Planning Advisory Committee

4:08Hi everyone. If you can just turn on your cameras. Lovely. I just am trying to

4:16decipher how many people we have here. So I just have to run upstairs, but I'll be right back.

4:22Okay, great. Thank you. Just waiting on Quorum as it stands. I think I only have

5:20three people from the committee from the looks of it. I need one more in order to get Quorum.

5:29Well, it looks like Justin may have just joined us.

5:49So it looks like we do have Quorum already so we can kick it off.

6:03Vice chair clash tourney. Did I just butcher your last name completely? Are you there with us?

6:18If you could just turn your camera on for me so that I know. Oh, it looks like we have lost

7:01Darren as well. Darren, if you can just turn on your camera for us just so that I can confirm

7:34that we have Quorum, that would be fantastic. I would turn on my camera if I could. There we go.

7:43There we go. Yes. Fantastic. Thank you very much.

7:51All right. So it looks like without our chair here today, our vice chair is going to take control.

8:01You don't mind. So you're welcome to call the meeting to order. Can't hear you. Still can't hear you.

9:33Can he be unmuted by you? He looks like he is unmuted. So I think it might be a connection thing on his end.

10:01Has to select the correct microphone perhaps. Do you feel like perhaps somebody else could share

10:19for us today? Given the technical difficulties, I'm getting a nod.

10:30So would Lisa, Darren, and perhaps would like to chair for us today?

10:40I have a really bad call. I prefer not to talk.

10:46We need to keep muting. I need to keep muting or I will deafen you guys with this call.

10:53Okay. Well, we don't want that. So how about I would Darren or Justin like to chair for us today?

11:05I'm happy to chair. Fantastic. Okay. Okay. Great. Thanks, Darren.

11:13So you just need to call the meeting to order more or less.

11:20Yeah. So meeting called order at 639. The first item is the First Nations acknowledgement and apologies.

11:33I don't have that with me. So that is okay. How about I read the First Nations acknowledgement

11:43for us tonight just to keep things moving along? Does that sound okay? Thank you. All right. So as

11:50we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in Guelph, a city

11:56built over rich indigenous histories. We are guests here and we should reflect upon the

12:01responsibility to care for this land, the people who live here today, and the generations to come.

12:08If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, we should take pause and make those

12:13decisions with intention and gratitude. This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands

12:19and a place of refuge for many peoples over time, but more specifically, specifically,

12:25the Atta Wandernak and the Haudenosaunee, sorry about that. This land has held as the treaty

12:33lands and the territory with the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation. Guelph lies directly

12:38adjacent to the Haldeman track and is part of a long established traditional hunting ground for

12:43the six nations of the Grand River. Many First Nations Inuit and Métis people have come from

12:49across Turtle Island called Guelph home today. All right. So next up, Darren, if you want to move

12:58along, that's great. Thank you for that. Next item is disclosure of pecuniary interest and general

13:05nature thereof. Any disclosures from the committee members? Seeing none. All right. Thank you for

13:15that. There are no minutes from the previous meeting to approve. So moving right into committee

13:23items. The first item, the downtown Heights study. Am I passing to Brenna McKinnon? Thank you, Brenna.

13:34No problem. Thanks, Darren, for taking over. It's my name is Brenna McKinnon. The last time

13:42many of you saw me was, I think, back in October when we opened up or started with or talked about,

13:51I should say, the community planning permit system. So that's second on the agenda tonight.

13:56You'll see me in both projects. But the first one we're here to talk about tonight is the

14:01downtown Heights work. We've, I have or I've been joined tonight by two members of our consulting

14:10team from SBN, architects and planners, Jonathan Tinney and Rahul Nargis. You can wave if you want

14:16there. We have a bit of a presentation and I can't remember, Carrie, how this works, whether you

14:23I know it's been sent out, but I don't know if I share it or whether you share it.

14:27I think you share it for everyone. Yeah. Thanks for saying slide please.

14:33Yeah, that's okay. So I can do that. I'm going to keep it in the regular PowerPoint

14:40just because I know when I switch it over to present in PowerPoint, it takes the

14:45takes the screen away from me. Let me bring this back. Can everybody see that?

14:58All right. Thank you, Lisa. So we're here tonight to present to you the downtown Heights

15:07study work that we have done so far. I'm just going to make the screen a little bit bigger

15:13so I can see you all. No, it's not working. Anyway, so that's fine. I can carry on.

15:21We, I'll get into the, you know, come to the engagement we have done so far, but would like

15:27to note that the draft official plan amendment has been out for public review since the middle of

15:34January. We've had our statutory open house on February 4th and our statutory public meeting

15:44just last week on the 11th. So we're fortunate enough to have to strike up this meeting essentially to

15:53look at these both projects with this one and both of them are coming to council for recommendation

15:59in April. So I would appreciate any feedback you can provide. Next slide. So as I said,

16:11we're here to present the official plan amendment. We're going to give a high level overview of what's

16:15going on. I'm going to start off with a bit of background and then hand it over to Jonathan.

16:22And Jonathan, I can continue to share the share of the study so you don't have to bring it up on

16:26on the screen. So as part of a council decision made in the end of December of 2023,

16:37after the minister had made a earlier decision on the official plan amendment 80 to increase the

16:42downtown heights to 23 stories everywhere. When the government was going through a reflection,

16:50I suppose on changes they had made kind of across the board in Ontario, there was an

16:56opportunity to tell the minister and reverting back some of the old decisions that the city

17:04was going to undertake a downtown height study to look at increasing heights in the downtown.

17:12So we started this work early last year, well I should say late last year and about

17:19July is when we issued the terms of reference and then brought on the SBT team shortly after that.

17:28So the purpose of the study is to look at increasing heights in the downtown to work to

17:34achieve our housing target of 18,000 new units by 2031 all over Guelph to increase the supply of

17:44affordable housing of course everywhere and in the downtown to also look at

17:52built form standards for tall buildings citywide while giving the current urbanized

18:00guidelines for downtown a bit of a refresh where need be. And the second part of the project we'll

18:08talk about next is developing a community planning permit bylaw for downtown which will help achieve

18:19the need for more affordable housing units in the downtown as well. The secondary plan for the

18:31downtown is included in the official plan of Guelph. It was approved back in 2012 by the city and

18:40then finally approved by the OLT or the OMB at the time in 2015. There wasn't at the time of official

18:49plan amendment 80 being approved and there was some work to see whether the downtown could achieve

18:56the capacity of 200 people and jobs per hectare and it was determined overall that yes the

19:05downtown secondary plan could work to achieve that. However it wasn't specific in terms of

19:13locations so this work is doing a little bit of a deeper dive on how to achieve that target which

19:20Jonathan and Rahul can get into but essentially what we have in the downtown currently in terms of

19:27permitted heights is three to six stories in the downtown more historic district. The 18 story

19:36permissions that are currently built the Tri-Car developments at the either end of McDonnell Street

19:45there's permission for a 16 story building through the OLT decision on Fountain Street

19:53and permissions for higher buildings exist under the special policy area

19:59and designations under the special policy area right now which is a layer put on by the government

20:06way back when to look at flood prone potential areas. This study isn't looking at increasing or

20:15decreasing or doing anything in the special study area that'll be part of what I'm affectionately

20:23calling kind of the downtown height study 2.0 so once the GRCA finishes the technical work the

20:30city of Guelph next year we'll look at that area specifically but moving back to the currently

20:37permitted heights a lot of the downtown is two to four stories which is some of the

20:45more old neighborhood parts of downtown. This downtown secondary plan also looks at

20:54the Woods 2 development on the other side of the bridge or the other side of the river

21:00so some of some of Ward West is also included in the downtown secondary plan so overall we're

21:04looking to maintain that 200 people jobs per hectare by 2051 but looking specifically at

21:11some areas that could potentially achieve greater heights so I'm going to turn it over to Jonathan

21:17now to look at there the proposed building heights and this was part of the official plan amendment

21:26that was drafted and released for public review and before council as of last week so maybe

21:33Jonathan from here you can unmute yourself and talk about how we got here. That's good thanks can

21:39everybody hear me? Perfect thank you so I'm Jonathan I'm a planning principal with SVN here in Toronto

21:48as Brenna mentioned we were engaged sort of end of last year to do this work based I think to a

21:54large extent on the fact that we're doing very similar types of work for other excuse me other

22:00cities in southwestern Ontario so we're engaged or we just completed some of this work in London

22:05as well as our wrapping up some in Waterloo. In those cases we're really looking at ways to

22:13incentivize taller buildings within specifically within the MTSAs throughout those areas looking

22:21largely at increasing heights significantly in those cases to provide that level of incentive.

22:28The work here in Guelph is quite a bit different in the sense that we're looking specifically at

22:33the downtown obviously that's a PMTSA as well but this is much more of a design exercise one where

22:41we're looking at the existing conditions looking at a existing policy framework for the downtown that

22:50really aims to respect significant amounts of architectural heritage specifically the Basilica

22:57and organizes heights and development within the downtown core around that so the currently

23:03permitted building heights that Brenna walked through really sort of respect that providing

23:07this sort of framework of heights in a relatively limited way so the existing height framework

23:13really covers most of the downtown with that three to six story height framework allowing for some

23:20development along the along the Wellington and Woolwich corridors but primarily just at those

23:28two bridgeheads as gateway features into the downtown core. We maintain this or the proposal

23:34we've put forward here maintains in some ways that structure but looks to increase heights

23:41modestly so the the tallest heights we've got identified within our proposed framework here

23:47sits somewhere in about the 20 story range which is a relatively modest increase over the max of 18

23:53stories within the existing downtown plan however we apply buildings up to 20, 18 or 16 stories in

24:02a sort of larger area throughout the downtown core but again sticking largely to that framework

24:09within the existing plan that sees the those heights hugging the external perimeter along

24:16Woolwich and Wellington streets you know creating this kind of a bowl or amphitheater concept that

24:25we're talking about and then providing for lower heights within the sort of heritage core of the

24:31downtown. Next slide. So in terms of how we got here you know obviously we put forward this

24:43this proposed official plan amendment it was informed by a couple of different things one was

24:49a modeling so we've taken the entire downtown we've modeled it to be able to look at existing

24:54building the existing building frameworks identify existing heritage buildings identify the the grade

25:00of existing property the existing ground plain grades or prevailing grades in order to be able

25:08to then model out and develop an understanding of where these heights might go and what the impact

25:15might be both visually and and on views. Excuse me the aim here ultimately is to try to get to

25:22that 200 persons per jobs per hectare which is roughly a doubling of what's there now.

25:28So we've done that modeling and the land assessment work we've also undertaken a

25:33jurisdictional scan so we've looked at a number of different housing policy or sorry downtown and

25:39taller building policies within sort of comparable municipalities and within primarily southwestern

25:46Ontario but also a little further field so we've looked at kinshore, Cambridge, obviously London,

25:51Hamilton where we're currently doing some work as well as Ottawa going as far afield as Ottawa

25:57and Kelowna not so much for the planning framework that applies in BC but more around some of the

26:03built form characteristics and guidelines that they've been able to apply to to the downtown core there.

26:09We've also undertaken some engagement with the both of city staff members of the community

26:16through a couple of open houses as well as the development stakeholders and the development

26:20stakeholders were I think an important one for understanding what the market opportunities are

26:27so trying to I think ultimately trying to right size the types of heights that are appropriate

26:33within the downtown with heights that also make financial sense for developers to be able to

26:40acquire land and build things because ultimately the official plan identifies this as a growth area.

26:50In terms of and I touched on this briefly but in terms of the sort of structure to the framework

26:56here we are looking at strategically locating taller buildings sort of throughout the downtown

27:01but primarily against those edges allowing a decrease in heights as we move towards

27:09existing neighborhoods or around public spaces. We're also looking at sort of permitting

27:15context sensitive higher density in a way that protects sort of cultural heritage

27:22resources specifically again creating that amphitheater concept that allows for the lower

27:28heights within that sort of heritage core of the downtown while also maintaining views specific

27:34views to to the Basilica next one and so those views are really important so right now there are five

27:43view corridors within the within the downtown core where we've looked to maintain most of those

27:52there is we are looking to remove one of them which is the one that extends out towards

28:00Hermosa largely because it's sorry not to remove it pardon me but to to realign it it's largely

28:09been sort of impacted by the growth of trees and and and other development and so the intent is to

28:15realign that existing view corridor and run it down Macdonnell which is actually the

28:22oh sorry it's not Hermosa pardon me it's Grange it was the Grange one Grange thanks

28:27sorry realigning the Grange Street view corridor and running that down Macdonnell which is actually

28:32this sort of postcard view of the downtown core and so one that we think is significantly more

28:37important to to to maintain and one that doesn't currently have a view corridor protection on it.

28:45Um we've also identified again that those heights that we've looked at that 20-story height peak

28:52that we've looked at it largely falls within the range that we heard from the development

28:56community they suggested something in that sort of 20 stories to 30 story range was represented a

29:03sort of market sweet spot for them we've tended towards the lower end of that largely due to to

29:11response to to the Basilica but also to based on some some of the responses received from the

29:17general public and so we've been able to try to moderate again providing this balanced approach

29:23to to these heights with a name to provide for both short medium and long-term intensification so

29:29there's some low hanging fruit in here there are some development sites here that are already under

29:35under investigation by by developers as well as some longer-term opportunities

29:41that will play out over the course of the next several decades to provide additional housing

29:45within the downtown core. Obviously we're looking at this in the context of maintaining and utilizing

29:52infrastructure and the various investments that that Guelph has made within its downtown

29:58and we're also doing this in concert with the CPP by-law as well as the Heritage Conservation

30:03Area work that's currently going on so that any changes that are made from a policy perspective

30:08as part of this work will dovetail nicely with those that work that's being done by others

30:15providing a really strong framework for the downtown core. I think that's it for me, Brianna.

30:20Yep thanks Jonathan. So just reviewing some of the community engagement we've had to date

30:30we've spent a lot of time in in front of the public starting way back in October

30:40just with the existing proposed heights and asking questions on these pop-up sites or on our

30:48heavier say page about what activities are people doing in the downtown what draws them there are

30:55they living there what are the concerns do they have about downtown in general and is there specific

31:04areas where they could see increase in heights or is there other amenities at the same time that need

31:10to be provided so with that as I come from this slide and as Jonathan spoke to we did have in

31:18November a number of focus group meetings with the downtown business association as well as the

31:25chamber of commerce focused meetings with a number of developers so we had actually two meetings with

31:32developer groups which has coalesced kind of into one-on-one meetings over the last month or so as

31:43has been out in the public there is some interest from from developers to go high they are getting

31:48into specifics as Jonathan said about what what pencils in what you know what are what are the

31:57costs what is the market realities right now for not just you know Guelph but also Ontario

32:05there's a lot of developers that have always you know stayed in and around the Guelph area and

32:11want to continue investing in Guelph there are our new players also to the game that see real

32:17potential in in downtown Guelph with all the investment that the city is putting in through

32:24the downtown infrastructure renewal plan so millions and millions of dollars of investment into

32:30infrastructure and streetscapes washrooms and sidewalks and and really a lot of public realm

32:40urban design policies so in December we we opened up the the project through a special

32:47meeting of council which is something required under under the planning act because it is a

32:53actually an amendment to the official plan regarding official like if it's opa 80 so the

32:59comprehensive review we received some feedback there we released the draft official plan amendment

33:07and the schedule the proposed schedule in January as I said since then we've had the open house and

33:15public meeting the have your say project page just closed on Sunday I think so we were receiving lots

33:24of feedback from members who are either at the at the council meeting or aware of the project page so

33:31there will be certain you know we are hearing strong feedback on heights in certain areas so

33:39up around Norfolk and paisley that area we had proposed you know heights going from

33:45two to four to four to eight so there was some pushback in that area so we're considering you

33:50know bringing that back down but then in other areas south of the tracks we were hearing well

33:55that's an that's an area of opportunity as Jonathan said where we can we can potentially go higher so

34:00we are looking at maybe increasing the heights in that area so by the time we get back to council

34:09proposed for April at this point in time there'll be a few changes and at that time we also hope to

34:16have well I should say in the next in the next few weeks probably early March we'd be releasing

34:22those built form standards as well for public review to bring those back at the same time with

34:27the official plan amendment in in August or in April well just bring that up so that's where we are

34:38today is in February having brought forward those the amendment the built form standards will come

34:47forward and then looking to April for a decision with the community planning permit work still

34:55ongoing we're joined by the the Dillon consulting team we'll be talking about the stone road area

35:01they're also involved in developing the community planning permit bylaw for downtown which is looking

35:09to through an increase in height or density trying to achieve a proportional amount of

35:19affordable housing units so if a developer wants to go above and beyond the heights as demonstrated

35:26through this proposed plan we're not sure how many stories that would be at this point in time so

35:32there's some financial work going on but let's say if there's a building that includes 200 units

35:40I'm looking for an increase in in height of maybe four stories or something like that and this is

35:48hypothetical there may be a requirement to provide a certain percentage of those housing

35:55units to be affordable they developer would enter into an agreement to maintain that affordability

36:01over a period of time generally around 25 years thereby increasing our supply of affordable housing

36:10units not in not only in the downtown but kind of across the board as well so work that was done

36:19through the affordable housing strategy brought to council in in December noted a need in particular

36:25demographics and in style of or unit size for instance or unit type which we're working through

36:33with right now in developing the background of the bylaw so with that that concludes the presentation

36:41but happy to take any feedback any questions that you may have thank you Brenna thank you Jonathan

36:52committee members any questions or comments for staff in the consulting team by Celisa

37:07I I have a sort of a number of questions from reading through the the bylaw and I just want

37:14I'm not sure if this is just a general comment or question to staff or to the consultants

37:19the first one is is about how when we're increasing the number of residents how are the community needs

37:30going to be addressed because you know if we have can't assume that all of these people are going to

37:35be adults and many of them will also have dogs so how are we going to cover sort of open space needs

37:42increased open space for maintaining livability and and just the school's question because conceivably

37:48we would want the housing mix to include two and three bedroom units so it's a bit of a mixed

38:01answer perhaps so the downtown heights isn't getting into the detail about the types of units

38:09at this point in time that will come out of the cpp work a little bit so we know we know

38:17through the housing affordability strategy that there's a dearth of a certain of all affordable

38:24housing units but a certain you know kind or level like a one bedroom affordable rental unit isn't

38:32you know available or even an ownership is is less likely to be available than others so

38:38we'll be taking a look at that to see where where the need is but we have to balance that

38:43off with what the what the developer can also build and afford to build other elements of that

38:50so certainly the application will be very site-specific so we're kind of looking at

38:58you know what heights could be achieved but what could actually be achieved will be will be done

39:03through you know a development application that we'll have to look at impacts to the public realm

39:10shadow studies you know provision of other items as you said so this doesn't get the developer out of

39:20necessarily having to provide money for parkland but the downtown right now of course if parking is

39:29an issue there is no there isn't a requirement now to for a developer to provide parking so we know

39:35that that might be an issue the school board talking to them today have yet to provide comments

39:44but they are aware that there's you know central public school one school that right that they made

39:54didn't they need to make adjustments for they said today for instance that yes they could you know

40:02accommodate some students through busing but it's it's really not until the time of you know a

40:08development application comes in that there's you know we wouldn't know you know the types of

40:16units that are being built or whether they would accommodate children we can't preclude children

40:21of course so the school lord will will comment on the application at the time as well as our parks

40:28folks and and everybody else there is we know that they're in downtown through the cpp by law that

40:35there's a a need for more park space per person of all areas downtown has a deficit so we're working

40:43with the developers at the time of an application to to understand that need and how they could help

40:51provide for it if that makes sense yeah yeah thank you um uh the the next question i have is um

41:00in the bylaw it says that the the taller part of the building shall be slender and elegant and i guess

41:09my um contractor brain says okay uh one person's elegant and slender is very different from another

41:19person's and i'm just wondering would it make sense or is it possible to have i guess instead of

41:28sort of trying to come up with these definitions would it not make sense to sort of be more

41:35performative like i guess the the idea uh that light gets into the back of the building so that

41:44the units aren't deep or um to to get to some kind of performative requirement that um uh

41:59yep i'll turn that over that over to jonathan who has uh more urban design experience certainly

42:08than i than i do yeah thanks i i i think we're very much on the same page uh at least i think

42:17you know the existing some of the existing materials have those sorts of uh wish you're

42:22wash your language i think the intent and part of our work is developing a set of

42:26built form standards that will go along with the work that we've presented to folks here

42:31and our bias in those is towards something that's very simple very clear um focuses on the

42:38things that um you know have the biggest impact on the public realm on uh some of the the sort

42:46of overall outcomes that guelph is looking to to determine within the downtown so fit with the

42:52the heritage context um you know we we tend to see a lot of design guidelines especially for

42:58tall buildings i think the ones in toronto are 138 pages long um and so they become difficult to use

43:05the there's there's conflicting sort of guidance within them other things so the intent from our

43:10perspective is to come up with a user friendly uh sort of a set of documentation that focuses

43:15very clearly on the important elements to to support fit um and and move those forward so

43:21that'll be that'll be an additional piece of material you'll see coming out in the next couple

43:24of weeks okay so i guess my question is is that currently that the what the proposed bylaw has

43:33that language slender and elegant um so i'm just wondering like how how this sort of translates i

43:45guess um and i can't even another one that said you know that there's going to be qualitative

43:54study uh studies that may be required like tree protection plans and and sound and

44:01wind studies and i guess i'm just wondering is where do we move that like how do we embed

44:06this livability into the bylaw um so that you know you're not sort of referring to one thing and then

44:16sort of on the back end you have to you have to try and incorporate these aspects of livability

44:24in them and i guess another area that i i noticed was the talks about overlooked roofs

44:32and and sort of the the tops of the building should be interesting or attractive or some

44:39some kind of prescriptive judgmental opinion kind of language and and i guess one of the things that

44:47i would think um is is introducing some some more requirements for performance standards so you

44:57know a certain percentage of overlooked roofs or any overlooked roof has to have a green surface

45:04or has to be finished or roofs have to be accessible or you know things that again drive this uh

45:13livability um metric thanks for that i appreciate that so the you know obviously the intent of us

45:20coming here is to get this this type of feedback so we we appreciate this um and certainly we can

45:25incorporate that in the revisions that we're making you know our there's a bit of a challenge in terms

45:30of looking at sort of generalized built form um which is the relatively high level that we're

45:36looking at um you know i think some of the language within the existing policy it's made it's it's

45:42found its way into the into the new version the intent though is that that will be defined through

45:46those built form standards so the um flowery language you get in the OP then gets defined into

45:53a set of guidelines that that help to get at some of those elements some of those sort of more

45:58performance based elements that you're talking about that said we're not going to get we won't get

46:03at all of those sorts of different uh livability elements in this piece of work i guess what i'd

46:09like to see is is that we just don't have the debate about these things that are can be opinions

46:19i like i'd like to you know that that language i'd like i just you know let's just get rid of it

46:26that's a good point um well because then we start having this conversation like

46:32when you're a parent you have toddlers right you just never offer an option that you don't

46:37want selected you don't even indicate that that's a possibility that's just not on the planet

46:44and i and i guess i'd like to see um planning policy that that that starts with the things on

46:57the planet that we want to have yep understood okay so that's um so i think and in in the the one

47:13last thing um is i noted in the actual bylaw the city that the bylaw we're still referring it to

47:24the church of our lady in each of the amendments and i believe you were referring to it to the

47:30basilica i think that's the official name so just as old gual fights still call it church of our lady

47:41yeah i i actually don't know uh not being a gual fight um i refer to it as the basilica but

47:50yeah no no i think they they changed the name of it a few years ago so i just just in terms of city

47:56staff in the in the bylaw i think it should be probably reflect the current name so it should

48:02be church of our lady no it should be basilica okay fair enough yeah so they're just that's an old

48:09that's a typo i guess good to know uh because yeah my my partner in this uh stacey who's not

48:18here tonight is a long-time gual fight and she's always referred to it as both like she yeah it's

48:23interchangeable a little bit that's probably well it's because um it's because they did

48:31decide to get their status increased i guess at some point in time okay good all right well

48:37thank you i can see real well commenting on that right now um that's it for me thank you

48:45thanks lisa uh any other questions comments from the committee artem i'm not sure how you would

48:52participate but if you oh we still can't hear you we still can't hear you so uh

49:02good luck i guess um does the chat work does is there a chat function no we have the chat disabled

49:12if you had a pressing matter i'm sure you could email us and we can pass it along um if there was

49:19something that you felt like you wanted to provide feedback on but don't need an immediate answer i

49:24think that would be an excellent solution um that would be my best guess you can always call um

49:32brena as well at any point i imagine you don't need to just receive information today um as this

49:39is coming back to council later that would be my guess or kushla you could also email kushla

49:45okay thank you for that uh justin any questions comments um nothing too much that i'm thinking

49:54off the top of my head i really appreciate some of the things lisa was saying um that's what i was

50:00doing kind of a quick scan of kind of that official plan i see a lot discussed about the built form

50:06of the kind of the tower portion of the buildings will there be um a level of um

50:16requirements for the podium um of the buildings as well you know things like keeping it more

50:21permeable to the street um things like that will will that also be covered um or is that is that

50:30part of this this process or is that outside of that that will be dealt with in the in the

50:38sort of separate built form standards so those so the language you see in front of us you hear is the

50:43um the official plan um language which we've updated although it's primarily updated to

50:52to respond to some of the changes on a kind of numerical basis the majority of the the focus

50:57on design will come from those built form standards which will deal with things like podium tower

51:02as well as the public realm right okay throughout our meetings with the the chamber of commerce and the

51:12um dgba and developers there were numerous times where the existing

51:20urban design guidelines or built form standards for for downtown were uh brought out as a very good

51:27example of what should exist in other municipalities perhaps uh they were commend developers inside

51:37and outside of golf kind of commended the the amount of work and detail that went in into

51:43those guidelines so um I know the the SVM team has started to look at those we're getting some

51:50feedback on uh on those as well um from from the developers uh and and making sure that you know

51:59projects work for the downtown to lease us questions about livability so a lot of that

52:05a lot of those existing guidelines are very good and um far above some other uh guidelines that

52:12exist in other in other places so we're looking to elevate those make sure that they can be they

52:18they're useful obviously um and um I think in the in the end we'll we'll see something that that

52:26works very well so okay thank you thanks Justin um I have a comment um maybe it's not a comment but

52:40to reinforce I think the issue Lisa brought up Lisa thanks for taking a close look at some of the

52:46policy language um I think if we can in the proposed amendments take a second look at some of the

52:54uh terms that are being used if they're outside of a visionary statement um to to pick up on the two

53:01that Lisa picked up on elegant and slender um to have those in actual policy statements uh seems a

53:08little bit um it's again it's unclear uh to Lisa's point um I'm I'm trying to get away from the

53:18neighborhood character debate right um the subjectiveness of that so um anything we can do to

53:26keep policy language more objective uh would be my preference um but I want to go back to the

53:33the presentation um there's a specific point on slide eight uh yeah slide eight the last point

53:42um says it recognizes that a cpp bylaw is proposed for downtown and will consider the potential for

53:49additional height beyond what is proposed um I wonder Jonathan or Brenna if you can expand on that

53:55idea um particularly uh why um and and why we would pursue this policy approach right now

54:10but then a cpp bylaw would come in and allow for additional height why not just address it in the

54:20official plan amendment yeah Jonathan I can I can take that so it's certainly something we are looking

54:28at because we don't want to put something out to the public or to anybody that uh provides any

54:38surprises in the future so the old density bonus provision was kind of that right it had something

54:45in the official in the official plan uh developers uh then said well I'll provide x and you can provide

54:54me you know seven stories of additional height and everybody's like well how does that work

55:01so there is some discussion about you know the proposed heights that we're seeing now

55:06are those the final ones are we going to drop those by a number of stories and then allow the cpp

55:12bylaw to pick up uh extra stories I think the problem we're having is we haven't done enough

55:18background work on um what what it costs to build to the developer an affordable housing unit in

55:26in a building um we know what the you know the affordable rents are we know what the affordable

55:33ownership mark is but how does that figure into their their performance uh in terms of building and

55:40you know we do want to we do want to encourage it so instead of an inclusionary zoning approach

55:48which requires a certain percentage of units to be dealt we're trying to do a bit of a a

55:53carrot approach you know a few if we give you extra height through you know permissions of

56:01council or of the general manager then um yeah we we we make everybody happy we get we get our

56:08affordable housing units we get an agreement to maintain that affordability so I hear you

56:14and it's an ongoing discussion right now certainly if we're considering it you know

56:20as I said earlier areas of additional height from what we've already shown

56:25um the public we need to really think about uh the language around that so uh likely

56:34what's on the on the proposed height schedule now maybe increased but we will include language

56:41within the official plan amendment that might say something like notwithstanding these heights

56:46and then get into more defined parameters around what the bylaw could could introduce

56:55so it's certainly from my understanding right now we're not looking at an additional seven stories

57:02I think that you know the threshold for council to make such a decision in in light of this work is

57:09probably a bit too high so we're trying to find that that point um where there's a comfort level

57:17on you know a couple of additional stories that the public would be aware of and by providing that

57:24those additional stories we're getting the units so there's not any other kind of horse trading

57:29going on it's not like there we can't get we can't get public art we can't get parkland through a

57:35cpp bylaw it can only be for for housing so we'll make that you know as abundantly clear as we can

57:42by the time April rolls around okay thank you brena and to confirm that language that contemplates

57:49that is not in the existing proposed amendment language that was attached to the agenda right

57:56right that's right thank you any other questions or comments from the committee following those

58:05answers I'm seeing none um there is a proposed motion in the

58:18agenda one that the planning advisory committee received the downtown height study draft official

58:26plan amendment presentation and that feedback provided by the planning advisory committee

58:31members be considered by staff look to the committee for uh one of two things either someone

58:39to move that recommended motion or propose an alternative uh motion slash recommendation

58:53lisa that's uh moving the proposal I will move that and uh looking for a seconder justin thank you

59:06any discussion on the proposed motion on the floor right now

59:13seeing none uh I will look for anyone opposed to the motion uh now to to raise their hand

59:21any opposition seeing none uh the motion varies okay uh moving on then the community planning

59:32permit system pilot project I think we're going to Annie and brena again yep I'm still me I feel like

59:49the only two agenda items on which works for me well I don't have to have two different

59:55meetings on this so I can again share the presentation Jonathan Rahul you know happy to

1:00:02if you want to stick around of course or go offline that's great um you can hear the the

1:00:09background of the the cpp bylaw work for here but you know yes uh or we'll talk to you later about

1:00:17the downtown bylaw so thanks for joining us um so for the the community planning permit system

1:00:24for the stone road edinburgh area I'm joined by Nicole and Annie from delin consulting

1:00:30I have again a bit of a presentation we can we can run through and I will I will start off

1:00:40let's see there can everybody see that good all right thank you Lisa so in October I believe we

1:01:04we started off um providing you some information on the community planning permit work I remember

1:01:10Lisa having some comments about the trail behind prairie park public school etc

1:01:21and I'm trying to think of some other questions but I remember that one in particular so it's

1:01:24one that we have we have looked at so today is a bit of an update as to where we are

1:01:35just for some some background which I think we probably presented back in October

1:01:39so this is part of the the housing accelerator fund projects uh of which gual was awarded 21.4

1:01:46million dollars um the community planning permit system pilot project um is one of the

1:01:55half initiatives and the community planning permit bylaw um I will keep saying community

1:02:05planning permit just unless people want me to shorten that down to cpp because I'm getting used

1:02:10to saying cpp too the the bylaw has advanced to us to a stage for the stone road edinburgh area

1:02:21where it's been to the public in we released it in December of last year so on December 31st

1:02:30released it to the public we had the statutory open house uh early January I remember January 11th

1:02:37or somewhere around that date and then the statutory public meeting uh before council on on the 21st

1:02:45the project page uh was open for a significant amount of time we're receiving feedback

1:02:52trying to understand from the residents point of view what they would like to see

1:02:56in the stone road edinburgh area it is identified as a strategic growth area in

1:03:03the guals uh the city of guals official plan and again where you are looking to increase

1:03:10the amount of affordable housing uh in this particular area as well as across guals the goal

1:03:17of of this initiative of the of the cpps work is to uh incentivize the development or creation

1:03:25of 35 affordable housing units so we haven't looked at dividing up that 35 into areas at this point

1:03:32in time one of the primary goals of course is in establishing this this system is to streamline

1:03:39or shorten the development approval process so just on the project itself we initiated the project

1:03:49um early last year worked throughout the summer with um some communication about what a community

1:03:58planning permit system is looking at what this area currently has or lacks in in terms of amenities and

1:04:09developing the bylaw itself so as I said we've released the bylaw

1:04:14uh for review uh we're currently looking at a at another draft um post the public consultation

1:04:24and council just council discussion we had on the on the 21st we're looking at

1:04:31bringing back the the bylaw for approval um with its official plan amendment establishing the policies

1:04:40and uh in april as well so the the two there's a date i'm saying april for both projects because

1:04:47they're both kind of aligning on on the same date and and somewhat inter interrelated

1:04:55so for engagement on this project we've had uh two open houses we've had a virtual open house

1:05:01we had our statutory uh open house um in january we were involved in another number of pop-up events

1:05:10so we uh collaborated with uh the work that kushlas and others on the in applying in gualph

1:05:20on housing so we knew this was part of a broader discussion on the the needs for a more affordable

1:05:26housing in gualph so we were at a number of events what we heard in this particular area

1:05:33uh were items around transportation and accessibility uh there is new bike lanes on

1:05:40on scott's dale so we heard some feedback on those we saw um uh or we heard about some ongoing

1:05:49transit and and transportation issues traffic issues as well so any any permissions to

1:05:55allow for for greater density or greater height on on some underutilized sites perhaps

1:06:03we'll need a need a look from a transportation point of view um a lot of discussion about the

1:06:10you know again to lisa's earlier comments about the types of housing um the size of the size of

1:06:17the units the affordability of the units and how to maintain that affordability through this

1:06:23project and then some of the the vision for the area was um a a focus on more

1:06:31multimodal access uh to the sites and to the area so there's pretty good transit there's some

1:06:39bike lanes as i mentioned earlier now but there's a desire for greater transit use and accessibility

1:06:48there um a more frequent transit and um but also looking at uh existing congestion and

1:06:58and other traffic issues so i'm going to turn it over to annie now who will talk about uh

1:07:08what currently exists in the development approval process and why we're moving towards

1:07:12a community planning permit system go ahead annie thank you very much bruna and i hope everybody

1:07:18can hear me uh my name is annie billis thank you lisa i'm a planner and associate um out of dylan's

1:07:27wealth office and um i will be providing a little bit of a deep dive into what cpps the

1:07:34draft opa and also the draft cpp bylaw so wealth housing affordability strategy targets 18 percent

1:07:44of new ownership homes to be affordable and to help um achieve this the city is looking to

1:07:51streamline the development approval process and provide a framework to permit additional density

1:07:58and this is where community planning permit system comes in so a community planning permit system

1:08:04is a planning tour that combines zoning bylaw amendments minor variances and site plan applications

1:08:12into one development approvals process and in a strategic growth area such as this such as stone

1:08:19and edinborough this tool helps to establish clear yet flexible development rules facilitate

1:08:28growth while reducing the likelihood of appeals which in turn supports consistent implementation

1:08:34of the vision for the area um speed up development approval timelines and also secure community

1:08:42mainly affordable housing as rana was mentioning um if we move on to the next slide

1:08:55cpp bylaw or community planning permit bylaw implements the official plan and replaces the

1:09:03existing zoning bylaw for the area so in wealth since the official plan and zoning bylaw have

1:09:09been recently updated um in most cases the bylaw carries forward the existing permission so it looks

1:09:18fairly similar in terms of the permissions of what's permitted in the existing zoning bylaw

1:09:23and what we have in the draft cpp bylaw so shown in the figure the area along stone road is a

1:09:32mixed use corridor which aligns with the city's official plan and allows users such as commercial

1:09:39retail office users a medium to high density residential development the area along edinborough

1:09:47and some power fields along janefield are high density residential submitting apartment buildings

1:09:54as well as convenience and commercial uses the corner of college and edinborough is neighborhood

1:10:01commercial also as per the official plan and allows commercial retail and mixed use residential

1:10:07buildings um there's also um a parks and open space area behind the mall and a very small sliver

1:10:16of the existing natural heritage system along edinborough um that has been carried forward and

1:10:21is a little bit difficult to see on this map since it's fairly fairly small and the remainder of the

1:10:28area what you see in the slide and dark or yellow is medium sorry is low to medium density residential

1:10:38permitting a mix of different residential buildings so the next slide shows the proposed

1:10:48official plan amendment graphically and bear with me as i'm going through this as this um quite a bit

1:10:55of information to cover um but why the precincts generally align with the existing official plan

1:11:02designations in the zoning bylaw there are a few properties that are proposed to be

1:11:08redesignated through an official plan amendment to accommodate a broader range of uses

1:11:14so palfal a where the priory park townhomes are located and palfal's b and c currently institutional

1:11:23uses are proposed to be redesignated from low density residential to medium density residential

1:11:32and palfal d on janefield currently um which is currently a vacant site is proposed to be

1:11:39redesignated from mixed use corridor one to high density residential uh then we have palfal e at the

1:11:47southwest corner of college in scott's dale which is proposed to be redesignated from low

1:11:53density residential to medium density residential palfal f at the southeast corner of college in

1:12:00scott's dale is proposed to be redesignated from low density residential to high density residential

1:12:07and palfal g adjacent to the south along scott's dale is proposed to be redesignated

1:12:13from medium density residential to high density residential and what that means is that for palfal

1:12:21a b c and e the building height would increase from a maximum of three stories to six stories

1:12:30for palfal d we are looking at an increase from six stories in the current zoning bylaw to

1:12:37propose ten stories in the draft cpp bylaw for palfal f we're looking at a maximum of three

1:12:44stories to ten story increase and for palfal g it would be an increase from a maximum of six

1:12:52stories to ten stories the next few slides um are diving into some more detail about what's

1:13:04included in the draft cpp bylaw which is also available on the have you say website so the draft

1:13:13bylaw includes three classes of development applications so a class one includes applications

1:13:22with permitted uses that meet all standards of the bylaw and are approved by the general

1:13:28manager of planning and building services or a delegate a class two development application

1:13:36includes all applications that generally meet the intent of the bylaw but require a staff

1:13:43variation within a set threshold and that set threshold is defined uh within the development

1:13:50standards of the bylaw and similar to a class one the applications are approved by the general

1:13:57manager of planning and building services or delegate and then we also have a class three

1:14:04application and again it generally meets the standards of the bylaw but it requires a council

1:14:11variation meaning it goes beyond the class two thresholds and would also be approved by council

1:14:18and committee and instead of the general manager so when a proposed development requires a variation

1:14:31from a development standard so a class two or class three variation the applicant needs to

1:14:39demonstrate how the variation criteria have been addressed as part of the complete application and

1:14:46the variation criteria are shown on the slide here and as an example of a variation sorry an

1:14:55example of a variation would be for example if there is a real yard of 7.5 meters and the applicant

1:15:04reduces requests a reduction up to 20 percent something also important to note is that a community

1:15:19planning permit may be approved subject to conditions so meaning that the application

1:15:26can be approved but there's still a few outstanding matters that will have to be addressed by the

1:15:32applicant another key difference of a cpp bylaw in comparison to a zoning bylaw is facility services

1:15:44and matters which also came up as part of the height study that was just presented on so under a cpps

1:15:53community benefits charge does not apply and instead the legislation allows a municipality

1:16:01to define where facility services and matters will be required and facilities and services and

1:16:08matters is a legislative term and generally refers to community benefits and include such things as

1:16:17affordable housing accessible dwelling units public service facilities public art or additional

1:16:23power plant and in addition the legislation also requires that services facility services and

1:16:31matters be provided in exchange for height or density and be proportional in quantity or monetary

1:16:40value to the number of additional residential units proposed so on the next slide we have an

1:16:50overview of the affordability thresholds for various unit mixes which is included in the cpp

1:16:58bylaw and these this information is based on a on the provincial bulletin benchmark of

1:17:05398 000 for an ownership unit and i'm just providing a few examples here and 1160 for

1:17:15a studio apartment and 1695 for a three bedroom unit which in the last two are rentals

1:17:27and the city is currently working with Watson and economists to undertake a market analysis

1:17:36of several development scenarios to identify the amount of affordable dwelling units that

1:17:42can be requested through cpp bylaw and this work is still ongoing currently and i'm going to hand

1:17:54it over to Brenna again yeah thanks annie um before i get into some of the the notice requirements

1:18:07for those of you that uh have been involved with this committee for a number of years are

1:18:12involved in the development planning in in guelph uh overall the cpp work would replace

1:18:24committee of adjustment for instance so if there's applications for a minor variance

1:18:31or a minor change in use the committee permit system would would replace that if there's an

1:18:37application for to to sever a property however that still goes back to the to a committee of

1:18:44adjustment so i'm i'm i'm having uh discussions with the existing committee right now to you know

1:18:54help all of us understand how this how this process is is going to work the the the class three

1:19:03variation it would be very similar to a zoning bylaw amendment so the community planning permit

1:19:09system kind of collapses the minor variance zoning bylaw amendment and site plan control

1:19:16into a permitting process and i would describe it fairly similar at the front end so we're really

1:19:25front front end loading the development approval process making sure that all the we're having

1:19:32those discussions with developers up front as they undertake you know the permit process

1:19:39to require the same studies that would be required under a you know a normal zoning zoning bylaw

1:19:48amendment that there's an ability to enter into an agreements with developers on conditions so

1:19:56right now we don't have you know conditional approval of zoning which a number of of you know

1:20:04municipalities have been asking for years so the permitting process permits that but it is as

1:20:11Annie said is only related to the proportional amount of housing units under the it for affordable

1:20:20not i guess i can't remember any and i'm totally lost here whether it's specific to affordable

1:20:25housing i believe it is that can be provided so yes there's other community benefits on that list

1:20:33that talked about parkland so similar to the section 37 work but of facility services and

1:20:39matters agreement per se would be in relation to affordable housing and the increase in density

1:20:47and height so if the developer says well if you give me extra height i will provide some parkland

1:20:54or a sidewalk and it's like well that's kind of extra so on top of any units that you may need to

1:21:01provide it would be something that we could you know we could entertain or ask council

1:21:09to get a council decision on that one when it comes to notice requirements this is an area

1:21:17where we are are seeing some feedback or hearing some feedback from from the public

1:21:22there is no requirement in the in the legislation for any public notification

1:21:30of a community planning permit but a lot of municipalities that are currently under a community

1:21:37planning permit like huntsville or lake of bays and portions of veniceville have a notice requirement

1:21:45for the different types of applications so currently what the bylaw states is

1:21:53like a like a minor variance right now so all development standards are met

1:22:03there isn't a a need for a

1:22:06a you could say that it includes all permitted uses so there isn't a change in use

1:22:17that may be a you know a slight variation under a staff threshold for something

1:22:23but that could that could go through straight to to building permit once all the you know

1:22:30any required studies are looked at if if needed so all but as i said all those would be highlighted

1:22:36at a pre-con stage and this is where there wouldn't be any any notice required

1:22:43so right now under the committee of adjustments agendas get posted the committee would be looking at

1:22:57a presentation by the applicant for instance to talk about adding a

1:23:01a garage or something like that under a community planning permit system

1:23:06those thresholds have already been established through through the bylaw and individual applications

1:23:13can't be appealed so we are looking at maintaining no notice required under the class one the class

1:23:22two is where we are looking at changing the notice requirements so right now

1:23:28it's a it's a variation that is still within the staffs or the general manager's threshold

1:23:36but it may have more than one variation required

1:23:43and may have a change in change in use and specifically if there is a request to reduce

1:23:51parking that would be under a class two and right now we are looking at under the bylaw

1:23:59proposed we have a posting just on the website a number of members of the public and council

1:24:08have stated that it would be great if there would be a sign on the property itself if it's a class

1:24:13two so we are looking at including that similar to minor variance applications right now there's a

1:24:20signage on the property that that talks about what is happening and how to find out more information

1:24:28and then a class three as I said earlier is similar to a zoning bylaw amendment

1:24:33so there would be a notice posted on the website those in the area of 120 meters similar to a

1:24:42zoning bylaw amendment would be circulated there'd be a meeting scheduled where it could be discussed

1:24:51at council and council ultimately would make that decision after feedback from staff as well

1:25:05of the public so that's how it it is proposed at this point in time to work but as I as Annie said

1:25:13we are still hearing feedback on all elements of the bylaw and look forward to perhaps hearing

1:25:22from you so that's the end of the of the presentation here we've just have the

1:25:27the site on the have your say page as well as my contact email so happy to take any any questions

1:25:37or go back to any slides down I'll turn it back to you thanks Brenna thank you any committee members

1:25:46any questions or comments for the staff and consulting team Lisa thank you for this I guess I

1:26:07I'm really wondering I guess sort of further to Darren what you brought up concerning

1:26:17the public confidence in the planning process I guess I sort of where you were leading with

1:26:23when people get surprised by changes and I guess that's what's come up with the the CPP

1:26:32um at council uh with this notifications and knowing so I'm just wondering

1:26:41like the the I know I realize this is probably premature but but the the variations and how

1:26:48one defines that and how how we actually get to a point where you are actually sort of

1:26:56doing the speed it up kind of process without having one of these variations like say your

1:27:04example of a of a 7.5 meter setback going to to six how we do it so those 7.5 meter setbacks don't

1:27:13go to zero um and and and how these variations and and and you know at a certain point when does it

1:27:29become like and maybe just give me an example of when an application would just be considered to

1:27:35not generally in any way shape or form meet the intent and and that this is just go away and come

1:27:44back with something reasonable I guess I guess how do you find that balance you know in terms of

1:27:51maintaining public confidence again maintaining in the planning process maintaining the the

1:27:57communications and also again that livability aspect so maybe just some examples of you know say

1:28:07okay that the class two variation would be meets 20 percent of of the guideline and you

1:28:17know do we go to 40 percent or if it's if it's less than 40 percent get lost given staff can't

1:28:27ever say that but right so we we we did establish fairly conservative thresholds for for staff

1:28:37variations so 20 percent for a backyard but it might only be 10 percent for the front yard for

1:28:47instance okay so there's variation there's variations throughout we paid particular interest I'll just

1:28:56use the front yard as one because there was a lot of concerns about tree preservation so if we allow

1:29:05too much variation in that front yard setback from six meters or 20 feet to something like four feet

1:29:20that doesn't work for utilities that doesn't work for trees that doesn't work for for parking on

1:29:25driveways that type of thing so we were very cognizant of front yard setbacks side yard setbacks

1:29:32for access for trees as well for landscaping for lot coverage in order to get you know storm water

1:29:47on site dealt with as much as possible for instance so we're looking at all of those all those

1:29:53things as we're you know going through the process there there will be areas where

1:29:59um the first application uh hasn't been applied for yet so it'll be a bit of a

1:30:07of negotiations we don't know if we've got it right yet and um as much as the thresholds allow some

1:30:15some variability there has to be a comfort level at the staff level to proceed with it at a staff

1:30:21level or we elevate it to council so that's kind of that the applicant's discretion to take it to

1:30:27council for a decision or as you know a staff decision to say we're not comfortable with the

1:30:34amount of variations perhaps whether it be just in the backyard itself or the cumulative amount of

1:30:39variations or uses that that somebody is looking at um we may you know take it to council just for

1:30:47for that discussion so it can be you know in more open than perhaps uh through um

1:30:55um uh you know a kind of a council council and staff discussion with the reminder that we have 45

1:31:03days to make a decision too so we know that it's as much as we're trying to front end load and get

1:31:10it right at the at the beginning we know that development applications tend to to change by

1:31:16the time they get to the end product so we're we're trying to make sure the developer knows exactly

1:31:21what they need to provide at that that stage you know down to you know some sort of modeling in

1:31:26where your your garbage and your access is going to be in the number of parking spaces

1:31:32and try to carry carry that through um so we need to get this the system established we need to get

1:31:41that you know that first application in the door um and see where it goes so I um we're trying to

1:31:49as I said front end load get as much as we can into the bylaw and the official plan amendment

1:31:53because that sort of sets the stage for the community expectations so we're developing it to

1:31:59streamline the development process achieve the affordable housing but what's the vision for the

1:32:03stone road area so we heard about protection of the open spaces that exist make sure that the schools

1:32:12um can be you know pupils can be accommodated as you as to your earlier point uh any transportation

1:32:20and traffic consideration so we're making sure that as I said those those um those things can be

1:32:27relied upon through the process to ensure that the developer knows going into it um what is expected

1:32:34of the development um even to you know how it looks so under a you know to there are other

1:32:39earlier discussions under a community planning permit system you can look at things like exterior

1:32:45design where you now can't under site plan you're under a community planning permit system um you

1:32:54can regulate uh development of 10 units and under under site plan you can't anymore so there's some

1:33:02advantages under a community planning permit system to get the affordable housing units but also look

1:33:08at other features that we can't currently under the under the development approval process so I hear

1:33:14you Lisa we're trying to bring it all bring it all together but until such time as we have you

1:33:21know somebody kind of at the door saying I want to do this under this process you know that's when

1:33:27we will focus in and see what we got right what we got wrong um and you know happy to of course bring

1:33:35an update report back to to this committee to see how how it's working um once we you know get it in

1:33:44place thank you um uh I would be interested in in and seeing how that goes and um one of your

1:33:56slides did say and you did just mention it um you know it wouldn't be a compact meeting without me

1:34:03mentioning urban forestry and um uh I guess the the thing that I'm also wondering about is if if in

1:34:14those uh staff variations if there is actually going to be a regulated amount of of urban canopy

1:34:23coverage required um I guess I guess um at this at the at the planning level is actually where we get

1:34:35the soil volume for mature trees and and it seems to be the regulations don't actually recognize

1:34:45um the details and I was quite disheartened to see that uh wealth water will not permit

1:34:54a water supply lateral under a driveway so again we're that that free and clear

1:35:04spaced actually achieve um soil volume that would permit a tree or driving a supported

1:35:14pavements cost I know having to get trees in and supporting the pavements to give them the root zone

1:35:27derives up the cost of construction and the intent of this is actually to decrease the

1:35:33cost of instruct construction to to get some uh affordable housing in place so I guess

1:35:45just challenging the consultant team to come up with a way to ensure the livability because

1:35:52really um we don't want to make just affordable housing we want to make livable affordable housing

1:36:01yep absolutely and I think that's why I raised you know the point about

1:36:10trees in particular in the front yard other discussions we've had um with uh Rory Templeton

1:36:17of the you know our landscape team was if if it's going to be a taller building to your earlier

1:36:23point about podiums or Justin's point about podiums um and lot coverage and green roofs and

1:36:31blue roofs so making sure that common amenity space uh is is provided um such that it's not just

1:36:42necessarily a small balcony off your apartment but there's other spaces um or and common amenity

1:36:50podium spaces that provide um some landscaping and and greenery to that but also accommodating

1:36:58blue roofs or green roofs where possible to uh reduce um our carbon footprint as well as um

1:37:09making a more friendly and livable space overall so we've taken those considerations and again it's

1:37:16it's one of those where we we don't know what we're up against until we get the first application

1:37:22in the door so if it's a multi-unit residential building um that's something that we can certainly

1:37:30look at in terms of of green spaces and and lot coverage in amenity space if somebody is um

1:37:38increasing the number of units on their property through the the four-unit work or or something

1:37:45else there's other regulations that come in come into play that there is work as you probably know

1:37:50Lisa on the on the tree bylaw ongoing as well um so that isn't disregarded in this process so the

1:38:00existing tree the tree bylaw and site alteration work uh it still applies for for a developer so

1:38:07they don't get out of uh any any requirements in in that regard but is something you know when it

1:38:13comes to the urban forestry coverage that you know gualph is working hard on through the natural

1:38:19heritage action plan etc doing it on a lot by lot uh is is more difficult but as long as we

1:38:28can provide as you said that soil volume for in that front yard for for the appropriate tree um and

1:38:37you'll have to work with me on with water surfaces on on permeable surfaces etc that's not something

1:38:44we're looking at at changing through this bylaw at at this point in time but uh the water supply

1:38:51work is obviously up for review right now uh uh overall for gualph but you know I come from uh

1:38:59Waterloo region where we didn't allow permeable surfaces for groundwater protection either so

1:39:07I'm not you know I can see why the the city is going that way for for groundwater but you know

1:39:14when it comes to trees you're right there's a bit of a trade-off there so anything else

1:39:31um I'll go ahead with um just a couple questions um I'm looking specifically for these at kind of

1:39:39that class two staff variation level um and with the um the notice I I do understand and I I think

1:39:48I probably agree with uh the comments you said you've got you've gotten um in the past about having

1:39:54you know signage or something like that on top of just um website postings just to keep that level

1:40:00of transparency about um the planning process um do you have an understanding of what the feedback

1:40:08process would look like um coming from the public like right now it's it's pretty clear cut um for

1:40:14something like a minor variance um you provide your comments to um the committee of adjustment or

1:40:22you attend the meeting um and you provide your comments there um and the timeline is also very

1:40:29well understood because the decision will be made on this date um with something like

1:40:37um a class two staff variation where we know that you have a 45 day timeline but you could make the

1:40:44decision you know within 20 days um what does the requirements or um parameters for providing

1:40:54feedback for the public look like um is there a certain timeline within which they should be giving

1:41:01feedback or within which they know that their feedback will come in in time to be considered

1:41:10most of me wants to stay stay tuned because those are sort of the implementation

1:41:16work that we are currently launching with with Dillon's uh assistance to understand

1:41:23our own internal processes as well as um what's happening in other municipalities that have the

1:41:30bylaw uh already up and running so my own thoughts are that it would be posted similar to you know a

1:41:39minor variance application um if it's my name you know on that particular project that uh a resident

1:41:47could reach out to me and get further information about about the project itself because a sign may

1:41:52say you know the you know the applicant is looking at using the community planning permit system or

1:41:57applied for a permit to establish blankety blank and if you've never been in the development

1:42:04approval process before as a resident or even a minor variance you may have no idea what what is

1:42:09actually happening so to talk to the planner and get some more information and provide feedback

1:42:13to the planner on the file who will then make you know a recommendation on that permit uh

1:42:20to the general manager or or it's delegate before a decision is made

1:42:24that's how I foresee it that time frame though is is a little bit unknown but I

1:42:32you know community uh of minor variances is generally you have to have a notification up

1:42:39you know a number of days 20 days before the meeting happens um decisions on community

1:42:46planning permits aren't as as regimented at this point in time because they are up up to staff but

1:42:52it's certainly something that we can look into to make sure um

1:42:58before we go out to the public with the final decision that that there's a you know feedback loop

1:43:04sort of in the in the process flow diagram you could say Annie's writing that down

1:43:10something where we can we can put out to public like this is the process this is where

1:43:13your opportunities exist for comments recognizing that

1:43:22right now under any applications you know since the government has changed the appeal rights

1:43:27that whether you're under the community planning permit system or even a minor variance

1:43:32unless you're the owner of the of the property you can't you can't appeal anything or you're

1:43:36you're an agency so council and and and staff are quite you know concerned that we want to address

1:43:43as many comments as we can um because there isn't that that appeal of community planning permit

1:43:50or or anything at this point in time so we hear you and and and stay tuned and we'll make sure we

1:43:57fully explained uh how this is supposed to work um before we bring a recommendation to council

1:44:04okay thank you thanks Justin thanks Lisa um I don't have any comments or questions so

1:44:18uh again uh for the committee there's a recommended motion here that the planning advisory committee

1:44:24received the community planning permit draft official plan amendment bylaw and presentation

1:44:30and that the feedback provided by the planning advisory committee members be considered by staff so

1:44:36looking for someone to either move that motion or propose uh a different motion Lisa

1:44:52um second seconder Justin thanks um any questions comments or concerns about the

1:45:03motion on the floor being none um I will ask if anyone is opposed to the motion please raise your

1:45:12hand seeing no one opposed to the motion uh motion carries uh thank you um Brenna andy for that

1:45:25presentation um moving on to the the next item uh chair and staff announcements uh staff do you

1:45:36have any announcements for us officially saying no okay thank you um I don't have any announcements

1:45:50so uh we'll move on from that item uh next item is adjournments so uh require a committee member

1:46:01to move adjourning the meeting Justin thank you seconded

1:46:13Arton thank you anyone opposed to adjourning the meeting seeing no opposition so that means

1:46:21meeting adjourned at 8 14 p.m uh thank you everyone uh for your presentations information um

1:46:30Harry am I missing anything no sorry no you've done a great job there and thank you

1:46:39okay thanks but this is not my first time chairing this committee so it's clear uh

1:46:47okay well thank you everyone for your time this evening um look out for a message from the clerk's

1:46:52office for organizing the next meeting and everyone have a great night keep warm everyone

1:47:02thank you everybody thank you