Agenda
Transcript
AI TRANSCRIPT
This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person — it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.
[0:00]
We're good. Okay, great. Well, welcome everyone and I just want to make sure that we've got a sound check here. For councilor furlong, you can hear me. Absolutely.
[0:10]
Perfect. Thank you. And councilor Davis and you can hear as well.
[0:13]
Yes, I can. Great. Thank you very much. And welcome everyone to our meeting afternoon, our special council meeting today.
[0:22]
First we'll call the meeting order and do our territorial acknowledgement. I would like to acknowledge that our gathering today is taking place in McMoggi.
[0:29]
the traditional unceded and ancestral territory of the McMot people.
[0:33]
But also like to acknowledge that Nova Scotia has another unique people, the people of African descent,
[0:38]
whose legacy and contributions date back over 400 years predating
[0:42]
confederation of this land, where all treaty people.
[0:47]
Included in the package is a number of items in the agenda.
[0:52]
First, we'll get a, um, we're going to proceed with the development agreement synopsis and council
[0:59]
wells.
[1:00]
You're going to take us through that.
[1:03]
Thank you very much.
[1:04]
So development agreement, second reading of one Albion Street.
[1:08]
The YMCA Carverland has applied for development agreement to permit the construction of a 36-unit
[1:13]
residential development on the property located at one Albion Street.
[1:17]
A public participation opportunity was held on March 30th, where verbal and written input was
[1:23]
submitted both in support for and in opposition to the proposal.
[1:29]
The Planning Advisory Committee reviewed the revised proposal on June 1st, but failed
[1:33]
to make a recommendation on the application.
[1:36]
A public hearing was held on July 8th, where verbal and written input was provided to council
[1:41]
both in support for and in opposition to the proposal.
[1:45]
The attached development agreement contains the terms and conditions intended to address the
[1:50]
relevant policies of the municipal planning strategy.
[1:53]
This infill development addresses the high demand for affordable housing and would be located
[1:58]
in a central location in the downtown core area.
[2:02]
The motion is that Council gives second reading of the development agreement for one Albion
[2:06]
Street to permit the construction of a 36 unit residential development.
[2:10]
Thank you. Do we have a seconder for that?
[2:15]
Deputy Mayor?
[2:15]
Seconder?
[2:16]
Thank you.
[2:18]
Just before we call for a question, I know I'd like to thank Council Firmlong for
[2:22]
a number of clarifications that were provided to Council this week.
[2:26]
I think all of Council had received those and read through those.
[2:31]
Very important points to make with respect to this development.
[2:35]
Are there any other questions with respect to this motion?
[2:41]
I'll share a comment if I may.
[2:43]
Absolutely.
[2:44]
Go ahead, Councilor Furong.
[2:46]
Most of my questions were thoroughly answered by the Planning Department.
[2:50]
So I very much thank them for the strong response and
[2:54]
citing a lot of useful information to help us make our decision there.
[2:58]
I am still a little on clear around policy 5.7 around a
[3:02]
minority space.
[3:04]
It uses the strong language that Council shall ensure adequate
[3:08]
on-site of an empty space. It doesn't say on-site space can be replaced or supplemented by
[3:13]
parks or other off-site spaces. So I'm a little unclear on how this proposal meets our policy
[3:22]
and whether any exemptions need to be explicitly made in order to comply with that policy.
[3:31]
Okay, I'm going to ask the CAO if you want to ask Andrew, you want to come up and just speak to that.
[3:39]
question and provide any clarification that you can.
[3:53]
Thanks for the thanks for the opportunity to answer the question.
[3:58]
I guess ultimately the policy talks about ensuring that there's adequate
[4:03]
amenity space.
[4:05]
As I attempted to answer in the questions the Council are for a long and
[4:11]
I attempted to put that into context.
[4:15]
There is 3250 square feet of Outdoor Humanity Space on site.
[4:24]
And I guess the other part would be if they did provide a 20 square foot balcony,
[4:33]
which is not very big and they for each individual individual unit.
[4:37]
That would satisfy the land use by law requirements.
[4:43]
But I guess I'll reiterate that under a development agreement,
[4:47]
those hard and fast rules of the land use by law are negotiated.
[4:53]
So I guess at the end of the day, there is over 3,000 square feet of outdoor
[4:59]
many space on site in, I guess, our opinion that that is better than providing a 20-square
[5:09]
foot balcony for each unit, there's an opportunity to gather to have perhaps a swing
[5:16]
set or for children to play together in that common outdoor area, so in our opinion,
[5:27]
I guess
[5:29]
space is being met. Ultimately, it's Council's decision to make whether that is adequate.
[5:37]
Right. Okay. Council, for a long-deserved, provide any further clarification for you?
[5:43]
It helps. A motor long-clear, the land use in the difference between the land use and
[5:49]
our municipal planning strategies. So the policy is 5.73 from the MPS. That's where the
[5:59]
I'm a little on clear on the minimum, I think we talked about a 6 foot balcony space and the gap between 6 to 20 and if you do the math,
[6:11]
the green space on the property is roughly 8.
[6:14]
So then I'm trying to close the gap here, I'm still a little on clear, why the minimum standards of the land use by law,
[6:23]
when the the verbiage is coming from the NPS and just trying to cover my bases there.
[6:32]
Would you like to respond to that, Andrew?
[6:33]
I'll try.
[6:34]
So the municipal planning, the development agreement must meet the intent of the
[6:39]
municipal planning strategy policies.
[6:41]
It is not required to meet the standards of the land use by law.
[6:47]
So if we were, if we were doing a different development that didn't require a
[6:51]
development agreement, you would be held fast to the minimum requirements of the
[6:57]
landies by-law. Because the development is by a development agreement, those
[7:04]
landies by-law, minimums are not a steadfast requirement. We rely on the intent
[7:11]
of the policies, and we use those requirements that might be relevant from the
[7:20]
wait for the proposal. It would be fair to say the adequate on-site square footage that
[7:27]
we're using. That's coming.
[7:30]
Or land use by laws, those numbers, the 20 square meters?
[7:35]
Yes, the 20 square meters, the 20 square meters, about dormant space requirement, is from the land use by law.
[7:44]
Which is what we're kind of saying at our baseline for adequate base, give or take, based on the attend of the MPS.
[7:52]
Correct.
[7:57]
Just to wrap up my thought there.
[7:59]
I'm
[8:04]
glad that's pretty much it. We talked about the the traffic congestion in the area and you're provided some some great
[8:09]
tangible stats on the current flow of the area and number of cars and how the
[8:17]
development would impact that. The only question that the number you gave me about the next expected increase of around 20 to 24
[8:26]
I forget what the term was, but that increase is that inclusive of a service delivery
[8:34]
vehicles, visitors, and all that stuff, would that just be the residential impact of that
[8:42]
36 units going up, and that's where we think the numbers would generate.
[8:47]
That's really a, that's kind of a generic plug-in, you know, what is a 36 unit apartment in
[8:53]
down town setting using affordable housing with no public transit and 18 square feet of
[9:04]
office space. So if you kind of like literally it's a simple, if you Google that that
[9:10]
traffic manual, the traffic demand manual and you put you key in those conditions, that's
[9:16]
number it gives you. So, okay. Yeah.
[9:23]
All right.
[9:26]
That's all I have
[9:27]
I guess. I've been on the receiving end of policy where I thought I'd
[9:30]
met the intent before, so I'm just being a little extra cautious. I didn't get the
[9:33]
results I wanted, so I just want to make sure I'm ensuring the consistency in the
[9:38]
application of our policy is also. Thank you. Certainly understand. Well, thank you
[9:42]
council for a long. Are there any other questions? Council, well, do you have a
[9:46]
That's all.
[9:50]
Everyone good.
[9:52]
I'll call for vote.
[9:53]
Now, all those in favor of the development,
[9:56]
approval, please signify by saying aye.
[9:59]
Aye.
[10:00]
Those against.
[10:02]
One nague.
[10:03]
Two nays.
[10:04]
Councilor Furlong accounts, though, quickly.
[10:07]
The motion has passed.
[10:09]
That completes our actions for today.
[10:11]
Thank you very much council for being here and folks for attending.
[10:15]
Meet you.
[10:16]
Meet you.
[10:17]
Thank you.
[10:18]
Thank you.
[10:18]
The answers?