Report titled “Statutory Public Meeting Proposed Downtown Community Planning Permit By-law” from Infrastructure, Development and Environment dated January 20, 2026, be received.

21:02under section 1734 and 51 of the Planning Act and

21:08the first one is going to be the downtown community planning permit system and

21:16Just right off the top. We're going to have

21:18some

21:19presentations from

21:21staff and our consulting partners

21:24Just a reminder that today is really just to hear feedback. It's to receive only there's nothing here to approve

21:32It's part of the process to hear back from people and from us

21:37About what we're hearing what we like what we maybe want examined a bit more changed it or whatever

21:42And then it's a motion to receive only

21:46There'll be an opportunity to just in case someone wants to call in or if anyone in the audience needs to also participate

21:52but we got

21:54Will Gregory here and we got justine

21:58Jean Cola, am I saying that Jean Cola am I saying that right?

22:02Help me out say it out loud for me. Okay, so I did it right perfect. I should go home now

22:10All right, so you will do your presentation for us and then Ian Panabaker. I saw you walk in so Ian

22:16You'll be up after our presentation. So please I'll turn it over to you go right ahead. Okay

22:21All right

22:43Good evening or a good afternoon mayor got three in council

22:47Not quite

22:49My name is will Gregory project manager of planning and building services and join here to this afternoon by justine

22:55Jean Cola from Dylan consulting who's supporting on this project

22:59We're here today for the statutory public meeting to present a draft community planning permit bylaw an official plan amendment for the downtown

23:07This is the draft CPP bylaw

23:10presented for public feedback and comment

23:12Staff were here to make to collect feedback and we're going to go

23:16We'll take that make revisions to the bylaw in response to feedback before returning for a decision later in the spring

23:23Tonight I'll provide a brief overview of the project and the engagement today

23:27And then I'll turn the podium over to justine to go through the summary of the proposed draft bylaw

23:32Does that the stage for the presentation justine and I will provide a background of the policies and goals and form the CPP s

23:38the progress of the project to date

23:42Sorry, I lost my place there

23:45An overview of the CPP s tool generally before outlining before outlining what we're specifically planning to do with the downtown

23:51And then we'll conclude with the summary of the next steps

23:55right

23:57So before we get into the specifics of the bylaw let's talk about why we're here and how we got here

24:03So start off with the community planning permit system or CPP s is

24:13One of the housing accelerator fund initiatives for the city specifically initiative number seven

24:19This project aims to incentivize 35 affordable units by the end of 2026 as a housing accelerator fund

24:27Project the CPP s is one of the many tools the city is employing to increase housing supply and to encourage affordability and wealth

24:35The CPP s is an in encouraging additional housing supply supports the city's aspiration goal of

24:4218,000 homes by 2031

24:44It will also contribute to the city's objective of improving housing supply

24:48Contributing to ongoing work to update policies and improve processes to support growth

24:53While we are seeing lower rates of development at the moment the downtown's

24:57Community planning permit bylaw responds proactively to development interest in downtown following the downtown Heights study

25:03The overall community planning permit system is split into two phases stone road Edinburgh Road and downtown

25:15The first phase implemented a community permit bylaw in the stone road Edinburgh Road strategic growth area

25:21Council approved the stone road Edinburgh Road CPP bylaw in April 2025 and is currently in effect

25:28The downtown is phase two of the overall community planning permit system pilot program

25:34the community planning permit area

25:37Matches the boundaries of the downtown secondary plan as well as protected major transstation area

25:42So while the community planning permit system is a new policy tool for downtown it integrates and carries forward several several existing policies

25:54Specifically the CPP s is informed by five key documents

25:58The first is the city of Gwell's official plan, which was amended in 2022 via official plan amendment 80

26:05It sets up the long-term vision for the city as a whole and comprehensive plans for growth

26:10downtown area is identified as both an urban growth center and as a protected major transit station area meaning the area's plan for

26:19intensification and transit investment

26:21As a protected major transit station area the downtown has a minimum density target of 200 people and jobs per hectare

26:28Wish this bylaw will help achieve

26:31The second key document is the city's downtown secondary plan

26:35Assess how to detail strategy for growth and development in the downtown area

26:39It provides more detailed directions on how the area will grow over the long term

26:43And it emphasizes the creation of complete communities through mixed-use development

26:50Improved public spaces and enhanced connectivity the CPP bylaw carries forward the vision of the downtown secondary plan

26:57The third document is official plan

27:00106 which was adopted in spring 2025

27:04the OPA

27:05Perrants additional height of the downtown so the area can achieve the 200 people and jobs per hectare as required by the province

27:11The OPA revised the maximum permitted heights to allow up to 24 stories on some sites in the downtown area

27:17The CPP bylaw will implement the revised heights

27:21adopted in OPA 106

27:23The fourth document is the city's comprehensive zoning bylaw

27:27Which feeds directly into the proposed bylaw

27:31Although the community planning permit bylaw will repeal and replace the zoning bylaw downtown

27:36The the CPP bylaw carries forward many of the development standards

27:40The zoning bylaw and by extension the community planning permit bylaw

27:44Contains detailed development standards that regulate what can be built the size of the buildings where parking is located and other design elements for development

27:52The community planning permit bylaw will replicate this road will replicate the

27:56Will replicate the regulatory function of the zoning bylaw

28:00Finally the housing affordability strategy provides guidance on the city's affordability targets

28:05The community planning permit system is trying to achieve the housing affordability strategy sets a target of 33% of all new housing as affordable

28:14Community planning permit bylaw addresses affordable housing in the community with a commitment to accelerate development approvals

28:20We do recognize that housing affordability can be at odds

28:23This bylaw represents a balance to meet our community needs with a streamlined development process

28:29So to catch us up on the project to date the product overall project began the spring 2024

28:41Staff introduced the stone road Enneboro Road community planning permit bylaw and the official plan amendment 105 in spring 2025

28:49Staff then pivoted to the development of the downtown community planning permit bylaw

28:53in May of last year

28:55Staff and Dylan have prepared the

28:58Repair the background report for downtown and embarked on new engagement in the summer

29:03Have the conclusion the preliminary engagement staff prepared the draft community plan

29:07Community planning permit bylaw through fall and winter and with the release of the draft community planning permit bylaw and OPA and

29:14The statutory meeting were firmly in phase four and

29:20Just to catch you up on engagement

29:23We've been trying to take this out as much as we can to get as much feedback as we can from as many people as we can

29:29We've held two in-person open houses

29:31one in June 12th 2025 and the and and another one on January 8th

29:382026 both at City Hall. We held one virtual open house on June 18th

29:442025 via zoom

29:45We've also been engaged in interest group engagement. We brought the project to the home-builder association

29:51Downtown wealth business association stakeholder groups as well as city advisor committees like P. Wack and ed tech

29:57We've also met individually with interested parties to discuss vision for the bylaw as well as reactions to it

30:04Through the community planning permit system have your say page

30:07The public can participate in a survey and comment on the draft documents

30:11Bluting the draft bylaw and the official plan amendment until January 30th at this point engagement is still ongoing and we're listening

30:19We're presenting a draft today for feedback. We're open to changes and updates in response to feedback

30:23And with that, I'll hand the podium over to Justine to go over the CPS tool

30:32Thank you. Well

30:34So as will mentioned

30:36Community planning permit bylaw does repeal and replace the city zoning bylaw for the subject area in this case

30:43It would be the downtown it also streamlines zoning minor variance and site plan into a single application and single approval process

30:51And in the downtown this tool can help establish clearer yet flexible development provisions and rules

30:58facilitate growth while reducing the likelihood of appeals and support of a consistent

31:04Implementation of the city's vision for the area it can speed up development approval timelines for applications at work within the standards

31:12established by the municipality and secure community needs such as affordable housing in exchange for

31:20Building heights

31:22And I'll get into that in a moment

31:24but

31:25This slide kind of highlights the difference between the current approval process and the community planning permit system and under the current development

31:33Approval process if someone wants to propose a development within the downtown that doesn't align with the current zoning bylaw

31:40So even if it does meet the OPA 106 maximum building heights, for example

31:45A zoning bylaw amendment would be required today

31:49Depending on the scale of development a minor variance application and or site plan application

31:56I would also be required to address specific site or design elements such as the location of buildings

32:02parking setbacks and site layouts

32:06these separate processes can each take time from staff the applicant and possibly council and

32:13Could be a hundred eighty

32:16Days under the current system and would be forty five days under a community planning permit system

32:25One unique element of the tool is that it provides

32:28classes of applications

32:30so

32:32Currently while zoning bylaw amendments would come to council for approval

32:37Minor variances would come to the committee of adjustments for approval and staff would be approving any site plan

32:43control or applications

32:45By combining multiple development processes and proactively identifying where potential variations could be accepted or where

32:54Development standards must be met the community planning permit system allows

32:59Identified classes of development

33:02so a class

33:03one or two

33:05application would be approved by staff and it's within any of the development standards identified in the bylaw itself and

33:13Anything above those defined limits where that council would be able to staff would be able to approve would have to go to council as part of a class three

33:22It's important to note that a CPS does not replace a need for any

33:28Building permit consent application or severance of property

33:34Nor anything else in terms of land title such as plan of subdivision. Those are separate processes

33:39And so let's look at these classes in a little bit more detail

33:44So while the provincial legislation for a community planning permit system has no minimum notice requirements

33:51For any applications under a community planning permit system the city is proposing a

33:57Number of classes as well as notice requirements for class two and three

34:02so the

34:03proposed

34:04approach would be akin to the stone road in Edinburgh

34:08Framework that is currently in effect and it would see that a class one application which includes all development that meets all the development

34:17Standards and proposes a use that is permitted within the bylaw

34:21That this is delegated to staff and similar to the current site plan approval process where you're really dealing with site plan matters on these development

34:29Applications, there would be no notice required a

34:33Class two application which generally meets the intent of the community planning permit bylaw

34:39But requires or or seeks some relief from a development standard within the limit or threshold defined by the bylaw

34:48And or a parking standard or a discretionary use

34:52These would be delegated to staff

34:55and that

34:56The required criteria or conditions of the bylaw would need to be met and

35:02The bylaw proposes that these applications these class two applications would require notice to be provided on the city's website

35:10In addition to a sign located on the property a

35:15Class three application picks up any development applications that go beyond that class two staff threshold limit

35:23Again, it needs to meet the general intent of the bylaw

35:26But it does require relief from a standard beyond that class two limit and in this case it would require council approval

35:33these applications

35:36Would require notice be mailed out to residents within 120 meters of the proposed development as well as

35:44posting on the city's website and signage on the property

35:48It's important to note that any development application that goes beyond what's council is able to review through a class three

35:54Would require an amendment to the bylaw and an amendment to the bylaw

36:00Within when a municipality passes a new community planning permit bylaw

36:05No, an amendment to the bylaw can only be sought if there's a council resolution to do so

36:11but any amendment process would include

36:15public engagement and

36:18statutory public meetings

36:20Similar to a current zoning bylaw amendment process

36:24So now I'm going to go through some specific parts of the community planning permit bylaw

36:30The first being the complete community charge

36:33So one feature of the bylaw is that there's an ability to identify conditions for land uses to ensure that development brings

36:42community benefits to the

36:44municipality and within a community planning permit area a community benefit charge does not apply

36:50Instead the regulations allow a municipality to require

36:54Community benefits or what's referred to in the legislation as facility services and matters

37:00In exchange for heightened density, which may be within the range is permitted or the potential variations that could be maybe permitted

37:09So the draft bylaw proposes a complete community charge to replace the existing

37:14Community benefits charge with the same rules and parameters that currently exist under the CBC

37:20In

37:21addition the draft community planning permit bylaw looks to implement additional building height and alignment with OPA 106

37:29And it proposes facility services and matters as a condition of development proportionate to the increased building height that may be permitted

37:38So in this case that facility services and matters

37:41could include affordable housing units or other things such as

37:46Parkland public realm improvements or other community needs and

37:50In the stone road in Edinburgh

37:53Context there was a framework that really prioritized affordable housing and in exchange for additional building heights and densities

38:00And we've certainly heard from the community

38:02And an interest in focusing on affordable housing again in the downtown

38:07When we talk about affordable housing, it's important to

38:13To highlight that the housing affordability strategy does identify a need for 33% of all new units as will had mentioned

38:21Ownership and rental to be affordable and these are based on the provincial bulletin. So we're not

38:27referring to

38:28deeply affordable

38:30And this is below market and it's identified on this slide the province updates the provincial bulletin threshold

38:38typically annually and

38:41You'll see on the slide what we mean in terms of ownership at about 407,000 or rental between

38:491200 and 1800

38:52for rental

38:56So in order to prioritize affordable housing the city

39:01retained Watson

39:03Economist to undertake some development feasibility analysis to help identify how much affordable housing the city could potentially ask for

39:12Now this financial analysis well not required under legislation

39:16was intended to

39:18Look at different development scenarios. They tested a 6 12 18 and 24 story

39:24Development as well as different parking rates and contingencies

39:29Across all ownership and rental scenarios considered

39:33When looking at just the the additional

39:36Stories 40 to 80 of the units associated with the development above the base

39:42Which was used as six stories in this scenario could be affordable without having any negative impact on the

39:49development feasibility when compared to the base scenario

39:54Given the comprehensive process undertaken through opa 106 and the additional building height

40:00The proposed community planning permit bylaw

40:04Uses the maximum building heights within opa 106

40:08as the as of right for class 1

40:11So this would mean additional justifications not needed to achieve the building heights up to opa 106

40:18But beyond this would require council approval

40:22Development that goes beyond the existing zoning bylaw maximum and is over six stories

40:28Would need to provide either

40:3133 of those additional units as affordable

40:35Or a cash and loo set at 97,000 or a combination of the two

40:42And again, this is important to note. This this is only for the units above the current zoning bylaw

40:47And over six stories. So this has no impact on development that um has permissions as of right today

40:55This is an exchange for the additional building height

41:00Um, you can see on the right an example of what this could look like on a six-story building

41:05On a building on a site that permits six stories today

41:08If development is proposing for example a nine-story building

41:12um within uh, that would be permitted within opa 106

41:17Um a third of the additional units or 33 of those additional units would be required to be affordable

41:30And that's highlighted there

41:33Recognizing that this bylaw will inform development and growth for decades to come in the downtown

41:40And that the current market situation is challenged

41:43The city is exploring i'm proposing a phase in of the required affordable housing units

41:49Where the additional percentage required

41:52Um would be uh phased in between now and december of 2027

42:00In this scenario, uh, what you'll see on the kind of um left hand side

42:08Let's see if the click works. There we go. Um an example where uh

42:13There's a six-story permitted through zoning. Um, the development is proposing an additional six stories again that

42:20This is assuming that the site has permissions through the current official plan

42:24And so five percent of those additional units would need to be afford affordable or cash and lew

42:30Um or a combination of the two so a significant decrease from the ultimate 33 percent

42:37The example on the right hand side

42:39demonstrates um when a development uh on the same site goes up to 13 stories where permitted

42:46um

42:47Sorry adds 13 more stories. So nine

42:5019 in total and in this scenario, um based on the graduated um phased in approach that the city is currently exploring

42:59Um the five percent of the first six stories would be required to be affordable while 10 percent of the additional seven stories

43:10And so on this slide, you'll see this is the maximum building heights

43:14From opa 106 we've carried them forward as the class one maximum building height

43:20identified a schedule d in the draft community planning permit bylaw

43:26And again these would be as of right

43:31And then on sorry, I said schedule d. I meant schedule c part of me

43:36And then on schedule d. Um, you will see um the the uh sites which would require community benefits or facility services and matters

43:45And really what we've done is we've netted out the existing zoning bylaw maximum building heights

43:51And anything under six stories. We have not applied the requirement

43:56And so um this would help um guide within the community planning permit bylaw

44:01Where that additional facility services of matter would be requested

44:11And there's a table within the bylaw that kind of outlines um these scenarios side by side

44:16Where any residential development um would be required to provide a complete community charge

44:22Which would be equivalent to the current community benefit charge citywide

44:27and then um, if any development between now when this community planning permit system, uh, is in effect

44:35prior to development, uh, december 31st 2026 would require um

44:43Sorry that should say 2027 in the middle um requires

44:47Uh five percent of any units for the additional six stories 10 percent from seven to 14 additional stories and 33

44:55percent beyond that so recognizing that the current market is challenged a phase in of that required additional affordable housing

45:04After december 31st 2027 um development applications that would come in

45:09Would need to provide uh, 33 of all additional units again

45:14This is all above the current zoning bylaw or six stories

45:18as um either an affordable housing unit cash or and lieu or a combination thereof

45:26And we'd be happy to um answer any questions about that analysis. Thank you for bearing with me. It is um,

45:32Rather detailed

45:34Um just wanted to highlight some of the kind of critical benefits by using a community planning permit system

45:40The city is really customizing an approval framework that focuses on accelerating housing supply

45:45In some incentivizing affordable housing needed within this community

45:50And comprehensively planning for growth to contribute to the creation of complete communities for the long term for people here today

45:57And for future generations

45:59And there's a range of benefits that this tool provides for the city of guelph

46:03It um in addition to the customized approval framework

46:07It makes development approval faster by combining multiple processes

46:11Provides clear guidelines on what someone can and cannot do

46:15Ensures development fits within the existing community by incorporating design standards into the bylaw

46:20Creating certainty and transparency for the community landowners and developers

46:26And provides residents with an opportunity to really inform how the rules of development are structured up front

46:32And lastly securing community needs such as affordable housing through this tool is really critical

46:40To support the city's long-term objectives

46:44And in terms of next steps, um, we are uh continuing to receive feedback and input welcome additional feedback and input this evening

46:52and um, we ask if possible that comments be provided by january 30th

46:57As we continue to work through the finalization of the bylaw into march

47:01Thank you

47:05Thank you very much

47:07um

47:08I think just normal kind of process if you don't mind we'll we'll go to the delegation that we have signed up just to get that out of the way

47:15And then we can um, I don't mean it that way. Ian like get you out of the way

47:18But we'll we'll get that part done and then we can see if there's anyone else and then we'll bring it back to us for some questions and comments to take away

47:26Okay, so Ian come on down

47:29Welcome and uh for this it's uh, no more than 10 minutes

47:35So, uh, you you you'll hear the chime uh, the nine minute 30 second mark anyone else that wants to also

47:43opine on this is nine minute and 30 second mark. You'll hear uh, a warning alarm bell go off

47:48So don't go over the 10 minutes, please and then just stick around in case myself or my colleagues have any follow-up questions

47:54Okay, over to you. Thank you. Thank you very much, mr. Mayor

47:59Mr. Mayor members of council fellow citizens staff

48:03Pleased to be here. My name is Ian Panabaker. I'm the vice-president of development for wood development group

48:08As many of you know, we're the a local land and building developer and property manager based in Guelph

48:13And we are the proponents behind the plant number two project in downtown

48:18It's in the ward between here on and duke

48:21Alice and elizabeth

48:23We have spent the last two years in engagement with staff and the public

48:28On our urban design master plan, which is required under the downtown secondary plan

48:33And it is currently uh, submitted to the to city for review and expected to come to council soon. We hope

48:41We're very excited that this is in the in the in the queue

48:45We've been working with staff on

48:48The potential to support the urban design master plan concept in the cpps by law process as these processes are kind of

48:55Coming towards council at relatively the same time. There's an opportunity to clean up some things that have happened in the in the meantime

49:04I should say though that we were excited to bring this forward

49:08Because indeed the draft cpps by law has come out

49:11That has some serious implications for our project

49:15And by extension, I think likely many redevelopment projects in downtown

49:20And i'm glad to have 10 minutes. So i'll just try and get through some some detail here

49:25Our plant number two is the largest block of redevelopment land in the downtown secondary plan

49:30It's roughly three times larger than baker street. If you can put that into context

49:37Includes hundreds of housing units and acres of new parks and open space being planned

49:42The development is a private sector led project that is not anticipating any brownfield or community

49:48improvement plan downtown

49:50support

49:52Unlike many other downtown developments that have happened in the last decade and from which by the way no affordable housing was required of them

50:01Plan number two's proposed density and scale that we talked to council about during the opa 106 process

50:07was directly related and calibrated to the cost of

50:11Redeploying this land. We have to do an enormous amount of work. It's a it's a nine acre brownfield

50:16If there's trunk and local services to reconstruct and renew

50:21There's a heritage building to be

50:23adaptively reused

50:25And it goes on and in the kind of keystone of this is the public space and public amenities that are coming

50:31in the plan

50:33this density was supported by council through opa 106

50:37And as I say, it allows us to overcome the costs required to to reposition the property

50:45At marketable land value costs within the performers for future buildings

50:49That's kind of key that we've

50:51This the space that was created in 106 is creating viability

50:57The draft downtown cpps by-law

51:00And this requirement for affordable housing within the space that's already been approved by council

51:06Does affect our performer dramatically

51:09It puts us into a no-go territory

51:13The 33 factor on the upper stories of our project

51:16Transmate trans kind of calculates into about a 15 percent overall

51:22requirement in the housing mix of the site

51:24When you include the podiums and the lower stories

51:28And that in our estimation as we were developing the public

51:34Community benefits in our plan kind of dwarfs what we were anticipating

51:40And so I once wanted to just point out that the province did remove bonusing from

51:46the planning act in 2020

51:49Which is what in effect the cps by-law is you were asking for

51:54contributions of

51:56In order to actualize

51:58Heights that you've already permitted

52:01In a way, it is also a part of the inclusionary zoning approach to

52:04affordability development around transit hubs

52:07So bonusing was replaced by the community benefits charge as you know, it's a four percent charge on land values

52:13across the city

52:15and the province

52:17In 2025 capped inclusionary zoning around major transit station areas for the Toronto and

52:23Mississauga and Kitchener areas at five percent last year

52:27And indeed just a week ago. They announced the pause on that potentially

52:32To remove any inclusionary zoning requirements for the next two years because of the state of the housing market

52:39We went through the economic analysis

52:41That was provided as part of the report. We wish to come out earlier

52:45So that we could have workshopped it with staff

52:48And and refined its outcomes

52:51It does appear to undervalue or miss cost elements

52:55It does kind of overstate the revenues possible

52:58And to create a picture that that the profits on a project can actually accommodate

53:03this kind of

53:06Implication or absorb the discount of 33 of those upper stories being brought at affordable

53:12So

53:14um

53:16As I say, we really wish we could have

53:18Talked with staff and worked with Watson on that ahead of the presentation to council

53:24as a test

53:26I would challenge you to look out the window and I'm being not slipping here

53:30If that was true that there are IRRs in in the city of Guelph for developing downtown of 30 percent

53:38Downtown would be built by now

53:40It's not

53:43We know that it stalled we know that it stalled after the community improvement plan

53:47incentives lapsed

53:49And what we've seen being built out is largely the result of those commitments early on

53:55Um, it's the case that inclusionary zoning really only works whether there's buoyant

54:00buoyancy in the economy that projects can actually absorb this as they're growing

54:04But we are in a period of quite uh a lot of flux

54:08We see dropping prices. We see land values being affected and yet costs are persistent and high

54:17It's the reason why the province has actually done this two-year pause proposal

54:21We've encouraged council to reconsider the class two and three

54:25categories

54:27And risk and to not risk further stalling downtown

54:30Interest and investments

54:33There are some other conceptual issues that I just wanted to raise

54:36In the design of the of the cpps you'll note that the

54:41The 33 percent provision is only for the sites that have this height adjustment through opa 106

54:47So there is a kind of punitive and

54:50imbalanced between properties and neighbors within the plan some properties or 18 stories they are

54:57Because they were as of right

54:59Into a year ago

55:01They do not have to provide affordable housing within their

55:04Reformas next door neighbor does and it may be actually be from six stories to 24 that a full 18 stories of their site may

55:12um

55:13It's conceptually for us a problematic

55:18Public policy

55:20um

55:21And I'd also

55:22Looking kind of stepping back and you look at the cpps is developed for edinborough and stone and downtown

55:29They reintroduce the community benefits charge in the form of community

55:33Complete community charge. That's the four percent that replaced bonusing

55:39And also required this additional

55:41bonus bonus and commitment of affordable housing. You're actually

55:45introducing two charges on the same property

55:49Where none is where this doesn't exist anywhere else in the city outside of these community

55:53planning system areas

55:55so

55:57we're questioning the

55:58Again, the equitable approach to that it seems counterproductive to to additional additional tax sites within

56:06the cpps's

56:09And finally the I just comment on the offsetting value of the streamlined approvals, which is the basic pitch for for cpps's

56:17We do want to note to

56:19council that we feel that having reviewed the variance is possible in class twos

56:25that

56:25staff may be too meek about

56:28Allowing themselves the delegated authority to resolve issues

56:32and we would

56:33Encourage councils to support staff in making this more flexible at the class two level

56:39You don't want to become the committee of adjustment

56:43For for for downtown or for stoneman maroo

56:48And I would also say that the

56:50The process for getting to council with ncpps means that the proponent has to put together a complete application

56:57So that's an enormous amount of work to get

57:00Accepted and considered complete to get to council

57:03Whereas I can test a variance with the committee of adjustment with a relatively light touch

57:10And so you do wonder about

57:12The efficacy of some of these if if the bylaw is too tightly constrained and doesn't give

57:17staff the authority to

57:19resolve problems

57:21So it's certainly back just in summary

57:24We're delegating tonight because we are so close to bringing a project that we were very proud of to council

57:31and

57:33We think it represents good planning and good urbanism for wealth and it already includes intentional contributions to the public good

57:41such as public space and heritage

57:43and

57:44We would encourage council to support staff in exploring with the community

57:49The viability of their assumptions in the in the bylaw and getting it right

57:54Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh, Ian

58:01Uh, councillor billings, please

58:05It's through you mr. Mayor. Um, okay, Ian. So you talked about

58:10under the class two

58:12for staff to have more flexibility

58:15and

58:17As the bylaw is proposed right now. You're saying we shouldn't be passing this

58:22But let's just look at the affordable housing issue because you talked about your performer

58:28So what would work the 33 percent as proposed would not what would work, Ian?

58:37Through you mr. Mayor to the councillor

58:40Uh, we of course given the scale of our project. We knew that there would be community benefits required to to

58:46attach to the master plan

58:48We were anticipating

58:50The provincial direction of five percent in that order

58:54Which is the cap for inclusionary zoning and we were also anticipating that

59:01Alternative matters like public space and parks and and heritage contributions

59:06would be part of the mix to

59:08Achieve approval within the the height limits that we wouldn't necessarily have to get to council

59:14But those have been broken out so that all of those become council decisions

59:18And only the affordable housing is a class two

59:21Uh approval

59:23so, uh, we we see that there's extra

59:26potential complexity or risk to get to class three for projects that that are

59:32Transparenly trying to create public benefit

59:35That that is acceptable within the list of the staff are are showing

59:42Okay, so then to drill down then you're saying the five percent would work. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Ian

59:48Uh, thank you councillor councillor goller, please

59:56Thank you through worship to mr. Panabaker

59:58Thank you very much for your presentation. I really appreciate this and uh, I my first question was already asked by councillor billings

1:00:05So so I appreciate that

1:00:07I wanted a little more clarity with regards to to the second part to

1:00:12The the delegated authority to to staff for for this in your view

1:00:18You know what would be an appropriate level of

1:00:22Of delegation so that it doesn't end up that you know everything comes to us. I'm going to end up looking at manisha

1:00:30Thank you through you. Mr. Mayor to councillor goller. Um, that's a it's a tricky one

1:00:36for sure and counts staff have to walk this line between

1:00:40What the public would find acceptable that they would have authority to do and what?

1:00:44Um

1:00:46They've been given

1:00:48There are and I don't have it in front of me, but there are you know each each regulation has a kind of

1:00:54tolerance beside it

1:00:56and some of them seem

1:00:59Tight like like

1:01:01forgive me will if

1:01:03Say the the setbacks on the fourth floor of a project which are required to be three meters

1:01:10I think

1:01:11You're giving yourself 10 percent either side of that

1:01:18What's the privilege?

1:01:21I'm not sure if I pulled up the step back one right away, but um shoot

1:01:32Yeah, maybe go to the um high density because we're looking at high density before it's a blowout I think he said that

1:01:39Forgive us

1:01:50There's the high density ones

1:01:53And if those maybe you would highlight it

1:01:57So 10 percent here non here

1:02:02Yeah, sorry through you mr. Mayor just for example in the

1:02:06um

1:02:08medium density and high density residential mdr and hdr's

1:02:12uh, for instance, um floor plate size on the seventh and eighth floor

1:02:18Can be 1200 meters staff can do that by 10 or 10 percent so 120 square meters

1:02:31This is the floor plate size for seven and eighth floors

1:02:36and that's actually different in the different categories of the

1:02:42The precincts that I noticed but that's an example where

1:02:46Um, you're 15 percent you're gonna come to council. Yeah, you know, I appreciate and I

1:02:53Sorry, what is the right tolerance for for counsel to delegate? Yeah, you know that that is I appreciate that and you know having

1:03:01Your experience has both been a city staffer and now being a developer. I really appreciate that lens. Thank you

1:03:09Thank you worship. Okay. Thank you

1:03:11Is there anything further at all on this one?

1:03:17No, okay, I think I did write some questions down, but I think they may be

1:03:23For staff

1:03:30Yeah, they are for staff. So thanks, yin

1:03:34I think that's it for questions then for you. We appreciate your presentation

1:03:37I do have my consultant tim smith here who's happy to delegate when the floor is open

1:03:43Okay, yep, no problem

1:03:47Um, so we didn't have anyone else registered. So let me just at least say the phone number out loud

1:03:52Uh, just in case there's a call in

1:03:54and then uh, so it is right now 519-837-5603

1:04:02And as we are waiting for that

1:04:06Was that a request to delegate or to only answer questions based on ian's delegation? I didn't quite understand

1:04:15Okay, so why don't you come up and you can we can start that right now?

1:04:18Just as the number is on the screen for a moment. Actually, if you don't mind

1:04:23Sorry, I changed my mind. We need to leave the number up on the screen

1:04:27So if you could just wait actually a couple minutes because we've got to allow people to see the number on the screen

1:04:31Uh, is there anyone else though other than this person that wants to delegate to this matter?

1:04:37No, just just for now. What's your name sir?

1:04:41Tim, okay. Yeah, Tim, if you don't mind just having another seat for just a couple minutes

1:04:45I'm sorry. I called you up. Let's just leave the number on the screen. Okay, and we'll come right back to everybody

1:07:52Okay, so there's been no calls in so we have the one extra delegation that would like to speak

1:07:58Tim Smith. I believe I said that right

1:08:01Can't screw up that last name there

1:08:03All right, so uh, thank you so much for joining us

1:08:07So you can also you also have the right to the full 10 minutes if you need to

1:08:12The the time is yours and just stick around in case there's a question. Okay. Thank you for joining us

1:08:17Go ahead. Thank you, mr. Mayor. I hope not to take the 10 minutes, but I do have a way of talking on so try and keep it tight

1:08:23Uh, my name is tim smith. I'm a principal with the planning and urban design firm of urban strategies

1:08:29And I'm here as the planning consultant for the wood development group

1:08:32So many of my comments will build on what you've heard from from ean

1:08:37Although I do come here also as the lead author for the downtown secondary plan

1:08:41Which is dates me a little bit but as someone with a really continuing keen interest in seeing downtown continuing to intensify

1:08:49Continuing to revitalize and it's just great to come back frequently and see the progress being made

1:08:54But as we all know it's on the development side things are not happening

1:08:59Asked enough so it's clearly the intent of this community planning permit system and the bylaw

1:09:04To really try to move things along a little bit

1:09:07It's going to be challenging in this current housing market, but of course we we need to stay optimistic and hope the conditions

1:09:14Improve in the near future

1:09:16Nevertheless the the cpps and the bylaw really should be responding to the kind of current realities

1:09:23I'd like to speak a little bit about

1:09:25um

1:09:26Our concerns as they relate to the plan to site

1:09:30As Ian said, we were a little bit alarmed when we saw the draft cpp bylaw

1:09:34I'll touch on

1:09:36Without repeating Ian's comments touch on the affordable housing requirement our concerns there

1:09:41um, but I I'd like to focus on

1:09:44You know some more basic stuff which is the precinct designation for our site

1:09:48And the provisions that go along with that we were concerned because really the draft bylaw

1:09:53Carries forward the current zoning provisions for our site and zoning for the site as a medium density

1:09:59residential site

1:10:01And I think if we're if you're all kind of recalling

1:10:05The concept we showed for plan two site. It is a high density

1:10:09High rise mid rise low rise development, but clearly high density

1:10:14Fortunately, we were assured we had a meeting with city staff last week

1:10:18Appreciate them arranging that quickly and the rest they gave us assurance that this is not a final bylaw

1:10:24It's a draft bylaw and their focus with this first draft was to really get a base

1:10:30Bylaw together that addressed many many sites but did not take the time to actually deal with some site specific

1:10:38Requirements exceptions that would be needed or in our case is sort of rezoning if you will a redesignation to recognize

1:10:46Our our concept which which by the way it's culminated in urban design master plan

1:10:50At the easy invention submitted to the city in november and we which we hope will be coming to council in the coming months

1:10:57Um, but we do have we feel quite a bit of support in principle from the community

1:11:02From staff and and even I think some of you on council for the directions within that urban design master plan

1:11:09So we were very optimistic and we remain hopeful that we'll be able to work with staff over the coming weeks

1:11:14To look at our site and and give it the right designation. It could be a high density

1:11:19residential hdr

1:11:21Precinct designation like the metalwork site has or it could be a d2

1:11:26designation we'll work through that with with staff and I hope be able to kind of develop the provisions that are needed

1:11:32Regarding setbacks and stepbacks and things like that that are going to really make it easier for

1:11:39Our community planning permit applications, which will come after the urban design master plan

1:11:45Is adopted

1:11:47This will likely happen in phases those cpp applications

1:11:50We expect three major phases of development over the next several years to to a decade

1:11:55So we're not looking at you know, this will being a two or three year project when we think about

1:11:59You know that affordable housing requirement, which I will come back to

1:12:03um

1:12:04So again, we are looking forward to working with staff and to emphasize how important it is to try to

1:12:10Get on the same page about the designation for our site and those provisions

1:12:14Regarding land uses and built form etc

1:12:17It is critical that we get to some level agreement

1:12:19We may still be some of these applications may still be class two even class three

1:12:25We might need to come to council for ultimate approval of those

1:12:28cpp applications

1:12:30But we don't want to be in a situation where we can't do certain uses in particular

1:12:34Including some of the non residential uses. We hope will be accommodated on our site

1:12:39Whether it's restaurants cafes community uses convenience store that type of thing

1:12:44We hope to have a number of those in the development

1:12:47And under the current it's kind of zoning

1:12:50That would be a problem and there's the higher high risk that

1:12:53We might be waiting five years before the cpp is amended. I don't imagine that scenario

1:12:58But that is the intention. You're not meant to be amending cpp by-laws for five years

1:13:04Uh council can give direction to accept those amendments, but we really don't want to go through that process

1:13:09We really want to try to get on the same page with staff and council

1:13:13um

1:13:14the first time

1:13:16um, I will

1:13:19Like to kind of talk a little bit about the affordable housing issue because it applies to our site

1:13:23But as Ian said it really is likely to apply to many many sites

1:13:27And there is that kind of really quite frankly an issue of fairness as Ian pointed out

1:13:32Because our as of right height limit is only 10 stories on our site at at at center

1:13:39It really means everything above that which is up to our 19 and 23 story buildings is subject to that affordable housing requirement

1:13:46Other sites that already have greater height permissions are not going to be subject to that

1:13:49So it's kind of like saying

1:13:51You know last april. Oh, we could have 24 stories, but oh by the way this all that extra height

1:13:56It's gonna it's going to kind of cost you and

1:13:59I understand you know, bonusing is a very effective tool and using cpp by-laws to

1:14:04Effectively bring back bonusing if you will to kind of permit extra height and density and exchange for community benefits and principle

1:14:12is is a valid approach, but I think the

1:14:15the

1:14:16approach and

1:14:18Provisions here in the cpp by-law just quite frankly won't work the economics don't work and and Ian's really made that point

1:14:25And i'm sure it's not going to apply

1:14:28Only only to our site

1:14:30So

1:14:32What then maybe is well one other point I wanted to make too is that

1:14:36I think maybe I need a little bit of clarification on this is that you heard about

1:14:41The proposal to require a community

1:14:44A complete community charge

1:14:46It kind of replaces the idea of a community benefits charge to capture community facilities and and services

1:14:52You also heard reference to affordable housing kind of

1:14:56You know not being

1:14:58Community facility or service, but it's kind of like treated like that when it comes to the affordable housing requirements

1:15:04So maybe that does need a little bit of clarification, but nevertheless on one hand you're looking for 4% for

1:15:10community facilities and services and it's not

1:15:13clear what those might encompass but presumably it's all manner of things

1:15:18landscape improvements

1:15:20green design

1:15:23Space within a development for community use for example

1:15:27And then these are affordable housing requirements. So really there's kind of like these two extra charges

1:15:32And I do appreciate there's certainty when you have

1:15:36You use math to figure out what those contributions should be

1:15:40You know the city knows what it's going to get, but I'll have to tell you the very best

1:15:45projects that are developed with it particularly within a downtown which is you know very complex

1:15:52Setting compared to anywhere else in your city every sites different

1:15:55What you can get through a development is often very different in terms of height and density and community benefits

1:16:02The very best projects are often negotiated right? There's certain standards you need to meet

1:16:07There's certain permissions that are granted

1:16:10Um, and then there's the extra things you'd like to get from a development

1:16:13And I'm not suggesting we go back to the section 37 days. That's not an option anymore, but

1:16:18um, I think they're really

1:16:20With the cpps the system should do and the by-law

1:16:24In implementing that system really should try to do a setup scenarios where there is that kind of negotiation

1:16:29There is flexibility in other words in terms of what those community benefits could be including affordable housing

1:16:36including open space

1:16:38improvements including a higher quality of design

1:16:41green design

1:16:42You name it and and I don't think there's really been room provided within the cpp i law for that to happen

1:16:49We know these things need to be permitted

1:16:51applications need to be approved in 45 days

1:16:55Very tight timeline

1:16:56But reality is that's just

1:16:59Part of the overall approval process there will be conditions put on approvals

1:17:03Which will take weeks a month to to to meet and so forth

1:17:06So there really is a longer period which will win

1:17:09Free application and post approval when some of that negotiation

1:17:14Can can be can happen

1:17:16So I I look forward to an opportunity to kind of work with staff

1:17:20Um, maybe with other consultants on from representing other landowners

1:17:23So maybe aren't here today to actually have that conversation to ensure that at the end of the day

1:17:28There is that flexibility that these contributions whether it's affordable housing or the complete community charge

1:17:34Are not going to stop projects from moving forward. This is the real concern here is that the the extra costs that are added

1:17:42um

1:17:43Are simply going to stop projects from happening

1:17:45So, uh, again, I hope

1:17:48There's time permitted and this is my really my final

1:17:51Comment is that our understanding is this by law really should be finalized in the next few weeks to a month to come back to council

1:17:58in march

1:18:00For hopefully adoption

1:18:01I'm not sure that's enough time to deal with some of the minor issues perhaps on our site

1:18:06But some of these larger issues that that ian and I have touched on so I really um, urge staff and council to kind of

1:18:14Make the time necessary to to get this right. Thank you

1:18:18All right. Hey good timing. Thank you very much. Is there any follow-up questions for for tim?

1:18:26Okay, I don't uh, I don't think so you've stated it. Well, thank you for your presentation to appreciate it

1:18:34Okay, so council it's back to us and just another reminder. There's no approval here. It's just all giving feedback on this

1:18:42I'll start with councillor Goller than councillor Allt and uh, I see classon and katin

1:18:49And we'll make our care coran as well. So we'll just work our way around. Okay

1:18:53Feedback if you can that'd be that'd be great. Thank you through worship to staff. Uh, first off, thank you so much for coming forward with this

1:19:02Draft by law. It's it's a lot of work. I can see that

1:19:05um

1:19:06And um, I had a couple of questions that were raised by the by the delegates

1:19:10But before I go to those I wanted to ask staff for some comments on the other letter that we got from fusion homes

1:19:17some of the similar comments about the

1:19:21the validity of the

1:19:23economic formulas used

1:19:26And I know you've had a chance to consider those questions. So if I could have some comments on those questions raised by the letter

1:19:36Through you the mayor, uh, perhaps I can start. Um, so there were a few specific topics brought up

1:19:44through the

1:19:45fusion letter homes letter dated january 16 2026

1:19:50um, the kind of three topics that are are pulled out that I'd like to go through our parking market sales

1:19:57and development costs

1:20:00As relates to the parking standards, um, they note that the november 2025 feasibility assessment assumes no parking constructed

1:20:08for various building scenarios

1:20:10there were two

1:20:13Watson memos provided on the city's website

1:20:16That looked at different development parameters

1:20:20The first one is from october 27 2025 and did look at development scenarios

1:20:27612 18 and 24 stories purpose built in condo

1:20:31But in this in these scenarios, they all did have parking standards

1:20:34So while the city does not is not allowed to have minimum parking requirements for the downtown

1:20:40The parking rates were used at point eight

1:20:44Parking spot per unit as well as 0.05 for visitor

1:20:50We did test that scenario

1:20:54and then

1:20:55Recognizing that the city is not able to identify a minimum parking requirement

1:21:00There was a desire to also make some tweaks and refinements to our our scenarios to look at

1:21:05Well, perhaps that's that's more than what we're actually seeing and maybe staff can speak to

1:21:10recent development applications

1:21:12um, and so we tested a scenario with no

1:21:17Minimum parking required, but we did increase the contingency

1:21:21And soft costs of the development. So that's why you see two memos on the website

1:21:27That do look at parking and no parking scenarios

1:21:31Before I go to the next point, was there anything anyone want to add on parking?

1:21:35Good

1:21:36The second point was market sales price assumptions are aggressive

1:21:41We have confirmed with Watson

1:21:44that the parking assumptions that they used are based on the

1:21:48Altis

1:21:49Standards that they provided Altis data studio database

1:21:53Which provides a listing of active and recent

1:21:56Completed projects in the local market

1:21:59for example the

1:22:00Downtown Guelph and they also did a desktop review of active listings for new developments to help compile the aggregate to generate

1:22:09average representative prices per square foot

1:22:12And unit as well as unit sizes for the different development applications

1:22:17The development scenarios

1:22:19Are intended to be prototypical so they certainly will not represent every individual as they might undertake a development application in the downtown

1:22:27But they are intended to

1:22:29Inform the analysis and represent more prototypical development

1:22:34As it relates to the third point on development costs

1:22:37similar response there. It's it's also based on Altis

1:22:43development guide and

1:22:45was

1:22:46Again, you know intended to be prototypical this this does get updated from time to time

1:22:52and

1:22:53development

1:22:56The purpose of the financial analysis was not just to test

1:23:01viability of development

1:23:03Development today

1:23:06In the downtown does have challenges and that is why we want to really look at pro forma

1:23:12Analysis this wasn't a requirement of the city, but it was in an abundance of caution to undertake analysis like this

1:23:19and the purpose was really to look at the

1:23:23uplift of the additional height and density or in this case height of the downtown

1:23:28And what that does to the pro forma so while each developer might look at the base case and argue

1:23:35Individual assumptions within the pro forma analysis

1:23:39It was intended to provide a prototypical development to help inform

1:23:43What is the uplift of the additional height being provided for as a right?

1:23:49And how much additional affordable housing could be asked for in exchange for that additional height?

1:23:58Happy to take any further questions. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. I I appreciate that answer and I understand the thought process behind this

1:24:05I really appreciate that

1:24:07I think

1:24:08We're still left struggling with the question of of how this will impact the viability of those projects

1:24:15If I'm here from some of the proponents that would be building in our downtown area

1:24:20To that end could you speak to to the requirement for the

1:24:24For the increased affordable housing on the changes since opa 106. I mean, what would happen to

1:24:31To our requirements if we were to say well, let's just assume that opa 106 is the base and we go from there

1:24:39um through you the

1:24:43Through you the mayor um if you so um

1:24:47You are adding significant height in the downtown through opa 106

1:24:52This is the highest uplift with some sites adding 18 plus store 18 stories onto an individual site

1:25:00Given the as of right given the parameters under the planning act and tools available to the city of guelph to look for

1:25:08and try to seek affordable housing

1:25:10and a commitment from the development community

1:25:15We believe that the land value capture opportunity is only when you add that as of right permission

1:25:22So you heard comments about

1:25:25inequitable or fairness

1:25:27um

1:25:27It is the the tool

1:25:30Demonstrates it needs to be proportional to the additional height that's being added. So if um, if you go adding this additional height now

1:25:38Um under the planning act, we don't think there's another tool right now to require any affordable housing

1:25:45You would only be getting affordable housing for anything over opa 106

1:25:50Um, and then those parameters. We really haven't tested

1:25:53Any financial analysis to say what the the proportional relationship would be to additional height

1:25:59um, what we know in the financial analysis is

1:26:04that

1:26:04You know guelph's context does have a bit of a sweet spot for where development feasibility exists

1:26:11um, and i'm not sure that beyond 24 stories you would see the same level of uplift

1:26:18associated with benefit to the developer

1:26:21of

1:26:22Compared to the uplift that you're seeing in opa 106 today

1:26:28Through through the mayor to the council if I can just add so we actually will meet with the

1:26:33The two people who corresponded tonight and make sure we go through that with them go through the numbers with them

1:26:38Um, I think the meetings. I know I know one's already set up

1:26:41I saw that one come through my calendar

1:26:43I can check on the other one as well, but we we will commit to doing that and reporting back to council when we come back

1:26:48Um, we also as the city

1:26:50Um, did the affordable housing strategy? That's an important document to get us to 2051 and affordable housing and in that document

1:26:57It did say that we need 8700 affordable housing units

1:27:01To 2051 in order to serve the needs of our community

1:27:05So this is what we you know, this is an opportunity to us to do it

1:27:09We took a look at it and it does provide us the opportunity to ensure we meet the needs of all of our community members

1:27:15By doing this. So we'll take a look at it

1:27:18We do have the phased in approach and and maybe that's something we get feedback on is

1:27:22To the end of 2027 enough for a phased in approach or should we

1:27:27You know look at a longer phased in approach or maybe no phase in and keep whatever number

1:27:33But we're also trying to achieve the balance in the community and we know we have that

1:27:37Affordable housing strategy that says we need affordable housing units in Guelph

1:27:42Yeah, no that is that that is that is fair. Thank you and your worship my comments

1:27:48I I would ask that you please just review those those formulas

1:27:51You have used with those the proponents to make sure that

1:27:55We're not missing numbers

1:27:56So we're not over estimating the actual cost to build today and the uncertainties that that we're facing as a as a country

1:28:04And I would ask that that we take another look at the requirement for that, you know, 33 percent affordable

1:28:11I want housing built. I want affordable housing built

1:28:14But I I want to make sure that

1:28:16We're not asking so much that it actually stifles projects and it prevents those couple of

1:28:23Projects in or downtown that are ready to go ahead

1:28:26And I don't know if that looks like like site specific exemptions or or what it looks like

1:28:30but I want to make sure that the projects that are in the pipeline get built and are not held back by

1:28:37by

1:28:39Requirements that the the market is not able to bear at this point. Thank you worship. All right. Thank you. So I got all to then closet

1:28:50Thank you very much. Mayor Guthrie through you two staff

1:28:56And I might have specific questions for specific staff at some point

1:29:00but with regards to the this

1:29:04revised bylaw a concern that I've heard from people in the community already is that what we as council and staff

1:29:10recognize as

1:29:12As providing efficiencies and being expeditious is seen by many in the community as reducing citizen and resident input

1:29:19Into the planning process. I was wondering if you could please comment on that and clarify

1:29:24Whether there is concern within the community for that

1:29:29Through the mayor

1:29:32So with with a lot of the development review applications, they don't come to council

1:29:37in the first place

1:29:39and

1:29:40A lot of the projects we're sending for to the committee of adjustment are routine

1:29:45Really small things that don't actually

1:29:48have a large public impact and that's one of the things we're trying to balance is

1:29:53Making sure that we're taking projects that merit this kind of stage

1:29:57and have a large-scale impact on the public

1:30:01making sure that they have a forum for it but

1:30:03making but delegating some of those decisions to staff where if a fence is too tall does that

1:30:09warrant

1:30:10A public meeting or there's something that staff can do because I know development staff often hear

1:30:15Why do I need to go for a public meeting and no one shows up?

1:30:18So it so there is a balance that we're trying to strike here and that's part of what the conversation is

1:30:24Thank you very much. Um more particular questions

1:30:29For staff, I don't know whether it's for uh for anybody in particular might be mizawaaki

1:30:34But I've heard comments about cpps as being bonusing is the analogy

1:30:40Actually correct. Is this bonusing?

1:30:46um

1:30:47Through the mayor of the counciler

1:30:48So it's a tool in the planning act that we have that the province gave us to to allow for these these types of

1:30:56Changes in our program. So the bonus the old bonusing provision is is no longer

1:31:02So I would not consider in my mind. I would not consider this bonusing

1:31:06Okay, thank you

1:31:07Carrying on is that the analogy correct that essentially we have essentially two classes of buildings those that we're considering

1:31:14um

1:31:15At the present and those that in the past were excluded from some of the considerations we've heard concerns about

1:31:25Uh through the mayor to the councillor

1:31:27So I think the figures that that are shown in the map kind of show what buildings that we are taking a look at

1:31:34And where the the potential increases in height height could be

1:31:38um

1:31:39So I I'm not sure if that's the two classes. We've got classes that's

1:31:44The way it's the worded classes in this case or where staff can can review two classes versus where

1:31:50The third class is where council council reviews and you know as as was indicated

1:31:55It's a tightrope on what on what we

1:31:58Delegate to staff and what we don't and what we think we we need some more additional community input on so I think that's the

1:32:05The difference in what we're doing here

1:32:07I was wondering also if staff could comment on

1:32:10Uh, delegated authority as was raised by mr. Panabaker. Is this something that is feasible?

1:32:15Is it something that staff could take back? Is there are there cautions or concerns that you might have?

1:32:21Yeah, through the mayor to the councillor so that is something we'll we'll take back and we'll meet with them to

1:32:25Understand their concerns a little bit more and find that line of delegated authority

1:32:30um

1:32:32And it is you know, even as mr. Panabaker indicated

1:32:35It's almost like a tightrope act. What is what can staff do versus what we feel the community needs?

1:32:39So we'll we'll look at those percentages that we put in there and see if they if they make sense

1:32:43Or if there's an opportunity opportunity to amend some of them and then definitely report back to council on what that is

1:32:49And then what powers we're giving to staff because they are this this is substantial in this case

1:32:54Thank you last question from mr. Smith. Mr. Smith raised the the the point of scenarios and flexibility

1:33:02Whether it be with design

1:33:04And whether things could be subject to negotiation

1:33:08Is that something with which staff can work or does that become problematic?

1:33:15Through the mayor to councillor so we will work with the applicants and and get a little bit more detail on that and and see what we can

1:33:21Either put into the bylaw or what we what we do feel needs to come for council for consideration. Thank you very much

1:33:28Thanks, uh, councillor oalt, uh claus and then kate

1:33:31Thank you through you mr. Mayor to staff. I have a question with regard to um, the project background and and why we're seeing this now in the timing

1:33:41so, um

1:33:43In the in the background section it talks about how this is part of our half funding our housing accelerator fund

1:33:50Funding and it does have a short timeline coming back to us in march when we've heard comments that maybe you know

1:33:56That timeline is is too short. So I was wondering if you could speak to that context

1:34:01And the timing required by the half funding

1:34:07Through the mayor to the councillor so we we did split this project into two phases

1:34:11So we have already completed the cpps for the stone road area. So we've completed that part of the project and

1:34:17um

1:34:18We're having meetings with some property owners on that. So hopefully that moves forward quickly

1:34:23We do know the property owners are excited about that one

1:34:26But we did split it out because this one is a little bit more complicated and does involve a lot more properties

1:34:31So we are splitting it out. We do have to have it in place

1:34:35version by the end of the year

1:34:38But then we've extended the timelines to 2027 and we'll work with our cmhc rep and let them know kind of where we're at

1:34:44We do on our check-ins with them. Let them know where we're at

1:34:48And to bring this forward, but we do have at least one of the cpps bylaws in place already

1:34:54Okay, thank you and through you mr. Mayor

1:34:57You mentioned it already, but the stone Edinburgh

1:34:59I was just curious about about that and you mentioned that we are talking to some

1:35:04Developers and so I was wondering if you could comment

1:35:06On you know, have there been any you know projects that have gone through the process yet successfully

1:35:11And if not, could you also speak to other communities that might have one of these in place that are seeing projects move through?

1:35:18the cpps

1:35:20Yeah, thanks. I'll start the the first part and then I'll pass it over

1:35:24So we don't have a project that's gone through the cpps in stone Edinburgh yet

1:35:30Some of the challenges when a property is for sale

1:35:32They also have to reach agreements with purchasers who are actually going to be doing the developments

1:35:37But we are working with the property owners in that area who are looking to advance their projects

1:35:43But we don't have any anything as of yet concrete and then I'll pass it over for other municipalities on what they're doing

1:35:50Um as it relates to uh through the mayor um

1:35:54It relates to other municipalities that have a community planning permit system in effect

1:35:59Um, the town of innisfil has one in effect for the shoreline

1:36:03It's been in effect for several years now and then expanded it to alcona. Um, their

1:36:08settlement primary settlement area

1:36:11Last year and they continue to have to work with applications on the shoreline as well as um, we understand alcona

1:36:17Um, and they're now going townwide on their bylaw

1:36:22Given some of the success

1:36:24The town of huntsville is the most recent in effect municipality wide

1:36:28Um, uh exercise and and that was a couple years ago. They're now reviewing and updating but they've had

1:36:34All development applications over the last kind of two and a half years since it's been in effect

1:36:38Have gone through this process because they did it municipality wide at the beginning

1:36:43Lake of bays as well

1:36:45Has one in effect municipality wide

1:36:48And then there's a number of municipalities that are working on kind of approvals right now

1:36:52Um for their community planning permit system and i'd be happy to speak to that if you would like

1:36:57But that wasn't your question. So i'll leave it there

1:37:01Thank you. I would appreciate if you could speak to it and especially any examples that are similar in context to our downtown

1:37:08Where there would be density like lake of bays. I'm just thinking is a low density community with the really small

1:37:14I think it's a quite small town center huntsville again smaller population

1:37:19Not as dense of a of a downtown. So if maybe inisville is similar or others

1:37:25I would be curious to thank you mr. Mayor

1:37:28Um through the mayor a number of different municipalities are looking at using this tool now to help support

1:37:34Intensification and growth similar to what the city of gualph is doing. Um, you are one of the leaders in this area though

1:37:39So, um, I don't want to downplay how um bold the city has been

1:37:45The uh, city of peter bro is going municipality wide and their draft by-law was just public as of monday

1:37:52So you can see a copy of that and they're going through their

1:37:55engagement and statutory approval process and that includes um a framework for officially services and matters

1:38:02and affordable housing

1:38:04You know building off of some of the lessons earned from guelph

1:38:07um, the city of uh, burlington um has been proposing to do a

1:38:11Cpps for their major transit station areas three of them

1:38:15And has been working through that process over the last number of years after a comprehensive review of those areas

1:38:21The city of waterloo has a draft community planning permit by-law

1:38:25That they've done several rounds of engagement on and they're coming to towards the end of their process

1:38:31for both the uptown and the

1:38:33herb street corridor, so

1:38:36Definitely areas where additional growth and intensification are planned

1:38:40um, and then

1:38:42Oakville has a draft for their midtown major transit station area as well as bronte village

1:38:49um, and uh, I believe calliton now has one

1:38:54That is waiting

1:38:56An approval on their enabling policies and then would be in effect

1:39:00um, and then, uh

1:39:03Brampton has had one for main street for many years. Um

1:39:07Uh, it has had some challenges. I understand in in implementation, so we don't often kind of use that as a as one of the kind of um

1:39:17Primary primary tools for facilitating growth

1:39:21Um, but they continue to use that tool and then there's a number of municipalities that are in process as well

1:39:27Um, that I haven't mentioned yet. Um, but I think uh, aurora

1:39:31Um, berry

1:39:33It's a long list now

1:39:36Thank you for the additional, um

1:39:39Information it's helpful. So you you know through you mr. Mayor. I heard I heard miss the the mayor say bold

1:39:47um as a as a bit of a comment to um

1:39:51The fact that the city of guelph is kind of leading in this area. So could you comment on that as well?

1:39:57Compared to I mean made a big list and then you know guelph is bold. So I'm I just want to clarify that

1:40:03um through you the mayor um

1:40:07that uh

1:40:08Using this tool to help facilitate growth and intensification is still

1:40:12Fairly new across the province many of the examples of a community planning permit system that are in effect

1:40:18We're used to control shoreline development or control more given the broader definition of development under a community planning permit system

1:40:26um

1:40:27The city of guelph having it in effect for stone road in edinbro and looking to

1:40:33provide opportunity for

1:40:36people to for the development community to build with different scenarios and and really um, you know

1:40:43Trying to be clear about what staff can do in enabling staff to streamline development approvals. Um, I think um

1:40:50Is bold and lots of other municipalities are looking at guelph as an example of how to do that

1:40:56Okay, uh, thank you

1:40:58All right. Thank you

1:41:00And so katin and karan are my last uh two on this

1:41:05Thank you through you mr. Mayor to staff

1:41:08um

1:41:09I I love that guelph is

1:41:12Being a leader in this space and I think that uh the work that staff has done on this up to date has been great

1:41:18I'm really looking forward to see how

1:41:21You kind of pull together the the feedback that you get tonight and what you present at the end of the month

1:41:26Um, a lot of my questions have been asked. I was just wondering in terms of the provincially mandated

1:41:33uh number or

1:41:35percentage of accessible units that you have to have in buildings of certain heights. Is it possible to?

1:41:42um

1:41:43include that as a percentage of the affordable units like of the you know, 5 percent or 10 percent

1:41:51x percent of that

1:41:53Should be accessible

1:41:58Through the marriage of the counselor. I think that's a very valid comment

1:42:01And we'll take a look at that and when we report back, we'll have a section on that for you

1:42:06Great. Thank you very much. That's all

1:42:10Thank you councillor Caton and now karan

1:42:13Thanks, mr. Mayor. One of the disadvantages of going last is everyone has asked my question. So thank you

1:42:20for calling

1:42:24In such a pleasant experience or thanks

1:42:30So yeah, just to confirm just because we had a little bit of a problem hearing you're you're basically saying ditto

1:42:36Okay, just wanted to make sure that we we captured that. Thank you

1:42:39And I do see councillor uh billings hand go up as well

1:42:43And just before you go ahead councillor billings

1:42:45Councillor Caron, I don't I don't know we just your volume is okay in here, but it's just very um

1:42:51It's not coming through clear

1:42:52So just wondered if maybe if you had if you have like a headphone or

1:42:57Or or anything like that or maybe just get a little bit closer to the microphone of your laptop or whatever

1:43:01That might help a little bit just next time you speak or you could try it now. Do you want to try it now?

1:43:05Yeah, I might have had some background noise. So

1:43:11Yeah, you're you're you're better now. Thank you. All right councillor billings

1:43:19Through you mr. Mayor, um, maybe I missed it and if I did I apologize, but through you to krista

1:43:25So with respect to the financial analysis that was done, are we going to do like um, or are you going to do like a

1:43:33Maybe a small peer review with the developers that do have this concern and that are telling you that

1:43:38The numbers are low. Some of the numbers are low or missing and so that because in the report you're pointing to

1:43:46this is financially viable based on

1:43:50What Watson and associates put forward but if it's not accurate then we shouldn't be going by this

1:43:55So I was just wondering are we going to be

1:43:58working with the development community to reflect the truer numbers

1:44:04Uh through the mayor to the councillor. Yes, we will be meeting with

1:44:08Both fusion and woods who said in correspondence and go over the numbers with them. So yes

1:44:14Okay, thank you krista

1:44:19Okay, we're at the end. So you get me lucky you

1:44:23Most of the questions I've been asked

1:44:26Excuse me. I took a drink right before uh talking to you there. Um, so I'm just gonna

1:44:33Dumb it down for me a bit if you don't mind. Um, I just want to understand. Are you trying to apply?

1:44:41The requirements

1:44:43On top of the old heights that were included in the official plan

1:44:48Or are you trying to do it

1:44:50On top of the height study that we've already approved

1:44:55I thinking I'm hearing the old and I'm not understanding why you would do that

1:45:01like we've approved a height study

1:45:04for a reason

1:45:07And now you're it feels to me if it is old

1:45:11That it's like a retroactive penalty. It's not feeling like an incentive at all

1:45:17To me if you're doing it from the old position

1:45:21Yeah

1:45:22Thank you, miragat three. So it is the the increase from the old zoning bylaw or the zoning bylaw

1:45:29It's in place. So the zoning bylaw is in place today with six stories or 18 stories or 10 stories

1:45:34So it that's the zoning that's in effect. So we're changing their zoning as part of this process and increasing it to confirm

1:45:41me with the opa 106

1:45:43And when we brought 106 forward, we did say that we would be looking at this through the community planning permit system for the increases

1:45:49In height and what we would be doing. So that's that's kind of where we're at today

1:45:54Okay, then just take that as a comment. I guess from me moving forward. That's that's fair

1:45:59um

1:46:02You know, I'm sorry. I I am just going to be right out there with these questions. So please forgive me but like

1:46:09I guess is there anything that can we exempt certain site specifics like specific sites?

1:46:16from this

1:46:19Is that an option for us?

1:46:21And I'm not saying I'm not in any way saying that just because we got a letter or just because we have a delegation

1:46:25I'm just I'm just purely out of curiosity. I'm just wondering like

1:46:30If this is more if this is going to become more cumbersome

1:46:34for a

1:46:35proponent that is like

1:46:37You know, they've moved the ball 90 yards down the field and they're like 10 yards from getting

1:46:42an application done and then we're in we're we're introducing this new thing that may not actually

1:46:50Work can we look at?

1:46:54Exempting that site

1:46:56Where there's been years of work that's already been pre planned for something

1:47:01But like for a site that's never you know, it's never knocked on our door on it ever

1:47:05They've never knocked on our door for a particular site. Then these would apply for that. So can you have

1:47:12Can you have that difference or no?

1:47:17um

1:47:18So thank you, mirgat three. So we can take a look at the meet with the the delegates tonight

1:47:23And have a discussion and take a look at where the line for the cpps is. Okay. Okay

1:47:31And by the way, I I I sincerely meant it like not just because someone came to the microphone

1:47:35There could be someone that's not here or someone that didn't write a letter

1:47:38But they they've been engaging with you or

1:47:41Or or had an application or had consultation like they they're already kind of moving the ball down the field

1:47:47And then all of a sudden this comes in. I'm just wondering if we're if

1:47:51Okay, you got want to say what I was saying there. That's fine

1:47:54This level now back to the delegations for real. I heard one of them say about the level two

1:48:01Um specific about delegated authority more back to staff and having something triggered to move up to council

1:48:08So, um, can I just get your feelings on that now or if it's a takeaway? That's fair

1:48:13um, but if there if you have feelings on that I wouldn't mind hearing that

1:48:17because

1:48:19You know, I think we all do want to try to make things move faster

1:48:23within parameters. That's what this whole thing is about. Um

1:48:27And my follow-up question to that one is is guelph an outlier

1:48:34Based on that comment

1:48:36There are other and the list of all the municipalities you gave councillor quassan

1:48:41Is guelph an outlier in requiring some of those things at the level two to be more triggered and more cumbersome

1:48:48Compared to other municipalities that have a cpps in place and at the level two

1:48:53No, their staff are trusted with the delegated authority to actually handle those issues

1:48:59So I'll start off and then I'll pass it over on the comparators

1:49:03Um, and it is that fine line on what you know, what we're comfortable with what we think the community would want

1:49:09More input on and be able to to delegate in front of council

1:49:14um

1:49:15We we did commit earlier that we were going to go take a look at those delegated numbers and we'll take a look to see if

1:49:20They're appropriate if we should increase their percentages instead of you know, 10 percent or 20 percent should it be 50 percent?

1:49:26That scares me a little bit, but

1:49:29To be honest, but we'll take we'll take a look at what the appropriate numbers and what we think

1:49:33Is an appropriate range and it may differ depending on the

1:49:36particular item

1:49:38So we might have some variations across the board depending on the particular items

1:49:42So we'll go back and take a look at all of those sure and then for the comparator follow-up question is guelph an outlier

1:49:49um, I would not say guelph's an outlier. No, um

1:49:54municipalities that are using this tool

1:49:56Generally are in within the range of you know, five to 25 percent of a standard

1:50:03um, one thing to think about, you know, it's it's not applied across the board. So, um, you know, they're um

1:50:11certain things have been a

1:50:13Smaller amount of staff variation where other items that are more maybe design related

1:50:19There's an ability for staff to accept an alternative method and it's not triggered at 5 10 15 20

1:50:26But it's you know, if you can find another method to meet that that need

1:50:31Maybe that doesn't need to come to council. So, um, it is specific within each of the tables within each of the development standards

1:50:38there are proposed, um

1:50:40staff variation limits and the one thing just to flag

1:50:44When you're trying there's a couple pieces to balance here. There's

1:50:48You know trying to provide staff with sufficient

1:50:52Kind of direction and flexibility to manage the unique site characteristics

1:50:56And not come to council with every little thing that they you know can effectively manage

1:51:02but there also is a fact that if

1:51:04um

1:51:05There is a perception that if the class two limit is too high that the development community will just work to that new limit as the standard

1:51:13So that these are the things that we're trying to balance is like where we want to demonstrate

1:51:17There is some flexibility in implementation versus where you know, the standard is there for a reason and it really we shouldn't

1:51:25Divert from that standard unless really unique unusual site characteristics

1:51:30Um, so those are just some of the balancing acts that different municipalities are thinking about when setting that class two limit

1:51:36Okay, I get it. It's new territory and I understand that. Yep

1:51:40I mean as a comment on that I would just say

1:51:43The balancing act for me is also not to provide more opportunity for true NIMBY

1:51:50Okay, so I'll just leave that as a comment

1:51:54um

1:51:59I think the other questions my colleagues asked

1:52:05So I'm sorry. I might have just misunderstood councillor coston's first question. So just a very quick follow-up

1:52:12Um, march was kind of the hoping time that this could come back

1:52:16And you know me. I'm always like let's go. Let's get stuff done

1:52:19but but based but based on the feedback

1:52:22Based on the kind of work that might be required on this one

1:52:27It's okay. If it what what do you what are you banking your time on coming back on then?

1:52:33April may

1:52:35Through the mayor, so we were trying to bring this back in march

1:52:38Yeah, but depending how long it takes us to go through and make an amendments

1:52:41It might be later

1:52:42It might be later than that and if there's any updates

1:52:44We'll certainly make sure it's posted on the have your say so community members and everyone can know

1:52:48And through agenda forecasting we'd be advising council of the changes

1:52:52Yeah, okay

1:52:55All right. Well, I I appreciate that and I appreciate all the I mean there's a reason

1:53:00There's a certainly reason why today it was here for a receive only just to hear the feedback, right? So

1:53:06We appreciate staff and consultants

1:53:08Advice and the delegations concerns too. It's all it's all in the same pot. So fair enough. So thank you very much

1:53:16I see nothing further. Can I have a motion to receive to send this information off?

1:53:22All right, uh caller and clausen

1:53:24And I'm going to call the vote is anyone against

1:53:28against that

1:53:29There's nobody that's unanimous. So thanks for waiting through that with us. We really appreciate it

1:53:35Uh, just give me a moment council

1:53:47Council, I I really do feel like the next one may be um

1:53:52Something that we can get through pretty quick. There's no delegation signed up

1:53:56But I will just ask just in advance. Is there any in the one in the room that actually wanted to speak to the um

1:54:03housekeeping amendments for handling creek business park?

1:54:08No

1:54:10Okay, I suggest that we go through this one

1:54:13Then we will take a break for a little dinner break if we need to and then that way when we come back

1:54:19All we're going to have in front of us is the uh, is the downtown heritage conservation district