Planning Advisory Committee

0:00So, we can begin also because we have the election of the chair and vice chair today, I'm Liz from the clerk's office. So, I'm happy to kind of chair the beginning of the meeting until.

0:17We get to that 1 item and then the chair.

0:20Elected can kind of take over from there.

0:23So, with that said, I will call the meeting to order.

0:28And I will begin with the indigenous territorial acknowledgement, which I will just read out.

0:35So, give me a moment here and I do have a cough. So, I hope I don't cough.

0:41I apologize if I do during this.

0:44But as we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in Guelph.

0:50A city built over rich indigenous histories.

0:54We are guests here and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land.

1:00The people who live here today and the generations to come.

1:04If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, we should take pause.

1:10And make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

1:15This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for many peoples over time.

1:22But more specifically, the Adirondarok and the Haudenosaunee.

1:26This land is held as a treaty lands and territory with the Mississaugas of the credit 1st nation.

1:34Guelph lies directly adjacent to the Haldeman tract.

1:38And as part of the long established traditional hunting ground.

1:42For the 6 nations of the Grand River.

1:45Many 1st nations, Inuit and Métis peoples who have come across Turtle Island call Guelph home today.

1:55So, moving on to the approval of the minutes.

1:59We have a recommendation that the minutes from the November 14th, 2023.

2:06Meeting of the planning advisory committee be approved.

2:10Can I get a mover for that please?

2:14Hello, Maria.

2:16Perfect. Thank you, Maria.

2:19And can I get a seconder for that?

2:26Perfect. Thank you, Artem.

2:29And anybody opposed?

2:33I'm hearing and seeing none.

2:36Okay.

2:40So, we can move on to the committee items.

2:42The 1st item is electing a chair and vice chair.

2:47I realize that pack this committee only meets the pool.

2:51They, you met about 3 times last year.

2:53So, you're probably wondering why we need to reelect a chair, but every year.

2:59We do as per policy have to elect a chair and vice chair.

3:05The role of the chair is really to move through these committee items on the agenda.

3:11And generate or facilitate a discussion when you can.

3:19Of course, the clerk's office, I'm always here to support if needed, but

3:24this is your committee.

3:25So, you should have a chair kind of leading the items today.

3:30So, with that said, you can either self nominate or you can nominate another member on the committee.

3:35If nominated by another member, you can either respectfully decline or you can accept that nomination.

3:46So, with that, I will open the floor to see if there's any nominations for chair of the committee.

4:07Does anybody like to put their hand up volunteer to be chair?

4:11Again, the committee is the ad hoc meetings.

4:13So, I'm not too sure how many times this year you will meet, but it is a good opportunity to try.

4:32I'll volunteer if no one else wants to do it.

4:36Thank you.

4:37I don't know.

4:37I think my term is up.

4:39So, I'm not quite sure.

4:43I had a 1 year term.

4:45So, I don't know if I'm still a member.

4:49Yeah.

4:51Yeah, I can briefly speak to that.

4:54Because of the ongoing, and this is the next committee item where Dilla and I will talk to you about the phase 2 of the advisory committee of council governance framework.

5:05But because of this ongoing project, council has agreed or they've moved a motion to pause all recruitment and

5:15and reappointments. So, typically everybody appointed for the 1 year term would be reappointed to the committee.

5:26But because recruitments and appointments were paused that report just didn't come forward, but everybody is appointed to the committee until such a successor is appointed.

5:37So, your term just continues on until a successor is appointed or you are reappointed.

5:44So, everybody who may have been on a 1 year term, you all remain on the committee and your term continues on.

5:54So, with that, we have Maria who has volunteered to be chair.

6:01Can I get anybody else would like to put their hand up?

6:05No.

6:07Okay.

6:08So, can I get a mover to appoint Maria as the chair of the advisory?

6:14Thank you, Lisa.

6:18And can I get a seconder please?

6:23Thank you, Artem.

6:26And you want to post?

6:30Hearing and seeing none.

6:34And now we'll do the election of the vice chairs. The vice chairs role will just be to step in when chair Maria isn't present or can't attend a meeting.

6:46So, with that said, I'll open up the floor to any 1 who'd like to maybe volunteer to be vice chair or pack.

7:10I could do it.

7:13Artem, thank you for volunteering.

7:17Anybody else?

7:19Give a long pause and silence. I'm going to go with no.

7:22So, can I get a mover to appoint Artem as vice chair of pack?

7:29I saw Justin so moved by Justin.

7:32And then Morgan, can I put you down as a seconder?

7:39Perfect. Thank you.

7:41And any opposed?

7:48Hearing and seeing none.

7:49Okay. So, we have chair Maria and vice chair Artem.

7:54With that said, Maria, I will turn over the meeting to you so you can kind of go through those next items.

8:01If you have the agenda up.

8:05Okay. So, I don't have the agenda up.

8:12So, in my call,

8:16Savviness, but how can I get the agenda up?

8:21Yes. So, actually, maybe, maybe Joey might be able to just share this his screen.

8:30Oh, thank you.

8:31And he can go.

8:32Through the next item.

8:33It happens to be a clerk's office item and you have Dylan and I here, but we'll let you introduce the item.

8:41If Joey can pull up the.

8:43Do you have the agenda present Joey?

8:45I would just want 1 second to pull it up.

8:48Thanks.

8:56I'll make sure I'm very prepared for the next meeting.

9:06Yeah. So we're at item 2.2 now. I don't know if we can just zoom in a bit here.

10:17Yeah. So Joey can just slide down and item 2.2.

10:39If you want to read the title and then the presentation and.

10:43Thank you.

10:44Thanks for that.

10:45Okay. So 2.2 on the agenda is a CoC governance framework phase 2.

10:52So we're going to be having a presentation by Dylan.

10:57Please and Elizabeth.

11:00Perfect. Thank you so much for having me tonight. My name is Dylan McMahon.

11:08I'm the manager of legislative services and deputy city clerk at the city of Guelph.

11:13So it's me and my team who manage administratively all of the appointments and

11:17recruitments to advisory committees in Guelph terms of reference updates and that kind of thing.

11:21You're likely maybe not have met me in person or virtually, but you'll certainly have received emails from from Liz and I and folks on our team at some point.

11:30I'm here today to talk specifically about a project that we've had on the go for close to a year and a half now.

11:36We're in phase 2, but I'm going to spend a little bit of time just reminding folks what happened in phase 1, how we got here.

11:42Ultimately, what we're here to do is to get some good feedback from the planning advisory committee on the current role that you play helping to shape Guelph's strategic objectives.

11:51And then we can have a bit of a general conversation about the role of the committee, what's working on the role of the committee, what's working on the role of the committee.

11:58What's working, what's not and that kind of thing. So if you can flip to the next slide, Joey.

12:04Thank you. Okay, so we're talking about the redesigning advisory committees of council project. This is a 2 phase project.

12:14The phase, the 1st phase of this project ended in November of last year when council approved an advisory committee governance framework.

12:22I'd encourage everybody to look at that framework. It's a significant lengthy document, but it's very important to the way that advisory committees function in Guelph.

12:30Phase 2 is really just a review of all of our existing advisory committees to ensure alignment with the framework.

12:36The framework itself was built collaboratively. So we had a working group of advisory committee members, certainly as advisory committee members.

12:43Everybody was given multiple opportunities to participate, provide feedback through surveys, meetings and that kind of thing.

12:50That framework was approved by council. It sets several key commitments, some of which we'll talk about today.

12:55And we have offered a couple of information sessions for advisory committee members.

12:59So you can better understand that framework and what it means for you. And if you do have any questions about the framework, how it was approved, what's in it.

13:08Then certainly you can reach out to Liz or I Liz or I anytime and we're happy to sit down and go over it.

13:12But I do want to be clear up front at this presentation that.

13:16Phase 2, we're reviewing each committee.

13:20Is going to be significant. There are going to be significant recommendations coming forward because council has through the adoption of that framework.

13:28Assigned resources to the city clerk's office to let us support in the range of 7 to 10 advisory committees of council and the city currently has 14.

13:35So a little bit of simple math tells us that there's going to need to be some pretty significant changes.

13:40That includes expansion or reduction of mandates, mergers, dissolution of committees, the creation of new committees.

13:46All of that is on the, on the table.

13:48You flip to the next slide, Joey. What you've got here is a list of the current advisory committees.

13:55You'll notice a little asterisk next to 5 of them. Those are statutory committees. So the math gets yet harder again. Of course, the planning advisory committee is a statutory committee.

14:04So through this review, there's no version of this where the planning advisory committee is dissolved from a mandate perspective.

14:11But the mandate could be merged with another committee, whether statutory or otherwise, there still could be changes, but the nature of the of the committee as a statutory committee will remain in place.

14:22Look to the next slide, Joey.

14:25So this phase of the project is being handled as a collaboration between the city of golf and the golf lab. The golf lab itself is a collaborative effort between the city and the university of golf housed in the community engaged scholarship institute at the university of golf.

14:42This is still a collaborative, collaborative piece of work. So the meeting that we're having right now.

14:50You're just at the tail end of Liz and I meeting with all of golf advisory committees as part of the 1st round of stakeholder engagement. So I think of the 14. This is number 13 of 14 that we've spoken to.

15:01We're going to reach out to all the committees. First, then we're going to have some discussions with the staff groups who support committees.

15:06We're going to have some discussions with city council to talk about their view of the topics that are most important for advisory committees.

15:12We're going to invite advisory committee chairs and vice chairs to a meeting this summer to review all of the content that was gathered through that 1st round of stakeholder engagement.

15:22And I want to be very upfront to say no specific decisions or changes to advisory committees have been contemplated at this point in the project. So as we have this discussion and go through this presentation, I may share a couple of.

15:35Examples or what if this, what if that, that's really just for the sake of getting some conversation going. There's no decisions. We want to hear from you. We want to collect all that feedback along with what we've heard from council and staff.

15:47Bring it to that meeting of chairs and vice chairs this summer and then ultimately we'll be coming back to each and every advisory committee in the fall with some more concrete recommendations wanting to know if you support or recommended change to your particular advisory committee.

16:01Should there be 1.

16:03This project itself is significant. Obviously, it's a 2 year long project. We've never in Guelph embarked upon a project that reviews our advisory committees holistically.

16:13So we've absolutely over the years dissolved some committees created some new committees, you know, merge committees updated terms of reference for committees.

16:21But we've never looked at the city's entire advisory committee program of work. All of the topics that are covered to see if they're working for Guelph.

16:30So the 1st step in that process was to approve that framework or to have council of group of framework, which talks about why we have advisory committees. What is the purpose of advisory committees? How do we measure if they're successful on what types of topics? Do we want to have advisory committees on what types of topics?

16:47Are we better suited to use other forms of engagement? I mean, some of our committees have been created in a time before there was internet, for example. So the type of community engagement you could embark upon in the 80s and 90s is obviously much different than you can now.

17:01So it is a significant body of work, but I think at the end, we're going to be able to get to a number of committees whose topics work for city council where these committees are providing specific advice to city council and when we can measure their effectiveness a little bit more than we can now.

17:18If you pop up to the next slide, Joey.

17:21Here you've got the 7 commitments included in that governance framework that council approved last November. All of these are very important. They all include a great deal of information in the framework itself. We did go through them in detail in the information session offered to committee members earlier this year.

17:37But what we're going to be talking about today specifically is commitment number 2 advisory committees of council should help shape the city's strategic goals.

17:45So if you jump forward, actually a couple of slides, if you don't mind, Joey.

17:49Perfect. What you see here is a quick breakdown of the city's strategic plan. We've got theme areas on the left. We've got objectives on the right.

17:59And what I'm looking to hear from the committee is which of these objectives the committee is currently contributing to helping to forward or helping to shape.

18:07And then as a secondary question, which goals could it potentially contribute to? So if there was a change in terms of reference, or if you were given a slightly different mandate or opportunity.

18:17Is there an objective where you feel, hey, we have the knowledge, the expertise, the ability to really help forward or contribute to this goal, but we don't right now because of a particular restraint or something like that.

18:27We're going to go through the same exercise for the city's community plan, which is similar, but different. And then we'll have a few minutes left over at the end for just a general conversation about what this, what this project might mean for the planning advisory committee.

18:41What sort of is working or not working well from your perspective, but as a starting point, we do want to hear from each committee about how you're currently contributing to the city's strategic goals.

18:51I could take some guesses myself, but I would certainly rather hear it from the folks who are volunteering your valuable time on our committees. So I will turn it over to you.

19:01And actually, so I just one thing I'll add very quickly is, especially as a statutory committee, what we're looking for is honesty here. There's no, there's no bad answer.

19:10And if the answer is honestly, hey, we're statutory and the legislation says we provide advice on this, this and this, and that doesn't seem connected. That's valuable information for us to have. It is not a bad thing or a knock on the committee in any way.

19:23But we do want to make sure that each committee has an opportunity to talk about how they're currently contributing to these objectives. So with that, I'll just turn it over to the committee. If you've got feedback, specific themes, objectives you think you're connected to or could contribute to.

19:37This is your chance to share it with us.

19:40So does anybody have any comments, anything you'd like to say.

19:48Lisa, I can't hear you.

19:57Thanks very much. If you've been at any committee meeting, you know that I always provide a perspective on the urban canopy.

20:09And my recollection of the wealth strategic plan is, I think that there was a very high level mention about the fact that we live in a community that's has urban forest and is, is connected to natural areas.

20:27And I'm just wondering, I don't quite see that specific requirement. And I believe that in reviewing planning strategies and policies, one has to sort of understand how those will spill out into the actual bylaw regulations and and and what kind of bill form will result from them.

20:55And I think one of the concerns that keeps coming up in talking with members of the community is how we're losing trees.

21:06And so, I'm just wondering, like, in my perspective, we can't be healthy financially if we don't have a healthy urban canopy. We can't be livable if we don't have an urban canopy.

21:22We can't be a leader in climate action if we don't take advantage of the trees ability, urban canopies ability to cool us down and manage stormwater. So, I'm just going to put that out there and I don't know where it would fit.

21:37I couldn't figure that out this afternoon when I was looking over this. But it is sort of core to everything that I'm here on the committee to do is is is to advocate for livable cities.

21:53Yeah, that's great feedback. Thank you. So, I think you're looking in the environment theme be a leader in climate action includes a sub objective that is, I'll just read it mitigate the impacts of climate change by increasing tree canopy coverage.

22:07There's a few supporting actions under there. But I think that from the sounds of things, correct me if I'm wrong Lisa, but I think it sounds like that's exactly what you were what you were talking about, or at least one aspect of what you were talking about.

22:18It's one aspect and I also think it fits in with the foundations because we to be.

22:28It's the first impressions so I just got back from I've been around the world in the last two months and I've stopped in a lot of different cities and in Asia and my impression like it's completely my impression is completely.

22:47My impression is completely bound to the the urban canopy approach and and of that city. So I think it's it's pretty core to, you know, you ask people in old university neighborhood what they like best about the neighborhood and almost always the answer is the first answer is always the trees.

23:14Thank you.

23:15Thank you.

23:21I just, sorry chair. I just wanted to ask so you did mention foundations there Lisa.

23:27I don't.

23:29I can't really connect the description you gave with any of the specific objectives that city council has included.

23:36In that theme. So I just wanted to give you an opportunity if it is connected to any of those 4 objectives.

23:43I want to hear it, but it did still sound more environmentally focused in objectives 1 and 2 under environment as opposed to foundations.

23:53Thinking specifically about the way that city council was intending those foundational themes. They're more focused on.

24:01Specific fiscal goals, accountability and transparency at city council advocating from an intergovernmental perspective regarding indigenous relations and that kind of thing. So I did just want to clarify. Is there a specific objective there you think fits or is environment closer to the to the mark.

24:20Well, I think it also belongs in city building more. I guess if those were the foundations.

24:28Because it's about growing and caring for our community spaces and places.

24:32Okay.

24:34I just, I just, I'm, I push back strongly against trees being relecated to a niche.

24:42And I think it's not just an environmental issue. It's sort of.

24:47It, it, it, it affects every aspect. It affects our health.

24:52It affects our cost of living.

24:55It affects our happiness.

24:59Got it. I think that, I think that makes great sense. And I think the growing care for community spaces and places.

25:11Feels pretty reasonable. There is a sub objective in there that is attract more people to parks.

25:16And there's a few supporting points there. It may not be exactly what you're talking about, but I think that is that is a fair.

25:23A fair objective to add in there alongside those, those environmental ones with a general note that, and this is true of most of our committees.

25:30Successful work on this committee probably does in one way or another support all of these objectives.

25:36A healthy urban canopy to your point probably supports.

25:39If not all, almost all of these, we try to differentiate a little bit between a primary contribution from an advisory committee and a secondary.

25:47As an example being if city council had a question about community well being, what committee would they ask versus if you do transit really effectively and we do have a transit advisory committee.

25:58Certainly that is going to improve community well being, but it doesn't mean that transit is necessarily where you would go to ask about well being.

26:06So we try to where we can differentiate between the primary and the secondary or the tertiary.

26:11Just because otherwise we get a less sane, you know, each committee is directly connected to all of these, but certainly city building. We have noted and specifically community spaces and places.

26:21I have flagged here too.

26:22Okay.

26:24You good Lisa.

26:26Yeah.

26:27Okay.

26:28I see hand up, but I can't see your name with beard.

26:32It's Morgan here.

26:34Okay, Morgan.

26:35Go for it.

26:37Thanks for it. Yeah, I think you kind of gesture toward this, but.

26:44I think particularly with planning related issues, it's not a very big leap to connect every 1 of the strategic plan themes to planning in some way.

26:54You know, city building being the most obviously connected, but also of course environment and people in economy.

27:03And then it's, it's, it's pretty easy to also include the foundations pieces. So.

27:09I don't know that that's just kind of my bias perspective as somebody with the background and planning, but it's, if you're.

27:17Looking to make the connection to these foundations planning.

27:22You know, kind of touches all of them pretty readily. That would be my only.

27:26Feedback that doesn't help you narrow down which committee you should talk to for which issues I recognize, but.

27:32Yeah, that's okay. Just to make the point that planning is pretty integral to.

27:36To all of these in a big way.

27:40Yeah, no, I appreciate that. And of course, it's not. It'll never be as simple as simply council had this question and it goes to 1 committee. There's always going to be overlap and intersectionality between the topics and that that is certainly fair game.

27:53I am curious.

27:55Regarding housing supply, perhaps.

27:58I mean, as a, I'm not a planner. I work in the clerk's office, but I would have thought perhaps that there might be a connection between some of the work that you guys do in housing supply, but I'm certainly welcome to be told that that is not directly the case.

28:11And I guess I do just want to push the committee if, you know, now is the time if there are some of these where you go, hey, I think this is a clear or stronger connection than there might be at 1st glance.

28:21This is certainly the time we want to hear it.

28:24Yeah, well, just to follow up on that, I mean, like you just picked 1 out that there is a very clear connection. I think the next thing on our agenda is really.

28:34Dealing with housing supply, right? So.

28:38And then affordability as well we've got on there. So there's, you know, and I've only been involved for about a year, but the kinds of presentations and the policies and projects that we've had a chance to look at.

28:51You know, they are very obviously connected to all 3 of those city building places, including, you know, we talked about transportation related issues.

29:01But again, you know.

29:05You don't have to take it much broader to see the connection direct connection to environment or, you know, economy.

29:14Community well being is very directly related to issues of, you know, affordable housing, for example.

29:21You know, how we get around the city is very related to, you know, making downtown a vibrant place, etc.

29:31Yep, God, if that makes perfect sense. I do want to say, if you see me looking away, we're just, we're just taking notes and promise I'm listening the whole time.

29:39Just before we go to the next slide.

29:411 more chance for people to add anything and then and then potentially just to think about question 2 as well if there's an area where you feel like, hey, we could provide more of a contribution or more feedback.

29:52Either on this or some of the stuff that's going to come up in the community plan by all means.

29:56Let us know.

30:02Anybody else have any comments.

30:04Maybe you can flip to the next slide. Joey not seen any comments there.

30:14There's a lot of overlap between the strategic plan and the community plan. The community plan is definitely more broad.

30:21Between Liz and I, we can definitely look at this and there are some obvious areas of overlap between what you've said on the strap plan and the community plan that makes sense.

30:29So, where it comes to housing, the environment components that we talked about.

30:34Growing and caring for community space spaces and places loving our neighborhood. Some of those connections are easy for us to.

30:41To make, but if there is anything else you see on screen here.

30:44And then in just maybe Joey, just 2 or 3 minutes based on the feedback here, we can flip to the next slide, which includes a couple more community plan themes.

30:52Why don't we flip to the next 1 now?

31:12No, no.

31:32Any comments.

31:33I'd like to make a comment.

31:48And I guess, I guess I'd also like to add something about the connections to the natural world because that's critical to feel well.

31:56Did you see that reflected Lisa in any of the specific objectives or themes on this slide or the 1 before it?

32:06I think that there were teasers of it.

32:11And I'm just, I guess the reason I feel like should go in the feeling and being well is because there, if you look at city planning and in different jurisdictions, there's a real correlation between

32:30community, personal well being mental health and distribution of parks and distribution of areas where incomes are lower.

32:42And so lower income areas tend to have less canopy cover and they also tend to have less access to nature and park infrastructure.

32:52I'm not sure if we're being as vigilant of guardians as that key aspect of health.

33:04Okay, so it seems like some of that probably touches the we are community, but then if you flip to the next slide, Joey and Gleesa, you would, yeah, you were tagging we feel well specifically as a planning advice that you provide.

33:18Yeah, and I think that's what we actually, that's what I do as a landscape architect bringing, bringing considerations of sort of an equitable distribution of park space and nature amenities, natural amenities.

33:43I think it was the region of appeal that was looking at, at, at diabetes in at a public health level plan and they realized that concentrations of patients with risk of diabetes increased in areas where access to trails and parks.

34:04Decreased. And, and so I think in order to make sure that we all continue to feel well, we, we, it's really important that we keep in front of mind.

34:17That's excellent feedback. Thank you. So I, yeah, I think that, I think that all makes sense and we, we've certainly got that flag.

34:32Anybody else.

34:33Yes.

34:39Yes. One thing that I could add.

34:44What I've noticed, at least in the, the advisory committees planning advisory committees that I've taken part in that our focus has been a little bit more on the housing supply side and

35:03I don't necessarily talk as much about the transportation side and I am aware that there's like, I think there's a transit advisory committee as well.

35:15But I think it's possible that it kind of the, these issues are linked together. So there's perhaps some opportunity to have some contribution there as well.

35:32Yeah, thank you. So I think that there is a couple specific strategic plan objectives. If you bump up a couple slides again, Joey, about getting around that is touching on that.

35:46Make it easier to get around is really sort of the closest thing in the strap plan that we get to it touches on transit and generally the way that people get around the city view various modes of transportation.

35:56So I think what you were saying, Artem, and correct me if I'm wrong is that there could be more of an opportunity for this committee to contribute on items related to transportation.

36:08Do you just mean from a planning lens?

36:11Or maybe you can flush that out like, is it, is it within your current mandate? You're like, we, we could contribute to different plans that come before the committee from a land use planning perspective.

36:21And how those are going to impact transit. Obviously, you know, you can tell them, I'm not a planner when I try to have these conversations, but if you can explain it to me in a way they understand, then surely you can explain it to anybody.

36:32Yeah, I think that's fair that we maybe can consider some plans that are related to transportation and getting people around the city.

36:49Okay, that's great. We've got that flag as I could potentially contribute to add something to this topic.

37:00In the past I've been on the train about on my advisory committee since the very since it was started. And in the past we have had more conversations about transportation type issues and I can't.

37:15And some of them were around what the boundaries we saw for looking at the golf central station and and the, the reach or the catchment area of that.

37:31And I think we, we had did review the transportation master plan at one point in time so I think it might just.

37:43There might have been more of a role in in previous incarnations of of planning advisory committee.

37:51Gotcha, right, but not within the current mandate. I don't think. Yeah.

37:56Gotcha. Thank you.

38:00My transportation committee possibly.

38:05Join up with this committee.

38:09Well, that's an interesting question and I think Joe, you can probably pull down the PowerPoint at this point and we can have a bit of a general conversation here.

38:18So the, the simple answer to that question is.

38:22We kind of want to hear to the extent we can from committee members about.

38:27What the sort of level of comfort is about mergers of mandates and that kind of thing.

38:33Knowing that council has asked for the number of committees to be reduced, but also understanding, for example, that council says advisory committee should be meeting monthly and we have some committees like the plan advisory committee.

38:44That meet much less frequently than that. There's an opportunity to.

38:48Merge mandates in some cases at least so that we may reduce the number of committees, but we're not actually necessarily reducing the topics or the amount of advice provided to council on those topics.

38:59Because of that increased meeting frequency. So I would put it over to the committee as far as is there.

39:05Is there appetite on the committee to be meeting more frequently? Is there enough of a mandate to meet more frequently? If that was an ask, or if there was to be a merger or an expansion of the mandate, perhaps.

39:19If you have any particular suggestions at that at this point about what that could look like.

39:25This is all a very early conversation. So I don't expect.

39:29To say, oh, well, they didn't, you know, they didn't suggest anything. So.

39:33We're going to do this, this and this and we're going to come back and have some conversations with a little bit more detail about these types of suggestions. But if there is stuff initially where you're like, yeah, this kind of feels like a no brain or we could certainly merge.

39:44If you can give us that indication now, then it's then it's certainly helpful.

39:51I personally, I feel that we don't meet often enough.

40:00And I'm not saying because I'm, you know, I want to meet on a monthly basis, but maybe that's what we need. I feel very disconnected.

40:09There's a very long time in between meetings.

40:14And I think when there's that much time in between, you just, I'm speaking for myself. You lose track of what is the purpose of this meeting. What am I doing? How am I, I just don't feel that I'm on the ball.

40:34Because it's just way too much time in between meetings. So if there was a more in the agenda, you know, I really think if we met more often and we were involved in more, I think we can provide better feedback.

40:57That's my personal opinion.

41:00Perfect. Thanks. Yeah. And if.

41:03In order to have a committee meet monthly, there would be a need to, I think, broaden the scope in one way or another. And.

41:10I'll just look for some informal, informal nodding heads at the idea of taking your existing mandate and merging it or growing it.

41:18In line with another committee, it seems like I'm sort of reading that there is.

41:22Generally, that is viewed not negatively, but don't get into specifics of what committee here or what committee there the view of adding to the mandate by merging isn't.

41:30Something that's viewed negatively at least at this point. Is that fair?

41:34Yeah. Okay. That's very helpful. Thank you.

41:37If I may now.

41:40I think I would, I would echo.

41:43Exactly what Maria was just saying with.

41:46When we're only meeting 2 or 3 times a year.

41:50It doesn't feel like we are able to maybe provide the.

41:57The fullest extent of what we could contribute towards the city.

42:03And towards these goals, I think.

42:07We probably, we do have a capacity to do a bit more.

42:12If we were able to meet more.

42:15Right now, I find we mostly have been looking at very high level policy.

42:22But I think it would be important and it could, it could be very helpful.

42:27For us to be able to look at some more.

42:31Trying to look for the right words somewhat more on the ground than just very high level policy.

42:37Within fill within the planning framework, I think a lot of room. Like you said, to somewhat expand the scope beyond just high level plan policy planning documents.

42:50Right. Yeah, that's great feedback. Thanks. I mean, there is.

42:54Yeah, I mean, there's a natural heritage advisory committee that like the plan advisory committee meets a limited number of time per year per year.

43:02So, yeah, I think there are, there are opportunities and there's a couple of committees that are sort of, I will just loosely say in the, in the planning world for lack of a better term.

43:11Where I think there may be some opportunities.

43:14Of course, we'll have to consider the implications of that and there's a whole lot that goes into it and we haven't had conversations with the staff who support the committees either. But yeah, I think all of the ideas being raised here makes sense to me.

43:24And certainly the reason that we recommended council approval framework that says you should meet roughly monthly, you know, 10 times a year and 9 times a year or something like that.

43:34Is for the reasons described that there's a certain continuity when you're meeting every month or even every other month.

43:41That you kind of can lose a little bit if you're only meeting a couple of times a year. So, certainly coming out of this review. Ultimately in November, when we go forward to council and we say here are the list of changes we recommend you make, you know, merge at a new dissolve whatever it may be.

43:56The expectation would be that all of the committees coming out of that the 7 to 10 that I referenced earlier in the presentation.

44:02We'll have a mandate that will enable them to meet most months, not necessarily every month, certainly most months.

44:08And because the planning advisory committee is a statutory advisory committee at the very least I can guarantee that the statutory portion of this committee's work will continue in exactly what form or shape. I think we've had a few ideas.

44:21Thrown around today, but we'll be back later this year to talk in more specific terms about what we think might be a good, a good option.

44:30And then as a next step, we'll be taking all the feedback that we've heard from you from all the other committees we've met with combined with staff and of course combined with council, because as an advisory committee of council, it's also very important to me that.

44:41We have committees that are providing advice to council on topics where they want to receive it. So there's a place for them to say this is where the advice is really helpful to us.

44:50We'll take all of that and bring it to a meeting of the chairs and vice chairs in the summer. Look at the sort of trends and themes that that emerge and then ultimately translate that back into a meeting with you folks in late summer early fall where we can talk in in slightly more specific terms.

45:06But I know you do have quite a bit on your agenda today and I don't want to take too much of your time. So, unless there is any other last sort of burning pieces of feedback you want to give, I think we've collected a lot.

45:17There will be an email going out in just a couple of days to all of our advisory committee members to give you a chance to fill out an anonymous survey if you prefer. So if there's anything you've forgotten.

45:26And you're like, oh, I should have said this, there will be another opportunity through that survey to provide that feedback. Certainly, you can contact Liz or Kershla or any of the folks who support the committee and say, hey, I'd like to know more about the framework.

45:39I like to chat with the clerk's office more about this project. I've had an idea. How do I share it? We're open to all of that. We want this to be as collaborative as possible.

45:48Well, respecting the fact that you are volunteers serving on these committees as well. So, yeah, I just want to say thank you so much. And if there are no other questions, then I hope you're able to enjoy the rest of your meeting.

45:59Thanks Dylan very much.

46:02Could we get the agenda.

46:04Put back on the screen please.

46:07Thank you. So we're 3.

46:11Sorry, chair Maria. Yeah, I believe.

46:16At the beginning, I may have forgotten to ask if there was any disclosures of pecuniary interest from the committee. I was trying to.

46:26Not cough and I think I skipped that item.

46:30So, if we can just scroll back up to 1.2 and if you would like to ask the committee if there's any disclosures just so that we have that noted.

46:39I apologize for missing that. Yeah, that's okay. Don't worry. So, does anybody have anything they need to disclose?

46:48No.

46:50Okay, we're good. You need a motion there or we're good to go. No, no, we're good. Thank you so much. Okay. Great. Okay. 2.3.

46:58So, and Katie are going to be providing a presentation on update on proposed zoning regulations to permit 4 units on low density residential lots.

47:11Katie and Kishla. Hi everyone.

47:16Joey, are you still there and are you able to.

47:21To share would you prefer that I do the presentation.

47:25I just gave you the presentation where you should be able to do it. No, Kishla.

47:30And thanks Joey.

47:35Okay.

47:44Okay.

47:46How is that looking for everybody? Are you just seeing the slides?

47:50Yep. Okay. Great.

47:54So, yeah, Katie and I heard today. Thanks for having us today to chat about and give you some context for some of the work that we're.

48:02Going to counsel with at a statutory public meeting on April 9th regarding our gentle density project and some of the proposed changes.

48:12To our current zoning bylaw regulations that would enable 4 units on low density residential lots and wealth.

48:22So, in order to sort of get you up to where we are today, I thought I'd give a little bit of a chronology.

48:31And for how we arrived at the draft regulations and more generally what we're calling the gentle, gentle, gentle density project. And I think I was here.

48:40A little while ago to sort of introduce this project, but the minister of municipal affairs and housing issued a letter in October of 2022 and then revised it in February of 2023 and it was concerning the province's bill 23.

48:58If you know it as more homes built faster act.

49:01And what that letter stated was that to implement the 1.5 homes target. The minister was asking that the city of wealth and other municipalities across.

49:11The province that we demonstrate our commitment to accelerating housing supply.

49:17By developing a municipal housing pledge and taking the necessary steps to facilitate the construction of 18,000 new homes by 2031 and so 18,000 is is is quite a lot higher than than what we're used to on an annual basis.

49:32So, so it certainly is an acceleration of housing supply.

49:36So, to demonstrate the city's commitment to facilitating this provision of new housing.

49:42We did submit a housing pledge in February of 2023 to the province that outlines some strategies that the city will or has adopted to prioritize and to accelerate this housing supply.

49:54Then if we move into April of 2023 as part of the discussion around the comprehensive zoning law by law and the adoption of that.

50:03So, we asked council directed staff to consider as a right permissions for greater than 3 units on residential lots and well.

50:12So, we started to wrap our heads around that and come up with the work on gentle density project. And so, as we were getting our request for proposals out on that for some support through consultants.

50:27In November of 2023, there was some more specific direction from council to to staff whereby we were asked to immediately prepare a zoning by law amendment that would permit up to 4 units.

50:40So, we secured our consultants in November of 2023 to work with us and that's, that consultant's called to work with us on the gentle density project.

50:51Then in January of 2024, the city partnered with the federal government to deliver wealths housing accelerator fund action plan.

51:02And so that's the funding where we receive $21.4 million over the next 3 years to incent 739 units over and above what we currently do on an annual average.

51:15So, as part of this action plan, there is the commitment consistent with council's most recent direction to permit up to 4 units on low density residential lots and wealth.

51:27And so, there are quite a few other municipalities that have either finished this process or are currently going through the same thing that we're doing right now.

51:39And so some of those municipalities are Hamilton Kitchener, St. Catherine's, Berry, London, for example.

51:47And as directed by council, we are moving fairly quickly through this process, but we also recognized that we did need to seize the opportunity really to get some feedback on where there might be some flexibility or not in terms of better enabling 4 units on low density residential lots.

52:07So, we scheduled in February, we scheduled 5 sessions, 4 of which were structured information sessions with the home building community and the neighborhood and community associations.

52:18And we capped this engagement off with a public open house at the end of February and that was held at City Hall.

52:27And as you can perhaps guess, we heard quite a wide variety of feedback and thoughts on 4 units.

52:35And some wondered why it's not already allowed and then some, you know, weren't really that comfortable with seeing increased density in existing neighborhoods.

52:45So, while we heard that sort of both ends of the spectrum, generally there was some support for it and there were some specific themes and that emerged from these conversations that we had.

52:58And those themes are what we heard here were requests for further simplification and less restrictive zoning permission. So, just making it easier and more understandable in terms of what could happen or how to get 4 units in.

53:11There also was an openness to exploring a reduced parking requirement.

53:16And finally, sort of the third big thing that we heard was requests to enable a greater variety of unit configurations.

53:24And so, we took this feedback along with the scan from those other municipalities.

53:31In terms of what they were doing or already have done and we got to work on crafting the proposed draft regulations. So that's what Katie will walk us through on the next couple of slides.

53:43Thanks, Kishla.

53:50Good evening, everyone. I'm Katie Nasswater and I'm a project manager in policy planning and I have been looking at the details of what 4 units on a lot could look like.

54:02So, in the images in front of you, you can see the kind of great out ones are what we already permit in the city.

54:11So, we do permit up to 3 units on a lot right now. So, you could have 1 building with a primary unit and 2 additional residential dwelling units.

54:23Or you could have a primary unit with 1 attached additional dwelling entered ADU and 1 detached in a separate building.

54:34So, when we considered what 4 units on a lot could look like, we've proposed that the lot could have up to 3 units attached to the primary dwelling or up to 2 units in a in a detached form.

54:50And so, it could look like some of the images here that are colored in blue. So, 2 additional units together with the primary unit and one detached.

55:02And that could either be stacked 1 on top of the other for the detached units or 2 separate detached units or a side by side in 1 building as well. So, in a variety of forms.

55:18Or we could have either 3 units together with the primary dwelling. So, 4 in 1 building or it could be a 4 plex and we'll talk about what the differences between those 2 are in just a minute.

55:32Could you go to the next slide please? So, then we looked at what we need to change, but also what could stay the same.

55:43And so, through testing the various configurations of 4 units on some standard lot sizes in the city.

55:50We found that actually we were able to keep the same building envelope that a single detached dwelling has today.

55:57But provide more flexibility within it in terms of how many units are permitted and how the space is divided up.

56:03So, we're not proposing any changes to the zoning regulations that exist today for things like minimum lot sizes and frontages, minimum setbacks of buildings from lot edges, the maximum height of the main dwelling unit,

56:19landscaped open space, lot coverage or driveway widths. All those regulations would say the same whether it's a single or up to 4 units on a lot.

56:28But we are proposing some changes definitely and one of the things I just mentioned before is 4 plexes. So, we'd be adding in a new 4 plex definition where we would permit 4 units of any size or any configuration within 1 building.

56:47So, with a 4 plex we're not concerned about having a primary unit and it could be any configuration that fits within the building envelope.

56:57They'd be permitted in the RL1 and RL2 zones which are low density residential zones in the city.

57:05And we would require 3 parking spaces for the 4 units.

57:10These parking spaces wouldn't be stacked which you'll find certainly will be different than permitting ADUs.

57:18But otherwise they need to meet the same regulations as other dwelling types in these zones.

57:25Then we move to additional dwelling units. And so currently in the zoning bylaw we do call them additional residential dwelling units but we're trying to streamline it just a bit into ADUs or additional dwelling units.

57:42And so, as I mentioned before, up to 3 ADUs would be permitted together with a primary dwelling.

57:49And that could be up to 3 in the same building as the main dwelling unit or up to 2 detached units and any combination thereof to get to 4.

57:59So, we no longer, some of the key changes are that we no longer regulate the number of bedrooms in ADUs. Currently we regulate them to either 2 or 3 bedrooms.

58:11And we're also proposing to change parking.

58:15So, currently you need 1 space per unit and we're proposing to still require 1 space for the primary dwelling.

58:25But we would not require an additional space for just 1 ADU.

58:30We'd require 1 additional space for 2 ADUs.

58:33And 2 additional spaces for 3 ADUs so it'll be a number of units minus 1.

58:40So, we're trying to add to some flexibility and lot coverage reductions by reducing the parking slightly in this 4 ADUs.

58:51We would permit ADUs in singles, semis and on street townhouses and again to a maximum of 4 units on a lot.

59:00Now for ADUs within the primary dwelling, it would be up to 3 permitted.

59:10And we'd be removing the regulation that we currently have today that requires an interconnection, excuse me, between the ADU and the primary dwelling unit.

59:20That's a regulation that's been in the zoning bylaw for a long time.

59:24But through discussions with building staff, we've determined that that regulation isn't really needed anymore.

59:32Each ADU does need to still be smaller than the primary dwelling unit.

59:40And we're adding a regulation that would require exterior stairs to upper stories, only be permitted in the rear or interior side yard.

59:52So, they'd be prohibited in the front and exterior side yard. So, we didn't want them front and center on lots.

1:00:01They'd be tucked away behind.

1:00:06Then for detached ADUs, we would permit up to 2 per lot and they could be stacked one on top of the other.

1:00:14They could be side by side in one building or they could be in 2 separate buildings.

1:00:21They can be 2 stories in height to a maximum of 6.1 meters.

1:00:27This is a change from the current zoning where they're permitted to be one story or they're permitted to be in the second story if it's above an existing garage.

1:00:38So, we're removing that regulation as well as the regulation that would require the detached ADU to be shorter than the main dwelling.

1:00:46So, it would be possible to have a 2-story ADU in a rear yard of one-story bungalow.

1:00:57We do restrict the size though for detached ADUs and we're recommending or proposing at least at this point that detached ADUs have a maximum size of 80 square meters.

1:01:10And we're proposing a regulation that for the second story of detached ADUs,

1:01:16those with a window facing a lot line or those that have a balcony or exterior stairs to an upper story,

1:01:23that they be set back 3 meters from a lot line.

1:01:27So, from an interior side lot or a rear lot line.

1:01:32And we'd also recommend that rooftop amenity area be prohibited.

1:01:38The idea of course is to kind of create that balance of permitting additional units, but recognizing the importance that people place on privacy and concerns about overlook in rear yards.

1:01:53So, that's kind of a summary of our key proposed changes to the regulations for that would permit 4 units on a lot.

1:02:08So, our next steps would be first to hold the statutory public meeting next week on Tuesday, April 9th to introduce these proposed regulations to council and get feedback from council in the community.

1:02:23We'll then be refining the proposed changes based on that feedback we hear and plan to bring a recommendation to council for a zoning by law amendment in June.

1:02:36And then doing that will be will be back in the fall, going back to the community for feedback on what 5 or more units on a lot could look like.

1:02:47Similarly, holding a public meeting for any further proposed changes, and then a recommendation on a bylaw amendment for 5 or more units by the end of the year.

1:03:04Thank you for listening and I know I threw a lot of details at you. So, I'm happy to discuss that we're happy to answer any questions you might have any questions or comments.

1:03:17Katie and Chris.

1:03:25Yeah, it's Justin.

1:03:29One of my questions. I think is you mentioned that.

1:03:36Ad use still has to be smaller than the primary unit. What percentage are we at? I know the existing says 45%.

1:03:49And is that also, is that of the full building, including if there were multiple units in the primary building?

1:03:56Or do you still have to have 1 primary unit that everything is else is based off of.

1:04:04So, what we're proposing is to still have a primary unit.

1:04:09And so the ADU would just need to be smaller than that primary unit. So it does create a lot more flexibility.

1:04:16We're proposing to remove the 45% regulation.

1:04:20Okay. So, it would simply, it just has to be there's 1 that is the primary that is larger than without a percentage.

1:04:28That's correct.

1:04:30Okay.

1:04:31Okay, I think that's not alone. I think is a very good change that will allow a lot more flexibility.

1:04:39Yeah.

1:04:42I think similar to some of the feedback you mentioned, you got right away of creating more opportunities.

1:04:51And more versions of how you could implement them is really helpful. And I see that.

1:04:59In the changes to the regulations, it's opened up a lot more possibilities than I think there has been in the past and I appreciate that.

1:05:08In order to get housing built, we need, we need to be a bit more creative.

1:05:12And in order to be creative, we have to have the room to be creative. And I think.

1:05:17We need to keep in mind and I think that it appears that's the direction you're moving with this. So.

1:05:24Yeah.

1:05:26Thanks, Justin. Anyone else?

1:05:29Lisa.

1:05:31And then, Arda.

1:05:35I just want to put it out there.

1:05:39Why don't we get even more creative on the parking?

1:05:44Because we've devolved so much land use to storing cars.

1:05:51And I don't know, like in, in my neighborhood.

1:06:00If we just need to, you know, there's wide frontages.

1:06:07And with this intensification and, you know, not, not a deep lot with the ADU.

1:06:16Specifically to detached ADUs, there will be no room for those lovely big canopies that the diagram shows.

1:06:28And so if I had a choice between a parking spot and, and enough root zone.

1:06:35Because we're looking, you know, we need a contiguous 20 square meters minimum.

1:06:41To get those little trees that you're showing in your diagram.

1:06:47So what you're saying Lisa is to consider maybe less parking.

1:06:52Even less.

1:06:53Less parking.

1:06:55Yeah, because it certainly sort of sterilizes a huge area of the property.

1:07:04What even areas near the university? I mean, I don't know whether all students have a vehicle, but is it really not everyone has a vehicle. So why is it important that we have to always ensure.

1:07:16Well, I think I think it well, and I think, you know, even if they do have a vehicle, if they're near the university, they, they, they don't drive it.

1:07:25Often so.

1:07:27Arda.

1:07:35Oh, I can't hear you.

1:07:39Yeah, sorry. So my question is pretty much the same as Lisa's that I think that we could allow for much more flexibility. If we didn't have these parking requirements at all.

1:07:56So if, if there was kind of an opportunity to build these ad use.

1:08:05But you kind of had to choose between adding an additional ad you and adding a parking spot for the existing ad you.

1:08:15And if you were forced to choose the parking spot, then that's kind of one housing unit that you're missing out on potentially.

1:08:23And there are certainly people that choose to live without a car and don't need to park it. So, I feel like we're kind of reducing the flexibility.

1:08:34That we're allowing by having this minimum parking requirements.

1:08:41There's a lot of nodding heads. Is it, would it be fair to try to get a consensus from this group as a recommendation or be, are we beyond that?

1:08:56I don't know.

1:09:00Clishla, could you like, do, is that important for you to know what?

1:09:07Yeah, how we feel about parking?

1:09:11Yeah, it would be very useful. We are, as mentioned in the stage of collecting feedback and we're still refining to reach a June 11 recommended zoning bylaw amendment and parking is certainly

1:09:28an issue that will likely be debated through this, through this recommendation.

1:09:39So, and just to give you some context, I think it's okay Katie to provide this context.

1:09:46We have heard this feedback before we've heard sort of both sides we've heard this feedback before though that parking if we can be a little bit more flexible and parking but we've also heard to keep it the same as well.

1:09:57So, we're trying to craft something and some proposed changes that we can get through as well and sort of chip away at some of the parking issues that

1:10:15sometimes council does talk about. So we're hoping by creating some more flexibility, we can get this through but certainly if this committee can reach a consensus on what they think about parking that would be helpful in terms of bolstering.

1:10:35I think it's council.

1:10:37Oh, wait, I saw Morgan first go ahead.

1:10:43Thanks. Yeah, I think I get the undertones of what you're saying there.

1:10:49I don't think any of us would want to endanger this entire policy because it gets hung up on the parking. Like I can see this.

1:11:02If this policy and just this one is like no minimum parking standards, it could become the issue with this.

1:11:12But I mean, I would agree with what's been voiced from everybody else that like the most flexibility in a policy like this would be to have no minimum parking but I kind of get the sense that you feel like you're pushing it maybe as far as you can.

1:11:29With this current iteration.

1:11:35Is there anyone else on the committee that hasn't provided a comment yet on parking.

1:11:40Okay, back to Lisa.

1:11:44I guess that what I would, I would really like to know is, is, is what the market research says like, like, this is a market based housing.

1:11:55Prevision provision and if people really want to have parking, then builders will build parking spaces for them.

1:12:09If the units are, are, are small and geared to low income folks, I think taking up all that space for parking is, is, is, is wrong because not everybody can afford to have a car.

1:12:24And if these are targeted for lower, lower income folks within the market.

1:12:34Then, and, and the parking is adding a huge cost to the cost of the, of the unit. Then I think we have to be a little more courageous.

1:12:47I don't think we're ready to do away all together with parking minimums, but I think, I think we should put it out there and, and let the conversation occur.

1:13:01So, are we able to put something in the minutes that can state something where we're, as a committee, we would, we're open to being more flexible on the parking.

1:13:23So I understand what Morgan you're saying is let's not lose this opportunity to, to have four plexes, but somehow make council know that the feedback from this advisory committee, planning advisory committee is that there should be some more

1:13:43consideration given to the parking.

1:13:46Is that reasonable? Is everybody okay with that to like minute it and make sure that it's not just a conversation, but it's right in the minutes and that council sees that we talked about it and that was an issue that was of concern to everyone.

1:14:01And by the way, I'm, I'm in agreement with everybody with what everybody else said as well. So that's like everybody on the call tonight is concerned about that.

1:14:13Is everybody okay with that? Anyone not okay with that?

1:14:20Okay, so if it could go in the minutes, that would be fantastic. I don't know the exact wording, but we don't want to rock the boat too much to not make this bylaw pass but at the same time, we're, we've got a very strong opinion about parking.

1:14:36Oh, sorry, I was just going to say, there is proposed recommendations that Kushla and both Katie have brought to the committee in the agenda.

1:14:48If we want to pull that up and then we can add in an additional

1:14:54recommendation that touches on those parking comments from the committee if that works for folks. So if we just want to look at the current recommendations and then see where we might be able to amend the language to include the discussion that just was held.

1:15:13Well, the first recommendation is just receiving the presentation. So that's okay.

1:15:20Right.

1:15:22Um, that the comments provided by planning advisory around the proposed regulations be provided to staff and council for their consideration.

1:15:32So, is that where we can add a specific comment on parking?

1:15:38Yeah, if members want to propose some language or if you want to amend that to include specifics about the parking, we can do that. I can make sure we capture that.

1:15:48Lisa, do you want to.

1:15:50So, I was thinking in the statement that would follows and that the planning advisory committee members advise staff and council that more creativity.

1:16:03Could be brought to the consideration of the parking requirements.

1:16:08Creativity, flexibility.

1:16:12Creativity. Yeah, I yeah. So, somebody else.

1:16:16I started it. I'll set it. We're just a reduction, consider her reduction in the requirement. Just say it outright what we're we're saying consider the possibility of a reduction in the requirement.

1:16:29And that there might be creative. So maybe it's not an across the board.

1:16:34Every 8 is a, you know, 80 units minus 1. Maybe there's.

1:16:40Other specific conditions that might.

1:16:44Be able to be met that would allow for.

1:16:48Even further reduced parking requirement. I don't know. I don't know if something.

1:16:53Coach, there's come up and you're look at other municipalities and how they've dealt with it, but.

1:16:59Maybe that's where the creativity is, but I think what we're saying Lisa is just straight up consider a reduction, right?

1:17:05Yeah, and going to your point about creativity, like.

1:17:10Like, should should some of the units be really small.

1:17:15Maybe they don't require a parking spaces, but the larger units.

1:17:23Might that yeah, that's an interesting point, I think.

1:17:28So that's why I'm saying that that it's not just sort of a cut and dry issue that.

1:17:34Maybe, which to say consider opportunities for reducing the requirement of number of parking spaces.

1:17:44Justin, did you have more to say? I was just thinking similar to what Lisa was just saying. If you also look at.

1:17:50Not just the number of units, but what the units look like, whether it's square footage or.

1:17:56Number of bedrooms, like if you're going to have a 2 or 3 bedroom.

1:18:02ADU, I would assume that would be more likely that that would be a household that.

1:18:08Has a car if you have a 1 bedroom or even a 2 bedroom.

1:18:13ADU those are many times people that.

1:18:18Don't have a car or might not need a car might be people who need more affordable housing.

1:18:25Or proximity to transit corridor. So, at the end of the day, if someone is going to build a 4 plex.

1:18:36And say there was no parking, then they're taking the risk themselves to have 4 rental units and no parking. So they are taking the risk.

1:18:49Of having housing and not having parking. So they may not be able to rent their places because there's no parking.

1:18:57So the risk is not with the city. The risk is with the landlord that is the owner that is building these additional units.

1:19:07So, I'm not.

1:19:10I would still agree that there should be consideration, especially for tiny little studio apartments, bachelor apartments where it shouldn't be so.

1:19:24Specific that they all require parking.

1:19:27Any other comments.

1:19:33So, I think we where we at. Oh, Artem, go ahead.

1:19:37Um, yeah, so this is not related to the parking specifically so that if we have anything else to say about parking, I can.

1:19:48Okay, let's finish the parking. So, I think the last comment from, I think from Morgan was that we should be very specific here that we should be considering reduced parking.

1:20:01Right.

1:20:03Less parking.

1:20:08Is everybody okay with that? I don't know what the wording should be, but.

1:20:12I think that's what we wanted to make sure was very clear.

1:20:18Michelle.

1:20:20I don't know as if I can jump in on just for specificity further. Is it possible to include less parking than what is proposed in the, in the draft regulations.

1:20:35Oh, is everybody okay with that? Yes.

1:20:39Because I think that's what I'm going to use to go further than what's already proposed.

1:20:43Okay.

1:20:44Thank you.

1:20:47Okay, so are we done.

1:20:52Artem, I think we're done with the parking. So, was there something else you wanted to comment on before we moved to point for.

1:21:02Yeah, so one thing I was considering during the presentation is, is there some opportunity for more flexibility if we don't have this distinction between primary dwelling and ADU, like if the definitions was just in terms of like the number of

1:21:25requirements on the property.

1:21:28I'm not sure how, like this flexibility would manifest, but perhaps we're kind of restricting ourselves by defining these terms.

1:21:41Yeah.

1:21:43So that's a very similar to what I was thinking about as well, Artem, which is why I asked about that.

1:21:51The percentages, which I know was previously there. So, again, it'd correct me if I'm wrong, but as I interpret it now, pretty much in order for one unit to be considered the primary unit, it just needs to be the largest.

1:22:08That's correct. That's a.

1:22:10So, in that sense, I think that that does leave some of that room for creativity. You just need to have 1 unit larger than the other units.

1:22:21But I do agree. It's the wording of primary unit that can be.

1:22:27I think a bit confusing because some of these buildings or properties might not have anything that when you look at it or when you're considering.

1:22:38You're constructing something you say, well, what, what even does that mean? I think that that description or that definition needs to be clear in in these regulations.

1:22:54Okay.

1:22:55Lisa.

1:22:57Your, your recent point raised a question. So, how is the four plex definition.

1:23:06Different. It like my understanding is the four plex does not have a primary unit. It is they can all be exactly the same size.

1:23:19Yeah. Yeah. So, so because they didn't be a triplex and a duplex.

1:23:25All within those.

1:23:27That's 5.

1:23:33No, no, but if you'd have a have a tripex, so you only have 3.

1:23:38Equal units or you only have 2 equal units.

1:23:42How does this still permit.

1:23:51So, so 2 parts to your question there.

1:23:54So, first of all, we did try to make a distinction between.

1:23:59So, so 4 plex can be 4 units within 1 building.

1:24:11Of any size and any.

1:24:14Configuration so it could have like 1 main entrance be like a small walk of apartment.

1:24:19It could have.

1:24:22I don't know how to describe it best, but like a small stack townhouse where you have 2 entrances to 1 for 2 units type of situation or each could have its own entrance.

1:24:34And it could and then for parking, it has the same parking ratio.

1:24:41But the parking can't be stacked. And the idea is that those.

1:24:44Could technically be individually owned like you could have a small a condominium in that in that.

1:24:54As its own little development.

1:24:57It also and then for for 80 years.

1:25:02We're asking them to be smaller than the primary we haven't defined the primary beyond it's the largest unit to try to allow for that flexibility.

1:25:11We don't care which ones the primary.

1:25:14But the idea of having the ADU as being kind of subordinate to the main is been an ongoing.

1:25:22Kind of an ongoing thing that we want to maintain it. It does come into play for, for building code reasons. There's different building code requirements for an ADU versus.

1:25:34A 4 plex, which is more of an apartment. There's.

1:25:38It's it's less intensive to to build ADUs on to a primary dwelling.

1:25:45And then the parking is different in terms of ADUs. We allow stacked parking in the driveway. So if we were requiring 3 parking spaces.

1:25:54Generally, most driveways can fit them.

1:25:57Whereas for 4 plex, not stacking the parking.

1:26:02Is is a little more onerous. So ideally that in the future, or maybe this round would be a place where we'd.

1:26:10We'd reduce parking potentially and but.

1:26:13The idea is that they would be 2 separate unit types.

1:26:17There's also some implications when it comes to like Parkland dedication and development charges that we'd be reporting back on to when you're looking at ADUs versus a 4 plex.

1:26:29Did that answer your questions, Lisa?

1:26:38Mm hmm.

1:26:39Okay.

1:26:41You mentioned the word condo. So.

1:26:44There are all kinds of condos out there and some people may think they can build.

1:26:52Onto their own property and not even know that they can't do that without the condo corporation without the board's permission.

1:27:03So, it has the, is there clarity or well.

1:27:12Like this bylaw won't affect condos because you won't, you know, owners just can't go ahead and and get approval to build.

1:27:23Within their unit.

1:27:26Or add additional apartments.

1:27:31That's right. So, so condo is generally a shared lot. Right. Where you own an individual unit within it.

1:27:39But we're talking about units on their own lots.

1:27:44Right. So an on street townhouse could could have additional units if.

1:27:49If there's space, right? Like most, most can accommodate it well or easily, but it's possible on like, especially on an end unit or if one has a larger lot size on average.

1:28:02So in that situation, it works, but in a, in a standard like condo townhouse.

1:28:08No, you wouldn't, you wouldn't be creating units like this. It would be a different configuration. When I was talking about the ability to create a condo.

1:28:17And with a four plex you could have, and I don't know how feasible that is for most, but it's a really onerous process, but the idea of the four plex could have four individual owners and a common.

1:28:37And the shared ownership arrangement like that. So, so not for, not for all certainly it's, it's in very specific cases.

1:28:49Okay.

1:28:52In terms of condo, since we're on the topic.

1:28:56Would you, would you see that it would also at all be possible or does this whole primary unit accessory unit kind of negate the ability to potentially do a detached unit in a condominium.

1:29:13Set up under under the current draft regulations. Would that be possible. I'm just thinking that could be a very.

1:29:23It's an interesting concept that could allow from forms of ownership when purchasing an entire property as it is, is prohibitive for.

1:29:33For many, if not most people who aren't currently property owners.

1:29:41Yeah, so, so I would say it's, it's not our intent to have any style of condo ownership when it comes to 80 us.

1:29:52It's possible for the four plex or going beyond if you have 1 building. And again, there'd be stringent building code differences between 80 you and essentially.

1:30:04Units that are able to be individually owned. Certainly there are these other kind of ownership models out there that that could be explored when you're talking about like kind of cooperative housing or that kind of thing.

1:30:19We're not going there with this with this round.

1:30:24And.

1:30:26Oh, sorry, I was going to ask 1 more question. That's right.

1:30:30Go go. Okay. This is on a totally different topic.

1:30:35Setbacks from what I saw it.

1:30:40So, if you have a detached 80 you say, are they still governed by the exact same, say rear yard setback as the primary building. So, if it's a 7.5 meter.

1:30:51Rear yard setback does the does the.

1:30:55Does it and a detached 80 you also have to have a 7.5 meter.

1:31:00Rear yard.

1:31:04No, actually, how it's set up is that.

1:31:09The same side yard setback that.

1:31:15The main dwelling unit has so generally they're either 1.2 or 1.5 meters would also be applied to the lot lines.

1:31:24Closest to the detached 80 you so they would also have to be 1.2 or 1.5 meters from those lot lines. So generally, if it's the rear and the.

1:31:32The side lot lines, right?

1:31:34And that only changes to 3 meters if there's a window or.

1:31:40Balcony stairs that kind of thing facing a lot line.

1:31:46Right. Okay. Okay. So that that helps clarify. I think I read something wrong. Nice looking at the existing.

1:31:52However, and I know we don't have that many laneways in the city, but we do have laneways.

1:31:59So, would or situations where you're having your rear lot line isn't directly.

1:32:07Facing.

1:32:10Another presidential property or on a corner lot say, would that 3 meters still be required for a 2nd story window.

1:32:20I think that those are situations where.

1:32:23If you're facing a laneway or it's a side lot.

1:32:26I don't know why you would need to add.

1:32:30Extra extra feet or extra meters.

1:32:34To the setback when you're not.

1:32:38Facing another property.

1:32:43Yeah, that's a good point. The regulations do account for through lots where you have kind of 2 frontages either like 1 on the main street and 1 on a.

1:32:52On a lane, but I don't know that we've specified specifically that you could reduce the setback in that in that incident. So, I think that's something we should look at.

1:33:01Anybody else.

1:33:06Lisa.

1:33:10Do we have any condo type arrangements in the in the zoning, the zones.

1:33:18The RL 1 and RL 2 is or is it just these tend to just be straight up.

1:33:26Single family dwellings.

1:33:31So, so the majority of housing.

1:33:36In the RL 1 and RL 2 are single detached dwellings, but single singles semis and.

1:33:44Very small on street towns are permitted. So.

1:33:47Most of the condo, yeah, most are freehold. There are some smaller.

1:33:54There are some small condos that are.

1:33:57Are made up of single detached dwellings in the city. They're not, they're not very common in Guelph, but there are a few.

1:34:05Okay. Okay. Is that it on this topic?

1:34:14Okay, great. Moving onwards to sorry for you.

1:34:19We just need to take a vote on the recommendation and if you'd like, I can read them out loud. I modified the 2nd 1 to kind of include.

1:34:29The parking requirements discussion. So just let me know if you'd like that amended again and or if I'm missing anything. But what I have right now.

1:34:39For the recommendation, the 1st 1 remains the same that the planning advisory committee received the staff presentation proposed zoning regulations to permit 4 units on low density residential lots.

1:34:51And that the comments provided by planning advisory committee members be considered by staff and council regarding the reduction of parking requirements outlined in the proposed draft regulations.

1:35:04Did I get that?

1:35:09How about the part to be provided to staff and council?

1:35:13Yes, be considered by staff and council. It's in there. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And that the comments provided by planning advisory committee members be considered by staff and council. So.

1:35:25I just kind of move that up.

1:35:28Is that we should ask for a motion if we're okay with the wording.

1:35:34Anybody want to put for Lisa, you want to move? I'll move it.

1:35:38Okay.

1:35:40And a 2nd year.

1:35:42I saw Morgan 1st. Any, any discussion.

1:35:49Comments corrections were good with it.

1:35:53All in favor. Everybody okay.

1:35:57Anyone opposed.

1:36:00Carried.

1:36:02Great. Thank you.

1:36:05Great. That's a really good conversation.

1:36:082.4 update on the housing affordability strategy.

1:36:13I don't know. Oh, you're going to be giving us a verbal update on the progress.

1:36:19Yeah.

1:36:20Yeah, so we're going from very specific.

1:36:24In terms of gentle density to back to the high level.

1:36:29So, we've got a lot of questions on the housing affordability strategy.

1:36:34Sort of chat, but hopefully there's a happy medium here in terms of.

1:36:38The where we're at with the housing affordability strategy. So.

1:36:42We're moving very quickly with this. We've done.

1:36:46Several 1 on 1, 21.

1:36:49They're 1 on 1 interviews with a very targeted people who have.

1:36:54An interest or.

1:36:57To get their feedback on draft directions for potential recommended actions that we'd like to take.

1:37:04We also have a workshop on this Thursday. You're all welcome to attend if you'd like.

1:37:11It's in person at city hall, but what I can also do and what I would like to do is send this.

1:37:19This committee, the slide deck from, from that workshop that has some questions attached to it.

1:37:27Again, regarding draft directions for housing afford the housing affordability strategy. So what we will be doing with that feedback is, is drafting some, some directions.

1:37:38That we that will guide the work that we're doing on housing affordability strategy.

1:37:44So, and then coming back with those draft directions.

1:37:50With sort of broader public engagement in the many June timeline is what we're looking at.

1:37:56There to get again more feedback on how to scope those draft directions or recommended actions.

1:38:03What we're also coming back with and we're still.

1:38:06In the midst of, of.

1:38:10Determining how to do this engagement is I had mentioned when I was here last about conversations around what does affordability mean to, to people in Guelph and well residents.

1:38:23Recognizing that we.

1:38:25You know, we do have parameters that we have to meet with the province. The province has a definition for affordability that we have to meet and we have benchmarks that we have to work towards and report on and all the rest of it.

1:38:37And there's still sort of a spot that.

1:38:42I think we can have conversations and that may guide the housing affordability strategy in terms of what does it mean for Guelph residents.

1:38:50What does housing affordability mean. And so we'd like to have those conversations again on that in that may June.

1:39:01And so before summer break, essentially before everyone leaves for summer and have those conversations. So whether it's likely that I will come back here and have more specific targeted conversations with this group, but also would it would.

1:39:17If you would like to, it would be great to have those conversations in a larger group as well with some other community members.

1:39:26That and it will likely be in person as well. So I just wanted to flag that for you.

1:39:32Could you send us the details of the meeting on Thursday.

1:39:36Yes, definitely. Yep, I can do that.

1:39:38Okay.

1:39:39Yep.

1:39:41Yeah, and other than that, that was it. I just wanted to flag that there's some upcoming engagement opportunities that we are working on draft directions that I would like to send you some questions that we are asking.

1:39:53Both public and private partners and agencies.

1:39:57And if we could get your feedback on that, like, not necessarily as a group, but just as to give you some knowledge of what we're asking.

1:40:08That would be great. So, other than that, I don't have anything, but when I do come back next time, it will be on the draft directions and conversations around affordability.

1:40:19Okay, thank you. Any questions.

1:40:22Comments for Kushla.

1:40:26Okay. Thank you.

1:40:28Thanks for the update.

1:40:33Okay.

1:40:35Next item.

1:40:38Has anyone provided any announcement?

1:40:44Not to me, of course, but to the committee liaison as of today. Are there any staff announcements?

1:40:54No, I don't think we believe we received anything.

1:40:57Okay. Thank you.

1:41:00Is there any other business before we adjourn?

1:41:08I just want to make a comment. I think we realized ourselves that when we were able to get more into the nitty gritty of a comment, there was a lot more participation and comments and feedback.

1:41:22Rather, not to say that the high level stuff is not important. It's crucial.

1:41:27But I think if we become a little bit more involved, we, a lot of great ideas come out of it, which I think we're, we're excellent.

1:41:38So, thank you to everybody.

1:41:41Well, if there's nothing else, could I ask for motion?

1:41:45Morgan, did you want to say something?

1:41:47Yeah, just before you close, Maria, I just wanted to say thank you to you for volunteering to be chair and for doing it such a great job at directing our conversation today. So that's much appreciated.

1:42:01Oh, thank you. I'll be better next time.

1:42:04No, no, this was great. This was great. I really appreciate it.

1:42:08Thank you.

1:42:10I could ask for someone to move to adjourn the meeting.

1:42:14Anybody Lisa taken and I don't believe we need a seconder, right?

1:42:20Um, yeah, it's just a regular vote still so move or a seconder and then seconded it. And we're all in favor. Yes. No one opposed.

1:42:30Carried. Thank you very much. And I guess we'll find out when our next meeting will take place, right? Approximately when do you think it will be?

1:42:44Any idea?

1:42:47Are there any deadlines we have to kind of, you want feedback from us?

1:42:54So, I'll likely be back in the major.

1:42:59We think sorry, let me just have a minute here. So we will be going back on the gentle density. The recommended zoning by law.

1:43:08And I miss, and we will be bringing that back so that it's very fast turnaround. So.

1:43:17Katie, if you're still at the end of May.

1:43:21Mid mid to end of May is likely for that.

1:43:25Um, okay.

1:43:29Does that sound about right? Yeah. Yeah, I would think so.

1:43:33Um, so that one. Yeah, end of May. And depending on how well we're doing on the housing affordability strategy, it may be a similar agenda items for that for that meeting. So.

1:43:518 weeks, 6, 7 weeks from now.

1:43:55Okay, then I'm giving you a heads up, Artem. You're going to have to cheer that one because I'm away from May 13th to the middle of June. So, heads up just so that you know, I'm sorry, but it's a plan.

1:44:10I'm sure you'll do.

1:44:14Okay, everybody. Thank you very much.

1:44:17And tonight's wall.