Statutory Public Meeting Report regarding proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications submitted by GSP Group on behalf of the owner, 2319426 Ontario Inc… be received

21:17All right, the next one is the public meeting now

21:19for 716 Gordon Street,

21:21their proposed official plan in zoning bylaw amendments.

21:25And as was discussed earlier,

21:27just in case people are joining,

21:29Councillor Caron has declared a conflict on this file.

21:32So she will not partake in that.

21:34We do have a presentation from Katie Nesbutter,

21:37our senior development planner.

21:40And Katie, whenever you're ready,

21:43and then we have a few delegations that have signed up

21:45and potentially a few delegations

21:46that might wanna add something more as well, which is fine.

21:50I'll turn over to Katie first.

21:59Good evening, Marga, three and members of Council.

22:01This is the statutory public meeting

22:03for 716 Gordon Street in Ward five,

22:06to provide information about an application

22:08for official plan and zoning bylaw amendments

22:11by GSP group on behalf of the owner,

22:14to permit the development of an 11 story

22:17post-secondary school residence,

22:19containing 532 units with a total of 1149 bedrooms

22:26and 90 square meters of commercial retail space.

22:35The subject site is approximately 1.7 hectares in size

22:39and located on the northwest corner,

22:42oh, that's not the northwest corner, excuse me,

22:44the southeast corner of the intersection

22:47of Stone Road East and Gordon Street.

22:49The site's currently vacant

22:51and previously contained a hotel.

22:53Surrounding land uses include to the north

22:56across Stone Road East, the University of Guelph campus,

22:59to the east, one in two-story single detached dwellings

23:02that front onto Evergreen Drive,

23:05to the south, one-story dental office,

23:07and to the west across Gordon Street is the Delta Hotel.

23:17The site is designated as high density residential,

23:22together with a site-specific policy

23:24that permits a height range of three to 11 stories

23:28and a density range of 100 to 156 units per hectare.

23:33The site is also within an identified strategic growth area,

23:37which permits a maximum net density

23:39of 250 units per hectare.

23:43The applicant is proposing to amend

23:45their site-specific policies

23:48to allow a maximum net density of 676 bedrooms per hectare.

24:01The site is zoned in the 1995 bylaw, R4B-14,

24:07which is a specialized high density residential zone.

24:10It contains a number of specialized regulations

24:13to implement an Ontario Municipal Board decision from 2013.

24:20The site is also zoned RH.7-4,

24:25which is a specialized high density residential zone

24:27with a parking adjustment in the new zoning bylaw,

24:31which is currently under appeal

24:32at the Ontario Land Tribunal.

24:35The purpose of the proposed zoning bylaw amendment

24:38is to revise the regulations

24:41in the existing site-specific R4B-14 zone

24:45to permit the development

24:46of the modified 11-story post-secondary school residents.

24:51A number of specialized regulations

24:53have been requested from the 1995 bylaw,

24:56including a revised definition

24:59of post-secondary school residents,

25:02a maximum density of 676 bedrooms per hectare,

25:07where 156 units per hectare is currently permitted,

25:11a revised common amenity area requirement

25:14of 4.9 meters squared per bedroom,

25:20which would result in a 5633,

25:26square meters of common amenity area,

25:29where the standard ratio for common amenity area

25:31would result in 10,840 square meters,

25:36a revised off-street parking ratio

25:38of 0.25 parking spaces per bedroom,

25:41and a minimum of 15 visitor spaces.

25:44This would result in 288 parking spaces

25:48plus the 15 visitor spaces,

25:49where the current regulation for this site

25:52would be one space per unit

25:54for a total of 532 spaces,

26:00a bicycle parking rate of one long-term

26:02and 0.1 short-term bicycle spaces per dwelling unit,

26:06and 0.1 long-term spaces per 100 square meters

26:12of commercial GFA,

26:14resulting in a total of 590 bicycle spaces,

26:20a reduction to the front and exterior side yards

26:25of the portion of the building that is closest

26:30to the intersection of Stone Road East and Gordon Street

26:33from a minimum of nine meters to a minimum of 6.7 meters,

26:39and to permit an increased encroachment of a canopy

26:44of 2.9 meters into the required front yard

26:48and 3.6 meters into the required side yard

26:52at the corner of Gordon Street and Stone Road East.

27:02So the applicant is proposing an 11-story

27:05post-secondary school residence containing 532 units

27:09and a total of 1,149 bedrooms,

27:12together with 90 square meters of retail commercial space.

27:16The applicant is not proposing to change

27:19the unique height permissions for the site,

27:21which are a result of the previous OMB decision,

27:24which limits 11 stories to the portion of the site

27:27closest to the Stone and Gordon intersection,

27:30while requiring the height to be reduced

27:32further from the intersection in a series of three

27:36small towers along Gordon Street

27:38and one additional tower on Stone Road East.

27:42There are several pedestrian entrances to the development

27:45along both Stone Road and Gordon Street frontages,

27:48and vehicular access to the site is primarily

27:52from Stone Road East on the most easterly edge of the site.

27:58There's also a secondary vehicular access from Gordon Street,

28:01which would enter directly into the site's parking garage.

28:09Staff will review the following issues regarding

28:11this proposal, including evaluation of it for conformity

28:14and consistency with provincial policy,

28:17evaluation of its conformity with the official plan,

28:20review of the proposed zoning,

28:22including the need for specialized regulations,

28:25review of site servicing and design,

28:28review of how the proposed development addresses

28:30applicable sections of the Community Energy Initiative

28:34and address all comments and issues raised

28:36during the review of the applications.

28:39Once the applications are reviewed and all issues are

28:42addressed, a report from Planning with a recommendation

28:45would be considered at a future meeting of council.

28:48We also ask that any interested members of the public

28:51request to receive further notice related to these applications

28:55by contacting the clerks department via email at clerks.c-

28:59at wealth.ca or by calling 519-837-5603.

29:06And I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

29:09Great, thank you very much for your presentation.

29:11And as normal, I'll just scoot to the delegations,

29:15but I'm sure we might have some questions

29:17when we come back to you.

29:18Okay, thank you.

29:19We do have three on the list here.

29:22Now I've been told in advance of the meeting

29:24that Chris Pigeon from GSP Group

29:29and Mark Villamere is from the eventist developments

29:35is I think going to do theirs together

29:39and within the 10 minute allotment if need be.

29:42So are they on video?

29:45Yes.

29:46Okay, I think you just need to turn your cameras on.

29:53Hello, Mark, it's Mayor Guthrie.

29:55Can you hear me okay?

29:57Loud and clear, thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

29:59Oh, okay.

30:01Could you just try your audio one more time for me?

30:05Is this not working?

30:07No, it's working now.

30:08Just continue to speak up and clearly for us

30:10just so it translates into the room okay.

30:12Thank you very much.

30:15As you're made aware,

30:16you have no more than 10 minutes to delegate.

30:21And so I won't interrupt you or give you any heads up.

30:26If you get to 10 minutes, I jump in.

30:29I don't like doing that.

30:30So please don't go past the 10 minutes.

30:32And I was told that you and Chris will be sharing

30:36the 10 minute allotment.

30:38And then after that, if you need to just stick around

30:40just in case there's any follow up questions, okay?

30:43So I'll start the clock as soon as you start speaking.

30:47Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council.

30:49I'm Chris Pigeon with GSP Group.

30:51I'm a principal planner on behalf of eventist developments.

30:56As you've indicated,

30:57we're going to be a panel this evening.

30:59So Mark Villamere is the project architect

31:02from SRM Architects on behalf of eventist.

31:07And I will point out to council and the public

31:10that tonight's presentation is identical

31:13to the presentation that we made at a neighborhood meeting

31:17that was held on February the 24th of this year.

31:21And that was held at the days in hotel.

31:25Next slide, please.

31:28So the purpose of our presentation

31:30is to present the proposed development

31:33of a private post-secondary school residence by eventists.

31:37And that requires some fine tuning, I'll say,

31:40of the official plan and zoning bylaw amendment applications

31:43that were approved by the former Ontario Municipal Board.

31:47The reason I mentioned private is there has been

31:50a little bit of confusion about whether this development

31:53is a post-secondary residence by the University of Guelph.

31:57And it is not, it has nothing to do with the University

32:00of Guelph other than it is providing student accommodation

32:03for students who will be attending university.

32:07Next slide, please.

32:10Eventist developments is a specialist

32:13in the development of private student purpose-built housing

32:17for post-secondary students.

32:20This is an example of one of their projects.

32:22It's called the LUX.

32:23It's a 19-story plus or minus 300-unit private student

32:28residence.

32:29And it's located just north of Western University

32:32on Richmond Street in London.

32:35Next slide, please.

32:39Masonville Yards is a seven-story plus or minus 400-suite

32:44private student residence.

32:46It's also located on Richmond Street

32:49just north of Western University.

32:51You can see the photograph on the left

32:54shows Richmond Street, the seven-story building,

32:57frames the street.

32:59And then on the back of the site, there's

33:01a low-density residential neighborhood.

33:04And you can see how the building cascades down

33:07from the seven-stories down to lower heights

33:10and then is separated by surface parking

33:13to those low density residential uses.

33:16And then in the background at the top of the photo

33:18is the Masonville Mall.

33:21Next slide, please.

33:24In 2013, the Ontario Municipal Board

33:28approved applications for official plan and zoning by-law

33:31amendment for student purpose built housing for 716 Gordon.

33:38And the OMB approved designation of high-density residential

33:42with site-specific provisions.

33:44And they include minimum and maximum building

33:47heights of 3 to 11 stories and a maximum density

33:51of over all 156 units per hectare.

33:54The Ontario Municipal Board also approved a specialized

33:57residential apartment R4B14 zone that Katie highlighted for you.

34:04And it included the post-secondary school residence,

34:08a restaurant, a convenience store.

34:11And that post-secondary school residence

34:13included allowing up to five bedrooms per unit

34:17with a density of 156 units per hectare.

34:20That would equate to just over 1,325 bedrooms overall.

34:28Slide, please.

34:31So the current application that is before the City of Guelph

34:36today is to maintain that existing official plan

34:39designation, so maintain the high-density residential

34:43designation and simply modify the site-specific provisions.

34:47And that is we want to change how density is calculated

34:50to a maximum density of 676 bedrooms per hectare.

34:55And we also want to maintain the existing specialized

34:59residential apartment R4B14 zone and modify the site-specific

35:05provisions, particularly to deal with density

35:09on a bedrooms per hectare basis and to deal with parking

35:13on a 0.25 parking spaces per bedroom,

35:18plus 15 visitor spaces.

35:21And then there are some other minor revisions

35:24to the site-specific provisions that Katie highlighted.

35:27Slide, please.

35:30So the proposed development is a mixed-use four-tower

35:33development.

35:35The Ontario Municipal Board approved four towers ranging

35:40in 6 to 11 stories in height.

35:42And they are connected by three and four-story podiums.

35:46And we are maintaining the mass of the 2013 OMB decision.

35:52In addition, they will proposing about 1,000 square foot

35:56or 900 square meter commercial cafe.

35:59And again, that density calculated

36:01at 676 bedrooms per hectare.

36:04And that equates to 532 post-secondary residential

36:09units and 1,149 bedrooms.

36:12And you can see that the average bedroom size

36:15is 2.16 bedrooms per unit.

36:18And the overall parking is 303 parking spaces.

36:22Next slide, please.

36:24So this slide in our presentation is probably

36:26one of the most important slides.

36:28And what it does, it identifies the difference

36:31between the 2013 OMB decision, which permitted 1,325 bedrooms

36:38and required a minimum of 280 parking spaces.

36:44Four building towers, 11, 9, 8, and 6 stories

36:48were proposed connected by two podiums, three and four stories.

36:55The proposal that you have before you today

36:57would reduce the overall maximum number of bedrooms to 1,149

37:04and increase the number of parking spaces

37:07to a minimum of 303 parking spaces.

37:10There is no change to the configuration

37:12of the massing of the buildings.

37:13We're still proposing four towers, 11, 9, 8, and 6 stories,

37:18and podiums that are of a height of three and four stories.

37:22Angular planes that were approved by the Ontario Municipal

37:25Board will be maintained.

37:27Tower floor plates and separation distances

37:29are also being maintained.

37:31Next slide, please.

37:34There were a number of technical studies

37:35that were submitted as a part of this new application,

37:39the 2013 application.

37:41This application was deemed complete by city staff

37:44on June the 20th, 2023.

37:46And tonight's presentation and public meeting

37:49is a part of the process.

37:53As I said, it's an identical presentation

37:55that we made in February at a neighborhood information

37:59meeting at the days in.

38:01This point, I'll turn it over to Mark

38:03and he can take you through the details of the design.

38:06Thank you, Chris.

38:07Next slide, please.

38:10This should be the site plan.

38:12So good evening.

38:14I'm Eric Guthrie, city staff, council members, members

38:16of the public.

38:16Thank you for the opportunity to present this development

38:19located at the corner of Stone and Gorton and Gwell.

38:22My name is Mark Billmer.

38:24I am a management partner at SRM Architects.

38:26I've worked on this development for a few years now

38:28with a team of architect, designers, planners,

38:30landscape architects, and engineers.

38:33Proposed is a fully furnished built student residence.

38:37So we have a combination of internal,

38:39external, programed, and empty spaces,

38:42as well as a cafe on the ground floor.

38:44That was that commercial aspect of this project.

38:47This development is designed to be a desirable destination

38:49for students, modern, supportive, safe, and controlled

38:52accommodation for students.

38:54The development consists of a T-shaped podium.

38:56And of course, we have the standard towers,

38:58the 11, the 9, the 8, and the six-story towers,

39:01which are, as Katie did, they are rather short towers

39:05on the podium, which is a combination of three

39:07four-story podiums.

39:09There's a total of 532 units in the project.

39:13Next slide, please.

39:17So take you quickly here, so I don't have too long,

39:19on the ground floor.

39:20So design takes advantage of the building wrapped

39:23around the triangle site.

39:24It's an awkward site to design efficiently.

39:26And so we've been able to maximize the building perimeter

39:29while introducing soft landscaping,

39:31seeding, and opportunities for outdoor planning programming.

39:34So much of our emphasis on design

39:36is to create seamless connections between the interior

39:40and the exterior of the site for amenity,

39:42because we're catering to a younger demographic

39:44that we want to find productive and active ways when

39:49they're not in school.

39:50The development has been designed to promote also

39:53alternative modes of transportation,

39:54including walking, cycling, and public transit.

39:57So this is also by means of appropriate parking

40:00supply for students and the general proximity

40:02to the university of Guelph right across the street.

40:05The consolidated landscape here support

40:07the mature tree planting growth.

40:09We've reduced the extent of the underground parking

40:12so that we have deep soil around the perimeter of the site,

40:15which is very key to sustainable planting.

40:19Next slide, please.

40:21Here's some quick examples of some amenities

40:24that would be designed to program within its development.

40:28They consist of rooftop patio spaces, yoga studio,

40:31basketball courts, co-working lounges, study rooms,

40:34courtyards, and seating amenities.

40:36Again, it comes back to the developer

40:38makes the priority to provide engaging amenities

40:41that are designed to meet the student needs.

40:44I believe I've had 10 minutes right now

40:47for the overall presentation,

40:48so I could continue or Mayor Duffy.

40:53Yeah, you're at 10 minutes and four seconds.

40:55So I was just about to stop you anyways.

40:58So I do have to stop you, but thank you to you both.

41:02And so I will just stop you there,

41:05but stay on the screen just to see if there's any questions.

41:10I just, before we get to questions,

41:12just want my colleagues just to be mindful of time tonight.

41:16If you could please get to your questions.

41:19Not a lot of preamble at the beginning.

41:21We have other delegations that might wanna speak as well

41:24and looking at time.

41:25So Councillor Goller, Klassen, and then Ault.

41:29Thank you, Your Worship, to the delegates.

41:35Thank you for your presentation.

41:37I wanted to better understand the letter we received

41:39from the university.

41:40Their main concern was about the specialized

41:44post-secondary school residence designation

41:47as opposed to using a specialized residential apartment.

41:51Could you help me understand what you're asking for?

41:53A new title rather than using a specialized

41:57residential apartment designation?

42:00Yeah, through you, Your Worship.

42:02So the Ontario Municipal Board approved the,

42:09and labeled the title that's been applied to the project.

42:13We met with the University of Guelph last week.

42:16As I indicated in our presentation,

42:18the confusion of a post-secondary student residence

42:24is causing the university some consternation.

42:28So we've indicated that we would apply

42:30or add the word private to that definition,

42:34just to be clear that it is a private development,

42:37not associated whatsoever with the University of Guelph.

42:41Perfect, thank you.

42:42Thank you for that.

42:43And in terms of how the buildings will be managed,

42:49is this condos that will be sold?

42:52Are they purpose-built rental?

42:55How will that be done?

43:00Art, do you want to take that?

43:02Sure, Your Worship.

43:05This project is designed,

43:10done under one condo ownership of the entire development.

43:13However, each suite would be unitized.

43:16And so regardless of rental or privately sold

43:20to individuals, the program that this developer does

43:25on their other developments like this

43:27and other municipalities,

43:28they have a property management arm

43:31that controls and maintains the building operations.

43:35And so that's done to obviously organize

43:40all the students in activities

43:43and maintain quality and assurance and comfort

43:45because again, the real underlying

43:50users of these spaces,

43:52it's important for quality and comfort

43:54to know that they're not just spending for themselves,

43:57they're an environment where everything

43:58is highly taken out to their needs.

44:01And so this is definitely a good term,

44:04which is typical of these developments.

44:06Okay, okay, just to make sure

44:08that I understood that correctly,

44:09they are meant to be condo units

44:13and each unit could potentially be owned

44:15by a separate individual.

44:17And they could be charging different rents for each unit.

44:21Is that?

44:23Sir, I wouldn't deal the speed to that.

44:25And I know from a design perspective,

44:27how we've, I'll give you a quick example.

44:30We don't have a centralized laundromats in the building

44:35with laundry machines.

44:36And so everything's designed

44:38so that they can be self-sufficient

44:39in terms of the use of the space.

44:41However, the actual marketing that the developer will do

44:47I guess is open question right now,

44:48but I can tell you from the past developments

44:50that we've been involved with,

44:52they have a property manager firm,

44:54it's actually one of their own companies

44:55that manages and operates these buildings

44:57even after they've, whether they rented or sold in space.

45:01Okay, thank you very much.

45:03You mentioned in the presentation,

45:04the average size of the units was 2.16 bedrooms.

45:09Could you give us an idea of the breakdown

45:11of how many two, three, four, five bedroom units?

45:14Certainly, through your worship.

45:16So we have roughly the vast majority

45:19of the current developments.

45:20And this is why we're here.

45:22The project has a certain cap

45:24of number of units in the bedrooms.

45:26And what we're seeking to do is reduce the number of bedrooms,

45:30increase the number of units

45:32so that we have smaller units.

45:33And so whereas before we were heavily weighted,

45:37and I apologize,

45:37none of the numbers holds concept

45:39in terms of the unit breakdown,

45:41but current breakdown right now is roughly 45%

45:45about 45% to two bedroom units.

45:48Then the balance is sort of anywhere between

45:5010 to 50% of one beds,

45:52some three bedrooms and some four bedrooms,

45:54and a good amount of units, about 20% or 18%,

45:58their studio units.

46:00And so right now it's getting away

46:02from the larger four five bedroom models.

46:04There's no five bedroom models currently contemplated.

46:06They're all vast majority,

46:09I guess you're close to 70%, 55%

46:12are either studios or two bedroom units.

46:17So maybe I can add in there Mark.

46:19So to the counselor,

46:22so there are approximately 280,

46:26or sorry, 381 and two bedroom units,

46:30and about 153 and four bedroom units combined.

46:34So the majority are one and two bedroom units.

46:39Okay, okay, well, thank you very much.

46:41I appreciate that.

46:42Those are my questions to worship.

46:43All right, perfect.

46:44Cost in the note.

46:47Yes, thank you,

46:48Councillor Goller stole my question.

46:50So that was one, but I do have a second.

46:53I'm just looking through the sustainability report.

46:56And I just had a question with regard to,

46:59and maybe this is the wrong time to ask this question

47:01about what the cost per unit would be.

47:04And because there's,

47:07you've used the language affordable housing,

47:09I just would like to get an understanding

47:11of what that might be.

47:15So Chris, I can speak so through your worship.

47:18I'm not aware of the capital costs

47:20for the anticipated market for this project.

47:23It's certainly very early in the process.

47:25We have not gone into detailed design development

47:29with this developer always seeking efficient ways

47:32to construct.

47:32So it's not only talking about the capital costs,

47:34but the ongoing operating costs of the units.

47:38And so whether it's a unitized and sold or rented,

47:41the capital costs are not the only factor in the play here,

47:45which revolves around looking at higher efficiency systems

47:49and envelope to reduce the cost of heating and cooling.

47:51But when it comes to the actual specific costs,

47:54I'm sorry, I said we don't have that permission at this time.

47:59Okay, thank you.

48:00But can you confirm then the units

48:02will be considered affordable?

48:05Through your worship, my understanding is the terminology

48:09of affordable housing and the table housing

48:11have different means and different municipalities.

48:14And so at this time, I'm not aware that we're seeking

48:17any CMHC classification to be deemed affordable housing.

48:22So I'm sorry, I couldn't speak to that.

48:27Thanks for the clarity.

48:29On a separate note, it's not very clear.

48:36Okay, guess what I get to do now?

48:38Yeah.

48:40I did not think I had to do this, but now I have to.

48:44As the chair, I request that you do not interrupt

48:47or say anything like that at all.

48:49It's not me being a meanie.

48:50That's our rules in this room.

48:52We have to allow decorum in here.

48:56And that means we have to respect who's talking

48:57and who's not talking.

49:00No jeering, no yelling, no clapping.

49:03It's because this is a safe room

49:04where differences of opinions

49:06can be brought forward by anybody, okay?

49:09So I would just ask that you please don't do that.

49:11It also means our meeting will go smoother.

49:14And so I'm seeing lots of heads nod in agreement.

49:16So I appreciate that.

49:18Please let's continue and let the councillor

49:20continue with our last question.

49:22Councillor Colassen, you have your last question.

49:26Okay, I'm gonna just switch over to a question

49:27about the architecture.

49:29I did read through the University of Gloves letter

49:31and they talked about how this corner is like the gateway

49:36to the university.

49:37So it's a significant site in Guelph

49:41because it kind of welcomes people to the university.

49:43And so thinking in that in those terms,

49:47will the architecture reflect that?

49:49Will the architecture be like a significant in any way

49:53so that it either kind of integrates well

49:55into the university site,

49:57but also looks like it kind of fits into the overall

50:01look and feel of that part of the city.

50:06Again, through you, Mr. Mayor,

50:10that's absolutely, these are great points.

50:12And these are things that we're actually really excited

50:14to work on.

50:15These are details that we've worked through

50:16this type of approval process.

50:18Way back when this project originally got approval

50:21and we started working through this type of group process,

50:24we were working with the city of Guelph,

50:26urban design team on talking about materiality

50:29of the projects we're looking at, you know,

50:30red masonrys and Indiana limestone,

50:33a lot of materials that are consistent with the community

50:35as well as you mentioned the gateway

50:37and that speaks to the height of the development

50:39and also one of the variances that are sought

50:42through the site specific amendment

50:44with is a projection of a canopy with its last feature.

50:47So we were going down that path

50:49and we're eager to continue, but at this stage right now,

50:51and even the design renderings you see before you,

50:54there's certainly not the finished product.

50:56And I think for us to be able to engage with city staff

50:59and continue the design exercise to make sure

51:01that it's a community that everyone's very proud of,

51:03including the university,

51:05those that would pretty much happen at the next stage

51:08after this process of working through rezoning right now.

51:12Great, thank you, I appreciate that.

51:15Okay, again, just being aware of time

51:18and other delegations, Alt, Downer, or Rourke.

51:21Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie.

51:22I have three questions, I believe.

51:24The first one, I just want to follow up on

51:27Councillor Clausson's question about affordability.

51:32Are you aware to the delegates,

51:35are you aware whether the properties in London

51:38and Waterloo are market value

51:40or whether they would be considered to be affordable?

51:45They are not affordable, they are not affordable.

51:48Okay, thank you.

51:50The next question, I'm curious about the occupancy

51:54of the units, are these intended to be for families

51:57or couples, or are these to be rented by the room

52:00to individuals just renting rooms

52:03as per a university residence?

52:07So, through you, Mr. Mayor, the intention is not

52:11to be renting rooms, in fact,

52:13the fundamental reason why we're here tonight

52:18to talk about the modifications to development

52:20was the original concept where it had larger

52:22four or five bedroom units,

52:24each bedroom almost acted like a suite,

52:26but that was not the intent through this modification.

52:29And this is as a result of the market forces

52:31and obviously the realities through COVID

52:33where people don't wanna be with four or five other people,

52:36they wanna have their own smaller units.

52:38And so, right now, as proposed, each unit is just rented

52:44or sold to one group.

52:46The building total only allows two persons per bedroom,

52:50even though this development here, the catering,

52:54what you asked about is this for young couples.

52:56We don't preclude other people using it,

52:58but it's so heavily catered to the students body

53:02because of the type of amenities

53:04and the size of the bedrooms.

53:06This is specifically designed

53:08for students post-secondary registration.

53:11Thank you, and just to clarify,

53:12I heard you say rented or sold.

53:14So, they will be a mixture of rental units

53:17and condominiums, is that correct?

53:20I think, I'm through you, Mr. Mayor.

53:21I'm not positive on what they plan on doing

53:23when they go to market.

53:24My understanding is based off of past developments.

53:27Units are sold in some times to investors,

53:30and then they effectively are using

53:33Adventist systems and teams to rent out these units.

53:37And so, I think that's more of a marketing

53:40and financial model.

53:43But at the end of the day,

53:44what it means to the community is,

53:46if you or I were going to the university

53:48and we were looking for accommodations,

53:50we would reach out to Adventists through their portals,

53:53their marketing portals,

53:54and we would look for a room that, you know,

53:56or a room, a unit where we could rent out

54:00for ourselves.

54:01And so, that's the model as I understand it.

54:04Thank you.

54:05And the final question.

54:06If this is not filled with students

54:09because you have a post-secondary residence designation,

54:13what happens to the other units?

54:15And what would happen after students graduate?

54:20Through you, Mr. Mayor, that's a great question.

54:22I generally don't know the answer to that.

54:24I think the least contracts I imagine,

54:29and I'm speculating here,

54:31that you're only doing a term at a time

54:33or a year at a time in terms of your rental agreements,

54:36but in terms of if you've graduated and you're still there,

54:39no one has any right to kick you out.

54:42I don't believe it works that way.

54:44And so, again, this development is not precluding

54:48other people who may want to live here.

54:50However, given the nature of how it's designed

54:52and how it's catered to a specific demographic,

54:55that would be overwhelmingly the majority of people

54:58who live in that.

55:00So, Mr. Mayor, if I may add,

55:02so, Mr. Mayor, what typically happens with these projects

55:06that Aventus develops is they're 100% geared towards students.

55:11The Human Rights Commission does not allow us

55:14to essentially ensure that 100% of the population is student.

55:21But what happens is students who perhaps graduate

55:25may stick around in this residence for a year or two,

55:30but then they generally then move on.

55:32So we may have a couple of graduate students

55:34who continue to be employed in the city of Guelph,

55:38somewhere after they've graduated,

55:40but then they eventually do move on.

55:43Thank you.

55:44Okay, Downer O'Rourke.

55:47Thank you, through you, Mr. Mayor.

55:48So the 0.25 parking spaces,

55:52is that the ratio that you have in London

55:55and your other developments?

55:56And how does that, if so, how's that working out?

56:00Yes, so as a part of this study or this application,

56:04we did a parking and transportation analysis

56:09and that parking justification

56:12looked at other student purpose-built housing,

56:15not just Aventus developments,

56:17to determine what the parking ratio

56:20that matched demand was appropriate.

56:23And the 0.25 seems to be the appropriate match.

56:28I will emphasize again,

56:31that the Ontario Municipal Board approved decision required

56:35280 parking spaces as a minimum,

56:38and we are now at 303 parking spaces as a minimum,

56:42even though we've reduced the overall number of bedrooms

56:45by almost 200.

56:48Okay, the other question I have is around the trees,

56:54and it was clear to me what Mark said around them,

56:57but I remember 10 years ago,

56:59you said that you were gonna be maintaining

57:01many of the trees at the back,

57:03and this is of course of major concern

57:05to the adjacent properties,

57:06because it's very difficult to replace trees of that size.

57:10Even if it doesn't matter how many trees you put in,

57:12they're not gonna have the same kind of barrier

57:14that they would, and that looks like that's changed.

57:17Could you clarify for me the trees

57:20that along the lot lines, that the large trees,

57:26whether they'll be maintained,

57:27or whether you're gonna take them all out,

57:30and it sounds like most of them will be removed.

57:35So through you, the intention of this application

57:39is to engage any changes to the land.

57:41So you're cutting, this is what I couldn't hear before,

57:43you're cutting out and I can't hear you.

57:46Oh, apologies, Chris, can you answer that if that's okay?

57:50Yeah, so as a part of this new 2023 application,

57:55we did an update to the tree management report.

58:00There has been some die-off of some of the trees,

58:04and I was just looking for a copy of the report

58:08to give you the best information that I have.

58:15So the intent, of course, in the previous application,

58:20there are many significant mature trees,

58:24also on the private property,

58:25so on the residence side of the property line,

58:28of course, those trees would be maintained,

58:30and there is some tree preservation and maintenance

58:34that's included on the subject property,

58:37but I don't have the exact number in front of me.

58:42So it doesn't sound like it's,

58:44as you don't have the numbers in front of you,

58:45my understanding there'll be 86 removed,

58:48which is significant, so.

58:50Well, you have the information.

58:52Well, I saw it in a letter,

58:55so I didn't verify it from your own information,

58:57so that's why I just wanted to make sure

59:00that I wanted to hear it from you,

59:02but you don't have that information to confirm that.

59:05So the other issue that I want to know,

59:10so this was approved 10 years ago at the OMB,

59:13so I'm just wondering why it's taken so long

59:15to put shovels in the ground on this development.

59:20So Aventus has been, they have a large portfolio

59:26of developments that they've been working on,

59:28some of which we presented today,

59:30and that you're aware of,

59:31but they have other projects as well,

59:33and this one just hasn't come to the top

59:35of the pile, it now is something

59:39that they would like to advance sooner rather than later.

59:42And so if you did get approval,

59:44when do you plan to put shovels in the ground

59:46on this development?

59:50I believe Aventus wants to move quickly

59:53to a construction program,

59:55of course they would have a site plan approval process,

59:58that would be required,

59:59and then a building permit process.

1:00:02Okay, one last question,

1:00:03just around the green features,

1:00:06what sustainability features do you have,

1:00:09do you plan to do in this building,

1:00:10anything out of the ordinary?

1:00:15Through you Mr. Mayor,

1:00:16the most significant green feature

1:00:20is we were doing rainwater harvesting

1:00:22on the rooftop terraces,

1:00:23for the considerable amount of rooftop planting

1:00:26that we have throughout the development time.

1:00:29Beyond that, the energy requirements right now

1:00:32through the building code are fairly high,

1:00:35and so we're not seeking additional

1:00:38higher-performing products

1:00:40beyond what we would be doing in otherwise developments.

1:00:42A lot of the features relate to the outdoor amenities spaces

1:00:45and how we can reduce the amount of water needed

1:00:49to educate our landscaping features.

1:00:54Okay, thank you, that's all the questions I have for now.

1:00:55All right, thank you so much.

1:00:56Ororak, then Boussatil.

1:00:58Thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

1:01:00Through you to the proponents,

1:01:02I can't argue with the parking ratios

1:01:04that's what the OMB said you were allowed to have.

1:01:07I just have a question about your minimum of 15 visitor spaces.

1:01:11So 15 visitor spaces for 1,149 bedrooms is just over 1%.

1:01:18And I'm just wondering what the basis is for that.

1:01:20So how did you calculate,

1:01:22because the university's letter does point out

1:01:24they are concerned about some overflow parking

1:01:26or raise that as a red flag.

1:01:28So how do you get to the 15 visitor spaces

1:01:30for that number of units?

1:01:32So the Ontario Municipal Board decision in 2013

1:01:37had imposed a requirement for 15 visitor parking spaces.

1:01:41We've just simply carried that forward.

1:01:43Now it was standing that we've reduced

1:01:45the overall bedroom count by almost 200.

1:01:51And it has been verified as a part of the parking justification.

1:01:56And I should note that the,

1:01:59that is a minimum requirement.

1:02:00The 15 spaces is a minimum.

1:02:03Of course, we've had this proliferation of deliveries,

1:02:09I'll say, whether it's food or whatever.

1:02:11So short-term delivery.

1:02:13So we wanna make sure that we've got sufficient parking

1:02:15on site to accommodate those kinds of things.

1:02:19Great, I'm really happy to hear you say that some minimum.

1:02:21Appreciate that.

1:02:23My next question,

1:02:24through you Mayor Guthrie,

1:02:25piggybacks on councillor Downers.

1:02:27And it's about the large mature trees

1:02:29that are along Gordon and Stone.

1:02:34And you can see that for years

1:02:35there's been fencing around them, trying to protect them.

1:02:37But in attachment seven and also on slide seven

1:02:40of your presentation,

1:02:42it looks like the building is at grade.

1:02:45And I don't see where those large trees are anymore.

1:02:48So did that change in the plan?

1:02:53Through you, Mr. Mayor.

1:02:54What I can say about the Stromatik renderings,

1:02:57they are artist interpretations.

1:02:59And so not all the time,

1:03:00at the certainly at this stage,

1:03:01the project has grading fully been accurately modeled

1:03:06when it comes to renderings.

1:03:07Though it is also important to note,

1:03:09there's gonna be a substantial amount of re-graded

1:03:11on the site as part of any redevelopment.

1:03:14And so that might also change the appearance

1:03:16of the development based on what you see on plan.

1:03:21But again, there's a fair amount of distance

1:03:24between the curve of the street

1:03:26to the actual property line and where the development is.

1:03:28And so anything outside of that property line

1:03:31that would be city of land along stone and Gordon,

1:03:34that would be maintained and unchanged.

1:03:37So through you, Mayor Guthrie,

1:03:38just so I'm sure I understand,

1:03:39when I'm coming north on Gordon,

1:03:44those great big trees that are all fenced off

1:03:47with snow fencing for years and years now,

1:03:49those will be incorporated into this development?

1:03:53Through you, Mr. Mayor.

1:03:54If those trees are outside the property line,

1:03:57they're absolutely not being touched.

1:03:58And if they are, that would be captured

1:04:01as part of the landscape plans

1:04:02and the tree preservation plans.

1:04:05Okay.

1:04:06Well, then I'll have that question for staff.

1:04:07And just two more questions,

1:04:09Mayor Guthrie, if you would allow.

1:04:13I'm curious, just a real quick one on parking.

1:04:16Will you consider adding a car share space

1:04:18or some car share spaces?

1:04:20Yes, that's something that Aventus incorporates

1:04:24into their projects.

1:04:25Great.

1:04:26And through you, Mayor Guthrie, two more.

1:04:28The image you have in your presentation

1:04:30of the Masonville Yards,

1:04:31it backs onto a shopping center

1:04:34as opposed to a mature neighborhood.

1:04:38So I'm just wondering what mitigates the impact

1:04:42on the surrounding neighborhood of a development this size?

1:04:44Like clearly we need purpose-built rental.

1:04:48What mitigates the impacts on the neighborhood?

1:04:50Yeah, through you, your worship.

1:04:53So that's in, what you said is incorrect.

1:04:56The Masonville Yards actually backs on

1:04:59to low density residential.

1:05:02The Masonville shopping center is across Richmond Street

1:05:05on the other side of the street.

1:05:07So there's no street between the Masonville residences

1:05:12and the single detached dwellings.

1:05:14There's a surface parking lot

1:05:16that's associated with the post-secondary residents,

1:05:19but it doesn't back onto the shopping center.

1:05:25Okay, no, I appreciate the clarification.

1:05:27That's what I thought I heard in the presentation.

1:05:29So I must have misheard.

1:05:33And then my last question, Mayor Guthrie,

1:05:35and it comes back to the affordability piece,

1:05:37just a curiosity policy question.

1:05:41So once this development is built,

1:05:44obviously built and occupied after 2018,

1:05:46so would this building be subject to any rent controls?

1:05:56I don't know the answer to that.

1:05:59Okay, just thinking about affordability.

1:06:01Appreciate it, thank you.

1:06:03And lastly, I have Pusatil, please.

1:06:06Thank you, I have a question of clarification

1:06:08to the delegates, please.

1:06:10Did I hear that the units, the intention

1:06:12is to sell them to investors?

1:06:14And then I do have one question.

1:06:17So through your worship,

1:06:20they're designed so that they could be,

1:06:23but I'm not sure the actual developer

1:06:27would need to clarify if that's the intent

1:06:29of the development.

1:06:30I don't want to misrepresent their intentions,

1:06:33but I can tell you that they are designed

1:06:35so that they could be standalone sold

1:06:37or they could just be rented out

1:06:40with all the typical amenities

1:06:41that the market would demand for property like that,

1:06:44or a unit like that.

1:06:47Thank you, and my question is,

1:06:49in your presentation, you had mentioned

1:06:51about a February neighborhood meeting

1:06:54and that your presentation is the same as what was used then.

1:06:58I didn't see in your documentation any kind of a report

1:07:01from that meeting about feedback from the neighborhood,

1:07:04any adjustments to your application, your design, nothing.

1:07:08Is that something that we could receive?

1:07:13So the neighborhood information meeting that we attended

1:07:17was a requirement of the city of Guelph.

1:07:19And we did get some commentary back from the residents,

1:07:24but we've made no adjustments.

1:07:28Thank you, that's all.

1:07:30All right, thank you.

1:07:31And seeing nothing further,

1:07:33we appreciate your delegation

1:07:35and answering the questions for us.

1:07:37Thank you so much and have a good night, okay?

1:07:40Thank you.

1:07:41Thank you.

1:07:43All right, Bill Mungle, is Bill here?

1:07:45Yep, there's Bill.

1:07:47Come on down, Bill.

1:07:58And thanks for joining us, Bill.

1:07:59You've been here before, you know the drill a little bit,

1:08:02but I'll just start the timer for up to 10 minutes

1:08:05as soon as you start talking.

1:08:06Go right ahead.

1:08:07Well, thank you, Your Worship, and no worries.

1:08:09I'm here for just one specific aspect of this.

1:08:12I won't need anywhere near 10 minutes,

1:08:14but if you don't mind, I have sloppy handwriting,

1:08:16so I do have to read from my notes.

1:08:20Your Worship Council, generally,

1:08:23I am in favor of a student-dedicated

1:08:26high-density development on this site.

1:08:30Having said that, I do wish to comment on

1:08:32and object to one particular aspect of this application.

1:08:37It concerns the nuisance of noise from this development.

1:08:41So the developer essentially won an OMB decision in 2013

1:08:46for four towers on this site,

1:08:48but the OMB decision did not provide

1:08:51for outdoor terraces or balconies,

1:08:54nor were they proposed by the developer at that time.

1:08:57So why not?

1:08:59That's because the developer's planner,

1:09:02who was GSP then, as they are now,

1:09:05sensibly pointed out in the initial planning

1:09:08justification report that balconies

1:09:10would not be compatible with the adjacent

1:09:13and nearby single-family residences.

1:09:16And in that regard, let me quote from GSP's wisdom.

1:09:20This is directly from the planning justification report

1:09:23written in 2010.

1:09:26The units will not have balconies to avoid issues

1:09:29related to unsightly storage and outdoor noise

1:09:33and assist in discouraging inappropriate behavior.

1:09:37The building elevations illustrate false balconies

1:09:41in order to add architectural interest.

1:09:44So I have made extra copies of that

1:09:47for any members of council who wish to see that.

1:09:50I'll leave it on the media desk here when I leave.

1:09:52Yeah.

1:09:54And I'll give it to staff too.

1:09:55Yes.

1:09:56Kitty, there you go.

1:09:58OK.

1:10:02So balconies and terraces were not even an issue

1:10:05at the 2013 OMB hearing.

1:10:08But now, this developer proposes three large outdoor terraces

1:10:13for student use on the fourth floor level, which

1:10:16was not part of the presentation you heard.

1:10:18And I was at that February 23rd meeting,

1:10:20and they were not revealed there either.

1:10:25Actually, they were discussed, but not extensively.

1:10:31These student uses would also include events

1:10:34that can be licensed for alcohol,

1:10:36this according to Mr. Pigeon of GSP at the meeting that

1:10:40was held February 23rd regarding a few of the changes

1:10:44that are before you tonight.

1:10:47With 1,100 students on the site and three large terraces

1:10:51for such events, many of which would naturally

1:10:54be held in the evening, it's axiomatic and just plain common

1:10:58sense that there'd be much student noise to afflict

1:11:01the nearby residents.

1:11:03While there's only 19 residences within 100 meters

1:11:06of this property, beyond this, there are 374 residences

1:11:11within 500 meters.

1:11:13And at night, noise from parties on these three terraces

1:11:16would be easily carried over 500 meters and likely more.

1:11:21And noise is only one of several defined

1:11:24nuisances in tort and actionable in law.

1:11:28The very foundation of municipal land use planning,

1:11:31as well as in the Environmental Protection Act of Ontario,

1:11:34are to plan to avoid and mitigate

1:11:37nuisances such as noise.

1:11:39To ignore noise as a planning issue

1:11:42exposes the city to risk and certainly

1:11:44to additional operating costs.

1:11:48Further south on Gordon Street, the developers

1:11:50of the Solstice I and Solstice II student-dedicated

1:11:53apartments showed common sense, as well as respect and regard

1:11:58for adjacent residences by foregoing all balconies

1:12:02and allowing only a very few terraces, all of which

1:12:05faced an immense swamp.

1:12:08But no such respect is being shown by this developer

1:12:11to residences next to 716 Gordon.

1:12:15The city must concern itself with the precedent that

1:12:17would be set should these terraces be approved at 716 Gordon,

1:12:22because just down the street at 785 Gordon,

1:12:26the same developer owns the days in

1:12:28and has proposed to redevelop the site with 21 terraces

1:12:32and about 60 balconies to also serve a student-dedicated

1:12:35clientele of some 520.

1:12:38If approved, the terraces proposed in the Royal Brock

1:12:41application could be potentially used by this developer

1:12:46as the thin edge of a wedge or as precedent

1:12:49to subsequently obtain city approval for the 81-party

1:12:53patios and balconies at its days in site.

1:12:57If approved, the resultant nuisance noise

1:13:01will render several stable neighborhoods that surround

1:13:04the days in on three sides quite uninhabitable for families

1:13:09and possibly to a lesser extent in the neighborhood by 716.

1:13:14To provide some useful context, the party patios

1:13:17and balconies that are proposed at the days in site

1:13:19are 29 times the size of the patio in the rear of the nearby

1:13:25Shakespeare Arms pub.

1:13:27Here at 716 Gordon, because of the eligibility of the diagrams,

1:13:32they couldn't tell you how many times larger

1:13:35they are relative to the Shakespeare Arms pub,

1:13:39but it would be somewhat smaller than 29 times.

1:13:43We fully expect the city to refuse the application

1:13:48with the noise nuisance party patio terraces

1:13:51as being incompatible with the nearby residences.

1:13:55We also similarly expect the city to negotiate

1:13:59during the current OLT mediation on the day's in-site

1:14:03to ensure that terraces and balconies

1:14:06will also be prohibited in that student residence.

1:14:10Thank you.

1:14:13Thank you.

1:14:14Are there any questions for the delegate at all?

1:14:17OK.

1:14:18Seeing none, thank you very much.

1:14:20Appreciate your time.

1:14:22All right.

1:14:23So we're going to get to an open opportunity for the numbers

1:14:27going to come up on the screen here.

1:14:29And I'll just yell that number out for people just in case.

1:14:32519-837-5603.

1:14:37Again, that's 519-837-5603.

1:14:41And you can feel free to call into our clerk's and clerk's

1:14:45department to see if you need to speak to the matter.

1:14:48There could be some people in the room here that

1:14:50are maybe interested as well before I see hands go up

1:14:53or anybody come here.

1:14:55We do ask that if it's new information,

1:14:58that maybe hasn't been already stated that you would come

1:15:01and express that if you feel that you need to.

1:15:04You, again, have up to 10 minutes if you need it.

1:15:07You don't have to use the whole 10 minutes if you want.

1:15:09But we would ask that if the person ahead of you

1:15:13or somebody that's already delegated

1:15:15has said something, you can say ditto.

1:15:19We hear you in that as well.

1:15:22And so just being aware of time, I'm

1:15:24going to just pause for a few minutes

1:15:25just to see if there's anyone that's going to call in,

1:15:28we'll go from there.

1:15:29Was there anybody here that needed to add anything further?

1:15:33I have two.

1:15:35Great.

1:15:36OK, these two.

1:15:37All right, well, we'll start with you.

1:15:38And if you can come down then.

1:15:40And then we'll wait to see if anyone else is online.

1:15:43And if you could just state your name for the record,

1:15:47that would be wonderful.

1:15:49And I'll start the clock whenever you start.

1:15:51OK, go ahead.

1:15:52OK, thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

1:15:54And good evening, Mayor Guthrie and members of council.

1:15:58My name is Kate McDonald.

1:15:59I'm the president of the Mayfield Community Association.

1:16:03And we have been involved with 716 Gordon

1:16:07for a very long time.

1:16:08We were parties at the let represented by council

1:16:12at the OMB hearing.

1:16:13And so we're very familiar with the whole project.

1:16:16And we do understand that a large student-based development

1:16:21has been approved for this site.

1:16:22But we do have some real concerns about the current proposal.

1:16:26And I'm just going to outline them very briefly.

1:16:31And just state that as a community, as I said,

1:16:36there was a four-week hearing.

1:16:37All of the evidence was heard.

1:16:40And we think it's important that the developer respect

1:16:44the parameters of that decision.

1:16:46And they're asking for exemptions with respect

1:16:49to setback, which concern us as to whether that they've

1:16:52said tonight it doesn't increase the mass of the building,

1:16:55but they're asking for reduced setback on either side

1:16:58of the building towards Gordon.

1:17:00So that gives us some concern.

1:17:05Other restrictions with respect to parking,

1:17:07they say they've increased the parking.

1:17:10But we're very concerned that adequate parking

1:17:12be allowed for the site because of concerns that would happen

1:17:15with respect to evergreen nearby.

1:17:19And while we do appreciate that the developer has incorporated

1:17:23many of the elements that were required of them

1:17:25as a result of the OMB decision with respect

1:17:27to height and distance between the towers,

1:17:30some of the changes give us great concern.

1:17:32I'm not going to elaborate on the three large open-air terraces

1:17:37because my friend, or that's a legal term, I guess,

1:17:42as my friend, the gentleman that just spoke really eloquently

1:17:46described the concerns that we also

1:17:49have about these terraces, which were not included

1:17:52in the OMB proposal, to the contrary.

1:17:57The other concern that we have was raised by Councilmember

1:18:02Downer with respect to the trees.

1:18:05And they weren't able to put their hands on the trees,

1:18:07but the gentleman Tim Laha will speak after me.

1:18:10We'll have some more particulars about what they

1:18:12intend to do with the trees.

1:18:14And it is a completely different tree plan

1:18:18and involves a lot more cutting of trees

1:18:21than originally proposed when it was approved by the OMB.

1:18:30The third concern we have is, and we

1:18:34need to examine the plans more because there seems to be changes

1:18:38with respect to where deliveries are going to be made

1:18:40and driveways.

1:18:41And we're very concerned for the residents

1:18:43who border this very large development

1:18:46because there's going to be a lot of deliveries

1:18:49into this area.

1:18:50There's going to be garbage trucks and different services

1:18:53that are going to be required to all come in through that driveway

1:18:56that goes right along the backs of the evergreen properties.

1:19:01And we want to make sure that that's addressed.

1:19:04We have concerns about that.

1:19:07So we think that some of the changes that are being sought

1:19:11are material when it comes to this project.

1:19:14They're not necessarily respectful of the OMB decision.

1:19:18Some of the things weren't dealt with in the OMB decision.

1:19:22But we're really concerned about the destruction

1:19:24of perfectly healthy trees, which provide a natural buffer

1:19:28for this area.

1:19:30Our legal counsel, Tim Laws, here.

1:19:32And I'm just going to step aside and let him talk

1:19:35in a bit more particular about the different issues

1:19:37that we are going to raise.

1:19:39Thank you for listening.

1:19:40Certainly just before we go to start,

1:19:41I stay kind of as procedural.

1:19:43Is there any questions for this delegate

1:19:44before we go on to the next one?

1:19:46No?

1:19:47OK.

1:19:48You're good.

1:19:48And you were well under time.

1:19:49So thank you.

1:19:52And I'm so sorry.

1:19:53I didn't catch your last name.

1:19:54I know you'll say it for the record when you come to the mic.

1:19:56I heard Tim.

1:19:57But I didn't sit and hear the rest.

1:19:59By all means, come on up.

1:20:00And I'll start the clock whenever you speak.

1:20:01Just your name for the record, sir.

1:20:03Good evening, Your Worship, distinguished members of council,

1:20:06Tim Law, LAW.

1:20:10I am.

1:20:11It does.

1:20:11And as somebody who gets paid by the hour,

1:20:13I'd hate to be saying ditto.

1:20:15But I will do that as much as possible.

1:20:17The comments have been made about density.

1:20:20And my observation for all of you

1:20:25is why have they changed the way in which they are determining

1:20:29density from units to rooms, something you should consider

1:20:33as you look at this application?

1:20:35Additionally, the people per hectare

1:20:38is significantly higher than any of the high-intensification

1:20:42areas in anywhere else in the city.

1:20:45Another point you should address as you consider

1:20:48this application.

1:20:51Traffic is something that I don't believe

1:20:53has been mentioned or asked as a question.

1:20:55And the observation we have is this particular intersection,

1:21:00as it presently exists, is it even going

1:21:04to be able to handle the extreme addition of both

1:21:08vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the way

1:21:12that it's set up at the moment?

1:21:13Another point that you will need to scrutinize

1:21:16as you look at this application, because there

1:21:19will be a relatively enormous addition of humans walking

1:21:23around that intersection, especially if they are,

1:21:26contrary to the folks from GSP or students,

1:21:30and therefore having to go to the university,

1:21:33not simply hanging out in the different units.

1:21:38In short, the way the intersection presently exists

1:21:42will need to be examined holus bolus.

1:21:46Is it going to be able to deal with 1,149 humans coming

1:21:50and going and all of that which goes along with it?

1:21:55As far as vehicle access is concerned,

1:21:58we have far less of a problem with coming in off Gordon

1:22:02and far greater coming in off stone.

1:22:06It would be best if those vehicles all disappeared

1:22:08underground as we understand they will off Gordon,

1:22:11because that will prevent the vehicles running along the side,

1:22:14especially of those residents of Evergreen.

1:22:17That brings us to the buffer.

1:22:2086 of the 99 trees are proposed to be destroyed,

1:22:25only eight of which are dead.

1:22:27That's a very significant adjustment,

1:22:30to put it lightly, to the trees that

1:22:33presently exist on the property.

1:22:35You mentioned how do we then replace those huge trees?

1:22:40I'm not an arborist.

1:22:41I don't know how one replaces such enormous trees.

1:22:44But what provision is there in the application for some buffer

1:22:49to stop all of this noise?

1:22:54And lastly, and I won't say ditto.

1:22:58I'll just repeat what the very articulate Mr. Lungren said.

1:23:03Terraces, those of us privileged enough

1:23:05to have gone to university, enjoyed making noise,

1:23:09enjoyed having parties at that age.

1:23:11There's no reason to believe that these young humans will

1:23:13feel any differently.

1:23:15We don't want them doing it on balconies and terraces

1:23:18for the reasons that have already been stated.

1:23:20Thank you.

1:23:22Looks like Councillor Allt has a question for you.

1:23:24Thank you.

1:23:25Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie,

1:23:27through you to the delegate.

1:23:29Mr. Lungren, I didn't think about this,

1:23:31and I don't know whether you're the person to answer,

1:23:33but I'm hoping that I can expedite this a bit.

1:23:36You mentioned maximum density of 1,149 people.

1:23:39But then something came up in my mind.

1:23:42If these are to be sold as condominiums,

1:23:45in your opinion, is 1,149 the maximum occupancy

1:23:50in those buildings?

1:23:51I don't know the answer to that, but as I listened,

1:23:56you were asking questions of planners

1:23:58about renting and condominiumizing a building.

1:24:02I don't think they would have the answers

1:24:04to those questions.

1:24:05My understanding was it was supposed to be built

1:24:08and then rented out.

1:24:10And so I don't know to what extent

1:24:11that will affect the ultimate number of people living there.

1:24:15Thank you very much.

1:24:19Seeing nothing further.

1:24:20Thank you, sir.

1:24:21Thank you very much.

1:24:22Thank you.

1:24:23And I don't think we had anybody call in,

1:24:25so it looks like everything's been captured.

1:24:27Thank you very much to the delegates.

1:24:29So it is back to us.

1:24:32As I normally say, you're gonna hear me say ditto,

1:24:35but I'm gonna say it one more time anyways.

1:24:37Anything new that needs to go to our staff

1:24:41because as staff have been this whole term,

1:24:44they've captured it all already.

1:24:46So is there anything new that you need for them

1:24:48to look at in regards to this before I do that?

1:24:51Would someone be willing to move receipt only

1:24:54of the application?

1:24:55Alt, Bousatil is seconding that.

1:24:58Thank you.

1:24:59I saw an auror can and a downer.

1:25:01I'll start over there.

1:25:02Actually, I'll start over there for all three.

1:25:04I'll go auror, downer and Bousatil

1:25:06to give anything new to staff.

1:25:08And then I'll swing over here, okay?

1:25:11Thank you, Marga.

1:25:12They're pretty technical actually.

1:25:15Through you to staff,

1:25:16I thought our official plan was trying to reduce

1:25:20driveways off of Gordon.

1:25:23And so I'm just wondering,

1:25:26I'm just curious how that works,

1:25:28especially if the long-term plan

1:25:29is to have a bus lane on Gordon.

1:25:32So just wondering whether that's even allowed

1:25:38under the official plan and entrance on Gordon.

1:25:48Three, Marga three to counselor or Rourke.

1:25:52For this case that our traffic engineering staff

1:25:54will definitely be reviewing that.

1:25:56I'm not sure offhand,

1:26:00whether there's a specific policy

1:26:03limiting the driveways on Gordon.

1:26:04I'm not aware of one end.

1:26:05Christa's hopefully shaking your head no as well.

1:26:08So it's definitely something we'll look at.

1:26:10And we do generally try to reduce

1:26:12the number of driveway entrances

1:26:14on main streets like Gordon.

1:26:16Okay, thanks.

1:26:17And three, Marga three.

1:26:20The new comprehensive zoning by-law that's under appeal

1:26:23has a maximum building length for buildings over 10 stories.

1:26:30And so I'm just wondering how that works

1:26:33or whether the comprehensive zoning by-law,

1:26:36the original by-law, they don't matter

1:26:37because we go with what the OMB says.

1:26:38Can you just help me understand

1:26:43which of the new zoning rules apply here

1:26:46and which just don't?

1:26:52Through you, Mayor, to counselor Rourke again.

1:26:56So essentially, they're at this point

1:27:02applying only for specialized regulations

1:27:05against our existing 1995 zoning by-law.

1:27:08However, of course at some time in the future,

1:27:11the new 2023 zoning by-law will come into effect.

1:27:16And they will need to have this by-law incorporated

1:27:21into that zoning by-law.

1:27:23So certainly all those regulations in their final form

1:27:27after the OLT resolution will have to be considered

1:27:33when this by-law is added to that essentially

1:27:35if that helps answer your question.

1:27:36So those are all relevant regulations to consider.

1:27:41So through you, Mayor Gasser,

1:27:42I'm just thinking about the massing

1:27:44about how the proposal that Dazin was described

1:27:47about the length of that one.

1:27:49This one seems to have a long,

1:27:50I didn't ask how long the length of this building is

1:27:53and I'm just trying to understand which rules will apply

1:27:56when the shovels go on the ground.

1:28:00And certainly I think it's important

1:28:02to consider all the regulations

1:28:04of the 2023 zoning by-law as well.

1:28:07And they would need to be,

1:28:10this application would need to be incorporated

1:28:12within it.

1:28:13So I think we will consider the 2023 regulations as well

1:28:18and in our recommendation.

1:28:21And I believe the second part of your question

1:28:23before was about the existing OMB decision.

1:28:29So we've settled on a different building length

1:28:32for a building that's over 10 stories, right?

1:28:34And the comprehensive zoning by-law,

1:28:36but there's an OMB decision.

1:28:38So I'm trying to understand which one

1:28:41takes precedent.

1:28:45So the OMB decision, it is in place now.

1:28:48So it's reflected in our current zoning.

1:28:50As a new application,

1:28:52this is something that is reviewed fresh.

1:28:55So we aren't relying on that OMB decision.

1:28:58We would consider it,

1:28:59but ultimately this is a new application

1:29:01that we test against current regulations and policies.

1:29:04Okay, thanks.

1:29:05I know Councillor Downer's got a definition question,

1:29:08so I'll let her have it.

1:29:12Okay, so just through you confirming

1:29:15this is a new application that's not bound

1:29:17by the previous OMB decision at all then.

1:29:23We're not bound by that?

1:29:29Yeah, through America,

1:29:30through Councillor Downer,

1:29:31so it is a new zoning application.

1:29:34They have a site-specific zoning,

1:29:36which was the previous OMB decision.

1:29:39So that is in the 1995 by-law, the 2023 by-law,

1:29:43as they're site-specific.

1:29:45They've applied for amendments to some of those provisions

1:29:49of their existing site-specific,

1:29:53but the site-specific is what they have on this property,

1:29:57so that's why they've applied for some amendments,

1:30:00but the other regulations will still apply.

1:30:04Okay, okay.

1:30:05So one of the issues,

1:30:07I just wanna sort of go back to this traffic issue.

1:30:10One of the concerns I have,

1:30:13is that I noticed that the main lobby

1:30:16is between the driveway and the intersection,

1:30:22and one of the concerns that has always been raised

1:30:24in the past is students coming out of that midsection

1:30:29and running across the road, like beating traffic,

1:30:33because it's just the closest as the crow flies.

1:30:36Let's go across the road here, and it's human nature.

1:30:41So I'm a concerned about the main lobby being

1:30:44in that location in the center

1:30:46between the driveway and the intersection,

1:30:50and I think we're gonna be bound to have to do

1:30:54some kind of crossing here to create safety

1:30:58at some point along here where that driveway is,

1:31:02because it's not gonna be safe.

1:31:05They're not going to walk,

1:31:06the students are not gonna walk

1:31:08to the intersection to cross, like well, majority will,

1:31:12but there'll be a significant number that will not do that,

1:31:14and that was always a concern in the past.

1:31:19And that's still, particularly with the main lobby

1:31:21coming in that midsection,

1:31:23the main lobby should probably come out of the intersection,

1:31:26but I don't know what can be done about that now.

1:31:29The other thing is,

1:31:34around the trees, I'd hate to say ditto by will,

1:31:38but in the original OMB,

1:31:40there was not gonna be that significantly different.

1:31:43There wasn't gonna be this note of tree loss.

1:31:46The driveway is along the back.

1:31:48There will be trucks coming in, moving trucks,

1:31:51there'll be delivery trucks,

1:31:52there'll be garbage trucks, as we talked about.

1:31:54There should become some kind of a sound barrier

1:31:57along that line where the driveway is

1:32:03in order to offset the trucks in traffic

1:32:07that will be coming in there.

1:32:08And also, going back to the amount of trees that lost,

1:32:12and when I look at their landscape plan,

1:32:14he said that from the on Gordon Street,

1:32:18any trees that were outside of the property line

1:32:21would be kept, but on their landscape plan,

1:32:25all the trees are inside their property line,

1:32:28so it looks like all the trees are being lost

1:32:32on Gordon Street.

1:32:34So I just would like to have that sort of looked at as well.

1:32:42The other significant difference is the terraces,

1:32:44and that's a ditto issue around the roof amenity areas

1:32:52that are identified within the,

1:32:57and also the half the amenity space that is required

1:33:03for a young population that will be living here.

1:33:09Those are my comments now.

1:33:10I mean, most of everything else has been talked about,

1:33:14so I won't add.

1:33:15Oh, the other thing was around the definition.

1:33:20I don't know, this is a finance issue,

1:33:21but we had it with the holiday end.

1:33:23Does that definition mean that of a residence?

1:33:29Post-secondary school residents,

1:33:30whether private's in front of it or not,

1:33:32that there's some kind of a tax exemption?

1:33:34Because this issue came into play with holiday end,

1:33:40and I don't know whether that was because it was

1:33:42on university land, but at the same time,

1:33:45does that definition mean anything around?

1:33:48And I'd like an answer to that,

1:33:50and that needs to be looked into with our treasure.

1:33:54Because it shouldn't play in,

1:33:55so if that definition means that,

1:33:58then we need definition.

1:34:02Okay.

1:34:03Thank you so much.

1:34:04Okay, we're moving right along.

1:34:06Anything new from Bousatil?

1:34:08Then I'm heading on over to this side to ALT next.

1:34:11Thank you, and through the mayor,

1:34:11thank you to Councillor Downard,

1:34:13that tax question as someone who does a lot of taxes,

1:34:17that was something that stuck out,

1:34:18and I actually looked at the tax act

1:34:20and I thought that was a good idea.

1:34:22Downard, I actually looked at the tax act

1:34:24around designated academic institution,

1:34:27and so I had a very similar concern and question about that.

1:34:31The question I have is, if you can help me visualize,

1:34:35do these units or rooms count,

1:34:39how do they count toward our housing pledge?

1:34:43And do we have any other examples

1:34:46of post-secondary student private residence designation,

1:34:51if you can help me understand, visualize that.

1:34:53I'm familiar with the holiday in,

1:34:56but I'm wondering Chancellor's way,

1:34:58any others, can you kind of point me in that?

1:35:01And the reason I'm asking that is the concern

1:35:03around the ownership of that

1:35:05and the condolizing and the affordability of this.

1:35:10So if you can help me, point me to something

1:35:13so that I can think about that.

1:35:21Through you, Mayor Guthrie to Councillor Busuttil.

1:35:24Definitely the two that you mentioned,

1:35:27so the holiday in conversion to student residence

1:35:31and the Chancellor's way properties

1:35:33are both privately managed, large student rentals.

1:35:38Only the holiday in or 601 Scottsdale

1:35:41is a different unit model,

1:35:45so it's predominantly individual rooms being let

1:35:50with no kitchens, so it's a bit different.

1:35:54These are more of a standard apartment unit proposed

1:35:57with a kitchen and living space.

1:36:02Thank you.

1:36:03And the other piece of that was,

1:36:04how does this count towards our housing pledge

1:36:06and affordability as well as a developer?

1:36:10Are they seeking relief as affordable build?

1:36:20Yeah, through the Mayor to Councillor Busuttil,

1:36:21the only comment we have is what the developer said

1:36:23that they were not affordable.

1:36:28And then again, just unit to unit,

1:36:31room versus housing, how does a room quantify

1:36:36in our housing pledge?

1:36:41Yeah, through the Mayor to the Councillor.

1:36:42So once the building plans come in,

1:36:45once they get to building permit stage,

1:36:47we'll look at them, but more than likely

1:36:48it will be considered an apartment.

1:36:50And so then the numbers will go to that

1:36:52if it's a full suite in the kitchen

1:36:54and everything's in the individual units.

1:36:57Thank you.

1:37:00Okay, I'm heading over to this side

1:37:02and I got three more here.

1:37:03Again, anything new please?

1:37:05Alt, Gawler, Klossum.

1:37:07Actually, I have to, with thanks to my colleagues,

1:37:10Bousatil and Downer, thank you for asking my questions.

1:37:15Great, thank you.

1:37:16Gawler, Alt and then Richardson.

1:37:21Thank you, Andrew, your worship.

1:37:23I think most of the questions that have been asked

1:37:26and I have many of the same concerns

1:37:27that were on traffic trees, the buffers,

1:37:30development charges.

1:37:32What I would like greater clarity as you go through

1:37:36the review is the impact of having this property.

1:37:43I mean, we could potentially get up to housing

1:37:47for 1,800 people in the City of Guelph.

1:37:49And we need the housing.

1:37:50We need the housing for students,

1:37:52we need the housing for families.

1:37:53But my concern is that this will not actually support

1:37:58our affordable housing targets.

1:38:02So as you go through with this,

1:38:04if you could explore any willingness from the proponent

1:38:08to actually make this dedicated rental,

1:38:10if there's any possibility,

1:38:12I think that might change many of the objections that we have.

1:38:15And if it is managed centrally,

1:38:17then I think it would be different

1:38:19than individual property owners and residents.

1:38:22So just wanted to ask for that.

1:38:24Thank you, worship.

1:38:26Okay, thank you.

1:38:27Koss and then Richardson.

1:38:31My colleagues have asked my question, so thank you.

1:38:35Perfect.

1:38:37And through you, Mary Guthrie, to probably staff,

1:38:40I am concerned about the balconies and terraces.

1:38:43And just wondering, is there any regulations

1:38:46or best practices for student housing?

1:38:48Because I don't believe there are any balconies

1:38:50or terraces on any of the student housing at the university.

1:38:57Thank you.

1:38:59Did you want an answer to that or was that a takeaway?

1:39:01I'm sorry.

1:39:02Yeah, just a takeaway.

1:39:03I just wondered if there was any best practices

1:39:05or if we are aware of any regulations regarding that

1:39:08when it's dedicated student housing.

1:39:13Okay, is there anything further at all?

1:39:15I think just a councillor or Rourke wanted me

1:39:17just to circle back.

1:39:18I think she just had one more quick comment on a definition.

1:39:21Go right ahead.

1:39:22Thank you, Mary Guthrie.

1:39:24So we know there's gonna be a building here

1:39:28with housing for students.

1:39:30We know we need it.

1:39:31All of those things are true.

1:39:33I just wanna say the language here matters so much.

1:39:37How we define this private post-secondary school residence

1:39:41can really matter so much.

1:39:44We heard the proponents say it has nothing to do with U of G.

1:39:47We heard them say we're not precluding people

1:39:49who wanna live here.

1:39:50We heard them say maybe they can be sold.

1:39:53So this, there's no resemblance really

1:39:56to the administration of a residence with an RA

1:40:00and rules and on campus.

1:40:03So I'm really concerned about how we define this building.

1:40:08I don't know why specialized apartment is insufficient.

1:40:13And I'm very concerned exactly because of the application

1:40:16at 601 Scottsdale where they are saying

1:40:19that because they serve primarily students

1:40:22that they are exempt from property taxes.

1:40:25So the city loses a hotel

1:40:27and we lose the property taxes and we lose the mat tax.

1:40:30So that's a fair trade off because we need the housing.

1:40:34However, I think we really need to be extremely cautious

1:40:38around the definition, especially as it pertains

1:40:42to the post-secondary school residence.

1:40:46And I would also implore people to still stay clear

1:40:50on the definitions when we're talking about units

1:40:53or bedrooms, it gets very confusing.

1:40:54The parking is based on this one,

1:40:56but the density is based on this other one.

1:40:59I'm looking for clarity in this application

1:41:02and I'm looking for fairness.

1:41:06Great, thank you.

1:41:07Thank you very much.

1:41:09I am going to say ditto to everything,

1:41:17but I'm gonna go back on my word

1:41:18and just add one extra for emphasis.

1:41:21And that was, because I want the developer to hear it,

1:41:25it's the buffer, the buffer issue for me,

1:41:29whether that's trees or a berm or fencing or something.

1:41:33I don't know what it is, but that is a big takeaway for me.

1:41:37So just other than that ditto to everything else.

1:41:43And then I do have two extra questions then

1:41:46for clarity and moving forward to staff.

1:41:49And that is under the planning act

1:41:54when we sit here as a council,

1:41:56is it any relevance on us

1:42:03to have to continue to ask about the ownership

1:42:09on how things are done?

1:42:12Is that part of our decision-making,

1:42:14it might be part of our own personal decision-making process,

1:42:17I understand that, but from a regulation point

1:42:19of view of a planning act, are we, does it matter?

1:42:24Should it matter that something is

1:42:27from an ownership perspective,

1:42:28oh, we're going to sell it as condo,

1:42:31or oh, they're gonna be rental

1:42:32and we're gonna own the whole thing?

1:42:35I was under the impression that that is,

1:42:38it might be difficult, I understand that part,

1:42:40but it doesn't come into play under the planning act

1:42:44on the ownership of how something is decided upon.

1:42:49So can I just get clarity on that?

1:42:54Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

1:42:55So no, sorry, yes, you are correct.

1:42:59So the ownership at this stage does not matter.

1:43:03We talk about, our zoning by law and official plan

1:43:05is units and not what type of tenure it is,

1:43:10whether it's rental or home ownership.

1:43:13It only matters if it is a rental building

1:43:17that goes to convert in the future to condominium

1:43:20and we do have policies in our official plan around that,

1:43:22around conversion and to ensure that we have a 3%

1:43:26vacancy rate before someone does convert

1:43:28from rental to private condominium.

1:43:33Okay, thank you.

1:43:35And then the final thing is just about

1:43:38a question of clarity around the terrace.

1:43:40I know that Richardson, Councillor Richardson,

1:43:42kind of threw the higher arching kind of question

1:43:45out there, which I appreciate,

1:43:46but if this was a senior's residence

1:43:51and it had terraces, I don't think we hear anything about it.

1:43:56So I'm wondering under,

1:44:01I'm wondering under like the planning act, again,

1:44:04kind of how we can say yes or no to something

1:44:09that is a behavioral issue,

1:44:12potential behavioral issue and not an amenity issue.

1:44:17Because if under the human rights code, we can't people zone,

1:44:23then can we also in that same vein say,

1:44:26well, you can use a terrace, but you can't.

1:44:29Because I wasn't really, you know,

1:44:30this will shock everybody, but I certainly was not a part

1:44:33of your when I went to post secondary school.

1:44:35I was very boring.

1:44:37So I would have enjoyed a terrace

1:44:39and I would have been respectful.

1:44:41So it's a behavioral issue.

1:44:43I know the executive team is laughing at my comment

1:44:45about that, but I guess I'm trying to figure out

1:44:49what is a planning issue and what is a behavioral issue

1:44:55in our scope as decision makers on how we go with that,

1:44:59not discounting the concerns or not.

1:45:01I just want to know the degree of how much ability we have

1:45:05to actually make that as a decision under the planning act

1:45:10versus what our thoughts are on it from a behavioral issue.

1:45:14And that's it, that's it for me.

1:45:17Okay, so with that, I will call the vote

1:45:21and for anyone that's kind of joining us here

1:45:23and maybe first time or maybe watching

1:45:25or listening from home,

1:45:26we are not making a decision tonight on approving anything.

1:45:30This is just a, I hate to say the word,

1:45:32but a formality of just accepting the invitation,

1:45:35not the invitation, the application into city hall

1:45:38for our staff to be working on it.

1:45:41And then at some point we will hear back.

1:45:44So I'll go ahead and call the vote.

1:45:46Is there anyone against just receiving the application?

1:45:50All right, so I'll consider that matter closed

1:45:52and that's unanimous.

1:45:53And so thank you very much

1:45:54and thank you to the delegations that came out tonight

1:45:56and the correspondence that has come in as well

1:45:58on this matter.

1:45:59We appreciate it and to the proponent as well

1:46:01for being available to present it for questions.

1:46:04All right, we're moving right along folks