
developments.
AI
I
think
you
probably
have
all
seen
the
CBC
reports
on
the
thousands
of
units
that
are
being
approved
in
Ottawa
they're,
either
approved
already
or
or
getting
ready
to
be
approved
and
so
I
don't
think
we're
looking
at
a
shortage
of
Bachelors
and
and
single,
oh
fun,
bedrooms
and
maybe
two
bedrooms.
So
in
any
case,
we've
got
a
lot
going
on
now.
This
section
of
Carling
Avenue
North
of
the
farm
is
really
not
suitable
for
high-rise
development.
AI
There
are
lots
of
parts
of
Carling
Avenue
that
are,
and
I
can
think
immediately
of
the
Westgate
Shopping
Center,
that's
being
redeveloped
with
multiple
towers
and
the
Canadian
Tire
site
that
is
being
proposed
to
do
that,
and
there
are
sites
all
over
Scott
Street
is
turning
into
a
wall
of
towers.
We
already
had
pictures
of
Parkdale,
which
is
really
that's
a
nasty
place
to
walk
yeah.
We
don't
want
that,
so
a
section
of
Carlin
north
of
farm
should
be
protected,
it's
not
suitable.
AI
We
know
that
if,
if
it
goes,
if
this
one
goes
through,
there
will
be
others
because
Towers
propagate
themselves,
agriculture,
neighbor
food
Canada,
has
raised
serious
concerns
about
the
shadowing
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people's
problem
is
that
they
don't
understand
why
you
would
have
these
quite
different
responses
to
shadowing
now.
When
the
city
looks
at
shadowing,
it's
taking
the
the
sort
of
the
picture
of
the
of
the
building
and
it
it
circles
around
the
building
and
it
covers
a
certain
place.
AI
You've
got
the
black
image
of
the
building
in
the
it's
the
experimental
Farm.
They
have
to
use
a
logarithmic
scale
to
represent
the
impact
of
the
wavelengths
of
light
on
their
on
their
plantings,
and
so
you,
you
actually
see
that
there's
they've
got
a
cone
effect
that,
instead
of
the
sort
of
linear
apartment
building
shade
dark
shade
you've
got
a
cone
effect
where
the
middle
part
is
darker
and
then
you
have
it
spread
out
lighter
that's
the
way
shadowing
works.
AI
AI
So
these
are
the
impacts
on
current
ongoing
research
of
just
one
proposal
to
build
high-rise
Towers
on
this
section
of
Carling
Avenue.
The
proposal
neglects
to
consider
that
the
Integrity
of
the
research
project
depends
on
the
researcher's
ability
to
foresee
and
understand
as
much
as
possible
the
associated
variables.
It
does
not
take
into
consideration
climate
change
and
the
urgent
need
for
research
on
crops
that
can
withstand
Extremes
in
weather,
conditions,
which
are
ongoing
there.
AI
This
actually,
at
the
time,
took
into
consideration
the
need
for
the
hundreds
and
thousands,
whatever
new
units
that
are
are
required
to
house
our
population.
Now
the
province
amended
these
Heights
to
mine
stories
mid
Rises.
To
find
this
five
to
nine
stories,
which
makes
a
jump
to
high-rise
quite
a
bit.
It
seems
quite
a
bit
less
of
a
problem.
Doesn't
it
if
you've
got
the
top
of
the
mid-rise?
Maybe
you
can
go
above
that?
Maybe
it's
reasonable
to
go
about
that.
AI
One-Size-Fits-All
approach
to
approval,
which
does
not
consider
microclimate
social
context,
historic
and
interesting
land
patterns.
In
conclusion,
I'd
like
to
just
sum
up
that
there
are
three
words
that
are
necessary
in
this
case
respect.
We
have
to
respect
the
expertise
and
recommendations
of
the
scientists
whose
years
of
work
is
being
threatened.
We
have
to
respect
the
farm
and
all
that
extends
for
past
present
and
future.
We
have
to
acknowledge
that
approving
these
Heights
in
this
location
does
not
reflect
a
holistic
understanding
of
the
impacts
on
vital
research.
AI
We
have
to
acknowledge
that
there
is
no
requirement
for
planning
and
housing
committee
and
Council
to
accept
a
proposal
that
goes
beyond
what
is
required
in
the
official
plan.
We
have
to
acknowledge
that
there
are
compelling
reasons
to
refuse
the
application,
so
we
have
to
have
the
courage
to
refuse
the
application.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
I
intend
for
that
the
last
nudge
to
keep
it
to
a
fairly
quick
conclusion.
I
do
appreciate
the
the
intervention
I'll
ask
members
of
committee.
If
they
have
any
questions
and
I
don't
see
any
sorry,
let
me
just
get
back
to
the
front
of
my
zoom
screen.
I,
don't
see
any
Heather.
Thank
you
for
your
comments
today,
I
appreciate
your
your
intervention.
A
B
AJ
Okay,
great,
thank
you.
Well,
there
are
at
least
three
solid
reasons
to
read:
the
proposed
Sony
environment
first,
just
contrary
to
staff
report.
Of
course,
there
are
illegal
implications.
Approving
Amendment
would
be
an
error
in
law,
as
it
would
asleep
hierarchy
and
an
overriding
National
interest.
AJ
AJ
AJ
Y
A
AJ
Great
well,
first,
first,
contrary
to
staff
report.
Of
course
there
are
legal
implications.
Approving
the
amendment
would
be
an
erroring
law
as
it
would
disregard
legislative
hierarchy
and
an
overriding
National
interest.
Approving
the
zoning
amendment
to
allow
building
high
rises
that
affect
the
natural
exposure
to
sunlight
on
experimental
Farms
Fields
would
seriously
hinder
and
permanently
damage
a
federally
mandated
facility
and
duties
that
are
carried
out
in
the
National
interest.
AJ
The
central
experimental
Farm
was
created
by
federal
legislation
and
has
been
federally
mandated
for
more
than
100
years
to
be
a
central
research
site,
a
focal
point
to
help
resolve
Farm
and
Food
production
questions.
Its
Fields
have
played
an
essential
part
in
many
food
research
and
development.
Success,
including
new
cereal
grain
varieties,
highly
adapted
to
Canadian
soils
and
weather
the
frontal
experimental
Farm
station
Act
is
federal
legislation
last
amended
in
February
2015
by
Parliament.
AJ
By
virtue
of
this
Federal
legislation,
the
central
experimental
foreign
and
its
officers
have
a
federal,
limited
Duty,
a
duty
to
conduct
research,
experiments
tests
and
studies
for
new
and
existing
varieties
of
food,
fertilizers
diseases
and
other
aspects
of
food
productivity,
including
those
related
to
adaptability.
To
varying
climate
and
other
conditions
to
answer
Council
or
blocking
funds
earliest
questions
about
the
importance
of
shadowing
concerns.
All
of
these
federally
legislative
duties
make
continuity
of
the
site
and
its
intrinsic
characteristics
over
time.
AJ
Approving
the
Sony
amendment
is
not
about
addressing
our
affordable
housing
deficit,
as
I
will
explain
in
a
moment.
It
specifically
serves
the
purpose
of
increasing
profitability
for
a
private
business
through
the
detriment
of
the
public
interest.
It
would
be
a
failure
of
respect
for
legislative
Edition
hierarchy,
a
failure
of
the
city's
duty
of
care
and
an
affront
to
the
National
interest,
but
the
way
councilor
leopard
the
essential
Irreplaceable
value
of
the
central
experimental
Farm
is
not
cultural
heritage
as
most
underhanded.
AJ
It
is
vital
food
security,
scientific
research,
it's
not
so
much
cultural
heritage,
but
scientific
research
that
would
be
irreparably
damaged
with
the
proposed
on
the
amendment.
Second
related
to
my
very
last
Point
approval
of
the
Sony
Amendment
would
make
our
city
look
ignorant,
and
you
know
ill
at
various
feeling
in
a
duty
of
current
support
for
the
national
interest,
in
order
to
help
profits
maximizing
for
an
already
very
rich
company.
AJ
Without
regard
for
the
harm
it
would
cost
to
our
country's
vital
food
resilience
and
food
security
research
at
the
time
when
we
most
earners
would
be
needed,
in
effect
disregarding
not
just
the
national
but
the
global
right
of
human
priority.
Third,
it
disregard
of
legislative
hierarchy.
National
priority
science
and
Common
Sense
would
be
done
by
brandishing
a
red
herring
specification.
The
argument
that
two
tall
tall
high
rises
are
needed
on
this
particular
location.
AJ
It's
a
red
herring
because
our
city
has
more
land
than
Toronto
and
massive
amounts
of
land
available
for
development
and
Redevelopment
throughout
its
Urban
boundaries.
This
includes
numerous
areas:
full
of
Aging,
large
single
house
laws,
countless
derelict
industrial,
commercial
and
vacant
sites
and
numerous
municipally
owned
sites
which,
by
the
way,
continue
to
be
sold
without
much
public
awareness,
never
mind
input.
Those
among
many
others
could
easily
satisfy
our
hunting
needs
if
they
were
redeveloped
sensitively.
To
say
that
we
need
two
high
rises
on
this
particular
location.
AJ
To
address
our
housing
needs
would
be
a
false
argument.
I
hope
you
don't
buy
into
it.
I
should
have
also
that
you
know
in
more
than
25
years
of
being
actively
involved
with
the
green
space
Alliance
and
as
an
individual
in
all
these
years.
I've
seen
attendance
in
this
committee
and
stuff
to
dismiss
valid
concerns
with
the
argument
that
the
Ontario
Municipal
board
and
the
Ontario
land
tribunal
and
Industrial
zoning
orders
would
overturn
a
good
decision
anyway.
So
why
should
the
city
proceed?
AJ
Otherwise,
the
municipality
has
a
legally
mandated
and
supported
authority
over
land
use
decisions
and,
in
my
25
years
of
involvement,
I
have
not
seen
the
city
try,
not
even
once
to
fight
all
the
way
at
the
little
system
on
OMB
ministerial
order
or
Olt
bad
decision
or
otherwise
assertive
legal
authorities.
The
long-standing
legislation
of
creative
municipalities
in
Ontario
guarantees
a
city
that
authorities
that's
something
worth
fighting
for.
AJ
AJ
A
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so
those
are
the
public
delegations
that
we
have.
Are
there
any
motions
that
anyone
wants
to
put
on
the
floor
right
now,
I'm,
not
seeing
anything.
So
it
is
an
opportunity.
Now
to
oh
I,
see
Riley's
hand
is
up
yeah
questions
to
staff,
so
please
get
your
hands
up
there
and
we'll
ask
any
questions:
staff,
councilor
Brockington!
You
are
first.
R
AK
AK
R
Enough
two
director
generals
from
agriculture
of
Canada
have
said
that
this
particular
shadowing
impact
from
the
proposed
development
will
have
quote
astounding
impacts
on
their
research.
There
will
be
significant
risk
and
jeopardizes
may
jeopardize
the
Integrity
of
research.
Do
you
agree
with
that
assessment.
AK
R
Experts
from
agriculture
Canada
are
responding
to
a
development
application
for
a
site
that
City
staff
have
been
engaged
on
for
quite
some
time.
Many
stakeholders
are
responding
to
similar
concerns
about
what
negative
ramifications
might
occur
when
Shadows
from
this
proposal
impact
agricultural
research
lands
on
experimental
firm
lands.
R
It's
a
very
important
concern
for
this
committee
that
we're
wrestling
with
and
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
how
our
city
staff,
who
I
acknowledge,
are
not
agriculture.
Research
experts
react
to
or
respond
to
letters
such
as
the
two
dgs,
who
are
clearer
that
this,
in
their
opinion,
will
impact
their
ability
to
do
research
here
so
I'd
like
to
have
a
better
understanding
how
our
staff
respond
to
and
react
to
those
types
of
letters.
AK
In
this
case,
we've
got
and
I
appreciate
that
some
of
those
statements
are,
are
you
know
fairly
to
the
point
with
respect
to
you
know,
rendering
lands
useless
or
or
not
being
usable
I
think
was
the
term
that
was
used.
I
think
that
that's
I
fully
appreciate
that,
with
the
current
research
that's
being
done
on
this
site,
there
is
a
possibility
that
that
is
in
fact
the
case.
AK
The
the
Heritage
designation
for
this
site,
however,
and
I
I
Don't,
Want
To
Tread
too
far
into
the
Heritage
piece,
because
I'm
not
an
expert,
but
the
Heritage
designation
for
this
site
speaks
to
the
openness
of
the
character.
It
speaks
to
the
fact
that
it's
an
agricultural
research
station,
it
doesn't
speak
to
specifics
with
respect
to
research
and
there
is
a
variety
of
types
of
research
within
agriculture
that
could
continue
to
take
place
with
a
variable
like
shadowing
you
know,
being
introduced.
AK
Next
to
it,
you
know
a
a
plant,
that's
on
the
edge
of
a
test
plot
gets
a
different
amount
of
Sun
than
a
plant.
That's
in
the
middle
of
a
test
plot
the
way
they
deal
with
that
predominantly
in
this
type
of
situation-
and
you
see
excuse
me,
you
see
it
in
the
air
photos
and
the
historical
air
photos
going
back.
It's
through
reproducing
or
repeating
those
studies,
which
is
why
they've
got
you
know
a
large
number
of
small
plots
within
within
a
field,
so
they
may
be
running
and
again.
AK
R
Going
to
come
back
to
that
in
a
second,
but
in
in
recent
years,
has
the
city's
planning
department
sat
down
with
agriculture
Canada
and
have
had
discussions
about
Shadow
implications
on
agricultural
research
potential
mitigation
strategies
to
implement
in
final
staff
recommendations
appropriate
Heights
along
the
various
corridors
all
around
the
perimeter
of
the
firm?
Have
we
had
those
discussions?
R
Have
we
proactively
reached
out
and
said
we
envision,
there's
going
to
be
development
on
Carling
on
Maryville,
on
Baseline,
on
Prince
of
Wales
I've
seen
files
already
in
the
queue
where
I've
people
come
to
me
over
the
years
and
say
we
want
to
develop
the
Green
Valley
Restaurant
site.
We
want
to
develop
the
Apollo
strip,
mall
side
of
Prince
of
Wales
councilor
Devine
Illinois
Baseline
is
going
to
be
developed
over
time,
I
referenced
other
properties.
Earlier
on.
We
know
it's
coming.
R
We
all
acknowledge
the
important
value
that
happens
at
the
experimental
firm.
So
why
is
the
city
of
Ottawa
not
being
more
proactive
to
have
that
discussion
come
to
some
sort
of
General
understanding
of
what
a
Canada
can
live
with
and
try
our
best
to
work
with
the
private
developers
who
want
to
build
around
this
perimeter
to
reach
reasonable
Heights?
R
AK
So
City
staff
did
participate
in
a
discussion
with
the
NCC
agriculture
Canada
from
the
research
branch
and
we'll
call
it
agriculture
Canada
from
the
land
division
in
a
meeting
in
the
winter
time.
I
can't
I
don't
have
the
exact
date,
I
apologize
counselor,
but
certainly
this
winter
we
did
have
a
discussion.
The
the
federal
public
servant
strike
was
underway
at
the
time
because
it
was
hard
to
get
into
the
ncc's
building
around
what
the
implications
of
future
developments
could
be
is
has
been
noted
today.
AK
There's
a
number
of
applications
that
are
before
us
that
could
have
those
impacts.
I
think
it
was
a
a
good
opening
discussion
with
with
members
of
egg
Canada,
as
well
as
the
NCC,
on
the
potential
impacts
of
that
development.
I
think
it
was
informative
for
us
to
understand
some
of
their
concerns
and
impacts,
but
it
was
I
think
also
informative
for
them
to
understand
the
policy
framework
that
we
work
within,
and
you
know
where
there
are
opportunities
to
provide
input
into
that
are.
R
R
My
colleagues
should
be,
everyone
knows,
I,
have
a
deferral
motion
I
want
my
colleagues
to
ask
their
questions.
I
think
that's
very
important
to
to
facilitate
this
and
then
I'll
put
myself
on
the
list
to
move
that
deferral
motion
and
I'll
introduce
that
deferral
motion
once
my
colleagues
have
had
their
questions.
Thank
you.
A
O
Mr,
chair
stuff
aren't
going
to
speculate
an
assessment.
That's
gonna
happen
on
barnesdale
road.
We
don't
have
these
specific
designations
and
Zoning
in
front
of
us,
but
what
I
can
tell
you
as
a
general
rule
of
thumb,
if
an
application
before
us
is
to
increase
Building
height,
a
request
of
a
sun
shadow
study
is
an
automatic
and
it
would
be
assessed
in
that
regard.
O
Mr,
chair
up,
my
understanding
is
if
lands
are
designated
Agriculture
and
we're
looking
at
and
we're
looking
at
potential
impacts
on
agricultural
land.
Sun
shadowing
studies
don't
necessarily
come
into
that
line
of
discussion.
We
look
at
things
like
the
appropriate
soil
capacity
and
and
makeup
of
the
soil
on
those
lands.
Other
things
like
noise
in
the
area,
a
planning
rationale,
looking
at.
What's
the
impact
on
the
agriculture
resource
itself,
I
don't
see
language
in
any
of
our
submissions
on
aglines.
O
That
would
specifically
look
at
shadowing
other
than
through
op
policies
where
we
get
into
mitigation
measures,
which
is
things
like
if
you
have
a
tower
proposed,
what
have
you
done
to
mitigate
the
impact
of
a
new
Shadow
things
like
the
tower
floor
plate
the
orientation
of
the
tower
size
so
that
Shadows
are
cast
differently
depending
on
that
built
form?
That
is
in
in
the
light
of
mitigation
measures
that
we
could
look
at
through
an
application
of
that
type.
P
Okay,
I'm,
going
back
to
my
College
question
about
you
know,
has
a
city
proactively
reached
out
to
AG
Canada
about
the
well
I.
Actually,
don't
remember
your
question,
but
it
was
in
the
in
the
context
of
this.
So
I
want
to
kind
of
flip
that
around
has
agriculture
Canada
proactively,
come
up
to
us
when
we
were
discussing
the
official
plan
and
everything
that
was
in
it
because
we
knew
we
know,
Carling
is
going
to
be
a
quarter
of
intensification.
We
know
Baseline
is
going
to
be
a
quarter
of
anticipation.
P
N
Thanks
for
the
question
chair,
I
did
go
back
through
our
official
plan
notes
and
although
they
were
circulated,
I
could
find
no
submissions
or
evidence
from
AG
Canada.
The
NCC
would
have
reached
out
to
its
all
the
federal
partner,
Partners
councilor
Brockington
will
recalls.
There
was
some
changes
to
the
Fisher
Corridor,
but
that
was
I.
Think
at
the
you
know
a
community
and
counselor
direction.
C
Thank
you
very
much,
chair
I
I
realized
that
the
the
activities
at
the
central
experimental
firm
are
are
extremely
important.
For
you
know
a
region
like
ours,
which
is
certainly
my
area.
Agriculture
plays
a
large
role
not
only
in
the
economy
but
also
and
I
know.
This
has
been
mentioned
by
delegates,
but
food
security
as
well
I
think
it's
it's
becoming
more
and
more
important.
C
The
work
that
the
experimental
Farm
does
with
no
droughts
and
extreme
weather
coming
our
way
and
the
the
advancements
that
are
made
at
that
at
that
experimental
Farm
are
are
likely
to
to
play
a
role
in
in
agriculture
in
the
future.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
this
right
and
I
just
wanted
a
couple
clarifying
questions
for
staff.
C
A
few
delegates
mentioned.
You
know,
Shadow
impacts
and
the
discrepancy
between
what
the
cities
concluded
versus
what
the
farm
has,
and
so
I
wanted
to
to
get
a
clear
answer.
So
the
the
impacts
that
were
studied
by
the
city
staff
in
in
this
scenario
and
and
the
limits
that
that
we
you
know
adhere
to
in
in
that
area,
is
that,
where
the
same
metrics
and
process
used
for
this
Tower
or
this
application
versus
an
application
anywhere
else
in
the
city
like.
O
Thank
you
chair.
The
sun,
shadowing
studies
submitted
by
the
applicant
team
was
done
in
accordance
with
our
our
terms
of
reference.
It
says
Council
approved
document
for
how
sun
shadow
studies
should
be
prepared.
It
sets
out
specific
dates
and
time
intervals
through
the
first
submission
and
the
second
submission.
We
actually
had
an
updated
Shadow
study
to
provide
more
details.
O
In
light
of
some
of
the
comments
that
were
coming
in
in
foreshadowing,
I
can
tell
you
that
the
approach
between
the
applicants,
team
and
agricultural
Canada
was
different,
although
the
letter
from
agricultural
Canada
or
it
may
have
been,
an
email
did
acknowledge
that
the
Barry
Hoban
office
studied
while
it
determines
the
outlines
of
the
building
Shadow
at
several
different
points
and
times
traces,
a
distinct,
Shadow
position
at
each
point
in
time.
Both
Studies
have
their
merits
for
the
application
and
neither
would
be
considered
incorrect.
O
C
So
I
think
the
fact
that
there
are
two
different
studies
that
are
not
necessarily
either
of
them
are
incorrect,
but
different,
so
I
think
that
actually
makes
this
decision
even
more
confusing
and
harder
for
members
of
this
committee,
so
I
the
other.
The
other
issue
that
I
or
Avenue
that
I
might
want
to
go
down
is
just
the.
C
O
As
it's
been
stated
probably
several
times
during
this
committee
meeting,
the
application
before
us
and
staff's
recommendation
before
committee
is
based
on
the
policy
framework
that
exists
at
this
time.
We
have
a
role
as
the
city
to
review
these
applications
against
our
official
plan,
which
are
supported
by
documents
like
the
high-rise
guidelines
or
terms
of
reference
for
sun
shadowing
studies,
and
our
new
official
plan
is
consistent
with
the
planning
act
and
provincial
policy
statement.
O
So
when
we
look
at
the
planning
application
before
us
and
Sun
shadowing
is
certainly
an
important
element
of
that
when
we
review
those
impacts
or
the
the
mitigation
of
that
proposal
against
everything.
That's
in
effect,
in
our
policy
framework,
everything
that
we've
concluded
on
is
that
the
partial
amount
of
shadowing
that
is
happening
on
the
farm
is
not
removing
the
ability
for
this
cultural
heritage
resource
to
continue
to
exist,
to
continue
to
look
at
various
research
opportunities
to
continue
running
it
as
various
agricultural
options.
O
The
amount
of
shadowing
is
consistent
with
our
terms
of
reference
being
a
few
hours
late
in
the
evening.
So
what
we
have
before
us
is
a
planning
application
and
the
tools
that
we
have
to
assess
it,
which
are
appropriate
and
consistent
suggest
that
this
is
not
an
add
you
adverse
impact,
which
is
why
the
recommendation
for
approval
is
before
you.
C
And
I
understand
that
on
an
individ
individual
basis
in
terms
of
applications,
but
as
we've
heard
today,
I
think
the
concern
is
that
this
particular
area
and
the
importance
of
the
experimental
Farm,
the
ability
for
them
to
do
their
work
could
be
affected.
If,
if
we
approve
this
and
there's
another
one,
also
in
the
vicinity
of
the
experimental
firm,
that
the
impact
of
those
shadows
will
be
cumulative
and
will
affect
their
ability
to
do
their
work.
So
is
there
and
I
mean
under
this?
C
O
Mr
chair
presently
with
the
policies
we
have,
in
fact,
I
think
it
would
be
the
latter
that
each
application
is
reviewed
on
its
own
Merit
I,
don't
know
if
a
subsequent
application
like
there
was
reference
to
that
Holland
site
if
their
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
would
look
more
broadly
beyond
that
development.
I'm,
not
sure,
but
it
does
speak
to.
We
would
have
to
review
application
on
its
own
Merit.
C
AL
AL
Okay,
thank
you.
I
was
having
a
lot
of
trouble
understanding
the
discrepancy
between
the
shading
impact
in
the
staff
report
and
then
the
shading
impact
that
AG
Canada
submitted,
but
I
think
what
I'm
understanding
is
that
the
100
000
minutes
of
impact
from
AG
Canada
includes
shading
impacts
in
the
winter
months,
whereas
staff
are
only
considering
the
growing
season.
Is
that
correct.
O
H
S
AL
I
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
had
similar
questions
to
what
counselor
kids
had,
because
I
was
puzzled
by
a
letter
was
received
from
Canada
from
two
director
generals,
but
wanted
to
know
what
the
dialogue
was,
and
it
sounds
that
you
you've
passed
it
on
to
the
applicant.
That's
correct,
but
in
terms
of
the
city
policy,
we
haven't
had
a
conversation,
because
this
is
really
more
than
about
this
application.
It
could
potentially
be
about
other
applications.
Is
this
something
that
could
be
happening
in
the
future?.
AK
Those
discussions
have
started
right,
I
did
reference
the
meeting
that
took
place
in
you
know
the
winter
months.
You
know
I
think,
though,
the
connections
have
been
made
with
Agriculture
and
agri-food,
Canada
and
and
the
NCC
for
that
matter,
is
sort
of
their
spokesperson
on
on
a
lot
of
these
types
of
files
and
so
certainly
on
a
go
forward
basis.
I
I
appreciate
that
Mr
Moody,
because
you
do
have
an
agriculture
background,
so
that's
it's
your
appropriate
person
to
talk
to
them,
but
I
am
puzzled.
Why
AG
Canada
reps
aren't
here
today?
If,
if
this
is
such
a
significant
issue,
it
just
puzzles
me
that
we
are
not
hearing
directly
from
those
who
are
saying
they
are
affected
and
that
a
Community
Association
has
to
speak
on
this
issue
instead.
I
So
I
think
that's
just
going
to
be
an
ongoing
concern.
One
of
the
things
we
heard
from
our
applicant
is
that-
and
this
is
what
we
know
is
that
we're
looking
at
going
up
to
40
stories,
which
has
already
happened
down
the
road
on
Carling
Avenue.
Are
we
going
to
have
to
rethink
that
because
we've
we've
already
looked
that
direction?
In
fact,
we've
already
started
going
that
direction.
So
what's
going
to
happen
in
that
in
in
terms
of
those
limits
around
the
farm.
N
Thank
you
for
the
question
I'll
attempt
to
provide
a
response,
so
certainly
there's
no
intention
of
reopening
our
official
plan
recently
approved
I
suspect.
If
we
did
that
we
would
be
opening
up
a
whole
bunch
of
appeals
along
that
Corridor
based
on
recent
Council,
Direction
and
expression
in
terms
of
the
density
along
that
Corridor.
So
there's
there
is
no
intention
to
reopen
that
that
policy.
At
this
point.
I
AG
AG
Colleagues,
I,
guess
I'm
here
to
speak
to
you
and
I'm
here,
because,
although
1081
Carling
isn't
in
my
ward,
there
is
the
project
in
my
war
that
is
coming
to
committee
soon,
which
are
the
proposed
Towers
at
780
Baseline,
whereas
you've
heard
would
result
in
similar
Shadow
impact
on
the
farm.
So
I'm
here
to
observe
the
conversation
which
I
believe
May
set
context,
if
not
precedent,
but
also
to
raise
questions.
AG
Shading
effects
to
the
research
plots
at
the
farm
adds
a
level
of
uncertainty
which
completely
undermines
the
integrity
and
validity
of
the
research
output
from
the
unaffected
plots
for
all
future
time
and
would
completely
negate
the
usability
of
the
research.
So
if
we
accept
what
this
science
position
is
with,
the
scientists
position
is
to
be
true.
AG
Will
they
hold
on
to
the
farm
if
it
faces?
As
the
delegate
said,
Death
By,
A,
Thousand
Cuts
yesterday
I
had
a
conversation
with
the
developer
for
780
Baseline,
where
he's
now
open
to
some
of
the
changes
I
proposed
that
would
lower
the
tower
Heights
in
order
to
diminish
Shadow
impacts.
I
have
the
luxury
of
time,
because
that
file
is
not
coming
to
committee.
AG
For
until
later,
this
fall,
but
what's
decided
here
today,
may
affect
that
decision
and
future
decisions,
and
so
for
that
reason,
I'd
urge
my
colleagues
to
support
councilor
brockington's
motion
to
defer
to
afford
this
committee
the
time
to
properly
consult
and
determine
the
real
impacts
of
these
developments
on
the
farm
and
to
properly
consider
the
Farm's
presence
and
future
place
in
our
city.
Thank
you.
A
AM
Great,
thank
you
very
much
and
there's
some
great
delegations
here
today.
I.
Actually,
my
grandfather
was
a
farmer,
so
I
I
do
appreciate
a
lot
of
this,
but
everywhere
we
have
a
house
in
this
city
was
a
farm
at
one
point.
That
is
the
truth
of
the
matter
and
if
you
go
back
into
the
Gloucester
Historic
Society
I'm
sitting
on
Farmland,
while
this
is
experimental
lands,
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
more
wholesome
conversation
regarding.
We
have
2
700
square
kilometers
in
this
city.
AM
It
there
has
got
to
be
an
opportunity,
because
maybe
it
wasn't
predicted
back
in
the
day
to
move
this
along
to
another
plot
of
land.
We
have.
We
have
tons
of
land
in
this
city
and
Deals
can
be
done,
but
we
also
have
a
housing
crisis
unless
I've
missed
something,
because
that
has
been
the
front
burner
issue
for
quite
a
while
and
I
support
a
lot
of
my
colleagues
when
they
say
if
this
was
truly
an
issue
where,
where
are
where
are
the
representatives
I
I
think
this?
Is?
AM
It
really
speaks
to
the
problem
we
have
here
today
as
Municipal
counselors,
trying
to
understand
if
this
was
really
the
issue.
Why
are
they
not
here?
Maybe
they
can
have
other
plots
of
their
land
or
use
this
plot
of
land
to
test
for
shadowing
and
growing
stuff
and
move
it
to
another
part.
But
we
do
have
a
major
crisis
in
this
city
right
now
and
if
we
don't
start
building
housing
quickly,
we
can't
keep
deferring
things.
We
have
to
move
ahead,
I'm
going
to
ask
Tim
Mark
real
quickly
from
a
solar
perspective.
AM
You
know
when
things
go
to
tribunal,
has
there
ever
been
a
a
rejection
of
an
application
based
on
shadowing
I
I
I.
Don't
really
see
that
as
obviously
it's
an
impact,
but
in
a
case
like
this,
we
will
be
in
paralysis
not
be
able
to
develop
that
whole
area
which
is
planned
for
development.
Has
there
been
rejections
at
tribunals
based
on
shadowing
on
a
situation
like
this
in
the
past
that
you,
you
know
of.
AN
Mr,
chair,
I
I,
took
some
time
because
of
the
uniqueness
of
this
case.
I
took
some
time
to
do
some
research
to
see
what
cases
were
out
there.
That
spoke
to
solar
impact,
the
the
impact
of
the
Sun
as
as
compared
to
the
more
traditional
shadowing
impact
of
one
building
on,
say,
neighboring
low-rise
buildings,
and
what
I
did,
because
it
was
the
only
parameter
that
I
thought
would
likely
show
up.
In
former
OMB
lpad
or
Olt
cases
is
I.
AN
Looked
for
cases
dealing
with
the
question
of
the
impact
of
tall
buildings
on
individuals
who
had
existing
solar
panels
because
I
thought
that
might
be
instructive
and
there
were
a
couple
of
cases
that
hinted
that
it
was
a
factor,
but
I
did
not
find
any
case
that
turned
down
height
on
account
of
solar
impact.
Mr
chair.
AM
And
thank
you
very
much
for
your
Sage
professional
opinion
on
that
Mr
American.
You
know
it's
great,
that
we
all
are
a
farmer
suddenly
and
probably
you
know,
have
coveralls
suddenly
out
of
the
blue,
but
at
the
same
time
we've
been
preaching
as
a
council.
We
have
a
housing
crisis,
so
you
can't
suck
and
blow
everybody
either
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
start
building
annoying.
AM
That
is
the
truth
of
the
matter,
and
if
we
don't
do
it,
we're
going
to
get
overruled,
there'll
be
more
mgos
and
these
things
are
just
going
to
happen
without
our
our
our
input,
so
either
we're
committed
or
we're
not
committed,
and
for
that
reason
I
won't
support
deferral.
I
think
this
is
a
great
opportunity
to
build
and
I'll
be
supporting
the
application
as
staff
proposed
it.
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair.
A
A
I
want
to
understand
how
staff
look
at
the
lack
of
angular
plane
and
how
that
is
a
factor
in
whether
or
not
this
development
has
the
appropriate
transition
or
not
to
the
low-rise
buildings
that
are
adjacent,
so
I
think
the
community
is
absolutely
right.
The
East
Tower
utterly
fails
to
meet
anything
that
one
would
consider
to
be
close
to
a
45
degree
angular
plane,
as
outlined
in
our
Urban
high-rise
design
guidelines
if
it
doesn't
come
even
close
to
that.
O
Thank
you
chair
to
start
off
it's
it's.
Obviously,
our
position
that
the
proposed
built
form
and
transition
is
consistent
with
our
policy
framework.
There's
a
number
of
different
tools
to
look
at
in
transition.
Angular
plane
is
one
of
them.
Our
policy
framework
is
not
set
up,
that
it
is
a
black
and
white.
You
do
an
angular
plane
or
you
don't
site
context,
is
very
key
and
there's
a
number
of
different
measures
you
can
do
to
address
transition.
Some
of
that
includes
larger
setbacks,
built
form
transition
at
various
Heights.
O
The
East
Tower
is
separated
by
a
new
city
park.
Our
high-rise
guidelines,
while
looking
at
angular
plane,
is
one
tool.
The
other
tool
in
emerging
Urban
context
like
Carling
Avenue,
that
is
slated
for
Rapid
Transit,
suggests
that
where
you
have
those
streets
like
Carling
that
have
butt
a
low-rise
contacts,
you
should
get
the
tower
at
least
20
meters
away
from
that
abutting
low
rise.
O
That's
what
we
focused
on
for
these
Tower
to
get
the
tower
potion
as
far
away
as
possible
from
the
abutting
low
rise,
residential,
the
closest
being
the
immediate
property
on
Hamilton,
and
then
there
is
a
city
lane
and
then
separated
by
the
park
as
well,
so
that
additional
20
meters
is
for
that
immediately
adjacent
residential
property.
The
balance
are
closer
to
30
meters
away,
which
is
consistent
with
our
policy
framework.
So
we
broke
down
the
mass
going
from
Podium
to
Middle
there's.
A
V
Through
you
chair,
so
when
I
look
at
impact
from
a
Heritage
planning
perspective,
I
tie
it
back
to
the
defined
Heritage
value
and
that
would
be
outlined
in
the
commemorative
Integrity
statement,
which
breaks
up
the
Farm's
value
into
three
distinct
zones.
The
applicable
Zone
here
would
be
the
experimental
fields
and
it
talks
about
that
value
of
a
historic
and
a
current
place
of
agricultural
research
and
its
understanding
as
a
farm
within
the
city
and
I.
Think
that
that
Heritage
value
will.
V
So
I
think
when
you
look
at
the
character
defining
elements
of
of
those
fields
themselves,
it
it
outlines
them
in
a
list
and
it
speaks
to
the
cultivated
Fields,
their
variable
sizes,
their
colors,
their
textures
and
their
seasonal
variations.
So
I
think
that
the
Shadows
I
don't
dispute
that
there
will
be
shadows
but
I
think
these
character,
defining
elements
will
be
maintained.
A
My
understanding
is
that
for
at
least
a
week,
or
so
that's
been
a
discussion
with
the
applicants
Heritage
consultant
and
that
your
agree
or
the
two
of
you
are
on
the
same
page,
we
can
expect
to
see
that
the
applicant
is
going
to
put
forward
a
revised
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
that
is
going
to
arrive
at
the
same
conclusion
as
what
you've
just
arrived
at.
That's
correct,
yeah.
A
You
know
what
my
colleagues
have
asked
a
lot
of
the
other
questions,
so
I'm
going
to
leave
it
there
I
know
counselor
Curry
needs
to
leave
at
2,
15
and
I.
Know.
She'd,
probably
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
vote
on
this,
so
I'll
just
say
that
obviously
we'll
take
the
time
that
that
we
need
to
take
going
back
to
counselor
low
for
a
second
round.
A
P
You
chair
no
I
the
one
of
the
other
questions.
One
of
the
other
topics
that
were
discussed
by
some
of
the
one
of
the
delegations
actually
was
the
traffic
impact
assessment
like
so
Inglewood
is
a
street
that
Ina
sort
of
is
adjacent
to
the
area.
It's
a
few
hundred
few
meters
away.
But
when
we're
doing
these
traffic
impact
assessments
like
how
far
do
we
normally
look?
Is
there
a
guideline
or
is
it
just
like
these
five
immediate
intersections
I'm
thinking
about?
P
S
P
S
So
the
the
transportation
impact
study
that
was
submitted
as
part
of
this
zoning
by
law,
Amendment
application
was
reviewed
and
by
our
transportation
team,
and
they
did
not
determine
that.
It
would
create
a
huge
impact
and,
of
course,
that'll
be
studied
further
in
the
forthcoming
site
plan.
Application,
as
a
more
comprehensive
report
will
need
to
be
submitted
through
that
process
and
reviewed
further.
P
Great
last
thing
is
I:
do
want
to
highlight
again,
like
the
the
you
know,
there's
there's
no
people
from
agriculture
Canada
here
and
you
know
when
we
were
discussing
Wellington
Street
at
Transportation
committee.
We
had
the
federal
government
like
speak
to
us,
including
a
senator
who
made
a
public
delegation
so
I,
you
know,
I,
don't
want
to
diminish
the
the
value
of
the
public
delegation.
P
It's
a
really
good
public
delegations
today,
but
like
to
to
just
receive
a
letter
like
this
and
to
have
no
kind
of
proactive
communication
from
the
federal
government
in
this
development
application,
as
well
as
the
official
plan.
Despite
it
being
very
obvious
that
these
quarters
are
going
to
be
intensification
corridors,
these
quarters
are
Rapid.
Transit
corridors
is,
you
know,
I
won't
say
it
says
everything
about
it,
but
it
certainly
does
give
us
an
indication
of
where,
where
they
might
stand
on
this,
so
thanks
very
much.
That's
it
for
me.
R
Thank
you
chair
again,
the
late
Paul
doer
was
in
my
office
in
2015.
We
talked
about
the
experimental
firm
at
length
and
he
believed
it
needs
Federal
legislation
to
give
it
the
same
type
of
protections
that
Gatineau
park
has
that
there's
going
to
be
ongoing
demands
on
the
farm
over
time
and
without
significant
Federal
legislation
we
will
continue
to
clip
and
chip
away
at
the
farm.
R
This
Council
has
not
hesitated
in
the
past
to
approve
developments
on
Carling
Avenue.
If
you
look
between
Preston
and
Churchill
in
particular,
encompassing
a
couple
of
our
Awards
30
Towers
have
been
built
and
or
approved
already.
Many
in
my
word,
your
word
as
well
chair.
So
this
is
not
about
an
Envy
argument
today.
This
really
isn't
about
1081
Carling.
This
is
just
the
Catalyst.
R
That's
get
us
together
to
talk
about
what
I
believe
is
the
more
important
issue
and
I
don't
want
to
minimize
it
or
other
issues
at
play
here
and
people
have
spoke
to
other
issues
and
I
don't
want
to
make
it
sound
like
I,
don't
think
those
are
important,
but
we
have
an
application.
That's
talking
about.
According
to
agriculture
experts,
significant
shadowing
impacts
on
agricultural
research,
land,
the
city
acknowledges
the
importance
of
the
experimental
firm.
R
R
So
how
do
we
address
Shadow
impacts?
How
do
we
mitigate
the
ramifications
on
agricultural
research?
What
are
the
building
Heights
around
the
perimeter
of
the
farm?
We
don't
know
the
answers
to
these
questions,
so
don't
take
out
your
frustration
why
members
of
a
Canada
aren't
here
today
they
could
be
on
vacation.
There
could
be
legitimate
reasons,
maybe
their
Senior
Management
said
we
support
sending
a
letter.
I,
don't
know
why.
R
But
this
is
about
getting
blocks
in
order
and
we
need
to
have
a
conversation
and
a
better
understanding
of
what
the
right
Heights
should
be
around
the
perimeter
of
the
firm
going
forward,
because
780
Baseline
is
next
and
then
maribel's
coming
and
then
other
Baseline
Corridor
and
we're
going
to
do
this
over
and
over
and
over
again,
because
we
won't
have
answered
those
key
fundamental
questions
that
we're
debating
with
today.
If
we
don't
it's
going
to
apply,
different
communities
will
show
up
with
the
same
types
of
questions.
R
R
So
we
want
to
put
that
on
the
screen.
So
as
respect
to
this
report,
the
bylaw
Amendment
application
for
1081
Carling
staff
recommend
approval
of
the
application
to
permit
the
development
of
two
residential
Towers,
including
a
West
Tower
16
stories.
East
Tower
27,
whereas
multiple
stakeholders,
including
scientists
from
agriculture,
Canada,
have
raised
concerns
with
the
proposed
height
of
the
East
Tower
and
that
the
shadowing
impacts
on
the
Agriculture
and
research
lands
on
the
adjacent
experimental
farm
land.
Whereas
various
stakeholders
have
requested
that
the
proposed
height
of
these
Tower
be
reduced
from
27,
am
I.
R
A
Thank
you
very
much
councilor
Brockington,
so
we
have
a
motion
for
deferral
on
the
table,
which
means
that
our
debates
will
immediately
switch
to
that
subject
and
that
subject,
Alone
counselor
Kavanaugh
has
put
down
her
hands
to
speak
to
the
substantive
merits
of
the
item,
but
we'll
come
back
to
her
first
one.
We
come
out
of
a
deferral
debate
in
case
the
deferral
debates
or
the
different
different
deferral
motion
fails.
So
we're
setting
up
a
speaker's
list
to
address
the
deferral
and
first
on
it
is
Council
or
vice
chair
gallery.
D
D
So
it's
difficult.
We
don't
perhaps
have
the
perfect
tools
to
assess
the
impact
of
Shadows
in
this
case,
but
I
do
believe.
Staff
have
used
the
tools
in
front
of
them
policies
in
front
of
them,
as
they
should
and
I
think
their
recommendation
is
sound,
but
we
do
need
to
have
a
continuing
conversation
as
it
may
affect
future
applications.
Thanks
chair.
A
C
Sorry,
just
a
quick
comment,
some
of
the
comments
from
my
colleagues
about
the
fact
that
the
official
plan
was
passed
and
the
province
approved
it
and
that
this
will
take
a
long
time.
I,
just
I,
don't
care
I,
think
doing
it
properly
is
better
than
doing
it
quickly
and
if
it
we
need
to
defer
this
longer
than
October.
Then
I'd
be
perfectly
fine
with
that
as
well.
So
I'm
I'm
definitely
going
to
support
deferral
today,
because
I
think
it's
important
to
do
things
right
more
important
than
it
is
to
do
things
quick.
C
We
absolutely
need
to
build
houses,
but
we
need
to
build
affordable
houses.
It's
my
understanding
that
none
of
these
are
going
to
be
considered,
affordable
houses.
We
had
a
delegate
who
alluded
to
sort
of
the
net
benefit
or
net
loss
of
making
a
decision
like
this
and
I
think
if
these
were
lower
rise,
homes
that
were
affordable
for
families
in
the
city
of
Ottawa.
C
That
we'd
be
having
a
different
discussion
today
and
so
I've
I
hope
that
that
my
colleagues
will
rethink
their
position
of
you
know
just
building
for
the
sake
of
building,
because
we
think
we
need
to
build
more
homes,
which
is
true,
but
we
need
to
build
more
affordable
homes.
So
I
want
to
support
the
experimental,
firm
and
the
research
that
they
do
and
I'm
going
to
be.
Supporting
deferral.
AM
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair
again,
I'll
remind
everybody.
We
have
a
housing
crisis.
Every
okay,
Clark
stop
with
the
head
shaking
I
worked
in
my
grandfather's
firm
for
many
years.
The
truth
of
the
matter
is:
either
we
have
a
housing
crisis
or
we
don't
so
we
have
to
get
it
together
here.
People
if
we
don't.
Let's
take
that
off
the
table
immediately,
but
the
reality
is.
This
is
a
corridor
that
certainly
take
the.
AM
AM
Does
that
not
mean
immediacy?
We
have
emergencies
for
a
lot
of
things
and
I.
Think
that
requires
immediacy,
so
I
will
not
be
supporting
deferral.
We've
heard
from
our
legal
expert
that
is
said,
solar
is
not
a
big
factor
in
this,
and
I
just
want
to
ensure
we
plow
ahead.
I've
I've
tossed
bales
of
hay
just
because
I
live
in
the
city.
Now
I
grew
up
on
my
grandfather's
firm
on
Carling,
Avenue
and
I've
done
the
ferment
thing,
this
experimental
Farm,
no
one's
shown
up
today.
AM
Nobody
so
give
you
everyone
should
think
about
this
for
a
second,
and
if
we
really
care
about
housing,
we
have
to
build
it.
I
wish
I
was
there
in
person
today
because
I'd
be
more
articulate
in
my
speech,
but
I
do
support
plowing
ahead
and
moving
ahead
with
housing
because
we
need
it.
We
have
to
bring
and
I
know
everyone
wants
affordable
housing
or
under
market
rate
housing,
but
the
more
units
we
go
to
on
site
is
only
going
to
help
our
city.
So
anyway,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
time
Mr
chair.
J
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
just
want
to
be
clear.
So
if
we're
suggesting,
if
this
is
deferred-
and
it
comes
back
to
the
October
meeting
councilor
Brockington-
we
will
make
a
decision
based
on
whatever
information
we
have
there.
So
it
will
not
be
deferred
Beyond,
October,
okay,
but
that's
not
your
intention.
Yeah
I'll
tell
you.
J
But
I
am
really
tripped
up
on
the
on
when
the
issue
of
a
housing
emergency
collides
with
the
climate
emergency
and
a
food
Security
emergency,
that's
where
I
really
get
stuck
so
I'm
inclined
to
support
the
deferral.
I
would
not
support
a
deferral.
Beyond
October,
but
I
do
think.
I
am
also
frustrated
that
there
is
no
one
here
from
the
federal
government
or
from
agriculture
Canada,
but
we're
being
presented
with
two
interpretations
of
a
study
and
I.
J
C
You
chair,
sorry,
this
isn't
on
deferral,
but
very
quickly.
I
just
want
to
apologize
to
my
colleague,
counselor
Tierney
I
did
shake
my
head
and
roll
my
eyes
when
he
started
talking.
I
I
disagree
with
him
and
we're
allowed
to
do
that
and
I
should
have
been
more
respectful
in
how
I
did
that.
So
my
apologies
Council
attorney
we'll.
N
AG
If
the
fundamental
question
that
I
am
concerned
about
is
whether
or
not
this
and
future
development
along
these
corridors
may
possibly
see
the
end
of
the
farm,
possibly
as
a
theory.
If
that
is
a
risk
that
is
out
there
a
two-month
delay
in
which
we
should
be
able
to
hear
back
from
agricultural
Canada
and
answer
to
that
question.
Will
you
pull
up
Stakes
if
we
continue
to
develop
along
the
farm?
A
two-month
delay
in
getting
that
question?
AG
I
would
rather
risk
a
two-month
delay
on
a
project
than
the
possibility
of
a
permanent
departure
of
a
much
treasured
asset,
I'm
I'm,
not
one
to
drag
feet
on
development,
but
I
think
there
are
fundamentally
huge
questions
here
that
can
be
answered
within
two
months.
So
for
that
reason,
I'm
still
hoping
that
people
are
willing
to
defer.
Thank
you.
A
A
You
still
have
to
decide
at
that
point
if
it's
down
the
road,
whether
or
not
you
consider
that
we
have
grounds
under
the
current
official
plan,
to
do
our
job
and
approve
a
development
according
to
what
that
official
plan
says
or
not
this
morning
and
and
for
giving
a
little
bit
of
a
stretch
here.
But
this
morning
Council
Menard
brought
the
satellite
site
plan
to
committee.
He
used
a
little
bit
of
Leverage
that
he
had
to
try
to
get
some
movement
out
of
a
developer.
Who
didn't
want
to
play
ball?
A
We
don't
have
that
leverage
anymore,
because
the
provincial
government
is
watching
Municipal
councils
across
the
province
make
decisions
that
are
not
in
line
with
their
official
plan
for
making
politically
popular
decisions
that
don't
align
with
the
plans
that
the
ministers
have
approved.
If
you
consider
that
our
official
plan
gives
us
grounds
to
refuse
this
or
not
great,
we'll
have
that
vote,
but
deferring
this
by
two
months
doesn't
buy
us
new
grounds
to
refuse
so
I'll
leave.
You
devote
your
conscience,
but
there
is
a
big
picture
here.
A
The
province
has
been
driving
us
to
harsher
and
harsher
time
frames,
removing
more
and
more
Powers
over
local
planning
decisions
for
municipal
councils
and
a
decision
taken
today
with
eyes
wide
open
that
it
doesn't
change.
The
final
outcome
to
defer
a
housing
application
is
just
more
of
the
ammunition
that
Queen's
Park
needs
to
continue
to
continue
to
drive
Municipal
councils
and
directions
that
we
don't
like
I'll
leave
it
there
Kelly.
AA
AM
D
V
A
R
So
I'll
just
read.
The
therefore
Clauses,
therefore
be
it
resolved
that,
with
respect
to
this
report,
the
zoning
bile
Amendment
for
1081
Carling,
Avenue
planning
and
housing
committee
approval
revision
to
the
staff
recommendation
of
the
proposed
East
Tower
area
e
on
document
3
from
27
stories
to
16
and
be
it
further
resolves
that,
pursuant
to
subsection
3417
of
the
planning
act,
no
further
notice
be
provided.
I
AM
AM
Maybe
I'll
ask
the
chair
to
rule
on
this
and,
if
there's
a
challenge
of
the
chair,
we
could
go
to
a
vote
on
that,
but
this
motion
doesn't
seem
to
make
sense
and
I.
Don't
know
how
we
selected
a
number
of
16
like.
Are
we
pulling
out
of
a
magic
hat
now
I
I
just
I
I?
Either
we
want
to
build
housing,
we
don't
and
as
someone
that's,
we
had
a
great
tour
of
one
of
the
ryokan
properties
recently
about
how
important
development
and
building
is.
AM
We
were
out
there
and
I
actually
have
I
know.
A
lot
of
people
didn't
believe
me
in
the
past,
but
I
have
some
of
the
highest
number
of
applications
coming
in
for
high-rise,
Apartments
I'm
supporting
them,
because
we
voted
to
intensify
so
I'll
ask
for
the
for
the
chair
for
some
guidance
if
he
wishes
to
rule
a
sort
of
order.
Otherwise
I'm
just
going
to
call
for
the
vote,
because
this
is
redundant.
A
So
we
don't
have
any
other
speakers
on
and
forgive
me
Tim
I'll
get
to
your
call
for
votes
in
a
moment.
There
are
no
other
speakers.
I
have
some
questions
for
the
the
move
or
the
motion.
I
do
consider
that
the
motion
is
in
order.
We've
chosen
not
to
defer.
However,
it
is
up
to
the
it
is
within
the
counselor's
prerogative
to
put
another
motion
forward.
We
don't
have
any
other
speakers
on
it.
A
A
So
there
are
a
couple
of
fields
that
are
in
play
here.
One
of
them
is
directly
south
of
the
one
of
them
is
directly
south
of
the
Civic
Hospital.
It's
the
the
field
that
you
drive
by
I
know.
We've
seen
the
assertions
that
it
is
actually
no
longer
usable
for
research
because
of
the
road
salt
issue,
and
then
there
is
the
field
where
the
soybean
experiments
about
which
some
of
you
have
read.
A
If
you've
taken
a
look
have
gone,
the
soybean
field
is
much
further
away
than
the
southern
field,
and
I'll
go
slowly
but
I'm
going
to
take
the
soybean
field.
So
one
of
the
scientists
is
using
one
of
the
research
fields
that
is
at
some
distance
from
the
proposed
Tower.
In
order
to
do
small
plot
experiments
in
which
he
is
testing
the
the
improvements
he
can
make
to
the
bacteria
that
help
the
soybean
to
fix
nitrogen
and
it
is
dependent
upon
Shadows
Shadows
affect
that
research.
A
I
do
want
to
move
to
the
second
field,
which
is
the
southern
field
which,
if
we
assume
is
usable
as
a
research
field,
if
it
hasn't
been
entirely
destroyed
by
road
salt
from
Carling
Avenue,
the
216,
the
27
and
16
Story
Tower
proposal
would
put
that
spot
in
Shadow
for
26
187
minutes
per
year.
That's
the
spot
kind
of
in
the
middle
of
that
field.
A
Two
16-story
Towers
would
put
it
in
Shadow
for
25
304
minutes
I'm,
not
sure
that
883
fewer
minutes
of
260
000,
total
minutes
of
sun
in
a
growing
year,
reducing
the
height
from
27
to
16
stories,
without
having
a
good
official
plan
basis
to
do
so,
however,
reduces
the
amount
of
housing
that's
available
in
the
development
counselor.
Your
motion
suggests
that
we
should
be
mitigating
shadowing
impacts
on
the
adjacent
experimental
Farm.
A
R
Thanks
for
chair
for
your
question,
you're
certainly
welcome
to
sub
amend
to
a
lower
height
as
the
local
counselor,
so
I'll
look
to
you
to
propose
a
new
height
on
the
table,
but
I
gotta,
say
I,
find
it
a
bit
Rich
that
my
colleagues
who
voted
against
a
deferral
where
we
could
get
more
information
about
Shadow
mitigation
and
what
the
ideal
Health
types
would
be
along
the
corridor.
Now
asking
me
questions
about
how
to
mitigate
shadowing
impacts
and
ideal
Heights
I,
don't
have
a
magic
hat.
R
I
believe
that
there
will
be
unanimous
support
for
this
application.
If
this
amendment
passes
and
it
was
moved
because
I
do
believe,
it
will
lessen
Shadow
impacts
on
the
agricultural
research
lands
and
my
understanding
is
the
community
do
support
the
16
Story
Tower
on
the
west
side
and
correspondence
from
a
number
of
stakeholders
have
indicated
a
16-story
tower
on
the
east
side
would
be
ideal
as
well,
but
ideally
chair.
If
we
had
had
a
two-month
pause
to
provide
us,
a
better
understanding
of
some
of
the
key
questions
that
you
are
now
asking.
A
Thank
you,
counselor
Brockington
I.
Don't
see
any
further
questions
so
I'm
going
to
ask
for
what
do
we
got?
Can
you
take
me
through
the
the
Motions?
We
have
a
right,
so
what
I
want
to
do
is
I
want
first
to
deal
with
the
if
it's
okay
with
the
committee
I
want
to
deal
first
with
the
addition
of
the
holding
symbol
for
the
requirements
in
order
to
add
an
updated
chis.
A
Do
you
have
any
other
motions
and
then
you'll
then
we're
going
to
vote
on
the
Brockington
motion,
and
then
we
will
vote
on
the
main
motion
that
has
either
been
amended
or
not
according
to
the
vote
on
the
Brockton
motion,
so
there
is
a
I've
sorry
there's
the
motion,
counselor
or
vice
chair
Gower,
brought
to
require
or
put
a
hold
on
this
until
we
receive
a
new
cultural
heritage.
Impact
statement
is
that
motion
carried.
A
A
I
B
A
A
A
How
that
miter
might
not
affect
the
overall
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
review,
so
I'm
actually
just
going
to
kick
it
off
by
asking
staff.
What
is
the
interaction
between
the
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
review
and
this
motion
that
seeks
to
ensure
that
we
are
respecting
The
Rock
Cliff,
Park,
Heritage
Conservation
District
plan.
AO
Thank
you
chair,
so
I.
This
motion
I
wasn't
directly
involved
in
it,
but
I
can
speak
to
the
intent
a
little
bit
so
Rock
Cliff
Park,
the
the
a
big
component
of
the
Rockwood
Park
Heritage
Conservation
District,
the
significance
there
is
the
landscape,
and
this
motion,
I
think,
came
from
a
recent
application,
a
Heritage
permit
application
where
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
some
of
the
concerns
related
to
landscape
and
I
think
also
grade
in
the
district,
and
so
this
motion
speaks
to.
AO
You
know
working
with
our
zoning
colleagues
to
make
sure
that
some
of
those
components,
those
landscape
components,
are
consistent.
Anything
new
in
the
zoning
bylab
that
that's
carried
forward
and
just
to
make
sure
that
those
landscape
elements
that
are
dealt
with
through
the
zoning
bylaw
are
captured.
AP
A
P
Sorry
there
you
go
okay,
sorry,
just
for
the
sake
of
the
clarification
for
myself
and
maybe
for
colleagues
and
whoever
whoever
else
is
listening.
Does
this
basically
ensure
the
continuation
of
there's
like
a
status
that
kind
of
protects
the
former
City
Village
of
Rock
Cliff
Park
for
before
amalgamation?
AO
Thank
you
for
the
question,
so
the
designation
in
Rockland
park
that's
going
to
remain
and
in
fact
you
know
we're
doing
a
consistency,
review
I
would
say
across
all
of
our
districts
in
the
city.
It's
to
to
make
sure
that
those
objectives,
The
Heritage
conservation
objectives,
are
carried
forward
in
the
zoning
by
law.
I
F
Thank
you
for
your
your
question.
So
Bill
23
made
changes
to
the
planning
act
that
rendered
a
zoning
bylaw
that
limits
secondary
dwelling
units,
those
those
Provisions
or
policies.
An
official
plan
can't
be
implemented
so
Bill
23.
Through
those
changes,
the
planning
act
supersedes
the
provisions,
in
the
exceptions
that
apply
to
Rock
Cliff
Park,
which
prohibits
secondary
dwelling
units.
F
A
AP
Absolutely
I'll
I'll
provide
some
context,
so
I
introduced
motion
at
the
last
Heritage
committee
meeting,
which
seeks
consistency
between
the
Rock
Cliff,
Park,
Heritage,
Conservation,
District
plan,
the
official
plan
and
a
new
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
and,
as
we
know,
the
motion
was
referred
to
planning
committee,
and
rightly
so
by
by
chair
leaper.
The
intent
of
the
motion
is
to
instruct
City
staff
to
review
and
fix
the
inconsistencies
between
our
existing
zoning
bylaw
The
Rock,
Cliff,
Park,
Heritage,
Conservation
District
plan
and
our
other
statutory
planning
documents.
AP
AP
So
the
the
idea
here
is
simply
to
ensure
consistency
which
will
help
the
community
in
its
efforts
to
protect
and
promote
the
Heritage
characteristics
in
Rock
Cliff
Park,
because
it's
very
difficult
when
applications
go
forward
on
the
Heritage
side.
That
aren't
you
know
equal
or
in
League,
with
the
technical
details
on
the
planning
side,
so
functionally
I
believe
a
technical
review
will
ensure
that
Heritage
policies
are
properly
aligned
and
calibrated
with
the
rest
of
the
city's
planning
policies.
And,
of
course
this
will
be
undertaken
through
the
public
consultation
process
and
deliberations.
AQ
AM
I'm
yappy
today
sorry
chair,
I,
want
to
thank
counselor
King
for
bringing
this
forward.
Rothwell
Heights
faces
very
similar
situations
and
I.
Think
a
review
will
be
very
helpful,
especially
when
it
comes
to
everything
from
corner
lot,
Provisions
to
land
use
and
and
how
we
can
actually
make
sure
there's
Equity,
as
councilor
Kavanaugh
has
mentioned
across
the
city.
AM
These
are
beautiful
areas,
but
at
the
same
time
we
do
have
Heritage
designations
in
my
area
as
well
through
the
province
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
good
understanding
of
how
things
move
forward
as
we
plan
on
intensifying
so
anyway.
Thank
you
very
much
Mr
chair,
that's
it
I'll,
be
quiet
for
the
rest
of
the
day.
A
A
A
So
this
is,
there
are
a
number
of
boundary
expansions
that
have
been
approved
in
our
official
plan.
How
are
those
actually
going
to
come
into
our
Urban
boundary?
What
is
that
process
so
I
believe
I've
asked
for
a
presentation
on
this
one,
so
we're
going
to
receive
a
a
relatively
quick
presentation
and
have
the
opportunity
to
pose
some
questions
of
those.
A
AR
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Mike
Schmitz
I'm,
a
planner
in
the
resiliency
planning
and
policy
branch
and
I'll
be
presenting
the
future
neighborhood
Urban
expansion
areas.
Report
next
slide,
please
oops.
Sorry,
as
noted
through
the
approval
of
the
new
official
plan
in
2022
over
3
000
gross
hectares
or
1900
net
developer
actors
have
been
added
to
the
urban
area.
This
includes
14
different
Urban
expansion
areas
to
accommodate
both
residential
and
Industrial
growth.
AR
AJ
AR
AR
The
report
is,
for
information
purposes
only
and
highlights.
Oh
sorry,
back
the
slide,
yeah
that
one
there
perfect.
So
the
report
will
highlight
the
overall
process
initiatives
to
help
streamline
the
secondary
planning
process,
resourcing
and
other
administrative
updates
to
come
forward
next
slide.
Please.
AR
AR
Next
slide,
please
so
the
new,
so
the
secondary
planning
process.
So
the
new
OP
policies
address
issues
with
past
processes
which
permitted
some
of
the
smaller
Urban
expansion
areas
to
go
straight
to
draft
Planet
subdivision
application
without
the
support
of
Master
studies.
This
resulted
in
a
more
ad
hoc,
piecemeal
approach
and
generally
led
to
much
longer
draft
plan,
a
subdivision
process
resulting
in
delays
in
receiving
draft
approval,
new
lot
registration
and,
ultimately,
the
construction
of
new
homes.
The
newop
requires
that
all
future
neighborhood
go
through
a
secondary
planning
process
Guided
by
supporting
technical
studies.
AR
I
want
to
highlight,
however,
that
this
is
not
a
one-size-fits-all
approach
and
the
studies
and
level
of
effort
will
be
scope
for
each
area.
I
also
want
to
highlight
that
the
secondary
planning
process
is
an
open
and
public
process.
It
includes
extensive
stakeholder
engagement
in
public
consultation
next
slide.
Please.
AR
So
the
secondary
planning
process
is
typically
in
the
form
of
a
CDP,
in
some
circumstances,
an
alternative
to
the
CDP
or
Community
design
plan,
known
as
a
concept
plan
where
CP
can
be
considered
both
are
planning
instruments
and
provide
a
framework
for
development,
ensuring
that
growth
is
consistent
with
the
goals
and
objections
of
the
official
plan
and
translate
the
policies
to
a
community
scale.
The
main
difference
between
the
two
processes
is
scope,
complexities
to
address
level
of
effort,
and
collaboration
required.
AR
AR
So
this
slide
provides
a
high
level
process
diagram
from
basically
start
of
the
secondary
planning
process
to
occupancy
in
the
next
slides,
we'll
go
through
in
a
bit
more
detail
next
slide,
please
so
the
first
phase
of
the
planning
process
for
future
neighborhoods
Begins
the
same
way
for
both
a
CDP
or
CP
process.
So
it
is
initiated
by
the
proponent
by
having
meetings
with
City
staff
who
discuss
the
process
as
well
as
terms
of
reference
for
the
various
supporting
technical
studies
that
are
required.
AR
It
also
includes
the
preparation
of
background
studies
and
existing
conditions,
reports
which
set
the
foundation
for
supporting
studies
and
plans
to
be
undertaken
in
the
next
phase.
Prayers
to
the
start
of
the
second
phase,
the
city
will
determine
in
part
based
on
the
existing
conditions,
reports
and
identified
Scopes
in
the
terms
of
reference.
If
the
process
should
be
full
CDP
or
the
alternative
CP
approach
next
slide,
please.
AR
So
the
next
phase
is
where
the
bulk
of
the
work
happens,
and
this
is
where
the
CDP
or
CP
is
prepared.
This
is
where,
at
this
point,
we've
decided
whether
it
requires
a
full
immune
design
plan
or
the
concept
plan,
so
they
Branch
off.
But
overall,
the
process
is
very
similar.
Just
level
of
scope
and
effort
differs
at
this
stage,
we're
also
finalizing
the
engineering
and
the
land
uses
for
the
future
future
neighborhood.
AR
If
it
is
a
CP
process,
this
is
where
the
proponent
can
actually
make
the
official
plan
Amendment,
where
CDP
it's
the
city
that
brings
forward
the
secondary
plan.
This
phase
also
includes
looking
at
alternative
options
for
layout
of
the
future
neighborhood,
including
land
use,
servicing
and
transportation
options.
AR
AR
So
this
next
step
is
the
approval
of
the
secondary
plan
or
area
specific
plans
and
the
removal
of
the
future
neighborhood
overlay,
which
then
allows
development
to
occur
development
applications.
This
includes
any
necessary
policies
through
either
secondary
plan,
as
mentioned
or
area
specific
policy
to
help
guide
future
applications
next
slide.
AR
So
at
this
point,
the
secondary
plan,
CDP
concept
plan
has
been
approved
and
we
can
now
move
to
the
development
application.
So
a
plan
of
subdivision
zoning,
bylaw
man
and
site
plans
can
can
be
made
next
slide.
Please
there
we
go
this
stage
once
the
plan
of
subdivisions
approved
and
Zoning
commence.
Work
is
issued
to
do
the
road,
Works
servicing
Etc
and
then
a
building
permit
can
be
issued
next
slide,
and
this
brings
us
to
the
final
stage
where
occupancy
can
be
given
for
dwelling
units.
AR
So,
as
you
can
see,
it's
quite
the
the
process
from
from
beginning
to
end
next
slide.
We
also
wanted
to
highlight,
as
mentioned
earlier,
that
the
expansion
here
does
include
some
industrial
lands
in
the
industrial
and
Logistics
designation
to
accommodate
industrial
growth.
This
includes
two
areas
so
there's
North
Statesville
near
the
carp,
Road
area
and
417
as
well,
is
in
Bar
Haven
at
near
the
416
and
barnsdale
next
slide.
Please,
so
the
industrial
lands
need
to
be
included
with
the
secondary
planning
process
for
the
adjacent
future.
AR
Neighborhood
overlay
lands,
but
since
the
context
is
different,
the
scope
of
planning
will
differ
be
different,
so
the
the
land
use
component
has
been
dealt
with
through
the
approval
of
the
official
plan.
We
know
that
this
is
designated
as
industrial
Logistics,
there's
less
issues
to
to
address
for
these
lands.
However,
we
still
require
a
broader
look
at
Transportation
servicing,
along
with
the
future
neighborhoods.
AR
So
here
we
want
to
highlight
some
of
the
things
we're
looking
at
doing
to
streamline
the
process.
Our
goal
is
to
reduce
the
overall
time
it
takes
to
complete
the
secondary
planning
process,
so
some
initiatives
include
having
staff
assigned
as
part
of
a
small
multi-dubsterity
team
to
work
on
the
secondary
planning
process.
So
this
will
improve
efficiencies,
and
coordination
in
in
the
planning,
January,
cdps
or
CP
process
will
require
to
be
supported
by
an
updated
sub-watershed
study.
The
city
in
consultation
with
the
local
conservation
authorities
will
prioritize
areas
for
Watershed
and
sub
Watershed
planning.
AR
We've
also
looked
at
an
alternative
way
of
updating
through
the
Environmental
Management
plan,
which
could
be
used
to
streamline
that
that
process
there's
also
the
availability,
as
mentioned,
of
a
more
streamlined
concept
plan
process
and
that
will
be
supported
by
development
review
staff,
letting
us
use
additional
resources
there
in
terms
of
other
areas
that
we're
looking
at
streamlining.
So
we're
proposing
having
tailored
terms
of
reference
for
supporting
technical
studies,
so
there'll
be
general
terms
of
reference
for
the
master
servicing
Environmental
Management
plan,
Community
energy
plan
and
some
others.
Some
of
these
are
already
underway.
AR
AR
AR
Between
the
future
neighborhoods
that
could
be
put
in
a
general
design
guideline
for
them,
and
that
would
save
time
through
the
process.
There's
also
the
use
of
the
integrated
planning,
an
academic,
school
class
environmental
act
process
which
allows
us
at
times
to
integrate
we're
planning
act
in
in
EA
act
processes
are
required.
Most
these
areas
will
require
both,
but
you
can
do
an
integrated
process
which
streamlines
the
process
and
moves
redundancies
next
slide,
please.
AR
So
in
terms
of
resources,
as
mentioned,
this
is
a
multi-year
process
to
go
through
the
secondary
planning.
It
requires
participation
of
multi-disciplinary
teams,
both
on
the
city
side
and
the
landowner
side.
The
process
is
initiated
by
the
proponent
land
owner,
so
the
CD
doesn't
control
the
timelines,
or
when
these
these
come
in
with
the
existing
resources
in
the
community
planning
section,
we
can
only
undertake
a
limited
number
of
cdps
concurrently.
So
if
cdps
are
initiated,
Beyond
staff
capacity,
additional
resources
will
be
required
to
ensure
they
proceed
in
a
timely
manner.
AR
So
staff
estimate
the
need
for
at
least
two
new
ftes
in
2024.
next
slide.
Please.
We
also
want
to
highlight
that
there's
some
future
amendments
coming
forward,
some
administrative
updates
that
will
come
forward
in
Q3.
One
of
them
is
update
to
the
official
plan
schedule.
So,
as
mentioned,
the
the
expansion
lines
are
shown
on
schedule
c17,
but
the
they're
not
shown
on
any
of
the
other
schedules
applicable
in
the
op,
so
that
has
to
be
updated
to
reflect
the
approved
expansion
areas.
AR
AR
A
Thank
you
very
much.
That's
a
good
overview.
I
I
appreciate
getting
that
and
I'm
glad.
We
did
that
here,
because
otherwise,
I
probably
wouldn't
have
paid
a
lot
of
attention
until
it
was
too
late.
So
it's
good
to
have
that
on
the
table
now,
I
see
that
counselor
kits
has
some
questions
for
you
and
then
I've
got
a
few
of
my
own
I.
Think.
AM
AL
A
But
your
answer
to
that
question.
What
triggers
the
CP
or
the
CDP
seems
to
be
the
applicant
themselves
when
they
want
to
start
moving
ahead
with
developing
the
land
they're
going
to
first
move
ahead
with
a
secondary
planning
process
before
moving
into
a
master
planning
process
subdivision
Etc.
Do
we
have
a
good
idea
that
those
are
going
to
be
spaced
out
over
the
course
of
the
next
many
years
do?
Are
we
expecting
a
flood
of
landowners
to
come
in
all
at
once,
or
what
does
that
outlook?
Look
like.
AQ
So
chair,
that
is
a
tough
question
to
answer.
We've
already
received
a
number
of
landowners
within
each
area.
Having
initial
discussion
with
staff
some
areas
we
anticipate
landowners
will
come
in
next
year
early
next
year
in
terms
of
spacing,
it
already
depends
on
when
the
landowners
or
the
proponents
can
complete
the
background
studies.
Some
areas
would
be
quicker,
some
areas
would
take
longer
and
then,
when
you
proceed
to
the
actual
Master
planning,
whether
it's
a
community
plan
or
a
quicker
process
concept
plan
again,
the
level
efforts
between
areas
can
also
vary.
AQ
A
And
there's
no
reason
to
think
that
some
of
these
properties
would
move
ahead
until
undeveloped
existing
lands
that
don't
have
some
of
these
or
how
much,
how
much
land
is
it?
Do
we
have
in
a
state
of
sort
of
like
not
a
lot
of
planning
approvals
already
having
been
given
from
the
last
round
of
expansions.
AQ
It's
fair
to
say
that
landowners
probably
want
to
start
the
process
as
soon
as
possible,
because,
as
you
can
see,
it
does
take
some
time
before
they
can
get
building
permits.
So
if
there's
a
process
in
order
to
get
their
products
in
in
queue,
so
to
speak,
so
they
would
probably
want
to
start
these
as
soon
as
possible.
Looking
at
some
time
in
the
future
in
order
to
get
those
building
improvements.
Okay,.
AQ
So
chair
would
have
to
wait
for
the
next
edition
of
the
annual
development
report
and
the
updates
of
where
the
official
plan
monitoring
report
will
be.
That's
anticipate
to
be
either
Q4
of
this
year
or
q1
next
year.
Before
we
get
the
sense
of
intensification,
don't
forget
that
the
province
did
add
significant
additional
land.
So,
in
terms
of
the
percentages,
it's
too
early
to
tell,
we
have
to
wait
to
see
how
those
lands
proceed
through
this
process
and
then
wetlands
ultimately
get
draft
approved
and
registered
and
then
built
before.
AQ
A
I,
don't
see
any
of
the
questions
from
any
other
members
of
the
committee.
So
thank
you
very
much,
gentlemen.
I
appreciate
the
presentation
and
I
believe
we
are
just
going
to
polish
this
meeting
off.
Now
they
won't
have
a
law.
Do
it.
It's
anyone
have
like
a
long-end
camera
discussion,
bring
something
ahead.
We've
received
several
ipds,
the
cashion
of
Parkland,
the
residential
dwelling
approval
pipeline,
which
I
should
mention.
A
If
you
have
not
looked
at
the
residential
dwelling
approval
pipeline,
that
is
an
excellent
new
report
that
staff
have
put
together
indicating
how
we're
doing
with
respect
to
meeting
some
of
those
commitments
you've
made
to
the
province
as
well
as
planning
real
estate
and
economic
development
work
program.
2022-26.
A
A
Perfect,
thank
you
notice.
This
emotion,
I
believe
there
is
one
notice
of
motion
for
a
subsequent
meeting.
Dave
counselor
Hill
has
a
notice
of
motion.
I,
believe
counselor
troster,
who
has
a
member,
will
get
that
on
the
on
the
the
next
meeting
agenda
because
she
is
a
member
counselor.
Gower
was
going
to
do
it,
but
he's
no
longer
at
this
meeting
so
counselor
Hill.
Are
you
on
the
on
the
call?
Oh
you're
right
there,
yeah
right
here,
it's
been.
A
AS
They
impacted
about
125
homes
of
those
27
homes
required
folks
to
be
displaced
for
a
period
of
time
about
probably
15
of
those
folks
have
been
have
been
able
to
come
back
to
their
homes,
but
we
still
have
a
number
about
a
dozen
plus
now
that
are
that
are
displaced
and
likely
will
this
be
displaced
still
for
another
couple
months,
a
third:
you
have
zero
tornado,
touchdown
of
Finley
Creek
on
August
3rd,
impacting
12
homes.
Unfortunately,
the
damaging
winds,
it's
becoming
more
frequent.
AS
You
know,
as
a
member
of
environment
committee,
we
hear
about
this
regularly
and
you
know
I
think.
The
theme
that
I've
been
talking
about
with
a
lot
of
my
colleagues
is
resilience
looking
at
grid
resilience.
Looking
at
wind
resilience,
flood
resilience,
ice,
storm
resilience,
all
that
kind
of
stuff,
and
so
this
is
aligned
with
that
and
basically
trying
to
take
advantage
of
the
opportunity
we
have
before
us.
AS
Where
there's
discussions
going
on
from
the
city
and
specifically
on
the
provinces
side
with
regard
to
building
code
amendments,
and
so
it's
just
trying
to
take
advantage
of
that
opportunity
to
to
incorporate
some
windows
Elites
into
that.
So
that's
really
my
my
introduction
to
that
I'd
offer
to
you
chair.
If,
if
counselor
truster
wishes
to
read
it
in
then
I
think
we're
good
to
go.