Staff to invite the Mayfield Park Community Group to view and provide feedback to the site plan for 716 Gordon Street.

1:48:19716 Gordon Street.

1:48:21The official plan and zoning bylaw decision.

1:48:25And this is a decision.

1:48:27Unlike the other ones where we're just receiving,

1:48:30this is decision.

1:48:32This means that the delegations only have five minutes.

1:48:36You'll hear the chime at four minutes and 30 seconds.

1:48:39And that would give you the 32nd warning.

1:48:41We have three.

1:48:43I believe they are all in person.

1:48:45And forgive me if I don't say your name correctly.

1:48:49Mauricio Fernandez, am I saying that right?

1:48:53Okay, thank you.

1:48:54You're first.

1:48:56And then Georgia Mason, is Georgia Mason here?

1:48:59Yes, I saw you on the way in.

1:49:00Thank you, Georgia.

1:49:01And Bill Mungle, I did see you Bill.

1:49:03So thank you, I see you all here.

1:49:06Mauricio, welcome.

1:49:08And I'll turn the microphone over to you.

1:49:10Go right ahead.

1:49:13Good, yeah.

1:49:14Hello everyone, I'm Mauricio.

1:49:15I'm the economic student at the University of Guelph.

1:49:18Came here a few weeks ago for the parking master plan.

1:49:23And I live in the South end, so it's close to home.

1:49:27I'm here to speak in favor of the development basically.

1:49:30I think this development is all perfect.

1:49:32Definitely not.

1:49:34I wish there were more units, I wish it was taller.

1:49:36I wish, yeah, less parking, especially considering

1:49:39this is right by the University campus.

1:49:42This is a four minute walk from the UC,

1:49:4415 minute walk from anywhere on campus.

1:49:46And most existing universities,

1:49:50senior residents on campus have little parking

1:49:53or no parking at all, with exception of the one

1:49:56on the west end, that's some parking.

1:49:58But other than that, they all have little parking.

1:50:05I wish there was more mixed use of more commercial areas

1:50:09engaging with the street.

1:50:11Things that could improve, more bike parking,

1:50:14more emphasis on building beautiful.

1:50:16So it's just the same land, modernized boxes.

1:50:21It could be better.

1:50:23However, we're in a housing crisis.

1:50:25And the only way of fixing it is building more housing.

1:50:28And in dense walk-in neighborhoods,

1:50:30student rooms in Guelph go for $1,000 a month.

1:50:34I don't know how I'm expected to look for that,

1:50:37but it is, and it shouldn't be.

1:50:41The nine housing projects based on aesthetics,

1:50:43feelings on the SARTO appeal

1:50:46to politically active landlords,

1:50:47a profit of this housing crisis is unacceptable.

1:50:51It's easy to talk about the use of housing supply

1:50:55and density while your house is fully paid off,

1:50:57$2 million, and the tax payer subsidizes you

1:51:02because we have seen the maps from urban tree.

1:51:05Most of the tax, most of the tax, tax, tax revenue

1:51:09from the city comes from downtown

1:51:11and the dense areas of downtown.

1:51:14In Guelph, like most cities in North America,

1:51:19we may not be safe in building

1:51:21car dependent, low density neighborhoods,

1:51:22say, Stroyd or Farmland,

1:51:25concentrated with climate crisis,

1:51:27and put many cities at the verge of a fiscal crisis

1:51:30due to a low tax base and too much infrastructure, basically.

1:51:35It's like for us to reverse back to low density,

1:51:37Serbia and build back great dense walk-in neighborhoods

1:51:41that are close to where people wanna go

1:51:44and where people need to go.

1:51:463D preservation and nature preservation

1:51:49is always important.

1:51:50This is why we need to build more dense walk-in neighborhoods.

1:51:53It was the low density Serbia

1:51:56that destroyed the Farmland and destroyed the forest

1:51:59that we don't have anymore.

1:52:01All of the southern developments,

1:52:04they used to be Farmland and they used to be forest,

1:52:06they're not there anymore

1:52:07just because we build more suburbs.

1:52:11If you have nature, don't pay for it.

1:52:15Preserving adequate noise levels is important.

1:52:17So why we need dense walk-in neighborhoods

1:52:19and increased housing supply

1:52:21close to where students need to go?

1:52:24The biggest source of noise in your city

1:52:26is high-speed highway traffic.

1:52:29And the only way to reduce it is with dense walk-in neighborhoods

1:52:32that allow for car-free living and car light living.

1:52:35So you have less cars on the road, less noise,

1:52:37less noise from the tires.

1:52:40It's a simple equation.

1:52:42Mass civilization was a great mistake.

1:52:45The land that we farmland and touch forest

1:52:47has now become an also stable place,

1:52:49a financially stable place for single-family homes

1:52:52with deadly vehicles running around

1:52:55and massive, massive parking lots are in there.

1:52:59To reverse this, we need to build back dense walk-in neighborhoods

1:53:02in those places where many infrastructure exists

1:53:05and where people wanna go.

1:53:07And campus fits that definition perfectly.

1:53:11To this end, this development application

1:53:14is a good step in the right direction.

1:53:17It's not perfect, of course.

1:53:19I wish it was better.

1:53:21However, for these reasons,

1:53:23I believe city council should approve this

1:53:25while we're on campus, 1,000 bedrooms right on campus

1:53:30so that we can build a much needed student housing

1:53:33and help make Guelph a more financially stable

1:53:36and more environmentally sustainable city.

1:53:38Thank you.

1:53:39Great, thank you very much for your presentation.

1:53:42And let me just see if there's a follow-up question for you.

1:53:46There is not, so thank you for coming though

1:53:48and thank you for taking the time, we appreciate it.

1:53:50Thank you.

1:53:51All right, and Georgia Mason is coming up next.

1:53:55Bill, you're in the wings there.

1:53:59Georgia, thank you so much for joining us.

1:54:00The clock will start whenever you're ready,

1:54:02so go right ahead.

1:54:04Okay, thank you.

1:54:05So the Mayfield Residence Association

1:54:08has sent all of you detailed written concerns already,

1:54:11but this evening I'll just present our main points

1:54:15and give you a view from Evergreen Drive,

1:54:17the residential street next to the site.

1:54:20I want to emphasize first

1:54:21that we're not a bunch of nimbies.

1:54:23Like Maurizio, we know how tough it is for students

1:54:26to find affordable decent housing near campus.

1:54:28This is a real problem that needs solving.

1:54:31Personally, I also live in a heritage mid-century house

1:54:35and had been worried about how the winds generated

1:54:38by the new building would treat our peculiar roof.

1:54:41And the heritage and wind reports generated this spring

1:54:45were very thorough and very reassuring,

1:54:47and I thank you sincerely.

1:54:49And for all of us, we went through an OMB appeal

1:54:5310 years ago, as you know,

1:54:54and we respect the decisions made there.

1:54:58We saw at the time that we were listened to

1:55:00and that the process was formal and transparent.

1:55:03And furthermore, although we went wild about the rezoning,

1:55:06we did get a few concessions based on member Denhouse's

1:55:10recognition and his citing of precedent

1:55:13that special considerations are needed

1:55:15when very high density housing is placed near low density.

1:55:24But fast forward a decade,

1:55:26and in February, we were invited to a neighborhood meeting

1:55:29by the developer held at your request.

1:55:32Just two topics were covered at this meeting.

1:55:35One was a strange bid to change what a unit meant,

1:55:39and the other was what it would be like to live in this building

1:55:41with many images of glossy sports facilities.

1:55:45So it was a pretty weird evening.

1:55:48And over the following weeks, however,

1:55:51as we compared the old approved plan with the new plan,

1:55:56we discovered three worrying changes

1:55:58that were not mentioned at all at this meeting,

1:56:01let alone raised for discussion.

1:56:04First, in the original OMB approved plan,

1:56:07balconies and openable windows were avoided

1:56:10explicitly to control noise,

1:56:12but in the new plan, there were now three open

1:56:15sort of party terraces overlooking our houses.

1:56:19Second, in the original approved plan,

1:56:22the service road along the east of the site

1:56:25was set back eight to nine meters

1:56:28from the border with Evergreen Drive.

1:56:31But in the new plan, that service road

1:56:33is only three to four meters away.

1:56:36And to accommodate the movement of this road

1:56:38closer to us, 45 trees are being cut down.

1:56:42And this brings me to the third difference

1:56:44or the third change.

1:56:46The original plan approved by the OMB

1:56:49preserved the Evergreen Trees that our street is named after

1:56:54and that were there before the street was built.

1:56:56This is a stand of Evergreens

1:56:58along the west side of Evergreen Drive

1:57:01and they're now about 80 years old.

1:57:04For us, this beautiful strip of woodland

1:57:06provides shade in the summer

1:57:08and is home to foxes, merlins, flickers and more.

1:57:12And the developers had recognized it as a natural sound

1:57:15and visual barrier between the neighborhood

1:57:17and the development.

1:57:19But in the new plan, essentially all the trees,

1:57:22their side of the property line are now being chopped down.

1:57:26So of the 45, that includes all 33

1:57:29of the large decades old Evergreen Trees

1:57:32that are now theirs.

1:57:35This is despite the city's own policy

1:57:37aiming for a well-treated gulf, an urban canopy

1:57:42in which mature trees are recognized as especially valuable.

1:57:46And it's also despite the new plan terraces

1:57:49making a natural sound and visual barrier

1:57:52even more important than it was before.

1:57:56As well as these three specific concerns,

1:57:58we're unnerved by the impactful ways

1:58:00the plans for this site have shifted and drifted

1:58:03since the OMB decision

1:58:05and the ways in which we had to figure this out for ourselves.

1:58:08It feels to us as though developers can win an OMB decision

1:58:12and yet still want and push for more and more

1:58:15with city stimp simply conceding

1:58:17with no meaningful public consultation.

1:58:20The service road should be moved several meters back westward

1:58:24as in the original plan.

1:58:26The mature stand of trees should be left intact

1:58:29as a valuable part of the city's urban forest

1:58:32and there should not be open terraces

1:58:33especially if these trees are to be destroyed.

1:58:37So we ask that the application is denied

1:58:39in its current form.

1:58:40Thank you very much.

1:58:42Thank you very much.

1:58:43Oh, so this is where I get to jump in

1:58:52and just to say we don't allow that in here at all.

1:58:55So just from our procedural bylaw for decorum,

1:59:00we just don't allow any of that at all.

1:59:02So I'll let that one go this time

1:59:04but please don't do anything more.

1:59:06And the reason why we do that is just to allow differences

1:59:09of opinions in this room.

1:59:12It's important that we have someone come before you,

1:59:16someone that might come after you

1:59:17and differences of opinion have to be free flowing

1:59:20without sort of any of that as well.

1:59:22So please just don't do the hooting hollering

1:59:26and keep decorum if you don't mind, please.

1:59:27Thank you.

1:59:28But please don't go anywhere.

1:59:29Thank you for your presentation.

1:59:31Let me see if there's a follow up question

1:59:32for you from anybody, okay?

1:59:34There isn't, so thank you very much.

1:59:36I appreciate it.

1:59:37And we have one more, Bill Mungle is here.

1:59:41Come on down Bill.

1:59:50And thank you Bill for coming

1:59:51and I'll turn it over to you whenever you're ready.

1:59:56Your Worship, Councillors.

1:59:57I'll be speaking also in favor of a refusal of this application.

2:00:03This is a file where it may be helpful

2:00:05to quickly review the history of the site just quickly.

2:00:09The developer's application was refused by the city

2:00:11in 2011, was appealed to the developer to the OMB.

2:00:14City and Mayfield Association residents defended the appeal

2:00:18at a lengthy hearing, which was essentially won

2:00:21by the developer in 2013.

2:00:23So the table was all set for the development to proceed

2:00:27with some 1,200 students about to be housed,

2:00:30but then nothing happened for a decade.

2:00:35Whatever accounts for this lapse of the next 10 years

2:00:38is something only the developer can explain.

2:00:40But had they started construction in 2013,

2:00:43it's fair to say this would have had quite a positive effect

2:00:46on the local rental market.

2:00:48So 10 years on, the developer seems to realize

2:00:51that maybe they aired and delayed,

2:00:52and now they want to realize on their investment

2:00:55and then some to make up for a lost decade.

2:00:59So they returned with this similar application,

2:01:02adjusted slightly for a different interior design,

2:01:06and had they left it at that,

2:01:08the neighborhood probably, I'm guessing,

2:01:11would have rested content given the finality

2:01:14of the 2013 OMB decision,

2:01:16and you probably would not even have

2:01:18any delegations here tonight.

2:01:20But this developer's come to an instinct

2:01:22to ring every last dollar out of this site

2:01:26by making some quite unnecessary changes

2:01:29in the current application.

2:01:30As George has summarized pretty well.

2:01:32By adding the inexpensive amenity

2:01:35of three large rooftop terraces or party patios,

2:01:39each featuring a bar, barbecues, lounge seating,

2:01:43and games courts, they could justify

2:01:45both higher rents and condo sales prices.

2:01:48By making the footprint of the buildings larger,

2:01:51they could justify removing most of the trees

2:01:54that would have been retained

2:01:55in the original application from 2010.

2:01:58If approved by you tonight,

2:02:01both these changes will significantly impact

2:02:03the adjacent residential neighborhood,

2:02:05and especially from the noise

2:02:07from the third floor rooftop patios.

2:02:10Your approval today would also set

2:02:13a very impactful and harmful precedent

2:02:16regarding the same developer's days in,

2:02:18just down the road at 785 Gordon.

2:02:21There, the developer proposes not just three,

2:02:25but 21 terraces, plus 60 balconies.

2:02:30And that site surrounded by residences on not one,

2:02:33but three sides.

2:02:35By the adding of terraces to 716 Gordon,

2:02:38the developer is counting on your approval

2:02:41of this precedent to support its days in application.

2:02:46And your approval will also undermine your own staff

2:02:49who are presently involved in a tribunal-ordered mediation

2:02:53of the developer's days in proposal.

2:02:56The city regulates noise from restaurant and bar patios,

2:03:00taking care to avoid impacts on residential properties.

2:03:04Why couldn't the city also regulate bars and patios

2:03:07on residential terraces as not this already

2:03:10been researched thoroughly by the city?

2:03:13Even the developer's own planners, GSP, who just left,

2:03:17wrote in their initial planning justification report

2:03:20that balconies, much less terraces,

2:03:23would be inappropriate on this site.

2:03:26Even the infamous student residences at Chancellor's Way

2:03:30don't feature outdoor party patios,

2:03:33but with the noise from the terraces,

2:03:35716 Gordon will become an even more infamous

2:03:39Chancellor's Way East.

2:03:41Now, the city fears that its refusal

2:03:44will result in yet another developer's appeal

2:03:47and yet another long delay

2:03:48before bringing these units to market.

2:03:51But please think through this alternate scenario.

2:03:55A city refusal could be coupled with the city's invitation

2:03:58to the developer to return in a few months

2:04:00with a slightly revised application

2:04:02that would simply delete the party patios

2:04:05and save the landmark evergreens at the rear of the property.

2:04:08Council approval would undoubtedly become forthcoming

2:04:12over the winter and construction would begin

2:04:15well before the spring.

2:04:17Clearly, the developer would be foolish

2:04:19to appeal any refusal of this application

2:04:23as that would tie up their financing for far longer.

2:04:26Why?

2:04:27Because appeals take close to a year to schedule

2:04:29at the tribunal because appeals are expensive

2:04:32and because the outcome is still uncertain for the developer.

2:04:36To protect neighborhoods from nuisance noise,

2:04:41the city must be resolute and refuse this application.

2:04:45Thank you.

2:04:46Great, thank you, Bill.

2:04:48And just before you go away,

2:04:49just to see if there's another follow-up question.

2:04:52No, you can go away then.

2:04:53Oh, yep, sorry, Councillor Downer has one.

2:04:56So through you, Mr. Mungle,

2:04:58is it your understanding that these terraces then

2:05:02have licensed patios, like at the license,

2:05:06they're an actual licensed commercial bar?

2:05:09It'd be an event-related permit.

2:05:13That is in the...

2:05:14For permits.

2:05:15Yeah, it is in the Planning Justification Report

2:05:17that the developer submitted, yes.

2:05:19Okay, thanks.

2:05:23Great, that's it, thank you, Bill.

2:05:25Thank you very much.

2:05:27Oh, sorry, Councillor Billings,

2:05:29did you have a question for the delegate or?

2:05:31Yeah, just real quick.

2:05:32Through you.

2:05:33Okay, go ahead.