Staff remove mentions and provisions for residential development from the Ontario Reformatory Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guidelines included as Attachment-2 of the staff report. That…

1:46:34we're going to have a presentation from steven robinson our planner for the senior planner for

1:46:41for heritage for the city and we have two three four we got five people that have signed up as

1:46:50delegations so steven we'll start with you and uh and then we'll move on to our delegations after

1:46:58that okay so thank you very much steven thank you mayor Guthrie mayor Guthrie and members of council

1:47:10senior staff and all who have joined us for this meeting in person and online i am very pleased to

1:47:18bring you the to bring your heritage planning staff report on the final major step in the

1:47:25Ontario reformatory heritage conservation district designation project i want to start by introducing

1:47:32myself or maybe reintroducing myself i'm steven robinson the senior heritage planner for the city

1:47:38i'm joined to my right by heidi shop of wsp heidi has been the consultant team lead for the entire

1:47:47second phase or the plan phase of the or hcd project the staff report before you provides

1:47:55background on the work completed to date a summary of consultation and engagement activities

1:48:02feedback received and actions taken in response to comments and concerns raised

1:48:09i just want to touch on what i feel are a few key points in order to help inform council's

1:48:15consideration of staff's recommendations regarding the or hcd staff's recommendations are to proceed

1:48:24to designate the area within the approved boundary as the or hcd under part five of the

1:48:29Ontario heritage act and also to adopt the associated or hcd district plan and guidelines

1:48:37as presented in attachment to of the staff report it has been a long and winding road

1:48:46that we started on together five years ago in 2021 when council directed staff to initiate a

1:48:53heritage conservation district study for the former ontario reformatory lands the or hcd

1:49:00project has included community consultation and key audience engagement to better understand the

1:49:07community association and other connections with the ontario reformatory site and to identify key

1:49:13considerations and priorities for the or hcd plan the following audiences were involved in the

1:49:20engagement they would be the heritage advisory committee the community and landowner group

1:49:26which is made up of key community groups and owners of property within the hcd study area

1:49:32who have a special interest or involvement in the with the study area members of the public

1:49:39people who live in work in and visit guelph and people from other communities with a connection to

1:49:45or interest in the study area the mississaugas of the credit first nation and the six nations of

1:49:51the grand river elected council in addition virtual engagement tools were used throughout the or hcd

1:49:59study and plan to gather feedback on the hcd process and that virtual and virtual engagement

1:50:06tools were hosted on the city's have your page engagement website the community engagement

1:50:12feedback received as part of the or hc study has informed the development of the or hcd plan

1:50:21so you'll remember that back in march 21st 2023 city council approved the recommendations from the

1:50:27or hcd study as well as the proposed boundary and that's you can see that as attachment one of the

1:50:36staff report the council also directed that a heritage conservation district plan and guidelines

1:50:42be prepared for the lands within the hcd boundary the initial draft of the or hcd plan and guidelines

1:50:50was released for council and public review and comment on november 1st 2024 and considered at

1:50:57the council planning meeting held november 13th and continuing on november 26th the meeting served

1:51:04as the statutory public meeting for the project under the provisions of the ontario heritage act

1:51:10at the public meeting council considered the petition for the establishment of a national

1:51:14urban park within the or hcd boundary and indicated support in principle staff continue to hold the

1:51:22position that although the national urban park initiative has received support in principle from

1:51:28council and subsequently from the heritage advisory committee the urban park is not a city led project

1:51:35and it's important to understand that the urban park initiative would be subject to a federal

1:51:40application process that is separate from the or hcd plan and project comments and feedback from

1:51:48the public meeting on in november of 2024 the the heritage advisory committee's workshop session in

1:51:56january of 2025 and the public and from the public through the may 2025 public open house

1:52:02and online engagement have been considered by staff and the consultant in the preparation of the

1:52:08revised and final draft of the or hcd plan that's presented in attachment to the report

1:52:16some key revisions to the plan include the following the final plan has been updated to

1:52:23include stronger language throughout words like should and seek to or terms like seek to

1:52:30have been replaced with shall where appropriate plain language summaries were added throughout

1:52:36the plan to help readers understand the intent of policy and guideline heavy sections the community

1:52:43value placed on greenspace and recreational use has been noted and i want to point out that it's

1:52:49important to understand that as per the approved gid secondary plan adaptive reuse already permits

1:52:57a mix of uses including institutional educational commercial office light industrial and open

1:53:05space and park in a form that respects the heritage attributes of the or hcd section 5.1 of the plan

1:53:14proposes an overlay for adapt for land use in the adaptive reuse area of the gid including the

1:53:24three areas called the or chl core the adaptive reuse areas a and b now you can see these you

1:53:35probably have them bookmarked already i'm sure but uh if you'd like to look at them again in

1:53:40attachment to they're on page 48 otherwise known as pdf page 56 so the the areas i'm referring to

1:53:50the core area is signified in yellow the adaptive reuse area a is a light green and the adaptive

1:53:59reuse area b is dark blue all within a black dashed line that indicates the adaptive reuse

1:54:07area established by the gid secondary plan so the intent of this overlay is to illustrate the

1:54:17recommended policies in section 5.1 of the or hcd plan so new development and significant

1:54:25landscape alterations are not proposed by the plan in the chl core area they're they're not

1:54:32proposed but if those were would be proposed those would be carefully considered as the core is really

1:54:41as its name signifies it's really the core area of the the reformatory heritage conservation district

1:54:49the or hcd plan recommends that from a heritage conservation perspective the recommended land

1:54:55use for adaptive reuse area a which is sometimes known as the front yard is open space and park

1:55:03in a form that respects and aligns with the presence of landscape heritage attributes in this portion

1:55:09of the hcd the plan recommends land use options within adaptive reuse area b the larger dark blue

1:55:18area to the rear and side of the main block of reformatory buildings that those land use options

1:55:26include in institutional educational commercial office and residential policy recommendations

1:55:35presented in this section and in the associated guidelines they still include parameters for

1:55:41development so the city staff have the ability to contemplate and control residential or other

1:55:49use and have underlined this if if proposal of this type were to arise this has changed from

1:55:57the public meeting and staff have made changes to contemplate residential if it were to arise

1:56:05we know this is controversial but since the secondary plan was approved there is federal

1:56:10provincial and local attention to housing the lack of housing and affordability staff feel it is

1:56:17important to have in the or hcd policies that address residential if it were to occur versus

1:56:25having no policies related to housing and thus the hcd not being applicable if the block plan for

1:56:34process proposed to change the land uses already approved in the adaptive reuse area within the

1:56:41gid secondary plan council would have to decide and council would have to decide whether to support

1:56:48the changes through amendments to the zoning bylaw and the official plan if that were to occur the

1:56:55or hcd would already contain policies that would help to control the built form of that land use

1:57:01change the change in land use would not occur because of the or hcd plan it would be a result

1:57:08of council changing course in its official plan and gid secondary plan so in in order to provide

1:57:17time for the public to review the final draft of the plan and guideline the release was announced

1:57:23at the january 15th meeting of the heritage advisory committee and it was made available on the or hcd

1:57:30project engagement page on have you say and also on the city's or hcd web page i have to apologize

1:57:38for constantly repeating those acronyms but it's better than rhyming out the entire words

1:57:46the heritage advisory committee indicated unanimous support for the or hcd plan at their meeting of

1:57:52february 5th in 2026 so next steps if council passes the proposed heritage designation bylaw

1:58:02for the or hcd which you can see as attachment three in the staff report notice would be published

1:58:10and a 30 day appeal period would begin if no notice of appeal is received the bylaw comes

1:58:16into force the day following the last day of the appeal period that's not really new information

1:58:25but what's also very important is something i refer to often as prevent provincial exemption

1:58:31it's important to understand that municipal heritage designation bylaws and the requirement

1:58:37of heritage permit approvals under part four and part five of the entera heritage act are not

1:58:44in force in effect on property that is under provincial ownership province of anterio is

1:58:50currently the owner of 785 york road the largest property within the or hcd boundary which contains

1:58:57most of the existing built heritage resources so finally i'd like to to address what i've

1:59:05subtitled losing non designated properties on the heritage register many of the heritage

1:59:11attributes in the or hcd have pending protection by the city of guelph in its approval in 2021

1:59:19of a heritage designation bylaw for 785 york road however not all built heritage resources

1:59:26or cultural heritage landscapes within that property were named as heritage attributes to

1:59:31be protected by that bylaw at the time that council at that same time council directed staff to list

1:59:38additional resources as non designated properties on the municipal register of cultural heritage

1:59:44properties council motion included built heritage resources that the province has since demolished

1:59:52and has plans to demolish and those being the the reformatory wooden trestle railway bridge

1:59:59and more recently the powerhouse chimney stack and service tunnel to the powerhouse

2:00:07in november 2022 the government of anterio made changes to the heritage act through bills 23 and

2:00:13185 that would remove that will remove all non designated properties from the municipal registers

2:00:21as of january 1st 2027 so that's next year therefore the following built heritage resources

2:00:28and cultural heritage landscape would be removed from our municipal heritage register and have no

2:00:34heritage status or protection under the heritage act those would be the chapel building the wood

2:00:40kiln building laning mill and stores the woollen mill building and the reformatory quarry area

2:00:48which is a cultural heritage landscape being part of 80 dunlop drive

2:00:54as these extant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes have been included

2:00:59as heritage attributes in the or hcd they would be protected by the approval of the proposed

2:01:07hcd plan or and by or bylaw i should say i will be happy to provide any clarification

2:01:15for you or to answer any questions that you may have thank you great thank you very much for

2:01:22that overview we appreciate it well what we'll do is we'll get right into the delegations and then

2:01:27come back to see if there's any questions afterwards just so we can hear the delegations first and so

2:01:32with that i did say that we have about five are you going to join me on this side thank you very

2:01:40much i feel lonely over here um susan ratt cliff i think susan here in person no okay we'll jump to

2:01:54the next one uh and that is is it lin uh pistare yep i'm just waiting for it to come on the video

2:02:09can you see me oh uh not yet but we can hear you okay yeah thank you very much for joining us

2:02:17it's maria gathry speaking and just for yourself and for anyone else that's going to come up or

2:02:21join us today uh it is no more than five minutes that you're allowed to speak at the four minute

2:02:29and thirty second mark there's like a chime or a bell that goes off to give you a thirty second

2:02:34warning uh and unfortunately at the five minute mark you are cut off your microphone is turned off

2:02:40so let's not get there and then uh uh stick around just in case that there is any questions from

2:02:45myself or my colleagues okay so your time starts then whenever you're you're starting okay you go

2:02:51right ahead okay uh thank you to the mayor and council for providing this opportunity for me to

2:02:58speak today i am the chair of york lands green hub and come as a representative to speak with you

2:03:04all and as many of you know we have been working to preserve this site for over 12 years and are in

2:03:09full support of establishing a national urban park there as others um as as others will have be

2:03:18addressing the inclusion of parameters around residential development in the orcd plan which

2:03:25is actually not included in the list even mentioned earlier we also do not support any residential

2:03:30development on the orlands now or in the future and given that this plan will likely take precedence

2:03:37over other planning documents in the event of a conflict with existing municipal zoning and other

2:03:43bylaws that were in place before the orcd we respectfully request that council refrain from

2:03:49approving the final draft until residential development guidelines are replaced with the

2:03:54natural cultural heritage guidelines to reflect the significance of the site and the public's wishes

2:04:01i also want to point out some concerns about the project to widen york road and the potential

2:04:07impacts on clive creek if it if it is realigned to clarify we are very glad to hear that sidewalks

2:04:14and bike lanes will be added as the current conditions on the road are quite hazardous

2:04:19to any pedestrians or cyclists however realigning clive creek is a different matter as this section

2:04:25of the or property contains some of the richest heritage features in this home to many wildlife

2:04:30species including turtles mink otter ducks herons and other extra species we understand that the

2:04:37current historic weirs in the creek are destructive to cold water fish like brook trout and that ideally

2:04:43for the sake of maximizing biodiversity they should be removed however oversight and careful examination

2:04:50is needed to determine the best way forward and to examine the latest information available but what

2:04:56was there originally before the creek recently maps have been found on the property as far back as

2:05:021847 by brian scarrett which shows that the creek led into a large wetland called cedar swamp this

2:05:09indicates that we don't know for sure if brook trout ever swam through that creek out also are the

2:05:15findings of the recommendations in the clive creek sub watershed study going that is going on right now

2:05:22and whether that is going to be part of the planning and design process this study ties

2:05:27into the whole residential development question as the sub water state states on page 221 under

2:05:34current conditions there are significant flood risks for property infrastructure and persons

2:05:38during a significant storm event within lands associated with york road watson parkway north

2:05:45watson road north reformatory lands and other lands within the golf innovation district

2:05:51what we are advocating for is much more fulsome examination of clive creek with public input to

2:05:57determine the best way forward to ensure both biodiversity is enhanced and the cultural heritage

2:06:03features are preserved as much as possible as well as the implementation of heritage permits

2:06:09for any changes being proposed for the to the heritage features also it's very unclear whether

2:06:15provisions in the or hcd plan will apply to this strip of land being purchased or not

2:06:21other questions we have are what happens to get what happens to getting access to the property

2:06:26during this construction many people rely on this space for walking daily with their dogs and

2:06:31families to connect with nature and relieve stress in conclusion we urge council to take the

2:06:36necessary time to carefully consider the long-term impacts of all proposed changes to the or lands

2:06:43our community hugely values the unique natural and cultural heritage of this site

2:06:48and it's essential that future decisions prioritize ecological integrity public access and

2:06:53the preservation of heritage features for generations to come and we look forward to

2:06:58ongoing dialogue and collaboration to ensure the or lands remained a vibrant healthy and

2:07:03accessible green space for all residents thank you thank you so much for your delegation

2:07:10is there a follow-up for our delegate okay councillor Gibson please hi thank you through

2:07:17mr. mayor and thank you Lynn for joining us today i'll commit to asking staff that same question

2:07:23i was under the impression in the capital budget of a few years ago that the the york road

2:07:29redevelopment approach was significantly rescoped to avoid the um realignment of plight creek

2:07:34but i'll commit to asking that to staff during question periods as well okay thank you

2:07:40councillor Allt and then councillor Goller questions of the delegate please thank you very much mayor

2:07:46gathley through you to the delegate mrs. basbari you made reference to concerns for residential

2:07:56development and your opposition to it i was wondering if you could outline what the foundations of

2:08:02your opposition might be please um it's it's because of the the well the issue around the flood

2:08:10plains um and the the um statement in the clive creek sub watershed study characterization report

2:08:19that says that any large event of a storm event could you know could cause quite a lot of flooding

2:08:29in that area um as estates in that in that study that's that's uh currently been released that the

2:08:35characterization report um and also just the sheer biodiversity um that's in that piece of land

2:08:44it's it's just we're losing more and more biodiversity um and we're facing climate change

2:08:49and we're just you know we keep paving over everything and it's just i don't think this is the right

2:08:56piece of land to put more housing and i don't i don't personally believe that the housing that

2:09:03will go there will be affordable it will be large 1.4 million houses most likely if anything goes there

2:09:10um and so i'm just that's why we're very much opposed and plus it will will have a huge impact on

2:09:18all of the the um the green space that's there the biodiversity the um the you know all of the

2:09:25features the heritage features um that are there it will you know it will have an impact on that so

2:09:34thank you very much i might ask this question staff and perhaps even another delegate

2:09:40great thank you councillor Allt and just as a reminder this is not an official plan report in

2:09:45front of us to change or add any zoning of residential at all okay just as a reminder

2:09:51um and i think i had one more question was it you councillor go ahead uh thank you

2:09:56through your worship to to the delegate thank you thank you so much um for your delegation

2:10:01i i heard um our senior planner say clearly that if the city does not include provisions

2:10:11to address the eventuality of of the province saying you can build housing here then the plan

2:10:17would not apply so just just wanted to hear your thoughts on that lin would it be worth to you

2:10:23risking having the plan not be applicable um by by removing the provision of what to do if we have to

2:10:32if this is sold privately and it is you know the province says this is now residential

2:10:38well it it i think it by including it it implies that that the city is on board for residential

2:10:46development they're good to be going there um it introduces the idea um in the first place um

2:10:56and i think that that and it doesn't wouldn't necessarily like if if the or hcd plan was put

2:11:04in place then um that would be the the ultimate word and and nobody would be able to provide any

2:11:13input into any um after that so um sorry i'm not a planning expert um and i'm you know trying to

2:11:24answer the question the best of my ability at this point but for that's my understanding that the or hcd

2:11:29plan would take precedence over any other um kind of um planning processes where public the public

2:11:38is allowed input okay okay no thank you for that and i will be asking that question of staff when

2:11:43it comes time to that thank you so much thank you thank you there's nothing nothing further at this

2:11:50time lin thank you as well for joining us we appreciate it great thank you and i saw susan

2:11:58wrackliffe walk in tada come on down yep yep come on down yeah thanks for joining us uh you were uh

2:12:13you were number one on our list you're now number two you're still in the top two so that's good uh

2:12:18you know the drill here no more than five minutes okay susan and uh you'll hear the chime at four

2:12:24minutes thirty second mark the time starts when you start go right ahead at the city of guelph we

2:12:29believe that meaningful engagement is the cornerstone of progress this is why we ensure that your voice

2:12:36is part of the city's decision-making process as we work towards making guelph an inclusive connected

2:12:44prosperous city where we look after each other in our environment why should you engage because your

2:12:52voice matters i'm quoting from the community engagement policy meaningful engagement is the

2:12:59cornerstone of progress we ensure that your voice matters really i mean really since 2013 you have

2:13:10ignored citizen voices on the matter of the ontario reformatory lands since 2013 yorkland's green hub

2:13:18has been advocating for the preservation of the orc land or lands since 2013 we have conducted

2:13:27walks arranged talks run summer camps and even cleaned the garbage weekly in june 2021 we gathered

2:13:3531 delegations over 300 letters and emails that advocated for this hdcd plan citizens applauded

2:13:45the decision and participated in great numbers in the consultations for this plan 15 pages on have

2:13:54your say 125 citizens at the first public meeting but did our voices really matter according to the

2:14:04staff report for today's meeting no not at all we specifically insisted not just on stronger

2:14:14language and correct grammar and spelling we insisted on removing all references to allowing

2:14:21or managing residential or commercial commercial development on these lands now the final draft

2:14:29says numerous comments subjected to the proposed residential land use in the orcd especially

2:14:37in the adaptive reuse area the community highly values the green space and recreational character

2:14:45of the or lands and do not see residential land use as an appropriate land use designation

2:14:53our meaningful engagement has been once again been dismissed the staff report acknowledges the

2:15:00community's robust engagement in all stages of the process the staff report then dismisses

2:15:08both the value of the or lands and the input of the community with the following sentence the policy

2:15:17record recommendations presented in section six still include the parameters for development

2:15:25so that city staff have the ability to contemplate and control residential or other uses if a

2:15:33proposal of this type were to arrive the public does not want residential or community development

2:15:41commercial development where else in Guelph is there a property with two lakes a heritage river

2:15:48community trails unique stone walls a place to take your whole family including dogs to fish kayak

2:15:56fly kites go rock climbing or have outdoor concerts in the limestone amphitheater bridal

2:16:04parties would not have to stand in front of fake red hearts they can pose on a lovely arched bridge

2:16:11or a beautiful causeway between two lakes allowing residential development on these lands

2:16:19would totally destroy any economic and tourism potential in Kingston penitentiary tours

2:16:27bring in millions of dollars every year to the local community and recent research shows that

2:16:33kids and adults who spend more time in nature are happier and healthier across Canada doctors are

2:16:41now involved in Canada's national evidence-based nature prescription program these lands with

2:16:49their mature forests and extensive open areas offer unique opportunities for time in nature

2:16:56so I ask you as an engaged citizen of Guelph to remove all reference to development from this

2:17:04hcd plan I ask you to follow your own strong statements on citizen engagement and I ask you

2:17:13to listen to citizens reject the staff report recommendations and this unacceptable hcd plan

2:17:22recommendation for residential use thank you great thank you very much and is there a follow-up

2:17:29for Susan countercard thank you very much for your presentation Ms. Radcliffe we heard at the

2:17:40beginning that we are under a timeline that we have until January 1st 2027 to get many of these

2:17:47buildings protected otherwise they they will not have protection I wanted to understand from you

2:17:53if you're calling for us to to reject the plan all right and send it back are you do you feel

2:17:59concerned about the risk of of this then going back and being another year or two and and then

2:18:05leaving those lands without protection once that prevents show deadline lapses I understand we're

2:18:12paying this company a lot of money so surely they could accelerate it all we have to do is take off

2:18:17the second half of the plan that that discusses planning for residential okay and just take it

2:18:26off and the rest is fine okay that's what we ask for thank you to leave the plan but take off

2:18:33the redevelopment section thank you thank you okay thank you councillor Chew okay through you

2:18:39Mr. Mayor thank you Susan for delegating today I'm just trying to hone in on the definitions that

2:18:47are in front of the plans and it doesn't state residential it talks about adaptive reuse are

2:18:53you opposed to any any conception of you know commercial spaces that's kind of reimagined

2:19:01within the footprint of the Ontario Reformatory and and I just ask that because you know I've

2:19:07seen a lot examples like in Seattle where there's a lot of adaptive reuse but you're actually promoting

2:19:12microbreweries and tourism based commercial activities in the space it depends on the kind

2:19:19of adaptive reuse and what kind of preservation there will be Toronto says it has adaptive reuse

2:19:25when it holds up the front wall of a building and builds 20 stories on top of it that's not adaptive

2:19:33reuse so it's a it's a negotiation on what how you can protect 110 year old buildings limestones

2:19:44pretty solid it stands up and so it can be easily reused I agree but that I'm talking about the

2:19:53residential along the very front of the land and up in the area that's all the wetlands that's what

2:20:01it seems to suggest okay I appreciate that thank you great thank you very much I see nothing further

2:20:09appreciate your time thank you sorry for being me that's okay I'll let it go this time

2:20:16all right uh it's uh is it Eva uh Kuchinsky here yeah come on down

2:20:26did I say your last name right that was perfect thank you oh not bad that doesn't happen very often

2:20:31no it does not so thank you thank you very much and you've been here so you heard the spiel no more

2:20:36than five minutes yes time starts when you're ready go right ahead okay thank you you'll notice

2:20:42a similar theme here so good afternoon Mayor Gatherian counselors my name is Eva Kuchinsky

2:20:49and I'm here tonight as a board member of Yorklands Greenhub and also a resident of board too

2:20:55so I'm asking you also to defer approval of the ORHCD plan and to direct staff to remove the

2:21:01residential development provisions in adaptive reuse areas A and B to us the issue is straightforward

2:21:09this plan is being used to introduce residential development where none currently exists and where

2:21:14it doesn't belong the purpose of hcd plans is to ensure cultural heritage value is protected

2:21:21managed and enhanced through managing changes to existing heritage resources not by introducing

2:21:27new land uses that contradict existing zoning and planning documents but that's exactly what's

2:21:33happening here once this plan is approved it establishes residential as an acceptable use

2:21:40once the province sells the land and they will this policy framework will then guide further

2:21:46rezoning decisions the fundamental land use question will already have been answered

2:21:52we understand that the city's intent is that the plan is not changing current zoning just

2:21:57preparing for it if it were to arise but here's the problem residential doesn't conform to the

2:22:04official plan or the GID secondary plan for the area so why are we preparing for a use that

2:22:11isn't currently permitted unless the intent is to enable it through the hcd plan the land use

2:22:18the land use decision will ultimately get made tonight not through tonight or today not through

2:22:24proper public consultation later the community has been clear your own hcd plan acknowledges

2:22:31that numerous comments objected to the proposed residential land use and that the community

2:22:35highly values this green space and recreational character of the property despite this overwhelming

2:22:42feedback these residential provisions remain yorklands has worked for years alongside urban

2:22:47park gulf and hundreds of residents to protect the site you'll hear from brian scarott after me

2:22:54we're united in our goal of permanent protection we support the national urban park initiative

2:22:59as one strong path forward but we're open to any mechanism that achieves the same outcome

2:23:05permanent protection is accessible green space we're asking you to support our vision and not

2:23:10to undermine it i'm going to share why this matters to me personally beyond my role with

2:23:15yorklands i grew up in guelph when the city had a reputation for being green a city that cared

2:23:21about its natural spaces and its parks especially i moved away for a little over 10 years and when

2:23:27i came back it just doesn't feel the same anymore i understand the pressures you're under we need

2:23:35housing we need a new hospital these things are critically important but we're asking you to be

2:23:40strategic about where development happens this we believe this is not the right site this is

2:23:45significant green space heritage landscape natural habitat and trails in the heart of our city these

2:23:51don't come back once they're gone you can't recreate these old stone walls matured tree canopies and

2:23:57aquatic ecosystems once they're developed so on behalf of yorklands and the broader community we

2:24:03represent we're asking you to do something that takes political courage to protect the site not

2:24:08just talk about protecting it in principle while simultaneously enabling its development the city

2:24:14has a real opportunity to champion the site's protection to work with the federal government

2:24:18on the the national urban park initiative or to partner and or to partner with conservation groups

2:24:24to secure this site for current and future residents as the kind of place that makes guelph special

2:24:31so please defer approval of this plan and direct staff to remove the residential provisions

2:24:36focusing exclusively on heritage conservation which is what an hcd plan is supposed to do

2:24:42thank you thank you thank you eva and is there any follow-up questions for eva

2:24:49there is not so thank you very much did you have

2:24:54hi my hand is out sorry i'm sorry eva can you come back for a second sorry councillor clauson

2:25:00i just didn't see you there my apologies um it's probably because of that big bright window behind

2:25:06you you're i didn't see your hand when it was in the window uh go right ahead it's over to you

2:25:12yes uh thank you through you mr. mayor uh to the delegate eva thank you for coming to delegate

2:25:17alongside of your um members at yorklands green green hub and thank you for the work that you've

2:25:25done um for so many years to protect the land my question is around some of the language use

2:25:34it's clear to me that the group is opposed to all residential and including the mention of

2:25:40residential for um the adaptive reuse sites so that part is is really clear to me um if i'm

2:25:47understanding you know staff's intentions with with that policy i i am imagining a world in which

2:25:56the the province sells the land to a developer and it becomes you know they use their own

2:26:05provincial powers to create residential land maybe that wasn't super well said and i'm sorry for that

2:26:11my question is for for the group for you what if we remove all of all the references to residential

2:26:18and we lose that potential opportunity what what would be the next step what would yorklands green

2:26:24hub be doing what would the community from your perspective of course um what what would what would

2:26:30be next so i'm not a planner in terms of my education or work but we're concerned primarily that this

2:26:42opens up the this basically paves the way for so to speak for development and next i think we need to

2:26:50see the all the different there's many conservation groups and many community members that have been

2:26:55working on this for a long time and i think this warrants a conversation for everyone to come

2:26:59together and talk about what is the next step especially if we have the city as a champion

2:27:03on this issue or at least a major supporter i think there's a lot of different groups out

2:27:08there that work that can come at this from different um different views and i think there's a lot of

2:27:15potential for the site okay thank you um i think i think that answers that answers my question

2:27:28and as far as um i don't want to speak too long but as far as the existing plant

2:27:34preserve the heritage buildings you've heard my colleague ask another board member with regard

2:27:39to like preserving that the heritage buildings that are on that site we know that a lot of those

2:27:43buildings are in in in bad shape and um there are concerns about um losing more of them and so i i am

2:27:53wondering around around the timeline like is that something that are there parts of the plan

2:27:58that we want to move forward with to preserve those buildings and will will the suggestions

2:28:04that you made in your delegation will that will that be enough do you want to help me answer this

2:28:13one is it over no is that okay i'm sorry we just yeah our rules don't allow that i'm sorry yeah

2:28:20do you want to restate the question councillor quas and so maybe the delegate can answer

2:28:28and if not that's fine yeah i mean i don't want to leave it open-ended um i i think i think maybe

2:28:37i'll have some some questions for staff with regard uh to to some of the concerns that we're

2:28:42hearing here um and maybe i'll i'll leave this one uh for now okay is there anything else further

2:28:52for this delegate nothing further for real this time so thank you very much for coming thank you

2:28:59all right and brian scarott is here as well coming on down and then is alexander smith here

2:29:05okay perfect so you're in the wings okay thank you and brian your time will start whenever you're

2:29:10ready to okay terrific thank you good afternoon mayor and councillors my name is brian scarott i'm

2:29:16with urban park gulf and i'm delegating to share a concern with the heritage conservation district

2:29:22conservation plan specifically the facilitation of residential development contrary to the gid

2:29:30secondary plan when the draft conservation plan was introduced urban park gulf retained dan schneider

2:29:36heritage consulting for commentary on the plan and his comments were generally positive with one

2:29:42exception the introduction of residential land use and i quote which clearly contemplates new

2:29:48residential building construction and wrestles sometimes uncomfortably with the introduction

2:29:54of new development on the property the most problematic section is section 5.1 development

2:30:02he goes on to say that while an hcd plan trumps other municipal plans in the event of a conflict

2:30:09it is better to avoid such situations what we have here is a situation where the conservation plan

2:30:17is putting itself in conflict with our secondary plan and takes precedence precedence over our own

2:30:23zoning our secondary plan and our official plan the adaptive reuse area in the secondary plan

2:30:30was intended to be employment land the conservation plan however has divided the adaptive reuse area

2:30:36into two zones with specific building height recommendations and adaptive reuse area b is

2:30:43clearly designated residential the conservation plan claims this is designed to contemplate and

2:30:51control residential development adding the caveat if it were to arise without acknowledging that by

2:30:58adding it to this document it is by default being considered it is a self-fulfilling prophecy

2:31:06as to the concept of control adaptive reuse area b has no building height recommendations or

2:31:12restrictions the words if it were to arise are doing a lot of heavy lifting here i've heard it said

2:31:19that this somehow means the conservation plan won't take precedence over the secondary plan

2:31:24but i quote from the Ontario heritage toolkit which is very clear on this once the district plan

2:31:30is adopted its policies and objectives will take precedence in the event of conflict over our

2:31:36municipal existing zoning and other bylaws our zoning bylaw does not identify the area for

2:31:44residential use as you heard from mr. Robinson to consulate the secondary plan identifies

2:31:50adaptive reuse and defines it as institutional educational commercial office light residential

2:31:57open space and park residential is not included in that definition if we introduce residential

2:32:06land use in this plan it is adding a land use that was specifically avoided by previous councils

2:32:12and without the usual process of citizen engagement and commentary on that future use

2:32:18the conservation plan says the gid secondary plan does not identify residential land use

2:32:25since block plan four has not been prepared on the other hand it also says a block plan is required

2:32:31to be developed to specifically implement the policies of the gid secondary plan a block plan

2:32:38is subordinate to the secondary plan and is supposed to conform to the secondary plan not to rewrite

2:32:45it in this instance the secondary plan clearly envisioned a future use it identified the employment

2:32:52lands and even provided an employment target of 750 jobs in block plan area four in the column

2:33:01for residential the secondary plan reads not applicable this conservation plan would not

2:33:08only shift the lands on residential development but throws into question what happens to the

2:33:13anticipated jobs that were supposed to be here urban park wealth is not opposed to residential

2:33:21development being contemplated here it isn't even antithetical to a national urban park

2:33:27we are opposed to rezoning by other means and rewriting the secondary plan through the mechanism

2:33:32of a conservation plan this shouldn't be a forum for a discussion about residential use and

2:33:38amendments to our secondary plan a conservation plan was never intended to replace proper land

2:33:44use planning and importantly consultation introducing residential uses this way deprives

2:33:51citizens of the deliberation public participation and transparency of a zoning by-law change or

2:33:58an official plan amendment we urge council to avoid a planning conflict with our secondary plan

2:34:04and amend the conservation plan to remove residential uses this doesn't mean they can't

2:34:10be contemplated it would mean they're contemplated fully let let him put his microphone back on

2:34:18to say the last sentence one more time thank you mr mayor we mean they're contemplated fully

2:34:23and with due deliberation and public participation perfect i'm not that strict

2:34:33thank you brian um let me see if my colleagues have questions i'll go to i see councillor Allt's

2:34:39hand and councillor Goller okay so alt first please thank you very much mr mayor um i think i'll

2:34:47proceed from the last points raised by mr scarott first of all mr scarott you said that urban park

2:34:55wealth is not opposed to residential but as opposed to rewriting the official plan and yet land

2:35:02use planning so your concern is about um uh municipal democracy would that be correct i would

2:35:09say yes it's about process um we actually haven't had a meeting or a vote on whether we

2:35:17like residential or not in this context uh i think the word contemplate is very specific and

2:35:23that's what i use that i don't i didn't say we either agree with or disagree with residential here

2:35:29but we need to contemplate it specifically in a bigger context okay thank you i think you've

2:35:36answered another one of my questions so i'm just going to actually flip to the start of your presentation

2:35:41there has been discussion and i think that councillor claustin was going to raise the issue

2:35:46of timeline and i don't know whether you have any comments on that or not um if i recall what

2:35:54councillor claustin was inquiring about correctly um it was concerns about other structures being

2:36:01protected i see her nodding um the timelines that mr robinson referred to in the changes in

2:36:11the heritage act as far as i know and you can ask him more specifically uh don't really apply to a

2:36:16heritage conservation district we can uh drop an umbrella of a conservation district over the zone

2:36:22at any time and at that time the the elements within the district get protected it's not like

2:36:30there's a ticking clock waiting and and that we never get a chance to go back i think that's that's

2:36:36my understanding of the process at this point it's it's a little dissimilar to the items that we

2:36:41have on the heritage register uh which will you know disappear from the register but if if anything in

2:36:47the heritage register not unlike we are doing right now with the downtown conservation district

2:36:52or the future ward west conservation district uh if the ward west conservation district doesn't get

2:36:57established in time when it does get established the buildings that get achieve its protection

2:37:05will still be protected thank you and i think it's the last question uh mr mayor through you to

2:37:12mr scott i'm going to forego the specifics of the housing i heard you say that there's not concerns

2:37:19about housing per se but the adaptive reuse is intriguing to me there's been great debate on

2:37:25adaptive reuse in a hospital in this space uh how does this fit into the the notion that you've

2:37:31been presenting for i think about 10 years of an urban park in that area uh you know with due respect

2:37:40councillor this isn't a conversation about the national urban park i think staff was very clear

2:37:45about that um you know i'm happy to have another conversation with anybody here about that but

2:37:51this is about specifically the land use planning in a heritage conservation district and you know

2:37:56urban park wall happens to have a level of expertise on this site and that's why we

2:38:00chosen to delegate to this apologies to you apologies to everybody i think i could have

2:38:06asked that question another way then thank you thank you mr mayor yep no problem thank you councillor

2:38:12uh goller and that's it thank you and through your worship to mr scarrot thank you for your

2:38:17presentation um and um thank you for the letters that you wrote i wanted to go back to the comment

2:38:23that i heard from staff that unless we um include that consideration for a residential if the province

2:38:31next week were to say okay we're going to make it residential and then we're going to sell it to

2:38:35a private developer there would be no protections in place for for the parcel so could you tell me you

2:38:41well my understanding is that if it were sold let's say that the province simply sells it okay there's

2:38:47no caveats they don't make any land use changes if the province sells it to a developer uh the

2:38:54developer and and there was nothing here in the conservation plan to speak to uh protections

2:38:59or development the developer still has to go through due process we have to change the secondary

2:39:06plan we have to change the zoning bylaws and that's where we get the fulsome discussion and the public

2:39:11participation which i think everybody wants so that's part of the the safety mechanism that we see

2:39:18that we're not we're not trying to remove safety mechanisms we're trying to ensure that a they are

2:39:23there and that be the public gets that chance to participate and then the the corollary to that is

2:39:29that if we insert this here it removes all those that that opportunity to participate in that engagement

2:39:38okay i appreciate that thank you great thank you i just one more uh brian from council or

2:39:43richardson please and thank you through you mr mayor too mr scarrett um i agree with you i i think

2:39:50that you know we do want due process and we want it done uh democratically i think part of my concern

2:39:57is that the province has total control and can change the zone change the zoning at any time so

2:40:02they can sell it to a developer change the zoning and i'm concerned that and please correct me if

2:40:09i'm wrong or if you have a different opinion that if we don't have any parameters in there that speaks

2:40:13to residential we would have very little control over that you too um although

2:40:23if the province indeed has that level of control they'll exercise it anyway right they can actually

2:40:31abolish the hergers conservation district they can choose not to to obey any of the rules that we set

2:40:37out so what we do really by introducing it here there's a concept called anticipatory obedience

2:40:45and uh you know this is this is planning for something and we're anticipating

2:40:49that this is going to come down so we're going to obey and and put this into the

2:40:52the conservation plan even though we we know it doesn't belong even though it creates conflict

2:40:58with our own planning documents seeing nothing further thank you very much thank you and last is

2:41:07uh alexander smith who's coming on down thank you your worship counselors staff members of the public

2:41:37i'm grateful for an opportunity to make some brief submissions i want to begin by

2:41:43acknowledging that the reformatory plan is largely an excellent excellent document

2:41:50but in my respectful submission it contains a serious flaw that is the inclusion of residential

2:41:57development in the plan the plan acknowledges the feedback from the public express concerns with

2:42:06the inclusion of residential land use within the adaptive reuse area that concern was loud and

2:42:15unanimous i note parenthetically that every written submission received by council for today

2:42:21today's discussion raised the same concern how did the reformatory hcd plan respond to these

2:42:29concerns it doubled down on the inclusion of residential development by elevating it from

2:42:36a potential land use on a list to a recommended land use in the present iteration staff takes

2:42:46the position that by approving the report as prevented presented council will not be making

2:42:53a land use planning decision rather the plan includes and i quote parameters for development

2:43:00so that city staff have the ability to contemplate and control residential or other uses if a

2:43:08proposal of this type were to arise with the greatest of respect that position is naive in

2:43:15the extreme not only does the inclusion of residential development in the adaptive reuse

2:43:22areas inform any future planning decision by council it also constrains future planning

2:43:30decisions having recommended residential development as an adaptive reuse council can

2:43:38hardly resist an application to approve a residential zoning in the reformatory hcd if the city reaches

2:43:47the conclusion at some future date that residential development is not appropriate in the reformatory

2:43:54hcd because it is not compatible with the preserve preservation of the cultural heritage assets

2:44:02that the city is protected under part four of the heritage act or for general zoning reasons

2:44:10the reformatory hcd plan as written will prevent the city from mounting a credible legal argument

2:44:17that no portion of the reformatory hcd should be zoned residential approving this plan with the

2:44:25inclusion of a recommendation for residential development as potential land use will represent

2:44:32number one bad planning the reformatory hcd plan is intended to and i quote ensure that the cultural

2:44:41heritage value or interest of the anterior reformatory is protected managed maintained

2:44:47and enhanced over time introduction of a land a new land use residential in the cultural heritage

2:44:56plan is bad planning particularly when the city has already had a land use planning document the gid

2:45:05secondary plan that does not approve residential development within the area now identified as the

2:45:12proposed reformatory heritage conservation district if you decide to change the proposed land use

2:45:20that decision should be made through the land use planning process not through the cultural heritage

2:45:27protection process and i should say the staff suggestion that if you do not control

2:45:36residential development through the plan it will be vault you won't will not be able to control it

2:45:44in the future in my respectful submission is fallacious you will still have the land the same

2:45:51land use planning and zoning tools that you have to any residential development secondly

2:45:59it shows lack of due diligence there are foreign theory hcd plan consents no analysis as to why

2:46:06the residential development should be included in the adaptive reuse areas as no analysis of the

2:46:12impact that residential development will have on the cultural assets as such it provides a

2:46:19perilous record to defend any decision council may make and finally i would urge that you amend

2:46:26the report by deleting the reference to residential development and approving it and that can be

2:46:35thank you sir thank you i appreciate that that can be done very easily by revising two barographs

2:46:44in section five and one heading and in my respectful submission could be done very quickly indeed

2:46:51thank you sir is there any questions for this delicate at all uh seeing and hearing none thank

2:46:58you very much thank you okay everyone it's back to us and um just at the very least can i ask

2:47:10someone to at least just move the recommendation so richardson and galler has moved the recommendation

2:47:17and you know what i just wouldn't mind just for a moment i'm putting you on the spot i

2:47:23didn't even give you a heads up but to our planning staff and and maybe to our consultant as well i

2:47:30think the the issue in the room is what we're hearing from the delegations and the and some of

2:47:35the questions that are coming from my colleagues around this residential issue so would you like

2:47:41to respond to that first before questions go to council please and if you don't want to that's

2:47:49fine just tell me i'll go to questions but guess what i can guarantee one of them's gonna ask anyways

2:47:54so anybody want to respond thank you uh merica three um so yes it's absolutely a complicated

2:48:05issue and we have had the provision for residential in this hcd um it was an is staff's belief that

2:48:14ensuring that we have a heritage conservation district that anticipates it was the prudent

2:48:20thing for staff to bring forward um it is known that this whole plan is not applicable to the

2:48:26province um if the province was to sell the land and we have no indication currently that they are

2:48:34although i think it's very well known that they previously had this land up for sale so if it was

2:48:41sold given this recent changes to the planning legislation i would suspect it would come with

2:48:46it with a minister zoning order and the zoning would be in place um it was staff's desire to

2:48:52ensure that we had policies that would protect any type of future land use in the heritage

2:48:58conservation district so that's why we do have it in there if contemplated um if the province

2:49:03sold the land without an mz or any conditions um then there's the standard planning process first

2:49:11you have to do the block plan similarly similar to what was brought before council recently on

2:49:16gid one and two with here's our overall concept plan and then they would come back with this is

2:49:21the official plan request and zoning request so um if it's a traditional process process excellent

2:49:28but if it's not a traditional process i believe staff have ensured that we have heritage protections

2:49:34for the uses that are there too in the natural landscapes as they go forward any future development

2:49:39would have to do a comprehensive plan they'd have to look you know we we heard comments about the

2:49:44natural environment you'd have to do an eis and ensure you know where those you know final lines are

2:49:50so all of that would have to happen but it could come forward with uh with a different land use

2:49:55and staff wanted to ensure that we had covered that that off i did like the the term that you

2:50:03know mr scarrett used the uh anticipatory obedience um but in this day and age i i do think it's a fair

2:50:11a fair comment for us across the across the river um we did have a change by the province

2:50:18in land use in height in density and um we so yes so yes we put it in there as a consideration if

2:50:25considered um it does not mean it has to happen um you know we also could see uh on those lands to

2:50:33you know as it went forward we could see a fulfillment center like a large industrial

2:50:38fulfillment center would also be permitted on those lands if it went through again the traditional

2:50:43process or come forward as an as an m zero so um yes we have put that in there and i was purposeful

2:50:52and we are planning for what could come down the pipe in the future and depending what path um

2:50:58it goes forward if it's sold then um i feel that we've covered off this the city's interests and

2:51:05the heritage conservation policies which is is truly what this is about um if it's retained by the

2:51:10province um it it's not applicable and is um was indicated by by staff that you know the the province

2:51:17is looking at removing a few other of the um buildings on that site and that may continue as well

2:51:26thank you before i go to go to council or all just after this as a follow-up if you don't mind then

2:51:31so um what's the i'm trying to get i think to another part of the the question which is

2:51:39um so thank you for the response to what you've heard from our delegates but

2:51:42um give us give us the scenario then if residential is removed if council decides right now to remove

2:51:50residential and then the province does um do what you said um then the impacts to that land

2:52:01from us from a like a tool or a mechanism point of view would be what would happen then so thank

2:52:09thank you mr mayor for that follow-up um so without having the contemplated uh residential the policy

2:52:16we do we'd have no residential policies in a heritage conservation district if it were to become

2:52:20residential and the heritage conservation policies are not applicable to that particular use

2:52:31meaning it's much easier i'm sorry just trying to so meaning meaning what then i mean if uh

2:52:37development came forward with an mz o from the province like with policies in place

2:52:42then the hcd would not apply if it was residential okay thank you uh i'll go to councillor Allt first

2:52:51and then uh and then councillor Goller please thank you very much mayor guthrie um i think my question

2:52:57or questions are um short but the answers might be longer um miss walkey uh through you mr mayor

2:53:05and miss walkey um the statement was made that its staff's belief that this is a more appropriate

2:53:13approach um i have to ask you a question because what i'm hearing in state is this is for all

2:53:20intents and purposes a calculated gamble and i'm looking at what kind of certitude is there in

2:53:28what staff has recommended in the resolution uh before i make a decision yeah through through

2:53:37the mayor councillor Allt um i don't think it was a calculated gamble from staff's perspective i think

2:53:46it was um if you want to use the word calculated a calculated decision to ensure we had protected

2:53:52against what could happen in there to ensure the long protect long term protection of the heritage

2:53:59resources that are there uh the structures as well as the natural landscape i'm sorry if you thought

2:54:07i was suggesting staff made the calculated gamble it was it was me who was going to make the

2:54:12calculated gamble based on staff's belief i apologize for that the the the next question

2:54:18that comes from there and it's the only one that i have from what i understand of this land

2:54:23this will be terrifically challenging to to convert into residential for a myriad of reasons

2:54:30um uh toxicity and and bottom land uh i stand to be corrected and i guess i'm asking you to

2:54:37correct or confirm for me yeah through the mayor so we do know there are some can there is existing

2:54:47contamination on site and i think the province is looking at that now and that's why they're proposing

2:54:51to remove a couple of the buildings so we do know that we also know that there is the like creed

2:54:58sub-buttershed and that work that's going on so there are environmental impacts as well

2:55:02but there is land on our portions of the rather large area that could have development of of

2:55:09various sorts as um in the future thank you very much thank you gollar please

2:55:19thank you through your worship uh just before you continue i see you as well

2:55:23councillor Caton you'll be next okay go ahead thank you and and thank you to to staff and to all

2:55:29the community that has provided input into this into this plan i thought that the plan clearly

2:55:35articulated all the comments against the residential and um and what i'm trying to understand here is

2:55:43if the province issues the ministerial sort of order and says this is now residential

2:55:50what exactly does that mean does that mean that none of the plan the whole document goes out the

2:55:56window and then there's no protections for any natural or any of the uh it's like either natural

2:56:02or the built heritage features is that what we're saying uh through through the mayor to the to the

2:56:09councillor in fact almost almost the opposite so if if we keep the residential provisions in and the

2:56:16province happened to do an MZO for a residential then the heritage policies and the heritage

2:56:20conservation districts still apply but if we move a motion and say take residential mention out

2:56:27then then what would happen then there are no heritage conservation policies related to the

2:56:33residential uh there are some policies still related to the open space and natural environment

2:56:38so those are still applicable but there would be nothing specific for residential on these lands

2:56:46okay so and then so that i understand with a ministerial sorting order would there be any

2:56:52other processes that come back to the city or would that allow a developer then to

2:56:57submit a building permit to tear down some of the historically protected buildings

2:57:04and because we didn't include the words residential they would not be protected is that is that correct

2:57:16yeah through the mayor to the councillor so the properties that are designated already the part

2:57:21for designation those would keep their heritage status so if a developer wanted to remove one of

2:57:27those buildings it would come to council for one of those buildings but depending on the contents

2:57:35of the the MZO and if it's very detailed if you know height stepbacks um four plates parking

2:57:44it may be able to go right to site plan unless they're proposing to remove one of the designated

2:57:49structures okay that council did in 2021 okay okay thank you for that clarification

2:57:54um one of the other comments that was raised by by some of the delegates was that the

2:58:00heritage conservation district plan takes precedence over other planning documents

2:58:05so if there was no ministerial sorting order and the province sold us out we approve the plan as

2:58:13has been presented by by the consultant and by staff would the inclusion of the words

2:58:20residential not mean that when an application comes forward we would have to adapt the official plan

2:58:27because it contemplates residential through through the mayor to councillor Goller

2:58:38I you began your question with the um the reference to the the situation where there's a conflict

2:58:46between the heritage district plan well that that that it takes precedence over the official plan

2:58:54right so if it's residential is contemplated in the in the conservation district plan then when

2:59:00someone applies for a permit to build residential even though it's not in the official plan we have

2:59:06to say yes because it's been contemplated in the conservation district plan through the mayor to

2:59:12councillor Goller I think it's important to point out in the Ontario Heritage Act in section 41 of

2:59:19part five which is the section dealing with heritage conservation district plans and if if

2:59:25you'll allow me I'd like to read out one sentence from the legislation it's it's from section 41.2

2:59:34and it's it's in um subsection two of that it's entitled conflict in the event of a conflict between

2:59:44heritage conservation district plan and a municipal bylaw that affects the designated

2:59:51district the plan prevails to the extent of the conflict but in all other respects the bylaw remains

2:59:57in full force so in the Ontario Heritage Act there actually is no reference to the heritage district

3:00:03plan trumping an official plan or a secondary plan within that OP I just wanted to clarify that

3:00:13it does have precedence over a bylaw and as we all know the zoning bylaw is one of our biggest

3:00:20bylaws um yeah and sorry mr. mayor if I may add to that too so if there wasn't no if there was not

3:00:27an MZO issue there is provisions in our official plan like you have to come forward with the block

3:00:31plan then they would have to come forward with the official plan amendment and zoning bylaw

3:00:36with that there'd have to be you know the planning justification reports to support whatever type of

3:00:41land use so at that time council would consider the land use so the HCD does not give permissions

3:00:48for residential um it if it can't it contemplates what it could happen but it does not give

3:00:54permission so the permissions would either come from the minister or from a development

3:01:00application that would come before council okay I I appreciate that I appreciate that so just to

3:01:08be clear that the inclusion of the word residential as a potential adapted reuse does not mean that it

3:01:16does not establish residential as an acceptable use short and sweet that is correct okay okay um yeah

3:01:26no that that is that is really helpful um that that is yeah I really appreciate it thank you thank

3:01:32you worship okay great last year I have councillor Caton please and then closet thank you through

3:01:40you mr. mayor um so most of my questions regarding the resident residential have been

3:01:47answered so thank you on that one um I have some questions about the ponds in the creek

3:01:56so with the city's natural heritage plan overriding the heritage just a conservation district plan

3:02:04could the decision be made to drain the ponds or straighten the creek in future

3:02:09without a heritage permit or heritage golf review or would those follow let's fall under

3:02:15requiring a review through the mayor to the counselor it's uh it's important to understand

3:02:28the the difference between a proposed intervention or a proposed change within a heritage district

3:02:36it's important to understand if it's can if it should be considered repair or maintenance

3:02:41uh because most in most situations maintenance is does not require the approval of a heritage

3:02:48permit whether you're talking about an individually designated property like 785 York Road or a

3:02:56property that's designated within a district however if if the intervention is reviewed and

3:03:02it and it's determined that that intervention would really change the characteristics or the

3:03:08heritage attributes of of what's being protected that's seen more as it could be seen as a major

3:03:15as an alteration or major alteration or in some cases it could be seen as a removal or even a

3:03:23demolition though all those situations do require review by heritage staff obviously but also review

3:03:31by the heritage advisory committee and approval either by the general manager of planning or

3:03:38in some situations as in demolition approval by council so there there is kind of a scale

3:03:45that's already as well established with all of the protected heritage properties that we have

3:03:50across the city and and within our one heritage just I'm sorry our two heritage districts in in

3:03:56our city but if the question is whether changing the nature of the ponds substantially in a way

3:04:08that that equals an alteration or removing them or draining them that that is definitely

3:04:13something that would be major enough to require the approval of a heritage permit under the

3:04:19appropriate section of the Heritage Act great thank you and when we're done questions circle

3:04:26back to me please mr. mayor you got I got two more questions then happy to come back to you

3:04:33looks like I now have three more questions clausen richardson gipson yes thank you

3:04:41through you mr. mayor um to staff I believe that my question is is restating councillor

3:04:48galler's question in my words um and so please bear with me I understand where the public is coming

3:04:57from with regard to the concerns around residential uses and I also at the same time understand

3:05:03staff's argument for maintaining it within the within the hcd so my question is my intention

3:05:16as a as a city councillor in supporting this hcd is that this land be maintained for public use as

3:05:23as conservation land and for public use as much as possible and that's what my intention was when

3:05:30I supported the urban park initiative and that's what I want to do when I'm supporting this this

3:05:37hcd and so my question is is if we support the hcd with the residential uses in it

3:05:45is there a concern that in the future that could be interpreted by the provincial government or

3:05:53other legal entities as as a recommendation that that's what this council wanted to do

3:06:07through the mayor to the the councillor so we absolutely appreciate the intent to maintain it

3:06:14maintain it as open space or parkland or or conservation area however this council is not

3:06:21the owner of those lands the provincial government is the owner and has the final say on what happens

3:06:28to the future of those lands so I just not to be clear on that that we as staff are not able to

3:06:35make those recommendations or changes and I can only go on in the you know certainly in the past

3:06:42when the government had offered it up for sale and it was for sale as as residential development

3:06:48so that is where staff are coming from and it's you know trying to be strategic and forward

3:06:54thinking on what could happen there and to ensure we have policies that protect the site as much as

3:06:59possible and allow us to be able to comment on those policies as we move forward the question was

3:07:06asked of of staff you know what what act kind of overrides the other act so if we happen to get a

3:07:16minister's owning order it was sold for for residential land the heritage policies still apply

3:07:22and the minister of municipal affairs is is not amending those the province can make changes to

3:07:28the site before it's sold but once it's sold then the policies that the municipality have are in

3:07:35in in force and effect okay thank you for that it sort of answers my question but I

3:07:53think that I will reiterate that as a councillor and as a councillor and I hope you'll indulge me

3:08:00with this Mr. Mayor is that when and if I support this it is with the clear intent for this land

3:08:11to be for conservation and public use as intended and and I can I can leave it at that for now

3:08:19um and I need to just reflect on the information that you've just shared with me so thank you

3:08:26thank you uh councillor Cawson so Richardson and then uh Gibson and then I'd like I think we need

3:08:32to we need to circle to uh you know to a move forward position here I haven't forgotten about you

3:08:38as well uh councillor Keaton okay so Richardson then Gibson and thank you um through you Mayor

3:08:45to staff and I know you can see how much we're struggling with this and that we really want

3:08:50to get it right because we all want to protect uh those lands as much as we can so two staff um

3:08:57probably Ms. Walkie if I'm understanding it correctly if residential use is already contemplated

3:09:03in the HCD plan the province will actually have less jurisdiction to override the heritage controls

3:09:10is that correct thank you councillor Richardson I may have to have you

3:09:26ask it in maybe a different way um yes maybe so there seems to be an innate risk if we don't

3:09:33and and as councillor Cawson said our intent with having residential in there is not to support

3:09:39residential but to be preemptive so that if it does get rezoned by an MZO that we're looking

3:09:47to have some protection in there so that we have some controls to uh you'd be able to have input

3:09:54into what's actually done on those lands so by having it in there it's actual that's what I'm

3:09:59saying it's actually um giving us more controls through the Heritage Act but not through the planning

3:10:06act through the mayor of the council so yes uh councillor Richardson that is is correct and

3:10:13Mr. Mayor if I may just councillor Cawson at the end commented that again she wants to protect

3:10:20this is conservation land um I do have to remind council that the large you know blue swath covering

3:10:29up the majority of the site is already adaptive reuse and adaptive reuse um in the official plan

3:10:35and the secondary plan recognizing you have to go through other planning mechanisms

3:10:40included institutional education commercial office light industrial open space and park

3:10:44so yes open space or park were there but so were the other uses and you know we talked about a

3:10:49large fulfillment center or something that is also could be contemplated on those lands so it's

3:10:55it's not one or the other it could be a combination of both so I just wanted to clarify that

3:11:03okay I am I'm sorry I should have written it down I believe it's Gibson

3:11:08yep yeah thank you and then I'm going to go right to Keaton after you okay Gibson go ahead yep

3:11:13just to clarify a commitment I made to the delegate about asking about the York Road project

3:11:18the redevelopment of York Road was rescoped a few years ago I think the budget for it was

3:11:23almost taken down by half to no longer require four lanes and I think I believe in talking to staff

3:11:30that remove the necessity to realign Clathford can I just have staff confirm that through mayor

3:11:36got through to Councillor Gibson yes that's correct with the rescoping from four lanes

3:11:41in the previous I'm going to say 2024 budget cycle the realignment of Clath Creek is no longer

3:11:46contemplated in that scope thanks very much I appreciate it okay so thank you for clearing

3:11:57that up I think that was actually a very important question I had nothing to do with the residential

3:12:01part but but there was you know there were people rightly asking by the way but completely

3:12:07rightly asking about like what's going on with this piece along along the road and the creek and

3:12:13so very important to get that that factual information out there Terry thank you for doing that

3:12:19okay Councillor Keaton I think so we have the main motion on the floor and I think you're looking

3:12:25at presenting an option for an amendment Councillor Keaton please yes thank you

3:12:31if uh Thurks could throw it up on the screen please I like to move that staff remove mentions

3:12:41and provisions for residential development from the Ontario Reformatory Heritage Conservation

3:12:45District Plan and guidelines included is at attachment two of the staff report and that staff

3:12:51bring the amended Ontario Reformatory Heritage Conservation District Plan and guidelines

3:12:55and subsequent bylaw to a future council meeting for approval and my my reasoning behind this

3:13:02is I just just one second I need to find a seconder which I have found in Councillor Goller

3:13:09okay so now you can go for it go for it speak to it thank you um I I totally I understand what

3:13:16staff is trying to do here I really do and I I recognize it and I I don't think they're complying

3:13:22in advance I think that what they're asking for is is reasonable given um the actions of the province

3:13:31and what we've just seen from our current government it doesn't seem unreasonable to me

3:13:36but I also think that this is the wrong place for residential and I think that we should be

3:13:42strongly opposed to it in all of our plans and to the province and to very clearly state to them

3:13:52that that's not the right place for that and um I I don't necessarily think it's the right place

3:13:58for the adaptive reuse either but that's not um there's already in our plans and potentially we

3:14:04can look at that later uh but I also think that right beside Carville and the Waste Processing

3:14:12Center is not a place for residential I don't think that this would be glorious mansions I think

3:14:17this would end up being you know low-income housing that could not complain about the environment

3:14:23that they're living in and I think that it's the wrong place for it and even with the provisions

3:14:31to help the heritage attributes in that area we still wouldn't be helping the people who would

3:14:40end up there and I I just think it's the wrong thing to do so that's why I'd like to remove the

3:14:47uh mentions of residential in this plan thanks okay no problem thank you for explaining your

3:14:53position on that is there any questions of staff on the amendment that's in front of us

3:15:00no problem councillor Goller again only questions of staff only on the amendments that are in front

3:15:05of us go ahead thank you and through your worship to staff um I understand that uh it was the the

3:15:13staff recommendation that there would be two causes I'm trying to understand why would you would

3:15:20want us to have this come back as opposed to making the change to remove residential and

3:15:25then approving it tonight through the mayor to the councillor so we are we're suggesting it come back

3:15:35so council can take a look at it council could just ask us to remove all reference to residential

3:15:40and bring back the bylaw so the bylaw is not in a position to go forward tonight

3:15:43okay thank you and and what would be the the timeline uh for staff to bring back

3:15:50the uh the plan and the bylaw through the mayor to the council it would be it be some time in

3:16:01q2 there's a fair amount to update the documents get them aod8 and a fair bit of polishing that

3:16:07would need to be done again okay but it would be this year yes okay thank you so much thank you

3:16:12worship and I just asked my council colleagues to to to listen to what the community's saying and I

3:16:18I really appreciate and I I'm grateful for for staff's advice to prepare for the eventuality of

3:16:25a ministerial zoning order but I do do hear the concerns from the community that by included

3:16:30in the document we're putting it out there that you know at some level there's some support for

3:16:34residential so if we remove it all together I think it does send a stronger message as

3:16:38councillor Caton said that we do not want to contemplate residential in this area at all

3:16:45great thank you very much for your opinions as well any any other comments before I call the

3:16:51vote then on the amendment please all right Gibson and then uh uh clausen yeah thank you

3:16:59through mr mayor all my comments will be brief I just I'm struggling with the language and even

3:17:04contemplation of residential when I I've proved to see voters to support the national urban park

3:17:10initiative so I'll be wanting to remove a residential from the language in the in the document

3:17:17thank you and clausen please and then uh and then how's her yes thank you through you mr

3:17:24mayor to staff I do have I do have a question um I am my question is with regard to the adaptive

3:17:34reuse area so thank you um miss walkie uh for the for the clarity with regard to the the heritage

3:17:42buildings and the recommendations for adaptive reuse there are a lot of structures that are

3:17:49recommended for protection and I wanted to clarify that um what no I think I think I'm I think I'm

3:17:59going to pause I I'm not going to ask that question and I'm I'm going to just pull pull

3:18:04up and pull my uh my question off the floor and let my vote uh support this or not thanks okay no no

3:18:11problem no problem thank you and how's her please thank you um through the mayor to staff I'm just

3:18:18going to double back and I just would like a clear explanation of what happens if the province says

3:18:25okay it's residential now and we have nothing I know you've talked about this but with this exact

3:18:31wording could you just tell us where what would we be looking at through the mayor to

3:18:43counselor howzer it would leave us with with less to less tools to use less power to negotiate

3:18:55in an environment that would likely be a very difficult time to negotiate uh it's and as well

3:19:04I'd like to reiterate what I said in my opening comments but also what's actually in the plan

3:19:09itself is that the that the resident the suggestion or recommendation of residential land use it

3:19:17it it is limited to the adaptive reuse area b that's the dark blue area

3:19:25behind largely behind the administration building so it's really I mean if if we could

3:19:31if you don't mind I simplifying it I do refer often to the front yard and the front yard we're

3:19:37recommending be uh open space and park the backyard this is really where where our recommendation

3:19:45is remains that residential should be considered as one option but not necessarily the preferred option

3:19:55in the event that re that a minister's zoning comes in it would give us some capability to

3:20:04to help guide what come what comes and just thank you for that just to follow up could I

3:20:15ask a question about the area that uh councillor caton did remind us of where the residential if

3:20:21it was residential or adaptive use is it that area that's over by where cargo in the waste

3:20:27everything is over there not it's we're not talking about like the park area the front yard

3:20:35through the mayor to counselor howzer uh that the adaptive reuse area b is quite a large area

3:20:44it's really in the overlay which we've presented as plate eight in the the Harris district plan

3:20:51it essentially is the dark blue area which equals about half of the adaptive reuse area

3:20:57and it's behind or let's say to the southeast of the main block of reformatory buildings

3:21:05and yes it is between that block of buildings and cargill and the city's facility

3:21:11hoping that answers your question thank you for clarifying all right chew please councillor chew

3:21:22thank you through you mr. mayor um i i chris so we have our our our bi-monthly check-ins all the

3:21:29time and you talk about how much extensive work you guys you and staff put into this

3:21:34body of work can you just confirm to me that the the essence of this work is to protect

3:21:42as much heritage provisions as possible so we can so when the province goes through the Heritage

3:21:50Act separate from the planning act there's a lot more checks and balances that allows us to

3:21:58define the characteristics for any future on this site is that a good characterization

3:22:08through the mayor to the counselor so yes that is so staff we're trying to ensure we looked at

3:22:14any future scenario and be strategic in putting those scenarios forward if if the province chose

3:22:20to do something um you know the whole plan is not applicable as long as it's in the provincial

3:22:26ownership but it's if they chose to dispose of it that we had looked at all all alternatives that

3:22:32may come our way and and just a follow-up because i know you guys put a lot of work studying this

3:22:39are there any comparator municipalities you guys have looked at that are using this avenue of

3:22:45of just really fine tuning your process through the Heritage Act so we can again provide as much

3:22:55protection as we can is this something other places are doing and just within your professional

3:23:01networks thank you for your question like yes we have looked at other scenarios um i think going

3:23:12back to uh steven you had mentioned when we went back to revisit this and take into account the

3:23:18comments we received from the community and the different perspectives as well as staff's goals

3:23:23to protect and be able to have a say in what whatever may come our way um this was set definitely

3:23:31top of mind um i think what's uh there's been a lot of discussion but really want to reiterate

3:23:39that that adaptive reuse area a the front yard the recommendation is now for that to be open

3:23:45space in park as the preferred land use from a cultural heritage perspective because we know

3:23:50how valuable that is to the community but again looking at that the big section of buildings

3:23:55that are we've already noted a few times are in disuse they're empty um what could happen there

3:24:03i think that was the question from a heritage conservation perspective um we have looked at

3:24:07other municipalities other similar types of developments um you know there's the distillery

3:24:14district in toronto brickworks which is another industrial site which is a really thriving community

3:24:19hub like there are really fantastic examples of adaptive reuse not necessarily residential

3:24:26some of them do include residential where the buildings are are wonderful places for people

3:24:31to go in they're not for private developments the public still has access to them but those

3:24:36different land uses are integrated in a way that's really interesting and it makes the space usable

3:24:41and i think that's a big risk um just being a heritage consultant disuse and empty buildings are

3:24:48just it's it's demolition by neglect they're such at risk so i think use here you know any

3:24:54type of adaptive reuse that concerns the heritage attributes is a big win actually and so that's why

3:25:00the adaptive reuse area b is really focused where those disused buildings are located and we're not

3:25:08saying this whole site is going to be residential like that's not the intent here if you look at that

3:25:13plate a or sorry plate eight i believe it was where we went back and we mapped out the heritage

3:25:19attributes we put on and overlaid the adaptive reuse area and then we actually shrunk it even more

3:25:26to be like okay this is highly valued as an open space area we've heard that from the community

3:25:32so that is a recommendation from a heritage perspective and also to respond to the community

3:25:38but hey this other area adaptive reuse area b we have a lot of buildings that are in disuse

3:25:44which could be great candidates for commercial institutional or maybe some residential i'm not

3:25:50sure but just having those provisions in there give something should something come our way

3:25:55that there will be some controls and oversights and checks and balances to deal with it so that's

3:26:00the intention and it is a conservation and a protection first it's just contemplating of sort

3:26:06of wider trying to give some broader tools for if this comes our way thank you i appreciate that

3:26:12and we want to empower you with with as many tools as possible i'm not sure if you're aware but is

3:26:19city of kincston kind of doing something similar as well currently and if you might have any knowledge

3:26:26on that i'm just throwing it out in the air if you don't it's okay no no problem i'm not familiar

3:26:31with that one i'm sorry yeah okay um maybe just some comments but to be honest with you i think

3:26:37we have to support our staff they we have probably the most dedicated heritage planners and heritage

3:26:43team uh in in all the municipalities that i've i've come across in my professional network

3:26:50this is a pragmatic uh decision and i understand there's a lot of politics attached to definitions

3:26:57but we have to be we cannot be dogmatic here there's a lot of work that went into this

3:27:03and and i know chris that talks about this all the time with me so i think we have to

3:27:08acknowledge the authority that the province has whether we like the government or not

3:27:13understand that there are areas within the heritage act the legislation of the heritage

3:27:20act that we need to we need to utilize tools through so that we're not just caught in the middle

3:27:28with nothing to hold against because the mzdo overrides everything within the planning act

3:27:35and we have if we have no no no work or framework that governs these lands then nothing happens

3:27:41so i think it's important for us to recognize the significance of this body of work that staff

3:27:46have put forward understand this is a very pragmatic decision that comes from very good

3:27:51intentions and i think we could argue that in the public realm but we have i believe we have to

3:27:58help our staff here because it's a lot of work that will go to waste if we don't do anything

3:28:03that's just my comments thank you okay i would like to call the vote but i'm not going to because

3:28:11i saw two more hands go up counts are katin and then billings you get council billings covers

3:28:19because it just says the mover i was like to have a final comment before we vote sounds good i will

3:28:25allow that billings and then katin please so through you mr. mayor to staff uh when we were

3:28:34dealing with this issue a while ago i uh you know read the report and made a comment at council with

3:28:39respect to i felt that staff were going to bring back um residential within the plan and another

3:28:47member of council uh anyways was upset and and questioned christa with with respect to that

3:28:54issue and and christa you mentioned that oh no that's not necessarily true that we would be bringing

3:29:00back uh residential within the plan the reason why i was opposed to residential in the plan because

3:29:07a few years ago i inquired with planning staff and that planner is no longer with the city about

3:29:13residential on these lands and the comment was that they weren't supportive because there can be um

3:29:23an odor from time to time in this in this area and so that staff wouldn't um uh recommend uh

3:29:31residential so i was wondering christa if you could comment on on this issue because that planner

3:29:37was very clear to me uh a number of years ago through the mayor to to council billings so the

3:29:46the property is is quite long and there's there is quite a distance from um the processing plant

3:29:55but any residential development would have to do a noise and odor study that would have to

3:30:04determine what the setback is from that avatar that we do have um on the land so they would have to

3:30:10do that um but there is probably a for sure there is potential for for residential there i don't know

3:30:17what the setback would be out of that study um but they would have to do a study to determine what

3:30:22the what the setback is okay um and then from everything else through you mr. mayor that you've

3:30:29said i want to drill down the province can do whatever they want right now they can remove

3:30:35whatever they want right now can they not you know and i'm talking in this area uh the redacted

3:30:42reuse area for residential or possible residential they could do whatever they wanted to make their

3:30:49land more valuable if they're if they are going to sell it correct is that correct or am i wrong

3:30:56uh through the mayor to the councillor so uh yes they can within reason they can't you know move a

3:31:06creek or alter some of the the natural features but they can remove the buildings yes um yes they

3:31:12they could yeah that's what i meant the the buildings in order to make their land more valuable

3:31:18to to sell okay thank you christa all right thanks councillor billings uh kateen as the mover uh

3:31:26you're gonna bring us home thank you so much for indulging me um so i know i've talked about it

3:31:33before y'all know that i'm a person who has environmental sensitivities i am the hound dog

3:31:37on council i can smell everything it is not fun um and that includes cargill you know from most

3:31:47locations uh that i've walked on that property and and as much as you know there would be environmental

3:31:55impact studies and everything else the the likelihood that that would end up as low income

3:32:00housing for people with disabilities who potentially have more sensitivities that would not necessarily

3:32:04like i've had to field so many issues with folks who have my disabilities in terms of proximity

3:32:13and everything else i i just think that even though it is a kind of a wraparound piece and that's

3:32:22not staff's intent i know it's not i just think it's too big of a signal and uh i think that it

3:32:32is outside of what we've already approved in these plans and that any amount of indication is going to

3:32:40signal that we would be okay and we wouldn't fight this as a council and so i would prefer we don't

3:32:45have that in there um because i think that it kind of goes against what we've already decided

3:32:52and i think it's not in the best interest of anyone to have residential in that area thanks

3:32:59okay no no problem thank you for tabling it that's what the debate in the the horseshoe here is for

3:33:06so i am going to call the vote on on these two does anyone want them separated

3:33:12okay i'm not suggesting that i just wanted to know so okay we'll keep them the same

3:33:16and uh yeah so to me this comes down to to protect or not to protect and i'm going to vote to protect

3:33:25because we've heard it like seven times till sunday that our staff have said if you want more

3:33:30protection we've got to have this noted in there okay so i'm not going to support what's in front of

3:33:38us by councillor Caton because i want to protect more i want to have levers that our staff can

3:33:47protect more and so uh that is exactly where my vote's going to land because i want to actually

3:33:54protect uh these these attributes especially um it's been very clear really the to me anyways it

3:34:02comes to be very clear it is a choice do you want extra protections or do you not that's basically

3:34:08what this vote is for me so with that i'll call the vote those against the amendments raise your

3:34:14hand please all right so we've got boosted till richardson got three and two okay by the way you'll

3:34:26notice how i said people's names out loud there that's very important when taking votes we'll talk

3:34:31about that later in the agenda okay so your amendment passes so um clerks if we go back

3:34:41to the main motion now we're good to call the main motion as amended but but are we uh

3:34:48you're good with that uh thank you miss marron through you to you um we'll get it up on screen here

3:34:55just to note clause number one very similar to what was in the staff recommendation although as

3:35:01amended there and then clause two and three are the motions for council katens amendment would just

3:35:06pass which uh replaces clause two in the staff recommendation yeah did everyone understand that

3:35:14okay so it's as it's as on the screen then okay so i and hold on oh oh oh as much as everyone likes

3:35:26to see me on the screen can you put that back up thank you okay so i will uh i will call the vote on

3:35:47this because of the amendment i will not be supporting this now um so that's just just to make

3:35:55that uh my position pretty clear on that one whatever anybody else wants to do so be it um

3:36:01before the vote is taken i just will say i got a vent this is the most complicated piece of land

3:36:12ever i mean what are we doing it's an urban park oh well maybe not an urban park because maybe it's

3:36:23going to have some some other stuff over here i mean our official plan still it's still real

3:36:28but it's an urban park but we want heritage stuff here but maybe not this and oh by the way the

3:36:37province owns it they could do whatever the heck they want in an instant i mean literally at 6 30

3:36:45today there could be an announcement that the province is like leveling the whole place and yet

3:36:52i will just say that this whole thing is in front of us right now when all of those things were being

3:36:59juggled in the air and i remember asking staff like why are we sending staff away to do all of this

3:37:06work when it's not our land and so i appreciate that this is here because of the protections well

3:37:14i thought that there would be some more protections but but the way it is at least now um but yeah i've

3:37:21just i'm just concerned that that this is we're we're rudderless on this

3:37:29we're completely rudderless on this as a community and uh and the captain of the ship is the province

3:37:39they will lead it where it's going to go so i was hoping that uh that we would have a different

3:37:45outcome for today but i respect i do i actually i fully do i respect the the community input

3:37:50and i respect the will of council on this i 100 do that's i'm being authentic on that but i just

3:37:55wanted to say it's very it's very confusing what's happening with this land i kind of wish the

3:38:01province would actually make up their mind on it so that we actually i think you're a planner is

3:38:06nodding in in improvement so that we can actually know what's going on here

3:38:13so uh anyways with that thanks thanks everybody i vented for a couple of minutes

3:38:18i will um can i have the motion back up for a second maybe my venting made me rethink something

3:38:24can i just look at the motions again thank you yeah you know what now that the amendment has passed

3:38:38i'd rather vote for it because you get at least at least i would get like everything except for

3:38:45that portion that's been removed so i i made my vote clear on the on the residential part

3:38:51but i think i will vote for this because at least at least the other stuff is in there that

3:38:56that is important it was kind of like all we've talked about is this residential thing

3:39:01but there's there's a great stuff in the plan too there's and we can't forget about that right

3:39:04so there's great stuff in the plan okay i i will be voting for this don't know if anyone cares but

3:39:10i'm voting for this uh i will call the vote is anyone against beauty okay unanimous thanks thanks

3:39:20everybody that's great okay um i'm gonna take a break for everyone and there is hold on here hold on

3:39:32there is okay we got two more things to go here so why don't we take a break until 6 30 just

3:39:46because it is kind of dinner time so we'll take a break until 6 30 and then we will come back

3:39:53and we will start with that official plan update phase one the decision report okay see everybody

3:40:00back here at 6 30 to plow through everything here okay thank you okay everyone this is your

4:08:29one minute warning if you could uh just take your seats or get ready to turn your camera on for my

4:08:35colleagues online that would be great thank you okay this is your four second heads up we're about

4:10:55to start clerks are you good everyone online good heads shaken awesome okay i will call the meeting

4:11:05back to order out here we are at the agenda item official plan update phase one official plan amendment