Natural Heritage Advisory Committee

0:01Yes, I know it's tough to, but 2, I think you have 3.

0:07Have you heard from any of the other.

0:09Yes, we got regrets from Mary Ann.

0:14So they will not be joining us.

0:17Just to let us know that you'll be here shortly.

0:21Okay, but when you're ready to.

0:27Let's call it.

0:32So, thanks everyone for being here and those are on.

0:36I guess we'll begin with the indigenous territorial acknowledgement.

0:44As we gather, let's take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in Guel.

0:49A city built over rich indigenous histories.

0:52There are guests here and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land.

0:57People who live here today and the generations to come.

1:01Our actions today can move us towards reconciliation. We should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

1:09This place we call Guel to serve this traditional lands and a place of refuge for many peoples over time.

1:16More specifically, you had a wonder rung and the.

1:22This land is held as the tree lands territory.

1:27It's the Mississaugas of the credit first nation.

1:30Well, it lies directly adjacent to the hall of the track.

1:34Part of the longest out of the traditional hunting ground, six nations of the Grand River.

1:39Many 1st nations anyway, and may team peoples who have come across the turtle on the ball.

1:49Next item is a disclosure, the culinary interests in general nature. There are anybody else anything to declare.

1:59Seeing none move on to purple minutes.

2:03I was already had a chance to review the minutes, the errors, emissions questions.

2:12Seeing none, somebody want to move adoption minutes.

2:16So, I'll second it.

2:20Oh, actually, you need to.

2:23No, just.

2:27Thanks. Your powers.

2:30So, moving right along.

2:35Oh, and just yeah, call the boat.

2:39Oh, right. Anybody opposed? I can do that. Yes. You can do that. I can see an action.

2:45All in favor.

2:48Any opposed.

2:52Seeing none minutes are adopted and.

2:56Thank you.

2:58Okay, onto the business this evening.

3:021st item is Wall Street protection by a lot date and team. I think you're going to do a presentation.

3:09So, I'm to me, but Margo is going to do the actual.

3:15Okay, take his way. Okay, great.

3:19Welcome everyone this evening.

3:25Thanks for having us this group is officially the Guinea big as the 1st receivers of this presentation. So, in addition to seeking your feedback.

3:35On the content of the presentation, we're also hoping that you'll be able to let us know.

3:42Is it clear are the options clear? What do you think we're going to you? We're going out to the public with this. If you have any comments on the content.

3:50Please, we can improve it. We'd be welcome to hear those as well.

3:53So, next slide please.

3:58I'll start by just quickly introducing a team. So, the project manager is me a filer city. She's a forestry technician.

4:08And we also have the elector here this evening who's been a key part of this project and environmental planner with the city.

4:17Amanda Kennedy has not here this evening, but has been instrumental in helping to develop and coordinate the engagement for this project.

4:27And we do have her associate Molly Ross, who's on the line who's taking notes on her behalf.

4:33So, next slide please. I believe this meeting is being recorded. We're asking that everyone could hold comments and questions until the end.

4:43After the presentation and for those of you who are online will also be making note. If you have any comments or questions there.

4:52And for those who wish, there will be a recording available after the presentation.

4:57Thank you.

4:58Next slide please. So, today, what we're hoping to do is talk to you about Guelph's current private tree protection by law.

5:11And how the options for updating the bylaw were identified and getting into the details, providing an overview of the 4 options.

5:22Those of you who were with us about a year ago might recall that we presented to you, we reached out as part of our phase 1 engagement for this project.

5:30To seek sort of what are your thoughts on the current private tree by law as well as how you might like to see it updated.

5:37And we've been working away at that over the past year or so. And now we've come up with 4 different options as well as some other items for consideration.

5:46So, really what we're doing is part of this engagement is we're asking you and the community to provide us with your input.

5:53Either the survey or by engaging with us here or at some of the public sessions.

5:59And we're also here to answer your questions about the current bylaw options. Next slide please.

6:07So, the 1st component of this presentation will be focusing on the rationale and the process for the bylaw update. Next slide please.

6:17So, really, since the bylaw was last update in 2010, a lot has changed in the city of Guelph.

6:24There's been greater shift towards intensification. The city needs to accommodate growth within its existing boundaries.

6:30And this means more contact development, more intensification and more pressure on the trees that are remaining in the city.

6:37There's also a recognized need to adapt to climate change.

6:41Maintaining and tracing the tree canopy covers recognizes an action to help the community adapt to climate change.

6:48The new strategic plan that the city has released for 2024, 2027 identifies the private tree bylaws, 1 of the tools to support climate change adaptation.

6:58And so that's really a key driver for updating this bylaw.

7:03And then in addition to that, the bylaw has also become outdated in some respects. There's been a new official plan over the past decade or so.

7:12There's been a number of new guidelines for tree protection and compensation that have been developed and a heritage conservation district in the city.

7:20So, there's a whole host of different policies and regulations that the bylaw needs to be aligned with.

7:29Periodic updates are recommended in general as part of best practices through the city's urban forest management plan and that's urban forest management best practice planning.

7:39And so again, just one more rationale for updating the bylaw.

7:43Next slide, please.

7:45So, where are we at in the project?

7:48So this project initiated was initiated late in December 2022.

7:53We took some time to do research and analysis. So we looked at bylaws among the comparators municipalities.

8:02We looked at data and the context in the city of well, we did some analysis of the canopy cover information that's available.

8:11It was provided through the 2019 urban forest study that was done in the city.

8:15And we pulled all of that together.

8:18As I just mentioned earlier, we went out to yourselves into the public as part of the phase 1 engagement last March and April.

8:26And then we took that information.

8:29I considered it in conjunction with the background review and we developed a key issues and options report.

8:37And for those of you who are interested, that is available on the project. Have your same page. It's been an 80 page report.

8:43And it really runs through the details of what we found the results to date and how we got to where we are.

8:50So, here we are now over the month of May, basically with the phase 2 engagement. And what we're really looking for now is feedback on the options that have been identified.

9:02After this, we'll be going to draft the actual bylaw. So there'll be a decision made on the direction for it. And then there'll be a presentation to counsel in the new year of 2025.

9:14Next slide please.

9:17So here are some of the highlights of what we heard in phase 1. There is a summary report that's available again on the project. Have your say page.

9:26But some of the key feedback and themes that emerged at the phase 1 engagement is that there is certainly support for protecting and expanding whilst tree canopy cover for many reasons, including climate change adaptation.

9:40There is certainly also brought support for mature trees being a priority for both protection and regulation.

9:47We also heard that many people are not aware of the current private tree ball. I do not know where it applies or how it works.

9:55And for those who were aware of it, there are many differing and strong opinions about how the private bylaw could be updated.

10:04Next slide please.

10:10In part because we heard from the community that there is not a great understanding of the current bylaw. I'm just going to take a bit of time here to provide an overview of the current tree bylaw how it works. Next slide please.

10:23So some of the key benefits in general of having a private tree bylaw and having a private tree bylaw and wealth include that it's a mechanism to educate residents about the value of trees.

10:33It's a regulatory tool that deters and prevents unnecessary tree removals or damage. And it also importantly provides a legal basis for requiring tree replacements and financial compensation for trees removed.

10:47One of the things that we've heard from council through our engagement with them is that as the tree bylaw is currently practiced and the intent is to continue this is that the tree bylaw is not to be used as a mechanism to prohibit tree removals but to regulate them.

11:03So it's understood that in some cases it's necessary to remove tree bylaws to accommodate development intensification, etc. But what the private tree bylaw does is it provides a tool to ensure that trees are replaced when they are approved for removals.

11:19Next slide please.

11:23So the scope of the current tree bylaw is really focused on larger lots. So the bylaw focuses on trees that at least 10 centimeters in diameter on privately owned lots that are greater than 0.2 hectares or half an acre.

11:36In this slide you can see approximately what 0.28 hectares is.

11:42And it is approximately the size of what we say is a hockey rink, for example.

11:50So that means that if you happen to be an owner of a lot that's at least 0.2 hectares and you plan to remove or damage one or more trees that are greater than 10 centimeters, you need to get a permit from the city to do so.

12:02Next slide please. So there are a number of permit exemptions in the current bylaw. Many of these are going to be carried forward. It is expected as part of the bylaw update.

12:16There are total in total there are 14 some of the most common ones that are at inquired about and used include exemptions for dead or hazard trees. Also called high risk trees.

12:30Trees that are listed as there are several invasive tree species that are listed in the bylaw that are exempt from the permitting process such as buckthorn.

12:39If the property has a tree management plan that is approved by the city.

12:44It is not required to get a permit to remove trees. And another example is cemetery lands.

12:50So here's a list of some of the things that are expected not to change as part of the tree bylaw update process.

12:59So the fact that no permit being required for pruning a regulated tree, of course, using good arborecal troll practices that is expected to be carried forward.

13:10As I mentioned, these permit exemptions, most of them are expected again to be carried forward with some minor updates and refinements.

13:18In terms of the types of requirements for permit applications, those are expected to remain the same as well as the considerations in place for issuing permits and the enforcement mechanisms.

13:29So right now into the current bylaw, the city, if needed, has the ability to press charges, seek fines and require corrective actions if there's been a violation of the bylaw and that is all expected to continue.

13:42Next slide please.

13:44So some of the things that are being considered for change are the following.

13:49The size of the tree regulated.

13:52The size of the private lots where the bylaw applies and potentially the cost of administration enforcement, which relates to the, you know, the extent to which the bylaw is expanded in its scope or not expanded.

14:06And so these pictures show some examples.

14:10The picture furthest to the left shows an example of a tree that's about a little over 10 centimeters diameter. So that's the current regulated size.

14:18Whereas the other picture shows larger tree. So a little bit more than 50 centimeters diameter.

14:24So that's as terms of the options that are going to be presented. What we're calling, you know, a mature or a larger tree, which is also being considered in terms of tree size.

14:34We're also going to be looking at potentially changing the lot size.

14:39The picture on the right hand side shows a point to Hector a lot. So that's the currently regulated size and a point one Hector a lot, which is one of the options that is that for consideration.

14:50I'll be digging into those a little bit later in the presentation. Next slide please.

14:56So I'm just going to speak again briefly about how the options were identified.

15:02It was very important as part of this process that we had an approach for identifying options that was transparent.

15:10And that was defensible. And so we really relied on the data that was collected and a process that's outlined in detail in the key issues and options report to come up with the options.

15:22Some of the key facts that were considered that helped us identify options were where the current private tree by law applies.

15:30So I'm just going to take a minute here. There's a fair bit of information on this slide.

15:35So right now the current tree by law, as I mentioned applies to lots that are point two Hector. So this represents a fairly small number of lots in the city.

15:43So that 5% of the lots or 2000 of the total 40,000 lots that currently exist in the city.

15:50However, it does capture about 50% of the city's tree canopy cover.

15:55So the initial intent of this bylaw was to really focus on these larger lots where at that time the development pressures were understood to be the greatest.

16:06We're the current private tree by law does not apply. So the remaining 35,000 privately owned lots that are less than point two hectares and these lots in total account for an additional 19% of the city's tree canopy cover.

16:22For those of you who are following the math here that leaves us with about 9% of the canopy cover and that is sorry.

16:32Now I messed up a map. Sorry about 31% of the canopy cover that's remaining, which is not captured by the private tree by law because it occurs on lands that are held held by public institutions.

16:47So that's either the city of wealth or other levels of government where other environmental rules and regulations apply.

16:55Next slide please. So some of the other facts that were considered is that council has indicated that they are committed to maintaining and potentially open to expanding this cope of the current bylaw.

17:09So we've been asked as part of the process if you know having no private tree bylaw that was an option that was not even considered the current protections that are in place will remain in place or something equivalent.

17:25Another important fact that we considered was that most of the trees and wealth were relatively young. So the work that was done in 2019 found that about 78% of the trees and wealth at least at that time are less than 20 centimeters diameter.

17:41The current private tree by law as I already mentioned captures about 50% of the canopy and wealth.

17:49With only 5% of the lots being regulated.

17:54If all of what's private lots and the city were regulated up to 69% of the tree canopy could be captured at the most.

18:04However, expanding the bylaw to all private lots also would add complexity and cost. And so these are some of the key considerations.

18:13So the process for identifying the 4 options.

18:20Involved a few steps. We started with 9 alternatives where we basically looked at every possible combination.

18:28Regulating 1020 or 50 centimeter diameter trees.

18:33On lots that were either point two hectares point one hectares or all lots. So that gave us a total of 9 different options.

18:40Those options were screened through against criteria that were established again based on the data that we have.

18:49The screening process resulted in 5 preferred alternatives. Those 5 preferred alternatives were then examined once again for feasibility and the two tests of feasibility were basically was the current level of regulation being met or exceeded by the option.

19:09And based on the cost estimates that were developed by city staff was the additional costs that was expected to be associated with implementing the option considered feasible.

19:21And that as a result, 1 more option came off the table. We were left with 4 options.

19:27And which are now being presented to the community for consideration.

19:31Next slide please.

19:33So now I'm going to dig into the options that have been identified and explain each of them briefly.

19:43So the 4 options that have been identified.

19:46Range from basically what we'll call no change. So the same scope is the current bylaw. So regulating trees of at least 10 centimeters to him and are private lots of at least point two hectares.

19:58The second option is the one that we've called someone expanded. So it's regulating trees of the same size as the current bylaw, but on slightly smaller lots. So point one hectares instead of point two.

20:11The third option is called significantly expanded. So this one is regulation of trees that are slightly larger. So 20 centimeter Samner, but on all private lots across the city.

20:23And then the 4th option is 1 that's a bit of a combination. So this 1 regulates is basically the current bylaw. So regulating trees 10 centimeters on lots at these 2 hundred plus trees that are a larger. So at least 50 centimeters diameter on all private lots.

20:421 of these options or potentially a combination of some different elements from these options will form the basis of the updated bylaw.

20:51So now I'm going to spend a slide on each 1 of those options again, just to speak to some of the highlights. So the current bylaw.

20:58As I've already discussed the emphasis is regulating 10 centimeter diameter trees on point 2 hectares.

21:05Who does this affect. So this really focuses on larger landowners.

21:11It also captures about 50% of the city's tree canopy cover and no significant new additional costs are expected. This can be accommodated with the available staffing and resourcing within the city.

21:25So the next option option to somewhat expanded. So again, regulation of 10 centimeter diameter trees on slightly smaller lots.

21:36So this 1 instead of capturing 50% of the canopy cover captures slightly more so 55% of the canopy covering the city would be captured by this.

21:46And again, this would focus on semi large private lots. So would affect about twice as many landowners, but still the majority of landowners in the city would private landowners would not be affected by the bylaw.

22:00And again, this could be accommodated with the existing and available staffing.

22:06Next option please.

22:08So the significantly expanded bylaw is trees of at least 20 centimeters diameter on all lots, irrespective of size.

22:17So this would affect any private property owner who wanted to remove potentially damage a tree on their property that was at least 20 centimeters diameter.

22:28About 69 or up to 69% of cities true canopy cover would be regulated by this bylaw. However, it would result in significant new costs for administration and enforcement on across the city.

22:45And then finally, the last option.

22:48So, next slide please.

22:51Option 4 so the current bylaw plus mature trees everywhere.

22:56Would affect all property owners. So it would be a combination of the larger property owners would likely be more affected by this bylaw, but potentially any property owner who wanted to remove a larger tree would need to go into our permit.

23:13This one is indicated that it captures a range.

23:1750 to 69% of the tree canopy cover and the reason why we have this range is because there is uncertainty that exactly how much of a canopy would not be captured by excluding the trees of 10 to 49 centimeters on all the smaller lots.

23:33So, this bylaw also would involve some significant new costs for bylaw administration and enforcement. I'm just because of the number of properties that would be potentially captured under this file.

23:47Next slide please.

23:50So this is an overview of the four options.

23:53In the first column here, this is the number of lots that are captured. So you can see the first two options. It's a relatively small proportion of the lot in the city. Whereas the latter two options.

24:05I captures almost all of the private lots. So that's where again, you get the cost increases are largely tied to that.

24:13You also get the canopy cover shifts.

24:16So the current bylaw capturing 50% and then with the different options ranging from.

24:22Up to 55% of the second option and then all the way potentially up to 69% with the third and fourth options.

24:31In terms of the costing as I mentioned, options 1 and 2 can be accommodated with the city's existing staffing. So no new costs would be anticipated.

24:42Whereas for option 3, it's estimated that there would be an additional cost of about $235,000 per year associated with additional staffing required to administer and enforce the bylaw.

24:54And then with option 4 slightly less, but still an additional cost of about 113,000 per year.

25:02And so you can see there are different pros and cons of each of these options to consider.

25:09Next slide please.

25:12So, in addition to the options related to both true size and log size, some of the other things that we have been thinking about and that have been identified as priorities are equity and talking about replacement traits.

25:30So, in terms of updating the bylaw, there is a desire to help protect the tree canopy, but also a recognition that we don't want to place an undue financial burden on residents and our landowners who cannot afford it.

25:45And so we're looking for input and ideas about how this might be able to be achieved.

25:50And there are some questions in the survey that's now open online. And I encourage everyone here to please complete the survey and to let others know to provide their feedback on the survey as well.

26:04Another question that has come up and that we're interested in getting some feedback on is regulating replacement trees.

26:11A few municipalities have decided to regulate trees that are identified for replacement. So, the city go and invest money in identifying, you know, approving trees for removal and then saying these trees need to be replaced.

26:28However, the replacement trees aren't regulated until they get to the regulated size. So there are no, there's a gap there potentially.

26:35So we're looking for feedback. Do you think replacement trees should be regulated as well?

26:42Next slide please. So again, just a bit of a recap in terms of what is expected to change.

26:51So, irrespective of which option is selected, there will be a number of updates to the bylaw going forward. So, for example, one of the things that we heard through the phase one engagement is that community doesn't really have a good understanding of how the climate is.

27:06So, there's a lot of information about how the bylaw works.

27:10There's also a desire and an interest in modernizing the permitting process right now because relatively few permits are sought because it affects relatively few landowners.

27:24Portions of the large portions of the process are still hard copy basically. And so there isn't an online permitting process, but there's an interest in exploring how this could be changed and updated.

27:36There's also a need to update the tree compensation requirements to align with the trees.

27:42So, there's a need to update the tree compensation requirements to align with the trees.

27:47So, there's a need to update the tree compensation requirements to align with the current guidance that's in the city's approved tree technical manual.

28:00As well as a desire to try and ensure that permitting and tree compensation costs for residents and landowners are reasonable and fair. So that is going to be reviewed in the upcoming months.

28:12There will be a number of minor housekeeping revisions to the bylaw as well as some shifts and staffing to help enforce the private tree bylaw.

28:21The extent and nature of those will depend on which option is identified as a basis for moving forward.

28:29And the city staff have also been asked by council to explore options for cost recovery. So, lots to do.

28:36And again, as I mentioned, things that may change. The size of the trees regulated the size of private lots where the bylaw applies and then related to both of those the associated costs for administration and enforcement.

28:53So, conclusion then. Next slide please.

28:57We are currently at the phase 2 engagement process and as I mentioned, following this will be we've got a series of public engagement opportunity through this process.

29:11Following that there will be a draft bylaw updated and presented to council for approval.

29:18Or in the first quarter of 2025.

29:22Next slide please.

29:23Next slide please. So, following this phase 2 process engagement process, there will be a summary that will be again posted online and available for the community.

29:35The city will need to confirm the direction for updating the private tree bylaw again based on the findings of the background review assessments.

29:42Based on consideration of the local context and issues as well as the feedback gathered through phase 1 and through this phase of engagement as well as based on input from city staff, including legal and bylaw considerations.

29:56An updated bylaw is going to be drafted over the fall and then there will be a presentation to cancel in the first half of 2025.

30:05And I think, oh yes, opportunities for engagement.

30:08So, as I mentioned, there is a survey that's available and live online starting today until basically the end of the month. So may 27.

30:19So, I'm going to get online and let again any organizations and neighbors, anyone who might be interested, please encourage them to complete the survey. That will be our primary tool for collecting feedback.

30:32There's also going to be a pop up at, oh, this hasn't been updated.

30:41There is a pop up not in the Italian Canadian club on Saturday. It's actually going to be a Victoria road recreation center from 1030 to 130.

30:52Yes, sorry that got updated and this presentation did not. There will still be a in person pop up at the farmers market on the 11th. That has been confirmed.

31:03And then an in person know again this one is also should have been updated.

31:09So, the in person information session is actually on the 14 from 630 to 8 that's here at city hall. And then the virtual one is on May 8 and you can register for that online.

31:23And all the correct information should be on the higher say page. So, yeah, this slide should probably be that's my fault. This guy also also buy all good.

31:33Okay, yeah, I think that's it. So, questions or comments, please.

31:40Thank you, Mark.

31:43Anybody want to start with any questions or comments.

31:47Maybe just one sort of historical question. They've been covered previous foundation than years ago.

31:58But in terms of the inventory. So, being able to get a handle on the VH and coverage across the city. So, when and how was that done.

32:10So, that work was done as part of the urban forest study, which was finalized in 2019.

32:17So, that work was based on to me field work over 2018.

32:20Yeah, so that was that was all part of the urban forest study. So, it was done using the land cover analysis done for the actual canopy cover, but the inventory itself was was sampling done across the city on city and private land as well.

32:37We'll be doing that again in 2020 29. So that's a 10 years cycle. We'd like to remind that, but we also have and continue inventory for street and park trees within our own.

32:50Like within our own operating.

32:52So, they would be kind of 6 years old then, I guess.

32:56Yes.

32:57Yeah, so we can add 6 years to whatever we need.

32:59Yeah, so it's yeah, we acknowledge and recognize that it's changed since then. So, again, some of those.

33:08Mark was very clear that we're generalizing based on those numbers. I think we can assume that there has been growth of the existing existing trees, but there could have been loss of canopy as well. So, yeah, we're doing a we're actually currently doing a land cover analysis.

33:25Not a full study. So, we'll have an updated canopy covered later later this year. So, we're just doing that as a quick exercise.

33:34Just to get it.

33:35Is light our coverage available here?

33:37Yes, but we're not using it for this one. We're just using satellite imagery. So, but we have there is why our imagery available. And I think we're exploring. I'm getting some of that.

33:47So, yeah.

33:49Let's go to the question. So, in terms of your costing, for instance, option 3.

33:56$235,000 extra cost.

33:59There's no range there in terms of the costing. And yet your data is going to be based on the number of trees that you expect to have to visit permit.

34:09So, so is that pretty solid number to 35?

34:15Yeah, it's also so it's, it's not the number of trees that we based on it was using the average number of permits we would get per year. How many, like how long it takes to do that. How many staff members it would take to review those or, you know, do do the inspections and whatnot.

34:33But it was a combination of and the number of permits, the time it took and sort of the volume of canopy more the more the canopy cover as opposed to the number of trees that are in the city. So it was really difficult to calculate.

34:47There's no set formula to do this and it's and it's very, it was very difficult to extrapolate that information, but we use the existing application planning is currently doing all the administration pilot as the enforcement.

35:02And again, this was based just mostly on the administration. The enforcement is separate bylaw. Consider that's not including any bylaw that's they have separate budgets again.

35:13So this is just for the administration of the like the permits permit reviews and permit issuances, follow-ups inspections, things like that. So.

35:26And you have a fee structure for these permits.

35:33Well, right now the permits a flat fee for a permit. So we're exploring different permit structure. Right. So that's the kind of feedback we're looking for. Again, I think in the survey where we're asking, you know, are you do you want a flat fee?

35:45Do you want an increased flat fee to cover for cost recovery? Or do you want to see a different fee structure based on how many trees or whether you can or affordability? So we're looking, we're definitely looking at the fee structure.

36:01The city currently charge $122 per. So, yeah. And again, this is challenging because 1 permit might take and these are permits. These aren't.

36:11So we don't charge anything for taking in an inquiry or any time spent on exemptions necessarily. Right. So we're only considering somebody applies. So they fill out a permit. They apply it and staff spends time reviewing it.

36:27It could take somebody 15 minutes to look at and say, you know, you're fine or it could take 5 hours depending on the complexity. That's why it's really challenging to narrow it down to 1. And that's why looking at fee structure might make sense.

36:41But I think the value. So, so that in terms of cost recovery, but in terms of.

36:47I think the compensation is really more the critical piece in terms of how the bylaws effective in.

36:56In sort of regulating the canopy itself, right? So, again, we're looking at different outside of the fee structure. We're looking at the compensation structure as well. The compensation.

37:09Yeah.

37:11Thank you.

37:13Sharon, you have a question raised hand right now. And also, we noticed that we didn't turn off the chat function. That's our back, but if.

37:22If Jamie, if you'd like to ask the question out loud.

37:27That be helpful and we're referring for using the chat.

37:32Yeah, sorry. This is Jamie. Hi, I was just thinking that on the costing slide, it might be helpful to have the current benchmark of what the costs are.

37:43It's just to provide a range. So, instead of just showing the increase, it would be helpful to have a benchmark of what the current costs are. So, is the increase, does it represent, you know, 5%, 10%, 50% increase to current costs.

37:57Yeah, just a suggestion for that.

38:00Great suggestion. We can do that.

38:03And Holly, sorry.

38:06Yeah, so I was just thinking you mentioned that there were criteria you used to kind of filter down into your top.

38:15For options, what were those criteria that you used it, or did I just miss it?

38:20No, no, we didn't get into that detail. So there were 6 criteria that were used.

38:26Sorry, I'm just flipping. Okay. So the first one was proportion of trees regulated and again, that's an estimate based on the data we have.

38:36Then proportion of tree canopy was a second one. The third one was level of protection compared to the current tree bylaw.

38:44The fourth one was alignment with community perspectives.

38:48The fifth was level of complexity. And then the last one was impact on city resources anticipated.

38:55So we kind of had two that were very tree specific like environmental to that were a little bit more like social community oriented.

39:05And then the latter ones were more called operational per se, right? How they would impact the resource. So we try to keep them balanced in that respect.

39:15If I can add to that. What we did is we took each of the options or all the nine alternatives and we scored them against those criteria, literally in a matrix.

39:26So they were scored. And so it was really easy way even visually to see which ones were coming out on top and that's where we picked the top, the top 5 and then brought it down to the 4.

39:39So it was again, we developed our own custom criteria based on our own context here in Guam, like all the considerations that we took that we wanted to make sure were included and then just weight them against each other, like evenly with all those considerations.

40:02Thank you. That's helpful.

40:05I just heard somebody speak.

40:12Okay. Martin.

40:16Just to turn off.

40:18I agree that there's been a lot of misunderstanding or confusion as to what the tree by law covers.

40:27You know, the question is, is it.

40:30Does it have restrictive capacity to learn development?

40:35I think a lot of people feel.

40:40That is a component of it, but it's the emphasis on compensation replacement versus restriction.

40:49Even when we talk about we want to try and build on the large canopy trees and you identified in your 50 centimeter.

41:00The question is, when you're in the bigger trees, where does that balance with the bigger trees, which are your top canopy component?

41:08How does that relate to development pressures?

41:12There are a lot of people who are trying to be restrictions saying, no, you.

41:19I know it's $5,000 cheaper to go this way, but we want to maintain that tree.

41:25Where is that balance between protection and development?

41:29Yeah, so, I mean, I think we are can also probably add to this, but I think there is a misconception that tree by law, you know, can prevent development somehow.

41:40So the tree by law is a regulatory tool that actually once an application comes in under the planning act, the tree by law technically does not apply anymore.

41:50And the planning act kicks in.

41:52So right now in the city of Montesivy has a practice and this is also another municipalities, some of it, that they apply the same standards in terms of the compensation requirements.

42:03If you're following me, but the tree by law is not a tool that can prevent or prohibit development.

42:11What it does is it regulates the whatever trees that are identified in those lands and provides a mechanism to require compensation.

42:19So whether that's replacement in site, which is always the city's preference to get trees back in the ground, or if it's financial compensation that goes towards planting trees elsewhere.

42:30It's one or the other. So that's really the emphasis.

42:34I think often, you know, the other thing that a primary tree by law does or one of the other things is it does also provide oversight so that trees that are adjacent to trees that are being removed don't get damaged, right?

42:48So that there are appropriate mechanisms that are in place. So there was a protective element from that perspective.

42:55Anything you want to add to that? Yeah, yeah, I would love to add to that.

43:01This comes up a lot with with developments that are infill developments in neighborhoods that have mature trees.

43:11What the tree by law allows for even through a planning act application and through a building permit.

43:20So say there isn't a planning act approval, but a building permit is required. If the tree by law applies, it gives staff the opportunity to raise the flag that the tree by law applies and that they need a permit or

43:39And if if a permit's needed, then it allows staff to talk to them about well, if you were to shift your foundation a meter to the right, you'd be able to protect the root zone of this tree and would put up the mitigation measures that are prescribed in the tree technical manual.

43:58We could take securities for it and require different things that would then be issued through a permit giving us that mechanism. But if we don't have a tree by law that regulates the lot size.

44:13So those infills a lot of the time are smaller than 0.2 hectares.

44:17If you have a lot that's 0.2 hectares, then we can do those things but for those smaller ones where a lot of the mature canopy is like in the old mature or the old university neighborhood.

44:31That's the piece that we've been missing because without the tree by law, we don't have the tool to say hey.

44:40You need to you need to have a permit and that gives us the opportunity but through sorry, I didn't even intend to get into all that but what I meant to say was that through planning Act applications like Ryan's one nine one.

44:55Jane or supervisor people who are reviewing development applications with a tree canopy component.

45:02We regularly work with applicants to make adjustments to accommodate trees. Our landscape plan or Rory is really terrific at championing that where there are opportunities to to work around or maintain.

45:16But ultimately we can't.

45:21Prevent development from happening, but the tree by law does give us that tool to.

45:27Take care of the tree can be so so to speak.

45:34What brought it up obviously we're we're hearing the pressure for intensification and we're hearing pressure.

45:42We're seeing this campaign maintain our canopy tree trust or risk.

45:48It'll spend thousands dollars to maintain that one tree.

45:52So we're sending a couple of really mixed messages out and people don't understand where the tree by my life.

46:00I had pretty idea what was.

46:05But it's just that when you talk about that communication challenge.

46:10So there people don't understand that balance. Yeah, I mean, I don't know if it's necessarily a mixed message, but it's a challenge right and having to try and do together. Absolutely.

46:21And just do it.

46:23Just to add.

46:24Um, staff have refused permits.

46:29Neither was related to development.

46:33But then then it goes to absolute to appeal. They can do that. There's a process there, but.

46:41Um, yeah, normally it's normally it's associated with the development and I think it was kind of going to going to.

46:51And what she was trying to say is, you know, there's that opportunity for conversation and they think more often than not. There's a lot of that that does happen.

46:59And I think, you know, they've seen that. So, while we may not see.

47:04Um, well, it may not prohibit the development. I think there needs to be maybe more visibility on.

47:12There's a positive way that it's been used. I don't think that's as clear to people as it could be. So, while it's not being prohibitive.

47:22It's, it's a tool for that conversation and there's been in my experience from what I've heard. There's been a lot of adjustments made a lot of accommodations and, you know, there's been trees that have been preserved through the conversations they've had.

47:35Because we have a bylaw in place. So it's there's just not splashed all over the news, right? So, so I think there's a lot of cases where I think it would have proven to be very useful to even though it wasn't prohibitive.

47:53Community, I want to think about 1 really important thing I think the bylaw does is it does a pretty good job of preventing clearing prior to an actual development application.

48:041 of the things that's tree inspectors were allowed to.

48:09Assess a permit against isn't the reason so someone wants to remove a bunch of trees.

48:14We don't have a formal development application. We can refuse the permit. And so when they actually come in for development application.

48:21We're looking at the tree removal in the context of the proposed development and then we can work with them to preserve the trees where it makes sense in the context of an actual development application.

48:33And so I think you don't see that in permits issues or refused. It's just something that the developers know they can't.

48:40They can't print it. We remove. So, it's not really a paper shell for that, but that is a very important aspect of the process as well.

48:49Do you have further question your option for is tied to large trees and the point 1 factor.

48:56Given that there's no cost going from point 1 to point 2.

49:01What is an option for point 2 plus 50.

49:06Option.

49:08Why is it option to you? Sorry. Option 2 doesn't cost doesn't cost anymore to go from point 1.2 isn't cost anymore.

49:17It is costing a little bit more, but it can be accommodated actually. So it's a new cost.

49:23Yeah, the cost. The cost.

49:25Yeah, it's not a direct. It's just twice or 3 times or 4 times or it's the 1st option plus this amount.

49:32The 4th option is really challenging because there's the potential to get inquiries and have permits reviewed for all properties in the city. So there's still a substantial amount of administration and.

49:45Issue permits work and enforcement that could be related to that and.

49:51But you can see my point.

49:53If there's no cost difference in your chart 1 and 2.

49:57So you're now saying go option 1.1.

50:01Yes, plus 50.

50:03My point is if it doesn't cost anything different from point 1.2. Why aren't you going to point 2 plus 50.

50:10Oh, I see. Oh, point 2 blue.

50:14I'll tell you was point 2, right? Option 2 is 2.1. Option 4 is point 2 plus 50.

50:22So, option 2. Yeah, so 10 centimeter trees on point 1.

50:28Okay.

50:30Yeah, there was the spreadsheets only 100 columns long on the cost thing that if you're really interested, I can sit down with it.

50:39It took us a long time to work that out. And again, these are I know these are very, very high level estimates when we presented this to council and the reason that it doesn't show like comparing 1 to the other because when we present to council.

50:51When we talk about financial implications.

50:53It's about.

50:54We how much additional cost is it going to be because they already fund this. They already fund budgets and so okay.

51:02We, they know the baseline and so we're saying from the baseline, there's no more additional. So that's why it's presented that way and maybe we'll reconsider the way that.

51:11I know it's presented that way in our material, but in the way that we maybe describe it when we're presenting to others, it'll be.

51:18It'll be sort of give a bit more of the background information because I can see that we knew that that was going to be complex.

51:26I just, I wouldn't focus on when focus on the complexity. I would just focus on the fact of focus on how they compare to each other.

51:35Basically the 1st and 2nd council are going to say, great, there's no additional cost. We're happy with that.

51:40We don't need to cost recoveries and as much of an issue.

51:44But with so many people, sorry, or with some people asking for the regulation of all properties, we really need to needed to show that it's a significant cost increase.

51:56And then the 4th one being.

51:58Significant, but not a significant. So it's more about comparing it versus the, the actual dollars like right down to the dollars and cents.

52:06I particularly like getting a larger.

52:08So you can say reached on the larger trees.

52:11The other question is compensation. Are you satisfied that the compensation.

52:16That you're asking for is very reasonable.

52:19It's not necessarily so we.

52:23So the $500 doesn't so that's the even the bylaw of $500 per tree. So it doesn't. So that's the cash in Lou value.

52:33So if you cut down 1 tree and you, you're not replanting on your property.

52:38Then you're paying $500 cash in Lou the $500 for the city. Yeah, you could plant for the, for the cost of the tree and the labor and the 2 years of establishment.

52:54So, you know, the smaller tree, you know, like pot it stock or 45 millimeter caliper, but you're not able to, you know, the 60 mil caliper that we want.

53:03Is it doesn't, you know, if it's not going to pay for that. So we're looking to find a balance, right? Do we.

53:10Do we push the compensation so high that it's unaffordable and people won't bother with it and illegally remove trees and not, but do you know what I mean?

53:19I mean, that costs the compensation to be so prohibitive, but we want it to at least cover the cost if the city has to our preferences that people replant on the property.

53:29You know, I, I'm not interested in collecting more money necessarily I'm interested.

53:35Just be me personally, I mean, personally, and I think in general, we just like to see the can if you replace it, the preference is always.

53:42If you have an option, you replace it on your property. We recognize that's not feasible, especially if you look at a development, you have an infill with a house and you're doubling the full percentage of that or something.

53:53Right. So, the reality is, is we're going to start getting a lot more compensation with infills on smaller lots and, you know, it's happened in the past. We've gone substantial compensation.

54:04And when there's compensation, we get the when, when they replace on their own properties, we tend to get adequate compensation is the cash and loom is more of the issue there.

54:17So, again, we don't want it so high that it's affordable and then people don't bother coming in for permit. They do it and they remove the tree anyways.

54:26So, and there's a big difference between, you know, me as a homeowner, you know, single income versus a developer that has millions. So how do you balance that right.

54:36So, it's a big question. So, and there the survey does, does have questions that are related to that about, you know, how if you feel he is the 500 adequate do you want to see, you know, that increase do you want to see it again like a different tiered scale.

54:53So, we're trying, we are trying to get that kind of feedback from the community. We really want to know how everybody else feels about it because we know how we.

55:02Yeah, Martin, I think you put your finger on the thing that was concerning me, which is the law size with the new gentle demonstration.

55:23We're going to see more of those law sizes.

55:26Severed, I think, broken up. And so you're going to reduce. So that's going to be, I think, reducing the numbers of mods that trees are are protected on in any way.

55:40And so, so I did like the number, the smaller lot with the large, but adding which Martin was getting at adding the largest size trees.

55:55So, right, I'm just curious, I'm going to get clarification. So option for right now is the current file, which is point two hectares plus 50, but are you both think you would like to see an option with point one hectares plus the 50.

56:08Is that what you were saying also. Okay.

56:10Okay.

56:12So trees that are 10 side, each on lots that are point 1.

56:17And then 50 centimeter trees everywhere. Okay.

56:22Because I think there's a lot of moving targets and I think the sizes of lots in the city is going to change. And how many, I think it's movement and how many actual lots is that.

56:32It's right now. So, and point two hectares, it's about 2000 at point 1, it's about 4,000. But as we said, it's moving like, like all of the kind of it's all moving target.

56:42See kind of trying to jump it forward.

56:45All right. Yeah.

56:47Keeping in mind, seeing that if you have a larger lot that's regulated.

56:52And it be that the tree protection is going to be captured through the planning, the planning application. It's going to be once something is severed and everybody walks away. Right. That's, yeah, I think that's over.

57:08Yeah, I think that's going to be the issue.

57:10So, follow up to that then talk about the costing.

57:18You have a field for where this might end.

57:23This is our first. You're the first.

57:26No, and if, you know, going back to going back to the first phase engagement.

57:32There was some neutrality, like things were in the middle there. We didn't find it was.

57:37You know, 1 side or the other it wasn't it wasn't like that. There was a lot of middle ground. And so it actually made it harder for us.

57:45You know, we're going into it. I, you know, I naively thought, okay, we're going to get everybody's going to come out for this. And they're going to say all trees, all lots.

57:54Throw all the money at it. But, you know, in a good way, I was surprised, but I was, I was happy to see that there are people from, you know, the other side, the flip side view of it came at and said, no, that's, that's too much.

58:09That's, you know, overreach. It's, it's too expensive that way. Enough of the canopies regulated potentially.

58:17You know, I want to do what I want on my property city already has so much, you know, their hands and everything I do.

58:25Yeah, so it's really, I don't know where this is going to go. And if it again comes sort of lands in the middle with, you know, you don't strongly or, you know, or completely against something and we land in the middle again, that's where it's going to come back to us and say,

58:42we have to work. It's going to be a very difficult thing for us to, to come to at that point because yeah, it's sort of one thing against another. There is no one clear direction with this.

58:58One thing that actually we didn't mention that is probably just mentioned. So we did go to cancel on March 5 presented the four options. And so they have before going into the public to make sure that we had their support that these were genuinely all feasible.

59:14The ones that we thought were feasible from our analysis. And so certainly whatever we land is going to be something within the range of what we have and could include something like what you suggested that's not that wouldn't be off the table either as a combination.

59:30Whereas I'm going to say 10 centimeters on all lots is probably not on the table because that one was just identified as cost prohibitive.

59:40Yeah, it was one of the options we screened out because of the cost. It wasn't whereas what you suggested is something that I think would be within the range of something that could be feasible. So, is there an option that

59:56we can talk about compensation even controls between residential lot that person's looking to remove one tree for a pool versus a developer that's going to take up 200.

1:00:14So in terms of more of a residential permit versus a development permit.

1:00:27Sure. Go ahead. Yeah, I would. So we we've talked about this we talked about the fee structure and the compensation structure. So we're not going to see no to that.

1:00:39But in talking about it. What we have to be careful of is that we're not putting roadblocks and creating inequitability for one group versus another.

1:00:51I think the focus is really on making it more equitable for for certain people and continuing to allow for business and growth and wealth.

1:01:02So, I'm not that I would hesitate to put out a different fee structure for developers, but there are already so many roadblocks for developers.

1:01:12That I think I really think we're going to have to hear from them. So we are going to we are going to be talking to the developers. I'm just not sure that that would be very welcome.

1:01:24The other thing is as justine was sort of, you know, implying.

1:01:30It's not it used to be in 2010. Yes, developers were focused on larger loss. There was kind of a clear line that line is not so clear anymore. There's development of all sizes on different sizes of lots.

1:01:41Like what, you know, what is how do you necessarily distinguish? Right. There's going to be all sorts of things. I could I could be a developer. Right. So yes, we have the option through the bylaw of, for example, changing the permit so that instead of $122 per permit.

1:01:58It's $122 per tree that you want to remove. Like I'm just saying as an example, right? That would be a way of scaling potentially to reflect someone wanting to take out 1 versus 100.

1:02:11But again, there's a number of considerations in there as well. Right.

1:02:14And remember for development applications, the approval is a planning act approval, not a tree permit. So it doesn't matter what the tree permit fee is for development applications.

1:02:25And the tree bylaw is what specifies what the compensation is. So if it says $500 per tree, you'd have to write it right in the tree bylaw developer. You pay this per tree.

1:02:38Anyone who isn't and then how do you define developer?

1:02:42I think to get a legal opinion on that it would be difficult to support.

1:02:47And there's a lot of the developers.

1:02:49Developer versus developer.

1:02:51Because a lot of the quote unquote development isn't necessarily, I think that's a very general. It's a broad term. I mean, there's definitions for it, but even a builder who's.

1:03:02You know, who doesn't even have to go to the community of adjustment. You do a demo building permit.

1:03:07Some people call that development.

1:03:09But that's not a development.

1:03:11Because not planning applications. So it's that's what the challenge is.

1:03:17I understand. I know you do. Yeah.

1:03:19Because obviously we can all see the need for intensification question of how do you balance it and how do you build it into the review process.

1:03:32And I think if other people hear that there's other mechanisms through the planning review to try and preserve or modify to reflect values.

1:03:46I don't, I don't think a lot of people understand that balance between the planning that it's very important for the management plan and the.

1:03:59Sure.

1:04:00No kidding. We study it and we know how complicated it's spent months like that. And so, you know, it is complicated.

1:04:07Just for just, it's really quickly and just sort of on on that same.

1:04:15Council is asking questions about the tree canopy.

1:04:22When they're talking about when they're considering other bylaws like the additional residential dwelling units and the was the one that the other one.

1:04:30Gentle density.

1:04:31So, I'm so I'm getting emails from planners saying, hey to me a council is asking questions about this. They want, they want to know how this bylaw or this zoning.

1:04:45You know, amendment or whatnot is going to impact the canopy. So there's the conversation between.

1:04:51Forestry and environmental planning and planners.

1:04:56So there's a lot of background work. So, count and councils, the one that are trying to.

1:05:02Trying to find that balance as much as we are because in the end, they have the most challenging.

1:05:08Job in the end to approve or not approve something. So there's other, there are things that are being considered and we're trying to find that balance.

1:05:16Yeah, you definitely have a council's interest. I've had 2 counselors contact me asked me about the tree by. Great. I love that.

1:05:25I said, we know tonight.

1:05:30You know, you had 2 questions in there.

1:05:34What was the equity and the other was about protecting whether how to protect the replacement trees so that they get have a chance to become part of the canopy.

1:05:50So, I'm curious.

1:05:52I was going to ask specifically what in your research, you've done a lot of studying of other municipalities. What kinds of mechanisms did you see in any other places that.

1:06:12Might be applicable here. Yeah, the 2 most recent ones. So both Mississauga and Burlington in their private tree bylaws.

1:06:21Now have specific clauses to regulate a tree that's identified as a replacement tree through the private tree bylaw.

1:06:28So irrespective of size, right? So if it's like through that mechanism, the extent to which that is gets enforced is challenging, I think, but it's in there.

1:06:38And so there's a mechanism to enforce it if desired.

1:06:43The other thing that we've seen is some municipalities have a clause in their private tree bylaws to regulate tree plants like through the whatever you call it through the planning process.

1:06:59One of the things that trees are removed, there's a planning plan that is approved. So regulating those. So that's more, I'm going to say development focused.

1:07:08So those are the 2. I don't know if I didn't think of anything else. So the 2 main ones that we've seen. So it's a bit more work obviously, but it seems like essentially a lot of work.

1:07:18It depends. Right. So it's all about again, that balance. How much oversight and regulation for what benefit, right? This is what we're, we're, we're trying to find like what's the community's perspective? What's council's perspective on that?

1:07:31And we, we don't where I would hesitate is that we don't have any evidence that replacement trees are being removed.

1:07:38So, right? There's, there's assumptions like the worst assumptions that all they're just going to remove that. So we don't have evidence to say that we're only bringing this up.

1:07:47Because there are other municipalities that are doing it and it's been recognized as a potential. Yeah. If again, we're expanding the file on.

1:07:55You know, you have heard enough time monitoring the trees you have now. Exactly. Exactly. So that's yeah. Interesting question. So the replacement.

1:08:04So the replacement trees that would be regulated in the side example that would be regulated as perpetuity.

1:08:10Right.

1:08:12Right. What about the possibility of an agreement to you when you enter into a compensation understanding, let's say with a landowner.

1:08:23They removed the tree. They're going to plant a tree. What kind of documentation is the exchange between the city and the landowner?

1:08:29Oftentimes that would be included in the permit as.

1:08:35Condition. Thank you. What is the word?

1:08:40A condition of permit. So it's the purpose issue conditionally provided that the landowner plant X, Y and Z and we'll take securities for that.

1:08:50So we'll require the cash and Lou and we'll stipulate that.

1:08:55At the 2 year mark, if the tree has.

1:08:59Kind of withstood the warranty period, then the $500 is released.

1:09:04After that point, though, it's kind of free to grow and.

1:09:09Whatever happens happens on a few occasions where.

1:09:16There have been violations of large violations. I have required legal agreements.

1:09:24To cover the compensation and set the terms in that using that as a mechanism.

1:09:34When you're, you don't have the permit as the vehicle.

1:09:38So that's another way we.

1:09:40So I was wondering what sort of a quasi legal agreement that you might have with a landowner that says, you know.

1:09:46Yeah, we're going to have this.

1:09:51Security in the 1st, 2 years, but then after that.

1:09:55We're expecting that you as a landowner and a good steward blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know, just. I know.

1:10:02Doesn't carry any weight legally, perhaps, but it puts them on notice that they have a responsibility. Just doesn't end at the end of 2 years. It's.

1:10:11It's a long term commitment. Yeah, it depends like for development sites, right? You often have like draft land conditions, right? That include the tree planting landscaping as part of that.

1:10:24And maintenance of that. But, you know, if we're looking for the purposes of the private tree, if it goes to.

1:10:31All private lots.

1:10:34I have seen in some municipalities, something like the municipality asked for a photo. Right. Like, so it's not, you're talking about a different story, right? This is a 1, like the pool example, right?

1:10:46We're taking the tree. We're replacing it. So, you know, please document because then again, you're not going to start setting up legal agreements with.

1:10:55Thousands, it's a lot of work to plan or like, if it's a substantial site, there's a number of trees involved, then there's a different process in place.

1:11:03So, again, this is where we're at. Like, if the city is going to go to that extent of expanding, you know.

1:11:09It's, it's managing the resource requirements that are associated with that. So the city wants to make sure that they have that they're going to enforce it. Right. Whatever's put in place.

1:11:20It's fine that that was.

1:11:23Yeah, I'm just going to highlight the time and make sure we also have enough time for Tiffany.

1:11:32So, if there's still like some discussion to be had, I just wanted to make sure that name or even their time is on these.

1:11:38Thank you about that.

1:11:40So, are there any more comments or questions or.

1:11:45If I may for you to just to clarify and ask staff, are you looking for a formal motion from the committee to include within your documents that go to council?

1:12:00Or are you going to return to the committee.

1:12:04Requiring a formal motion.

1:12:08Not as far as I'm aware.

1:12:11No.

1:12:12In my experience with this committee, the.

1:12:16It's comments received and the motion is to receive the comments.

1:12:24Um, maybe you're getting at something different than that.

1:12:28Um, if you have that way, I mean, procedurally, the best way to do it is to pass motion with the comments included so that the committee together agree on comments that are included in that motion.

1:12:41If, if the committee would like that, just to that council or that the committee comments being received and forwarded to council and staff for consideration, that's also.

1:12:54Um, that's also a motion, but then it's up to the committee to decide.

1:12:59Yeah, I'm sorry.

1:13:01Leah said in the past, we've received the presentation provided comments for consideration.

1:13:07Okay, so you trust staff to just cash or those comments and included.

1:13:12And the.

1:13:14It's usually been it's like a motion is taken without comment. So, I'm going to be to receive.

1:13:21Well, private protection by law, and we did talk about a fifth option. So, if they fit option be considered this would be the appropriate time to be motion on that.

1:13:34Yeah, that's a really important point.

1:13:40speaks to fundamental challenges around this council, but you know, and how effective they are.

1:13:46It's not makes sense. The conveyor's message is yet through to. So I didn't try to draft something, but something might have to help me here.

1:13:54But the natural heritage advice which we received the gloss private tree protection by law update and request that a fifth option be considered to include trees of at least, and this is where I get the lost 50 centimeters diameter on lots greater than 0.1.

1:14:08Is that what we're trying to get to? Can I would move it? Can we say a combination of option 1, 4, and 7 meters?

1:14:18I think what you would want is a combination of option 2 and option 4.

1:14:24Absolutely an option. Yes.

1:14:32So, to clarify it, make sure I've got it right too. So we'd be dealing with lots that are 0.1 of a.

1:14:41Hector or larger trees of 10 centimeters.

1:14:47Larger all trees 50 centimeters or larger on all lots.

1:14:52Correct. Yeah. So, if I mail just read the motion out loud that the natural heritage, right? When you receive the gloss private tree protection by law update and request that a fifth option be considered to include option 2 and option for presented.

1:15:09Thank you very much for your support on that. That's really excellent.

1:15:19And it's very serious. I don't really figure out the diameter.

1:15:24And is the diameter at the stump? Why are you picking in breast height?

1:15:30Oh, jeez.

1:15:33You've got figures for all of that. Yeah.

1:15:36Yeah.

1:15:39Probably just people are asking. Yeah. Where is where do you measure that?

1:15:45There's the outreach right there's the outreach, you know, how to measure your tree 1.4 meters from the from the first.

1:15:54This is this fire right here.

1:15:57Right there.

1:16:00Okay.

1:16:03Yes. Just.

1:16:05Who would like to second that aren't separated all in favor.

1:16:14That's good. Good. Good. Good. Hi.

1:16:19Thank you.

1:16:20Sorry I lost connection for a second. Did you call my name?

1:16:26Yes.

1:16:28Are you in favor of the motion that we just?

1:16:31Yes. Sorry.

1:16:32Okay, thank you.

1:16:34So let's.

1:16:35Alright.

1:16:37So, onto the next item, thank you very much. Margo.

1:16:42Thank you everyone. See you.

1:16:47The next item is the outdoor sport of the strategy and presentation by.

1:16:53Just to clarify the meeting usually ends at 830 or 8 o'clock.

1:17:02Okay, I was like, oh, we got about 10 minutes.

1:17:07Um, okay, so I'm to be and I'm a park planner and in Ferguson.

1:17:12Um, used to be the program manager.

1:17:16For sport fields, I probably should just like.

1:17:19Uh, yeah, so, uh, I have very long title. Uh, my name is the Ferguson.

1:17:27Uh, currently projects manager sports them leisure grounds with this particular project. It's my main focus.

1:17:34Um, when I'm not working on this project, I'm program manager of sports and leisure grounds. So looking after sports fields, turn maintenance trails waste collection in the park system.

1:17:46Great, fine. I have you here. Thank you. Um, so here, we're here to talk about the sport facility strategy. So we're going to give you a project overview, project goals, objectives, scope.

1:17:56Um, and engage on topics we think are relevant to this committee.

1:18:00Um, we are at the beginning of our project, unlike to Mia and Leo, who have done a lot of work. So we're just at the beginning and our intention is to be barely.

1:18:11How do we with our approach here? Um, so if you've got questions, please feel free to jump in. Um, so.

1:18:19To the top of the week that we're pretty important to you might be sport field lighting, fertilizer, um, conversion to from natural gas bills to synthetic term store, modern management.

1:18:34And we've got some just general questions at the end.

1:18:38So our project overview, the strategy is going to be a 15 plus, 15 plus year document.

1:18:45Um, that's going to kind of deal with the development of sports field, the management of sports fields and the maintenance of sports fields.

1:18:53And when we say sports fields, we talk about rectangular fields. So like, thanks for football, rugby, first B, and then baseball diamonds, softball, three pitch, whatever you play.

1:19:05Crickages also included in there, but it wasn't, um, called out and courts, including basketball, tennis, pickleball and volleyball.

1:19:13So most sport facilities, except for like skate parks and those things.

1:19:20So we are at the very beginning of our strategy. So we're right now doing our comparative review, our engagement analysis, just trying to understand like, what do we need to include in our strategy? How to move forward?

1:19:33Um, so the full year, we're going to just be mostly doing research, listening, talking to lots of people.

1:19:40We've already met with 13 user groups just here, kind of what's working, what's not working. So this is kind of in that initial phase of like, what should we include? What are the problems? Just get an idea of what's going on.

1:19:53Next year, we're going to start doing strategies and figuring out how to solve the problems.

1:19:58And then, uh,

1:20:00a presentation council in 2026.

1:20:02So yeah, a couple of years of work to get there.

1:20:07So the first topic that we feel free to like ask questions,

1:20:11jump in is fort lighting.

1:20:13So Ian is the expert on most of these things.

1:20:17He can talk to some of them, I don't know if you want to,

1:20:21if you want me to come through the slide or.

1:20:24I can speak to this a little bit.

1:20:27So, you know, here in the city of Guelph,

1:20:29we have a limited amount of land and we're also experiencing a lot of growth.

1:20:32The density came up as well.

1:20:35And as the city grows, we're going to need more facilities.

1:20:37We don't have a ton of land.

1:20:38So lighting our existing sports fields is one of those options

1:20:42where we can gain more use out of an existing space.

1:20:48By lighting it,

1:20:51those obviously come with investment costs,

1:20:53although probably less of a cost than acquiring new land

1:20:56to build a new soccer complex or something like that.

1:21:01But with with that lighting existing sports fields,

1:21:05as a lot of our sports fields are also in community neighborhoods,

1:21:10there's residential areas nearby that may limit some of the places

1:21:14where we can or cannot light our sports fields.

1:21:20So some key areas we're looking at

1:21:24are things like light trespass on a private property.

1:21:27And then also some of our more prime locations

1:21:30where we might not have neighbors where we're going to affect light trespass

1:21:35will be adjacent to natural areas.

1:21:39And then there may be issue with having extended

1:21:44light period into those natural, natural spaces.

1:21:49So this is one potential solution,

1:21:52like I said, very early days for us,

1:21:55but we're trying to listen to our user groups,

1:21:59listen to our community and recognizing that we do have

1:22:04growth pressures and pressures on our existing inventory

1:22:07on how we can meet the needs of the community.

1:22:13So sports field lighting is one topic we have.

1:22:16And as Tiffany said, we're all happy to just entertain questions

1:22:19like her topic if you'd like to go that way.

1:22:23So if there's any questions, concerns, we'd love to hear them.

1:22:28Anybody have any questions, comments related to sport lighting?

1:22:33I thought, well, one, I just wanted to make a comment.

1:22:38Maybe staff can help sort of write the answer I'm looking for.

1:22:44And that is that there's some push recently for the city to be designated as a dark sky.

1:22:52Pardon? Dark sky.

1:22:55Dark sky. That's the term that's being used.

1:22:58And so it's kind of interesting that just from the center on your strategy,

1:23:03when at the same time there's this push.

1:23:05So obviously it's a critical item for you to wrestle down to the ground

1:23:12and come to grips with how city can be trying to do 2 things at once

1:23:16that seem to conflict with each other.

1:23:19And you mentioned that hilarious.

1:23:21We also have the bird friendly strategy that is how will the lighting affect that?

1:23:31Right. So we don't know exactly how the lighting would affect it.

1:23:36We're just flagging this as a potential solution to sports field issue,

1:23:41but it may in turn create new issues for us or may contradict some other some other bylaws that we're trying to push through.

1:23:51How many of our sports fields have you done?

1:23:55Oh, don't hold me to the exact number, but it's about 16.

1:23:59I think 16. Interesting stuff.

1:24:06Examples in Florida actually where we end up going wintertime.

1:24:11The turtles migrated up to the beach in the springtime to lay eggs.

1:24:17And so the town has got all these fancy looking light standards with big sort of.

1:24:23Um, Brella's almost over them, right? That really direct the light down. I guess that's.

1:24:29Come to just a second. And then even requirements for the residents that are in that area to shut your lights off.

1:24:37You know, anything facing the water, make sure the lights are shot off and even during this critical area. So it's a.

1:24:43So, not going concerning a lot of other jurisdiction, but I'm sure there's lessons to be learned from maybe there and elsewhere.

1:24:49In terms of how you can do that to have an effective sports field. At the same time, I mean, minimizing the.

1:24:55The area of influence.

1:24:58I mean, there may be a strategy to focus on the ones that are not right next to natural areas, like not the 1 out.

1:25:05But I think there might be that 1.

1:25:08Sorry, that's like 1.

1:25:12Yeah, to color temperature to get noted.

1:25:18And I was thinking about that because the brain halogen is what you want to see, but you're playing for his be at night.

1:25:24But in some research and some new standards that we went in at the algorithm that are.

1:25:31Dark sky friendly and they also have a much warmer color temperature.

1:25:35And there's a bunch of research about that. Maybe already familiar with some.

1:25:42Tiffany was kind and saying that I'm a lighting expert. So I'm always learning new things though. But yes, we are.

1:25:50As recently as today, Tiffany are discussing like.

1:25:54The balance between like the traditional metal halide floodlight style.

1:25:59And like the newer technology, which is the lighting.

1:26:04The L. E typically has a much cooler.

1:26:06Temperature to it, it's less likely to spill or trespass.

1:26:11It's a lot more intense and it's a lot more to the blue spectrum.

1:26:15They can really control that now. There's a lot of setting now.

1:26:19They can the sport lighting. They're generally the faster.

1:26:23The speed of the ball or the poker, whatever you're playing with the brighter and the wider.

1:26:30You want the light to be right. So.

1:26:33We haven't gone into that amount of detail just to yet.

1:26:39But the intensity and the color of lighting on a tennis court.

1:26:45It could be noticeably different.

1:26:49Then the lighting and the intensity on a soccer field.

1:26:52So we haven't really, you know, built into that.

1:26:58Like the minutiae of that just yet.

1:27:02That's an excellent comment that we can take away, which is to, you know,

1:27:07good opportunities where they're less impactful to natural areas.

1:27:12Have you worked with them, the like athletic department on like impacts of the

1:27:17algorithm from their sports field lighting?

1:27:20Like, has that been something that you guys have been?

1:27:22We have not. OK, I was just hoping that maybe you also have resources to share with us.

1:27:27Like, rounds of that stuff. So.

1:27:29And the ones from when we did lots.

1:27:33But but that's the question, right? Is it right to say that?

1:27:37Yeah. And I think like the industry itself is generally understanding of like,

1:27:43well, we don't want light trespass.

1:27:44We want to protect the sky, like dark sky birds.

1:27:48Like they're all are we always coming up with new technologies.

1:27:53But again, it's like competing interests.

1:27:55Like we want to we have to play.

1:27:57It has to be bright. It has to be uniform.

1:27:59You know, it's got to be low, like low energy.

1:28:01So like, how do we like find that balance is interesting.

1:28:04So.

1:28:07Do you guys have any more comments online or about sports field lighting or should

1:28:11we move on to the next topic?

1:28:14Next topic, Joey.

1:28:18So we've got fertilizer and maintenance.

1:28:20So I think is actually your expertise.

1:28:24This is my expertise.

1:28:25So my background, so I'm a graduate university and well progress management

1:28:29program, so I know everything to know about how to grow grass.

1:28:38So I can tell you about fertilizer and maintenance.

1:28:41So sports fields are heavily maintained.

1:28:44They're intensely maintained.

1:28:48And by most measures, I would say they're intensely fertilized.

1:28:54The growth equals recovery on a sports field and recovery is what you need

1:29:01to sustain the use.

1:29:04So we fertilize to make the grass grow.

1:29:06And if the grass is growing, that means you can get more play on it.

1:29:09But I can say about our current fertilizer program,

1:29:12which we don't apply any phosphorus at all.

1:29:15We're only on nitrogen and potassium.

1:29:18So the reason we avoid phosphorus, it has a potential to have high mobility

1:29:23within the soil, which just it has a greater likelihood of

1:29:28finance way into our waterways and our water systems.

1:29:31And most of the science out there is all based on crop production,

1:29:35where you're actually removing your crop at the end and you're removing

1:29:39those nutrients where our sports field, as we mow the grass,

1:29:43the clippings fall back in and the nutrients are all returned back into the soil.

1:29:48So the only nutrients we're actively trying to replace is often just nitrogen.

1:29:55That's the main, the main nutrient.

1:29:58To instigate growth.

1:30:00So we've already done some environmentally responsible things by trying to

1:30:06reduce or completely eliminate phosphorus applications.

1:30:12But how that feeds into our strategy right now, similar to sports field

1:30:17lighting is if we want to get more use in our existing fields, we'll have to

1:30:21instigate more growth out of out of them.

1:30:24If we're talking about natural grass and so there's a potential for

1:30:29increasing our use of fertilizers.

1:30:34What about herbicide?

1:30:36We only have one location in the city of Guam for we are allowed to apply

1:30:41any kind of pesticide and that's the lawnmower.

1:30:45It's a specialty turf that's creeping back grass.

1:30:48It's for a lawnmower in the countryside.

1:30:50The boat house, that's the only place.

1:30:54The spray is so close to the water.

1:30:58It's been there for a very long time.

1:31:01We have, it's a great question to reassure you we have two licensed integrated

1:31:06pest management operators on staff.

1:31:10They're fully licensed to be fully aware of all of the things that are

1:31:14required for the

1:31:22application requirements and reporting requirements as well to the province.

1:31:26We also work closely with the University of Guam when they come take

1:31:30tissue samples to help us monitor proactively for disease.

1:31:34We're not just spraying because we decided it was a good day of spray.

1:31:41We have just said, the whole philosophy of limiting herbicide use

1:31:46or cosmetic purposes.

1:31:48The lawnmower has pretty cosmetic.

1:31:52So the lawnmower in green itself is akin to a golf cream.

1:31:57And when you mow grass at half a centimeter, it's susceptible to a lot of diseases.

1:32:05Herbicides is probably the product to be applied the least of.

1:32:08Fungicides would be the one that would apply the most of.

1:32:13The other topic related to the fertilizer and maintenance is that through the

1:32:21parks and our master plan, we identify that there might be a need for

1:32:24electrification of our maintenance vehicles.

1:32:28Like as the city moves towards electrification of most fleet vehicles,

1:32:31that's the other thing for consideration, but it also comes with a

1:32:35significant cost to replace all of our vehicles.

1:32:39I don't know if you're in a process right now with electrifying all of them

1:32:43or some of them.

1:32:45The industry has not quite caught up with the scale that our park system

1:32:54operates on to have direct replacement electric solutions for us.

1:33:00But it is coming.

1:33:02Most of our smaller tools are in the process of getting replaced with

1:33:06electric right now.

1:33:08Smaller tools like leaf blowers, weed lacquers.

1:33:12Pushmores.

1:33:14So we are moving that way.

1:33:16Does that have any comments about fertilizer and maintenance or questions or

1:33:23questions or detailed questions?

1:33:27So our next topic that we brought was storm water management,

1:33:31which I understand for Brian, this might be more of something that you're

1:33:36particularly interested in.

1:33:38So we know that sport courts prevent water infiltration and premium

1:33:43source fields require a lot of water to keep them safe and properly

1:33:46maintained.

1:33:47The other thing is the storm water management master plan is planning for a

1:33:51lot of underground storage tanks and parks.

1:33:54I don't know if you wanted to add any more about kind of your watering

1:33:57regimes and that, like how many of your fields are irrigated?

1:34:04Sure.

1:34:06So irrigated fields, we probably have 20 irrigated fields in the

1:34:12city.

1:34:14All 20 are using potable water.

1:34:18They're on the city's drinking water supply.

1:34:22That's where we get our water from.

1:34:24For all 20, the one exception, the one boiling club, we actually pulled from

1:34:30the, it's right at the, where the two rivers converge, what we'll call the

1:34:35speed river.

1:34:36We're drawing water directly from the speed river for that particular one.

1:34:41So we are using potable water to irrigate the fields.

1:34:47We have a fully technology enabled monitoring system.

1:34:55So as soon as an unscheduled flow is predicted, all the valves shut down

1:35:03and so we don't waste any water due to leaks or damage or broken pipes,

1:35:07anything like that.

1:35:08So it is, I wouldn't say it's state of the art, but it is a very intelligent

1:35:14watering system that we use.

1:35:17And yeah, there's less than 20 of them in the city.

1:35:24In terms of adjuvant system, it's not like we see in some residential areas

1:35:30where it's programming, it's going to go on, even if it's raining, you

1:35:36directly monitor the site conditions, soil conditions before flying irrigation.

1:35:41Each site has its own rain sensor.

1:35:45So it's got a little, it's like a weather station, but it's very specific

1:35:51just to rain and it monitors the rain.

1:35:54So because they're all developed in the United States at one quarter inch of

1:36:00rainfall, the system will not run that late.

1:36:05So we'll just skip that date and just go ahead to whenever it's next

1:36:09programmed cycle is.

1:36:12I see Holly's butter in hand up.

1:36:15Thanks.

1:36:17Thank you.

1:36:19Okay, so I've just two things that came to my mind was just curious what the

1:36:23underground storage tanks and just sort of how, like whether that contributes to

1:36:28like reuse of water that you're using for irrigation systems.

1:36:33So in the context of sort of the impermeability of sports courts, is there,

1:36:39is there any efforts to look at permeable solutions or green infrastructure

1:36:45adaptations around these courts to help a stormwater management and flow to

1:36:53kind of very different questions.

1:36:56You can take the stormwater on the court since more of a planning related one.

1:37:02Sure.

1:37:05So, like in terms of permeability, yeah, so in terms of permeability on tennis

1:37:11courts, it's something that we can look at through the strategy.

1:37:15My understanding is that the paint that we use on the tennis courts doesn't

1:37:20like really like it's very finicky.

1:37:25So even if you use a lower contact like if you use more recycled asphalt in the

1:37:30asphalt mix, it doesn't like it and they end up doing more maintenance on those

1:37:34courts.

1:37:36But I that can be something that we can do a little bit more research on this

1:37:39here to see if there are any strategies or other tools that other people are

1:37:44using so that we can be using more environmentally friendly things.

1:37:48We just know with the experience the tennis courts and the paint that we're

1:37:52using just they don't work well together.

1:37:55We've had a couple of experiences where we put more recycled content in the

1:37:59asphalt and then the paint doesn't stick and it sends up to being more wasteful.

1:38:04And then you can talk maybe about the reuse or irrigation systems.

1:38:08Sure.

1:38:10So as far as the stormwater master plan, parks are identified as places where we

1:38:17can accommodate more of the surge when we get heavy storms.

1:38:26The water, the source water itself typically will be using older neighborhoods that

1:38:33didn't develop larger stormwater ponds like you would see in newer developments.

1:38:39So a lot of that water is going to be surface run off off roads and has the potential to

1:38:45have some contamination in it.

1:38:47So it's not as simple as just pumping the water out of the tank and onto the sports

1:38:51field is probably some sort of treatment.

1:38:54So an oil separator desalination something like that that would have to get her a tank

1:39:02instead of further down in a simple collection point somewhere else where that may occur.

1:39:10It's not my area of expertise, but it's not quite as simple as just taking it off the road

1:39:16and pumping it onto the field unless you have a comfort level with potentially killing all

1:39:21the grass because you don't really know what your source water quality is.

1:39:29Definitely just gray water in general is something that we are interested in.

1:39:37So that'd be more like water collected from like a large building where you have a much

1:39:44more predictable kind of water quality coming off the roof of a building.

1:39:50You're not having to worry about contaminants off the road, salt, oil from vehicles, that sort of stuff.

1:39:57We haven't really dove into if there's any opportunities to implement something like that just to that.

1:40:06And I also think that the technology for use of gray water on irrigating sports fields is still too new.

1:40:14Like I think there's some concerns about like public health and safety, but like, well, what's in the water now you're

1:40:22springing on the field. Is there a public health concern in terms of like disease or things like that.

1:40:29So I looked at this a number of years ago. So maybe the research has changed, but I haven't seen anything recently about, you know, like if there's any regulations and how public health would approach that.

1:40:43I mean, if you look at it from a risk perspective, you're like, well, it's on the ground like isn't going to, but it's something that we definitely would have to consider and look at and do a little bit more research through the strategy about the reuse and gray water systems.

1:40:56One of the areas you might require would be about conservation is already where they've got a blue roof.

1:41:02That's been studied to death. And I know that the gray water there they want to reuse as much as possible.

1:41:10So that may be something that they can share with you in situations where store motor tank coincides with a sports field.

1:41:21Is there potential and or maybe would you feel there's a need for treatment of the rock from the storm on from the field itself or from the tennis court.

1:41:31The basketball courts.

1:41:34You know, taking advantage of the fact that there is going to be some level around some level of contamination to take advantage of that. And those two overlap.

1:41:45I think the new swim regulations require anything over.

1:41:51The rule that they want you to do quality and quantity training. So we're probably going to have to start looking at stormwater a lot more. Like the way that we've approached parks is like they.

1:42:03They're typically didn't like designed to train into whatever system they were assigned for.

1:42:09But within new regulations that came out with this water management master plan. We have to like think about how we're doing things now.

1:42:17So the answer is we don't quite know, but potentially that's another area that we're going to.

1:42:27All right. Good question.

1:42:33No, I think I'm good now. Sorry.

1:42:36Thank you.

1:42:37Okay.

1:42:39So then our last topic is synthetic turf.

1:42:49So a lot of people are not for synthetic turf because they think about, you know, it's not natural.

1:42:58But both natural fields and synthetic terry fields are net producers of greenhouse gas emissions.

1:43:05There's no conclusive research currently that says one surface is better than the other from the health risk perspective.

1:43:13They both have health risk you have to mitigate.

1:43:16The one big one is that the synthetic synthetic turf generates micro plastics. So the potential for migration of micro plastics.

1:43:26It can be mitigated through the best practice of just recapture systems so that it's just reading recapture the system and it isn't leaving.

1:43:35And then synthetic turf and natural grass fields provide both provide no biodiversity. Like it's typically a monoculture grass species.

1:43:47I mean, there might be some more to say about like the birds and the bees and the bugs and all that stuff.

1:43:53But in terms of like biodiversity itself, like they're both kind of along the same lines.

1:43:59The only benefit of synthetic turf is that they can accommodate four times the usage of natural turf fields.

1:44:08So like Ian was talking about like the programming.

1:44:11So you can get on them earlier in the year. So right now we people can't use sports fields.

1:44:16Maybe tomorrow they can start tomorrow.

1:44:20But like we'd be not like people have been asking like, can I play sports since March and we're like, no, the fields are not ready for people's feet to play on them.

1:44:30So like they can get on them earlier and you can program them for a lot longer. I think you, you know, all the stats on that.

1:44:39Yeah, that many.

1:44:41Yeah, not as the city doesn't as a guy vision, Mac just is in the process of instructing someone at the high school.

1:44:50And the university has some as well.

1:44:53Yes. Yes, they do.

1:44:56Yes, they do.

1:44:58Yeah, yes.

1:45:00Like I was like, I'm sure he did. Yeah, the university has several.

1:45:04Richard Mac high school in the south end is in the process of installing one.

1:45:08This year.

1:45:10And the city does have one synthetic field, but it's inside an air supported structure. So it's not an outdoor.

1:45:18Synthetic field, but it is a synthetic.

1:45:22It's a 3 quarters of a regular size soccer field.

1:45:26It's up in Timmins.

1:45:30In summary, when they put a synthetic one in, I couldn't believe how much early and late use they got out of it.

1:45:40Everyone was shown the snow and they're playing football.

1:45:45It has it has a lot of benefits in a colder climate to extend our seasons. So we'll be starting.

1:45:53You can play on it whenever you want. If you want to show the snow off it.

1:46:00So there's a lot of benefits to extending our season that way or programming it more heavily through the traditional playing season.

1:46:09But it does come at a considerable investment to get going.

1:46:17It's also not considered a permeable service. So it has a storm water infrastructure component to it as well.

1:46:30And then be approximately 10 to 12 year life cycle.

1:46:36It's like a roof where they say it has like a 25 year warranty, but it's pro rated. So.

1:46:46Most anecdotally, most of my peers and other municipalities, they find that they replace their turf.

1:46:5312 to 15 years.

1:46:56We'll see you again.

1:47:04Yeah.

1:47:06Yes. So I just was wondering. So maybe it was just cheap turf that I've been on on the past, but it heats up. So my question would be like, are there any able to be review into that?

1:47:17When considering turf, if it's going to be like kind of hotter than what natural grass would be as well as if.

1:47:23Just sort of also pointing out like in the winter, if it's still green, it's darker. So it might actually be attracting the sun, opposed to reflecting it like the white snow.

1:47:31So like, how does that work? I guess to the surrounding natural areas will have any impact on them or not. Are those things being considered?

1:47:40Yeah, that's a, it's a great question.

1:47:44And a good comment as well. It's a bit of a common misconception, but a synthetic sports field actually does still require some sort of irrigation system to cool the surface down so players don't get burned.

1:47:57It will.

1:47:59There's I don't have studies in front of me, but a lot of my peers at the university of golf with them on to studies.

1:48:05On 5, 6, 7 degrees Celsius hotter.

1:48:10Than natural grass. So it is a, it is a real concern.

1:48:15And most of the higher end synthetic fields will still have any irrigation system. They're not trying to get the plastic to grow. They're trying to make sure that it's not so hot that players will get burnt.

1:48:26When they slide on.

1:48:31Thank you.

1:48:32Those are good points though. Thank God.

1:48:35What's the, so the base layers of.

1:48:40Some of them some of the systems are a little bit proprietary, but the most common ones will be a 3 inch fiber with about 1 inch of.

1:48:56Sand infilled into the fibers and then an inch and a half or 1 inch of crumb rubber.

1:49:04So the sand holds it in place. The rubber provides you with the bounciness. You're not breaking your, your ankles would be in too hard below.

1:49:15And then below that surface. It just depends on whether it's a retrofit or a new build, but it could be.

1:49:22After a gravel or the case of.

1:49:25Our dome, it's just concrete underneath.

1:49:29I guess I, when I read over the bullets here related to synthetic turf.

1:49:38The exception of the common on micro plastics.

1:49:42The language here suggests that turf synthetic turf grass versus natural turf grass are virtually the same.

1:49:51And I think you're going to go out with this information. You're going to have to substantiate that like to say that.

1:49:59And when if you're talking about synthetic turf and you're producing it with fossil fuels and the production costs so and so forth.

1:50:07Versus.

1:50:08Grass that absorbs carbon, but you're cutting it, you're leaving it there. So it's giving off car. You know, that's going to have to be explained.

1:50:17A little bit more than just sort of taking this as fact and the same with the biodiversity.

1:50:22You know, grapita gravel and rubber and plastic versus soil and grass.

1:50:29There is difference by diversity.

1:50:33By diversity, we would find in natural grass. The certain census, of course, is nothing we want to write home about.

1:50:41But there is a difference.

1:50:43I think by diversity have to think of it.

1:50:46What's below the grass too.

1:50:49So I think those need to be expanded upon a little bit or justify the commentary.

1:50:55No, that's definitely appreciated. It was taken from the Vancouver sports field strategy. So they did a very extensive study on.

1:51:04On this and these were most of their summary notes of like how they were kind of justifying the use of synthetic fields.

1:51:12But yeah, definitely if we were to have the conversation.

1:51:18About, you know, are we doing like, are we going to be considering this for our needs? Like, it'll be definitely a wider reaching.

1:51:27Like a more comprehensive explanation about why we would be doing it, but I appreciate the comment though.

1:51:33Yeah, even as I was reading it again, I was like, oh, these don't celebrate.

1:51:38So I appreciate that.

1:51:39I'm just noticing the time before Ryan tells me.

1:51:45We've got about 6 minutes left.

1:51:47That's all we've got. So perhaps we can move on to comments section.

1:51:54Yeah.

1:51:55So after we've talked about this thing we've taken you can jump to the next slide. Do we have an X slide?

1:52:03Maybe I check it out.

1:52:05It's okay.

1:52:06Our final comments were just after we've talked about a few of these things we've picked up some of your comments about things that we should look at in more detail.

1:52:15Things that we should research.

1:52:17Is there anything else that we should consider as part of the sports field strategy that we may be a mess that would be of interest to the committee?

1:52:27And any opportunities that we should be looking at to do things better as a city in terms of sports fields? So there's 4 questions, but generally that's it.

1:52:39Well, there's a lot potentially there.

1:52:45And I think that for this committee, perhaps 1 of our areas of greatest interest would be if you're going to be considering design details.

1:52:55You know, planning details around sighting.

1:52:59If you've got a greenfield opportunity, how are you going to handle that? What procedures are going to put in place to ensure that if you.

1:53:08Minimize or eliminate any potential offsite or final issues.

1:53:13That's the kind of stuff we really want to probably really get our teeth into.

1:53:17I've got a few comments here about that kind of thing, but.

1:53:21Maybe it will be an opportunity down the road to provide more of that type of input.

1:53:26For sure. Yeah, like I said, we're just at the beginning of the process.

1:53:32So, once we kind of figure out where we might be going, maybe there's an opportunity before we get into like, these are the strategies you were going to use to test some of those.

1:53:41And we're still figuring out what that's going to look like. And a lot of what we're hearing through engagement right now is going to help us form like, where do we really need to do a little bit more research?

1:53:52Where do we need to make sure we have our data and help us kind of focus our work plan moving forward. So it is being done by Ian and I like we're not using consultants for it.

1:54:04So the good news is, is like, you have the internal expertise. So all your comments are listened to the people that hopefully are writing it. So, yeah, but that that's good feedback.

1:54:16You know, obviously when we're talking about natural heritage, natural resources, sports fields aren't really a natural resource.

1:54:25So, we're looking at that balance. And that's why I asked questions with his herbicide.

1:54:30What impact on the environment and the adjacent natural areas.

1:54:37We're trying to take a look at the overall city invocations, not just one individual soccer field.

1:54:49If you find your favorite now, is there an opportunity to get this?

1:54:53No, no, we are bringing it. So we're bringing it to some of the advisory committees to get some feedback.

1:55:00I think we're planning for the middle of probably beginning of June now to coincide with parks and rock months. So we're going to be going out.

1:55:09But we're not going to get into the, I don't think we're going to get into the level of detail. We are here.

1:55:15It was just timing wise. It made sense. Like, let's come, let's figure out what we need to do research on here from you. And then some of these will form later engagement with the community, but not right.

1:55:27Not stuff we're going to get with now. I think we're going to be saying like what's working. What's not working. What should we consider in our first kind of go at it.

1:55:36And a lot of it is through like a lot of our engagement will be through kind of one on one conversations as opposed to like public surveys. Like those are great.

1:55:45We have a lot of data from the parks and rock master plan about that. So it's like, what are people's lived experiences that we need to consider? How do we like, how are people using it?

1:55:57Are we missing the vote? I guess. So I think that's, yeah. So it's a lot more conversational based in terms of our engagement. So.

1:56:08Do you have the information on where the demand is where it's growing?

1:56:14I was going to ask, do you know, the pickle ball is there's 1000 people money not wanting to play.

1:56:23Yeah. So through the parts of our class, we did.

1:56:26Like, I identify the demand. One of the problems that we have at the city is that we have an indirect creation model. So the city isn't always the one that does the planning.

1:56:37We rely on the user groups to tell us, you know, what their way lists are, how many people they have. So it's a little bit of like art form of taking like the trends in each of those sports to understand based on population where we might need.

1:56:53That's a big component of our study is figuring out how much land are we going to need for sports fields? How much land do we have for parks moving forward? And like, how do what do we need to optimize and how do we kind of optimize our capital investments to make sure that we have demand?

1:57:09And what we're seeing from the community is that like, people are generally are not sorry.

1:57:16We're just we're one minute to a 30, so you might need a motion to just extend the meeting beyond a 30.

1:57:24Yeah, formally.

1:57:26So, really, this is how it has to go.

1:57:28I didn't realize that was.

1:57:30That's fine.

1:57:32Um, I want to talk to you extend the meeting.

1:57:35I want to second that.

1:57:39All in favor.

1:57:41It's okay to draw me please I'm sure I still losing.

1:57:44Oh, I don't want to play.

1:57:47I don't want to play.

1:57:50Order.

1:57:51Go ahead Natasha. Yeah.

1:57:55So I just raised the strategy only for the fields themselves are also where like the spectators are.

1:58:01And it'll include spectators as well as well. Like we're looking at the fields themselves and looking at like, okay, well, why do we need to like make a good field or make a good experience?

1:58:13Are they accessible for people? Are they accessible? Like, are they accessible for players? Are they accessible for spectators?

1:58:19Do we have enough fields to meet our needs for the next 50 years?

1:58:24Um, all of that is kind of in the works of what we're figuring out.

1:58:29The other piece of it is like, we're going to be starting a land like a parks acquisition strategy. So some of the work that we're doing is going to see.

1:58:38Well, how much land do we need for sports fields to meet our needs for the next, you know, 50 years.

1:58:43And then, you know, do we have enough park land to do that? If we don't, like one of the strategies we're going to use, but they're separated.

1:58:52I don't think the work for the acquisition strategy is started, but that's generally the plan.

1:58:57So, does that help answer your question? Natasha? Yes. Yeah. And I was just wondering, is there any consideration of maybe incorporating more biodiversity? Maybe where the spectators are? Cause like, maybe you don't have to intensely mow those areas or use as much fertilizer.

1:59:13Or maybe you can plant more trees or maybe pollinator gardens or something like that.

1:59:19Yeah, I think that's definitely on the table. I made a note of it here.

1:59:24I know that like with the fields on York Road, Wellington, in Silver Creek Park, they definitely just did a massive planting there along the edge of the sports field.

1:59:39So, it's definitely in the work that we're considering. So, anything we do new, we definitely try to make sure that we're putting trees, biodiversity, that sort of stuff.

1:59:49And then it's like, well, what do we do with the existing stuff? So all that'll be on the table.

1:59:53Trees are well working closely with the city on identification of those parks, recreational areas.

2:00:00Saturday we're planting in Norm Jerry Park.

2:00:04Okay.

2:00:05So you've got the ball field along the edges.

2:00:08We're all you've got as a whole fence and a ditch.

2:00:12We're now converting that into a riparian zone.

2:00:17That's working quite effectively.

2:00:19It does, some of them from a ball field perspective may be concerned that we're encroaching, but

2:00:26it's the question.

2:00:27You're taking advantage of the land that's on the edges and making it more useful.

2:00:34So Norm Jerry is on that Saturday.

2:00:37Yeah, and I know Moritz, I think it's still Moritz, right?

2:00:42Moritz, River Treats for Guelph.

2:00:44Oh yeah, yeah.

2:00:45Yeah.

2:00:46Like I know that they're just looking for every available space possible to start doing

2:00:51more of that stuff.

2:00:53So it's definitely on our, both our work plan now and like a consideration for the

2:00:58strategy as well.

2:00:59But yeah, I love that stuff.

2:01:01Like I think we're starting to do more and people like love planting days.

2:01:06And yeah, I don't know how many people they had out on Saturday at the, I think GCAT ran

2:01:12one and like when there was this just a walk one, I don't know how many people they had

2:01:16out in the rain.

2:01:20Do you guys have any more things that we should consider as part of our strategy or things

2:01:26you may like to see?

2:01:27How do you, you're looking at it from a simple point.

2:01:32How are you, how do you bring in what's happening with the school grounds or university grounds?

2:01:41So we're working with, so we're meeting with the school boards and with the university.

2:01:49And the strategy that we're going to look at is like, you know, what's available regionally,

2:01:53what's available that the city has control over, are there opportunities for joint use

2:01:57agreements?

2:01:58So that is definitely part of the strategy in figuring out like what opportunities exist,

2:02:06like what are the underutilized spaces?

2:02:09Is there opportunity to renovate the ball diamonds on like in school grounds that we

2:02:15can use those instead of building new?

2:02:18So those are all things that we'll be considering.

2:02:21What are your comments?

2:02:29I will just note, sorry for your chair that we did lose Holly's lost connection.

2:02:36She just sent an email and I'll read her comments out loud just so that it's publicly transparent.

2:02:45And she said that she agrees with Mike's comments at the end of it, discussing possible integration

2:02:50with future design details and is interested in how this strategy can be aligned with enhancements

2:02:55that benefit natural heritage biodiversity.

2:02:58It would be interesting to see if there could be some alignments with green infrastructure

2:03:02or more naturally enhanced or water management options.

2:03:05I think much more of this might be as it relates to advancing any new facilities, but opportunities

2:03:11to improve the areas surrounding existing sports fields can be entertained.

2:03:16So just wanted to make sure that staff have that courage to encourage any turf grass

2:03:23biodiversity within turf grass to have much sway there.

2:03:32Okay.

2:03:36Do you have a motion for it?

2:03:40Well, it would if just going back to the previous presentation in that in the past, what has been

2:03:49done is that I think the community emotion that the cause provided by natural heritage

2:03:54advisory committee members on the outdoor sports facility strategy be provided to staff

2:03:58and council for their consideration.

2:04:01Typically, I would like all of those comments within the motion so that the committee agrees.

2:04:08But if it's the committee's will that staff take notes and that we included in the minutes later on,

2:04:16then we can do that as well.

2:04:18So it's up to the committee if there's a specific motion or if staff is looking for a specific

2:04:24motion.

2:04:25Although this is just the beginning of the engagement, right?

2:04:29So the committee can request that once something is a bit more established that come back to

2:04:35the slide.

2:04:36It kind of comes along with the provider now for you to the committee.

2:04:39Yeah, I was going to suggest maybe modifying your drive motion to reflect that.

2:04:46It's forward to providing additional comments on the draft strategy.

2:04:52This would be next year timeline.

2:04:58Hopefully.

2:04:59That's put additional pressure on you, but we appreciate the opportunity to meet with you again.

2:05:08And I think at that point we'll have will be more like to Mia and Marco and Leah in terms of well researched and defensible in our presentation like they were.

2:05:19So, so we can edit this.

2:05:25I'm just writing real quick.

2:05:27So, I'm just going to talk about the comments provided by the natural heritage advisory committee members on the out there sports facility strategy be provided to staff and counsel for the consideration and that staff return in 2025 with final draft recommendations for the committee input.

2:05:43Does that work for staff?

2:05:46Yeah.

2:05:47Yeah.

2:05:48Okay, so then you need a mover secondary.

2:05:50We'd like to move that motion.

2:05:55Pardon.

2:05:56Seconder.

2:06:00All in favor.

2:06:03Jamie.

2:06:08Yep.

2:06:11Thanks. Thank you.

2:06:13Well, I guess before we leave them, one of the things we brought up with the concept of the advisory committee concerns I always had was when we make recommendations.

2:06:27As the past, how do we find out if those recommendations have been accepted incorporated rejected.

2:06:34Whatever.

2:06:37And the answer was, we can see the file document and read it.

2:06:44I don't think that's a reasonable response.

2:06:48And I can accept a no, but I like to know why.

2:06:53Princess the last, the last motion we made consider another option.

2:06:58When it comes to the final strategies, I'd like some feedback that this committee that says we heard you suggesting an option.

2:07:07It was reviewed and it was deemed too expensive for this reason.

2:07:12I can accept that, but when I don't, I don't like something going in, never remember.

2:07:19Just before you respond, I know you will.

2:07:24I was involved in their committee that was established to review the functionality of the advisory committees.

2:07:32And the comments that you made was front and center in almost all.

2:07:37It's a concern almost all of them.

2:07:42And I think it's been adequately addressed.

2:07:46In terms of recommendations in that overview document that's produced by the.

2:07:51Justine and I are going to be meeting with.

2:07:57From the first, and shortly, I think.

2:08:02To talk about a little bit further and how it affects.

2:08:06It's just our committee or all the chairs and vice chairs.

2:08:10Yeah, so.

2:08:11We all have a common interest in.

2:08:14With those committees that will continue to exist.

2:08:17That the reporting relationship between the committee staff and council is much better defined.

2:08:25And then if there's greater accountability.

2:08:27On behalf of the 3 layers to ensure the communication is effective between all 3.

2:08:34It's not going to certain.

2:08:36Yeah, so.

2:08:38And a chair might be 100% correct in that it is front and center in the governance framework, which was approved in November.

2:08:452023.

2:08:46It is also another opportunity for staff liaison.

2:08:50They encourage you and so we would hope that perhaps.

2:08:55Presenters would come back and close the loop with the committee, especially given the motion that was passed.

2:09:02And then including things such as requesting that staff return with an update in your emotions can help with that in the future as well.

2:09:12Also, enough, the chair can also add agenda items.

2:09:18And so chair might get that for using opportunity after the engagement process that was mentioned.

2:09:25And that staff have begun drafting the final document for council. You see it on a.

2:09:31Hopefully you see before council agenda, but you may also request that an item be added to an agenda or any committee members really can go to you chair and ask that a committee item be.

2:09:45Added to an agenda and then staff can also.

2:09:49Can look into connecting with those appropriate staff to see if there would be an opportunity to circle back.

2:09:54But I do agree that the circle back and closing the loop.

2:09:57As to whether or not feedback was taken or if it wasn't why is very, very important. So.

2:10:05Multiple avenues that we can use to make things better moving forward, but those are those are the primary ones.

2:10:13I guess now we need a motion to adjourn.

2:10:16Yeah, if there's any if there's a chair staff announcements.

2:10:22No, no one else.

2:10:24Okay, so thanks.

2:10:26Yeah.

2:10:28The national heritage advisory committee be adjourned.

2:10:32The mover second.

2:10:34And moved.

2:10:36Just the seconder.

2:10:38If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.

2:10:42Thank you.

2:10:44Thank you everyone.

2:10:48Yes, you're not allowed.

2:10:52Move the second.

2:10:54No, thank you.

2:10:57Thank you.

2:10:59Thank you.