1
00:00:57,690 --> 00:01:05,750
Good morning, everyone. We'll get underway. Welcome to the 70th planning and housing committee meeting.

2
00:01:06,910 --> 00:01:16,650
We acknowledge that Ottawa is located on the unceded territory of the Algonquin and Shnavination, whose culture and presence have nurtured and continued to nurture this land.

3
00:01:16,650 --> 00:01:20,450
It is important to me that I have to ask the truth of the title 12,

4
00:01:20,730 --> 00:01:23,370
no city of the National Algonquin and Snabbeck,

5
00:01:23,450 --> 00:01:25,770
during the culture that presents on the sheet,

6
00:01:26,090 --> 00:01:28,250
a continued down the shield, say, towel.

7
00:01:28,850 --> 00:01:30,470
May I have a roll call, please?

8
00:01:31,790 --> 00:01:32,990
Councillor Brokington.

9
00:01:33,290 --> 00:01:33,410
Here.

10
00:01:34,430 --> 00:01:36,490
Councillor Currie here.

11
00:01:37,030 --> 00:01:37,730
Councillor Dudes.

12
00:01:43,230 --> 00:01:43,810
Councillor Johnson.

13
00:01:46,680 --> 00:01:47,260
Councillor Cavana.

14
00:01:48,780 --> 00:01:49,440
Councillor Kelly.

15
00:01:49,920 --> 00:01:50,780
Councillor Kitts.

16
00:01:52,250 --> 00:01:54,090
Councillor Lowe,

17
00:01:57,120 --> 00:01:58,280
Councillor Tuney?

18
00:01:58,420 --> 00:01:58,740
President?

19
00:01:59,120 --> 00:01:59,820
Councillor Traster?

20
00:02:01,740 --> 00:02:02,580
Yes, your gower?

21
00:02:03,700 --> 00:02:05,060
Chair, you've come.

22
00:02:06,180 --> 00:02:07,240
Thank you, Councillor.

23
00:02:07,540 --> 00:02:07,820
Do that.

24
00:02:08,120 --> 00:02:08,540
Just come in.

25
00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:10,060
My understanding is that Councillor Kits.

26
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:11,820
It was likely to miss roll call this morning.

27
00:02:11,840 --> 00:02:13,300
But we'll be joining us.

28
00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:15,260
This is a public meeting.

29
00:02:20,510 --> 00:02:20,950
Present.

30
00:02:23,070 --> 00:02:29,130
This is a public meeting to consider the proposed comprehensive official plan and zoning bylaw amendments.

31
00:02:29,130 --> 00:02:35,950
listed as item 515261 on today's agenda for the items just mentioned only those specifically

32
00:02:35,950 --> 00:02:40,250
identified in the Planning Act who make oral submissions today or written submissions

33
00:02:40,250 --> 00:02:44,430
before the amendments are adopted may appeal the matter to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

34
00:02:44,890 --> 00:02:48,210
In addition to the applicant may appeal the matter to the Ontario Land Tribunal,

35
00:02:48,590 --> 00:02:53,370
if Council does not adopt an amendment within 90 days of receipt of the application for

36
00:02:53,370 --> 00:02:57,210
zoning by law amendment and 120 days for an official

37
00:02:57,210 --> 00:03:01,330
plan amendment to submit written comments on these amendments prior to their

38
00:03:01,330 --> 00:03:06,930
consideration by city council on September 9th, 2026. Please email or call the

39
00:03:06,930 --> 00:03:11,190
committee or council coordinator. Are there any declarations of interest?

40
00:03:12,410 --> 00:03:18,570
Nope. Are the minutes of our meeting August 19th, 2026 confirmed?

41
00:03:20,670 --> 00:03:25,930
Thank you. There are a number of responses to inquiries on the agenda,

42
00:03:28,350 --> 00:03:29,570
and then with respect to the

43
00:03:29,570 --> 00:03:33,450
substantive agenda, of course, we'll be coming back to item 5-1, which is the official planning

44
00:03:33,450 --> 00:03:39,290
zoning by-law amendment for three Hamilton Avenue North in 223, 229 and 233 Armstrong Street.

45
00:03:39,390 --> 00:03:46,550
We have 12 public delegations signed up for those, and I just want to make a quick note that

46
00:03:46,550 --> 00:03:50,050
Councilors, Low and Johnson have joined us as well.

47
00:03:54,250 --> 00:03:56,570
The zoning bylaw amendment, the zoning bylaw

48
00:03:57,450 --> 00:04:05,870
2026-50 appeal resolutions. There is a technical motion on this one. Is Councilor Kerry,

49
00:04:05,970 --> 00:04:13,410
I believe you'll be making that one. Yes, I will be. All right, we're as report ACS-2026P,

50
00:04:13,410 --> 00:04:20,390
PBPS-0064 recommends several amendments to zoning by-law 2026-50 to address matters currently

51
00:04:20,390 --> 00:04:25,550
under appeal, including site-specific matters and revisions to section 110, continuation

52
00:04:25,550 --> 00:04:30,650
of approved applications, exceptions, and schedules to clarify to add clarity.

53
00:04:31,470 --> 00:04:38,990
And whereas report ACS-2026, PDBPS-0064 does not contain all languages necessary to add

54
00:04:38,990 --> 00:04:44,530
clarity sought to section 1-10 and the map contained in document 1D contains a technical error.

55
00:04:44,870 --> 00:04:49,650
Therefore, it was resolved that document 2 be amended by replacing item 2 with the following.

56
00:04:50,230 --> 00:04:55,870
A men's subsection 1-10-4 of zoning by a law of 2650 by replacing it with the following.

57
00:04:56,710 --> 00:05:03,710
Section 4, in areas inside area B, shown on schedule A13, where exceptions, schedules, and others

58
00:05:03,710 --> 00:05:12,950
code suffixes apply. And the primary zone is H2, H2, H3, H3, H3, H3, H3, MS1, Main Street,

59
00:05:12,950 --> 00:05:19,630
Zone 1, Main, MS2, Main Street, Zone 2, CM1, minor corridors, Zone 1, and CM2, minor

60
00:05:19,630 --> 00:05:26,030
corridors, Zone 2, then A. For exception schedules and other zone code suffixes in zoning

61
00:05:26,030 --> 00:05:31,430
by law 2008 to 50 approved before November 4th, 2022,

62
00:05:32,010 --> 00:05:35,530
the data, the new official plan, subject to B and C,

63
00:05:35,790 --> 00:05:37,750
the most permissive provisions apply

64
00:05:37,750 --> 00:05:41,350
between the primary zone, sub zone, exception, schedule,

65
00:05:41,570 --> 00:05:43,070
and other zone code suffixes.

66
00:05:43,690 --> 00:05:45,390
B, however, any holding,

67
00:05:46,010 --> 00:05:48,550
dash H provisions continues to apply,

68
00:05:49,110 --> 00:05:51,310
and C, subsection two applies.

69
00:05:51,730 --> 00:05:54,670
Therefore, be it resolved that map 1DB replaced

70
00:05:54,670 --> 00:06:00,190
with the map attached as a attachment one here to. Therefore, be it further resolved that

71
00:06:00,190 --> 00:06:05,490
pursuant to subsection 34, 17 of the Planning Act no further notice be given.

72
00:06:07,430 --> 00:06:12,990
Thank you very much Councillor Currie. We hadn't anticipated a presentation on this and there

73
00:06:12,990 --> 00:06:18,710
are no delegations although Lisa Delarosa is here with FOTEN, my understanding is you're aware of

74
00:06:18,710 --> 00:06:23,850
the technical amendment that was made and you don't have any need to speak this morning. Thank you.

75
00:06:23,850 --> 00:06:30,090
If that is the case today members wish to have this one held, no, is the technical amendment

76
00:06:30,090 --> 00:06:30,490
carry?

77
00:06:31,350 --> 00:06:31,890
Thank you.

78
00:06:32,130 --> 00:06:33,850
And is the item as amended carried?

79
00:06:33,890 --> 00:06:34,130
Yes.

80
00:06:34,890 --> 00:06:35,530
Thank you.

81
00:06:38,730 --> 00:06:44,650
There is the item the zoning by-law amendment 27752785 Poladium Drive 350 called

82
00:06:44,650 --> 00:06:45,310
F Road.

83
00:06:45,990 --> 00:06:49,570
We hadn't anticipated the presentation or our no delegation signed up to speak.

84
00:06:50,150 --> 00:06:51,990
There has been some correspondence on the item.

85
00:06:51,990 --> 00:06:56,830
the applicants are here to speak to the item if they need to.

86
00:06:58,130 --> 00:07:05,150
The, so to the applicant, so I'll just ask if the committee is prepared to carry this item to just still wish to speak.

87
00:07:12,090 --> 00:07:12,670
Good morning.

88
00:07:12,890 --> 00:07:13,390
Good morning.

89
00:07:14,150 --> 00:07:15,670
I'm just here to answer any questions.

90
00:07:16,750 --> 00:07:17,250
Thank you.

91
00:07:18,190 --> 00:07:19,430
Thank you very much.

92
00:07:20,430 --> 00:07:23,570
And then Vice Chair Gower does have one quick question.

93
00:07:23,690 --> 00:07:25,090
I thought we would do that now.

94
00:07:25,090 --> 00:07:29,110
rather than hold the item, just let the staff go and later the fact that we have a longer

95
00:07:29,110 --> 00:07:29,970
item coming up.

96
00:07:33,820 --> 00:07:46,520
I'll preface it by saying most of the feedback from residents on this file has been really positive. People are excited about a potential water park in the community, and it's well located near the highway.

97
00:07:46,520 --> 00:07:54,320
but it is right next to an existing residential community and we've had significant feedback

98
00:07:54,320 --> 00:08:02,140
about impact from traffic originally this site was proposed as a RV sales lot so this is

99
00:08:02,140 --> 00:08:06,820
quite a different use there's also been significant concern on the environmental side

100
00:08:06,820 --> 00:08:16,500
about water capacity about environmental features resident asked about whether or not the

101
00:08:17,840 --> 00:08:22,900
permissible payment and so on. All of that as I understand it will be reviewed through the

102
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:28,240
site plan. The site plan was submitted concurrently to the zoning. Where are you at with the site plan

103
00:08:28,240 --> 00:08:33,580
process and are you aware of those concerns and are these things that you're reviewing right now?

104
00:08:34,940 --> 00:08:39,620
Yes, thank you through the chair. We are aware of those comments. We've reviewed the first

105
00:08:39,620 --> 00:08:43,820
submission from the applicant provided comments. We've made the applicant aware of the comments

106
00:08:43,820 --> 00:08:47,700
community and they will be addressed through our future submissions.

107
00:08:48,540 --> 00:08:53,060
Okay, so that site plan is still underway and those elements are still building reviewed.

108
00:08:53,280 --> 00:08:53,820
That's good to hear.

109
00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:54,420
Yes, that's correct.

110
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,020
Okay.

111
00:08:55,420 --> 00:08:55,900
Thank you, Chair.

112
00:08:56,100 --> 00:08:56,500
That's all.

113
00:08:57,040 --> 00:08:58,060
Thank you very much, Vice Chair.

114
00:08:58,580 --> 00:08:59,220
So, is that it?

115
00:08:59,320 --> 00:08:59,800
I'm carried.

116
00:09:00,360 --> 00:09:00,660
Very.

117
00:09:01,220 --> 00:09:02,360
Thank you very much.

118
00:09:03,080 --> 00:09:10,400
And I will just note that there are two IPDs information previously distributed on the agenda.

119
00:09:10,400 --> 00:09:14,140
I hadn't received any indication that members had wished to have those held.

120
00:09:14,420 --> 00:09:18,420
Last chance, if you did want those held, nope, no sweat.

121
00:09:19,000 --> 00:09:22,840
So we'll consider those received and we will go back to the start of the agenda,

122
00:09:26,970 --> 00:09:30,650
which is the OPA and Zoning By-law for Hamilton Armstrong.

123
00:09:31,990 --> 00:09:35,930
We'll first receive a presentation from staff from there.

124
00:09:36,170 --> 00:09:41,890
We'll go into public delegations and then we will go into questions by members of staff.

125
00:09:41,890 --> 00:09:47,570
So, whenever staff are ready, if you could introduce yourselves and take the seat of the presentation.

126
00:10:10,940 --> 00:10:11,620
Thanks, Chair Leapert.

127
00:10:12,160 --> 00:10:12,600
Good morning.

128
00:10:12,880 --> 00:10:15,400
My name is Jack Smith and I'm a planner with the Development Review Central.

129
00:10:15,880 --> 00:10:20,020
I'll walk us through the Proposed Official Pline Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment at 340 Parkdale Avenue.

130
00:10:20,740 --> 00:10:21,200
Next slide, please.

131
00:10:22,830 --> 00:10:40,830
The subject lands represent four parcels known as three Hamilton Avenue North and two two three two two nine and two three three Armstrong Street representing an entire city block in the Hintonburg community bound by Armstrong Parkdale Spencer and Hamilton within a 500 meter walking distance the Tunis pastor station next slide.

132
00:10:42,450 --> 00:10:45,790
The subject lands are designated hub and located within the inner urban

133
00:10:45,790 --> 00:10:50,470
transect and evolving overlay within the official plan, which contemplates heights up to 40

134
00:10:50,470 --> 00:10:50,970
stories.

135
00:10:51,870 --> 00:10:52,510
Next slide, please.

136
00:10:55,660 --> 00:10:58,900
The lands are designated hub within the Parkdale Park Policy area in the Wellington

137
00:10:58,900 --> 00:11:00,400
Street West Secondary Plan.

138
00:11:00,860 --> 00:11:05,340
A site specific policy applying to 233 Armstrong Street and 3 Hamilton Avenue North permits

139
00:11:05,340 --> 00:11:10,200
a development of the site with a floor space index that is generally equivalent to eight

140
00:11:10,200 --> 00:11:14,700
stories without being subject to a maximum height requirement. The remainder of the site is subject

141
00:11:14,700 --> 00:11:17,640
to a maximum height of eight stories. Next slide, please.

142
00:11:20,260 --> 00:11:21,920
Under zoning by law 2008 to

143
00:11:21,920 --> 00:11:27,140
50, the Landsers Own Mixed Youth Center and Light Industrial, these zones are subject to

144
00:11:27,140 --> 00:11:31,660
site-specific exceptions, floor space index requirements, as well as the zoning schedule and

145
00:11:31,660 --> 00:11:34,040
holding symbol of flying to a majority of the site.

146
00:11:37,790 --> 00:11:40,410
Under zoning by law 202650, the Landsers

147
00:11:40,410 --> 00:11:44,870
and Hub2 and mixed industrial and the site-specific provisions, schedule and holding provisions

148
00:11:44,870 --> 00:11:46,970
were carried forward from the previous zoning dialogue.

149
00:11:49,430 --> 00:11:50,130
Next slide, please.

150
00:11:53,810 --> 00:11:54,950
And for the English

151
00:11:54,950 --> 00:12:03,940
presentation, if we could go one more slide. One more. Thank you. So looking at the site plan,

152
00:12:04,020 --> 00:12:09,900
the proposal seeks to permit a 32-story mixed use building with 386 units. A new low-rise building

153
00:12:09,900 --> 00:12:13,960
will be provided on the southeast corner of the site, which reinstates the Carlton Tavern in the same

154
00:12:13,960 --> 00:12:19,300
general location and likeness to the existing building, and 850 square meter pops is provided

155
00:12:19,300 --> 00:12:22,620
on the southern extent of the site to contribute to the public realm and further animate

156
00:12:22,620 --> 00:12:24,780
park tail park. Next slide please.

157
00:12:27,090 --> 00:12:29,230
With respect to tree plantings and greening of the site,

158
00:12:29,690 --> 00:12:33,710
street trees and various plantings are proposed on all edges, including within the proposed

159
00:12:33,710 --> 00:12:39,430
pop area, the remainder of lands at grade will include hard skatepapers. Next slide please.

160
00:12:41,980 --> 00:12:46,220
Further comments provided by staff, technical agencies and members of the public, a number of

161
00:12:46,220 --> 00:12:50,380
of changes have been implemented in the development proposal to align with the feedback received.

162
00:12:50,940 --> 00:12:55,720
Namely, the reduction to the overall building height from 38 stories to 32 stories,

163
00:12:56,180 --> 00:12:59,340
and the reduction in the overall podium height from nine stories to five stories.

164
00:12:59,820 --> 00:13:02,720
Now, move on to the next slide where I'll speak to the remainder of the changes.

165
00:13:05,330 --> 00:13:09,530
On the screen, you can see the previously proposed six to eight story podium on the left,

166
00:13:09,710 --> 00:13:12,290
and the revised five to eight story podium heights on the right.

167
00:13:12,290 --> 00:13:17,250
additional changes which have occurred include reconfiguration of the pops to be

168
00:13:17,250 --> 00:13:22,130
south facing, reconstruction of the Carlton Tavern and architectural design that

169
00:13:22,130 --> 00:13:26,510
is reflective of the historic and surrounding context. Next slide please.

170
00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:28,980
Knowing

171
00:13:28,980 --> 00:13:32,860
that the lands to the western north are also located within the hub designation and

172
00:13:32,860 --> 00:13:36,780
can be developed at a greater density, sensitive transition to the east and south

173
00:13:36,780 --> 00:13:41,300
was the priority. The tower locates itself furthest from the Parkdale Avenue corridor

174
00:13:41,300 --> 00:13:46,500
and plant sensitive lorized contacts to the east, indicated in the orange neighborhood zone

175
00:13:46,500 --> 00:13:51,720
on the right side of the screen. The proposed 32 stories represents a transition down from the

176
00:13:51,720 --> 00:13:56,840
plan context of 40 stories at the center of the hub, and the tower is below a 45 degree angular

177
00:13:56,840 --> 00:14:03,000
plane measured from those neighborhood zones located east of the Parkdale Avenue corridor. To the south,

178
00:14:03,140 --> 00:14:06,780
the pops in the reinstatement of the Carlton Tavern Incorporate a lorized built form

179
00:14:06,780 --> 00:14:10,960
which provides separation and transition of the development to Parkdale Park to the south.

180
00:14:11,300 --> 00:14:12,440
Next slide, please.

181
00:14:14,950 --> 00:14:19,270
The proposed OPA will permit up to 32 stories on the subject property, subject to the tower

182
00:14:19,270 --> 00:14:21,930
being located in the closest proximity to rapid transit.

183
00:14:22,610 --> 00:14:26,610
Policies are included within the OPA to ensure that any high-rise development of the land

184
00:14:26,610 --> 00:14:31,770
provide a pops, and where the Carlton Tavern is proposed to be demolished, policies

185
00:14:31,770 --> 00:14:36,070
have been included, which require replacement to story building, containing ground floor

186
00:14:36,070 --> 00:14:40,290
commercial, and representing architectural character appearance and location of the tavern.

187
00:14:40,930 --> 00:14:41,550
Next slide, please.

188
00:14:43,240 --> 00:14:54,420
The proposed rezoning seeks to reason the full extent of the lands as mixed use center within the old zoning by law and hub to within the new zoning by law both subject to site specific exceptions and zoning schedule.

189
00:14:55,240 --> 00:14:57,120
The proposed rezoning application permits the

190
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:04,160
And the recommendation report contains full some details on the extent of relief required to permit

191
00:15:04,160 --> 00:15:09,080
the proposed development, which generally relate to height, setbacks, projection of the rooftop

192
00:15:09,080 --> 00:15:14,260
amenity area, requirements for non-residential uses at grade, and removal of the holding

193
00:15:14,260 --> 00:15:18,400
symbol in addition to other technical provisions. Next slide, please.

194
00:15:22,520 --> 00:15:26,580
Staff recommend approval of the OPNs that be as indicated in the report as the proposed

195
00:15:26,580 --> 00:15:31,660
development will provide an increased housing stock, improve the pedestrian realm, improve active

196
00:15:31,660 --> 00:15:36,820
transportation and include ground floor commercial uses, which will contribute to the local economy.

197
00:15:37,420 --> 00:15:41,120
The proposal is consistent with the city's official plan, the Wellington Street West Secondary

198
00:15:41,120 --> 00:15:46,720
Plan, and applicable urban design guidelines. Next slide, please. That wraps up my presentation

199
00:15:46,720 --> 00:15:49,500
to the committee. Thank you and please let us know if there any questions.

200
00:15:52,120 --> 00:15:53,160
Thank you very much

201
00:15:53,160 --> 00:15:58,040
for the staff presentation. We'll come back to staff after the public delegations.

202
00:15:59,000 --> 00:16:03,840
I would ask the representatives are here from Taggart as you want to make your presentation

203
00:16:03,840 --> 00:16:10,740
first or do you want to go last and have an opportunity to answer any concerns that you may have heard raised by residents.

204
00:16:12,780 --> 00:16:13,220
Okay.

205
00:16:38,780 --> 00:16:42,920
Good morning, gentlemen. Whenever you're ready, you'll have five minutes to make a presentation to the committee.

206
00:16:51,330 --> 00:16:52,470
Hello. Perfect.

207
00:16:55,050 --> 00:16:57,710
Good morning, Chair. Members of committee. My name is Bear Wager.

208
00:16:57,710 --> 00:17:01,990
Senior Planner with Stantec Consulting, and with me as part of the applicant team is

209
00:17:01,990 --> 00:17:06,810
Braden Walker of Taggart Realty and Hugo Latrell of Hope and Architecture.

210
00:17:08,370 --> 00:17:12,190
I'll share a few project points and then I'll turn it over to Hugo for a brief presentation on

211
00:17:12,190 --> 00:17:15,270
the architecture. We can turn this slide too.

212
00:17:19,580 --> 00:17:22,000
So firstly we'd like to thank staff, the UDRP,

213
00:17:22,320 --> 00:17:26,160
and the community for their collaboration to date that's helped transform this proposal from

214
00:17:26,160 --> 00:17:31,800
initial design. The redesign you're seeing today was centered around preserving space for a

215
00:17:31,800 --> 00:17:36,960
reimagined Carlton Tavern and included the following key changes. For the podium, it dropped

216
00:17:36,960 --> 00:17:43,000
from nine to five to six stories. It's scale reduced, it's form improved, and it's appearance

217
00:17:43,000 --> 00:17:48,660
re-aligned with the areas industrial past. For the tower, it dropped from 38 to 32 stories,

218
00:17:49,080 --> 00:17:53,760
and its location appropriately shifted closer to Tony's pasture station. For the balance of

219
00:17:53,760 --> 00:17:57,360
site, space was freed up to accommodate two significant features.

220
00:17:58,040 --> 00:18:03,660
The first being a pops, along Armstrong Street, which is linked up to through block connections,

221
00:18:04,180 --> 00:18:09,140
and the second being a stand-alone building for a tavern of similar location in architecture

222
00:18:09,140 --> 00:18:10,660
as the existing Carlton.

223
00:18:11,160 --> 00:18:15,460
Beyond these highlighted changes, the redevelopment will require ground floor commercial

224
00:18:15,460 --> 00:18:20,180
space, provide over three times the zoning requirement for family-sized dwelling units,

225
00:18:20,840 --> 00:18:22,240
and it will address site contamination.

226
00:18:22,240 --> 00:18:31,540
Taking together these elements support desirable intensification in a targeted area near rapid transit, employment, and commercial uses.

227
00:18:32,340 --> 00:18:40,820
Supporting this project will help to advance provincial and municipal planning objectives for housing, transit oriented development, efficient land use and urban design.

228
00:18:40,820 --> 00:18:44,540
In short, this proposal represents good land use planning.

229
00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:46,480
Slide 3, please.

230
00:18:49,080 --> 00:18:51,280
It's important to note that when Taggart assembled this block,

231
00:18:51,580 --> 00:18:53,940
it offered the opportunity to reimagine it in whole.

232
00:18:54,340 --> 00:18:57,140
An opportunity not afforded with previous development schemes.

233
00:18:57,820 --> 00:19:00,680
This allowed the design for the block to make better use of its permissions

234
00:19:00,680 --> 00:19:03,920
under the secondary plan, which prescribe a maximum density

235
00:19:03,920 --> 00:19:07,200
without any limit on building height where the tower is proposed.

236
00:19:07,800 --> 00:19:10,560
With that, the design distributes a permitted density

237
00:19:10,560 --> 00:19:15,540
into a podium and point tower form that frees up large portions of the site for public

238
00:19:15,540 --> 00:19:21,020
round space and a reimagined tower. The context of the block also allows the proposed building

239
00:19:21,020 --> 00:19:26,600
heights to achieve appropriate tower and podium transition for the adjacent properties. Lastly,

240
00:19:26,940 --> 00:19:31,300
I'd like to emphasize our appreciation for the history of the block and its importance to the community.

241
00:19:31,860 --> 00:19:36,060
We believe the proposal reflects that value and we recognize there will be further opportunities

242
00:19:36,060 --> 00:19:40,860
for input through a future site plan control process if the applications before you are carried

243
00:19:40,860 --> 00:19:41,980
and approved by Council.

244
00:19:46,750 --> 00:19:46,890
All right.

245
00:19:46,950 --> 00:19:47,770
Thanks, Barrett.

246
00:19:48,290 --> 00:19:49,350
So can we go to the next slide, please?

247
00:19:50,850 --> 00:19:56,130
So the proposal is a 32-story development providing 386 new homes.

248
00:19:56,510 --> 00:20:03,430
Importantly, 17% are larger family size units, more than three times the rezoning requirement.

249
00:20:03,430 --> 00:20:10,290
The project's also targeting 30% affordable units and includes 3,700 square meters of a

250
00:20:10,290 --> 00:20:14,450
amenity space, 850 square meters of publicly accessible pop space.

251
00:20:14,910 --> 00:20:15,890
Can we go to the next slide please?

252
00:20:17,610 --> 00:20:22,450
So, at the ground plane, the design is organized around a simple idea, creating a connected

253
00:20:22,450 --> 00:20:25,250
active place that works as a part of this rounding neighborhood.

254
00:20:25,890 --> 00:20:31,930
The main building defines Parkdale, Spencer, and Hamilton Street Edges, with a tower positioned

255
00:20:31,930 --> 00:20:36,930
towards the western side of the site, and the reimagined Carlton tavern remains at the corner

256
00:20:36,930 --> 00:20:42,510
of Parkdale and Armstrong in a location similar to where it stands today. Next slide, please.

257
00:20:44,590 --> 00:20:49,770
Together, these elements frame a large central public space with approximately 37% of the site

258
00:20:49,770 --> 00:20:56,110
dedicated to the public realm, and almost 50% if we count the tavern into that. This space connects

259
00:20:56,110 --> 00:21:01,810
Armstrong Street through Spencer Street and Parkdale Avenue, creating new pedestrian routes

260
00:21:01,810 --> 00:21:08,950
through the block. Next slide, please. So these images will show how we envision the space functioning.

261
00:21:09,630 --> 00:21:14,830
So the tavern remains a recognizable neighborhood landmark, but now opens onto padios,

262
00:21:15,030 --> 00:21:21,810
landscaping, and a flexible public plaza. Next slide, please. The space can support outdoor dining

263
00:21:21,810 --> 00:21:26,610
and informal gathering, as well as market stalls, community events, and seasonal activities.

264
00:21:27,190 --> 00:21:27,950
Next slide, please.

265
00:21:29,510 --> 00:21:33,330
The surrounding commercial spaces face into the plaza, helping animate it throughout

266
00:21:33,330 --> 00:21:35,710
the day, and making it a true public destination.

267
00:21:36,570 --> 00:21:37,330
Next slide.

268
00:21:38,710 --> 00:21:44,210
The five-story podium draws from Hiddenberg's Industrial Warehouse character, so Red Industrial

269
00:21:44,210 --> 00:21:50,050
Brick Strong Structural Bays and a large punched openings give it a grounded durable expression.

270
00:21:50,050 --> 00:21:52,590
Oh, you just did a wrap up, please.

271
00:21:53,230 --> 00:21:54,410
I'll finish up with the last slide.

272
00:21:54,490 --> 00:21:56,070
We can just go to the, there you go.

273
00:21:56,510 --> 00:22:00,270
So finally, glass your six floor creates a clear transition between the

274
00:22:00,270 --> 00:22:01,630
Mason Repotium and the tower.

275
00:22:02,470 --> 00:22:06,050
Above, the tower has a lighter contemporary expression with a minimalist frame

276
00:22:06,050 --> 00:22:08,290
intersected by a glass your east facade.

277
00:22:08,670 --> 00:22:12,110
It's crowned creates a subtle landmark from a distance while remaining

278
00:22:12,110 --> 00:22:14,170
restrained when viewed closer to the site.

279
00:22:14,510 --> 00:22:18,370
So overall, the design concentrates the height where it has the least impact

280
00:22:18,370 --> 00:22:23,730
while creating a lower-scale street edge, a renewed home for the Carlton tavern, and a substantial

281
00:22:23,730 --> 00:22:26,650
new public space at the heart of the block. Thank you for that.

282
00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:36,620
The presentation from the applicant, do any members have questions of the applicant? I know I have a couple

283
00:22:38,890 --> 00:22:40,590
questions of the applicant.

284
00:22:41,430 --> 00:22:45,250
There are there are public delegations. Yep. They get their five minutes.

285
00:22:46,250 --> 00:22:50,790
Sorry, Chair, do we get to ask you get to ask the applicant's questions? Only now.

286
00:22:51,530 --> 00:22:58,370
Yep. And thank you. That's why I want to go first or last. Okay. Well, I guess in that case.

287
00:22:58,370 --> 00:23:07,570
There was a move by the chair saying that there was an opportunity to move this and we were given a perception that it was okay.

288
00:23:08,330 --> 00:23:14,470
Last night we were updated that there is a major concern with timelines and construction.

289
00:23:15,650 --> 00:23:18,650
Were you consulted by the chair on this?

290
00:23:19,270 --> 00:23:20,690
Because in what's your position?

291
00:23:24,150 --> 00:23:26,530
I can answer that through your chair.

292
00:23:26,890 --> 00:23:30,590
We have contractual obligations with the previous landowner.

293
00:23:30,590 --> 00:23:35,010
If I can just speak a little closer, we have contractual obligations with the previous

294
00:23:35,010 --> 00:23:39,890
landowner where we purchase a site from, that we need to move this planning process along

295
00:23:39,890 --> 00:23:46,570
by a certain time. We did originally we're okay with the potential will you deferring the site

296
00:23:46,570 --> 00:23:52,570
but or the hearing today, but knowing that we're going into election and that there's only one,

297
00:23:52,590 --> 00:23:56,270
maybe two more committee meetings coming up. We were very concerned that we could get

298
00:23:56,270 --> 00:23:58,870
delete further and we just can't have that happen.

299
00:23:59,130 --> 00:24:01,090
I would put us off side with our contracts.

300
00:24:02,350 --> 00:24:03,990
Okay, and what kind of time frame

301
00:24:03,990 --> 00:24:05,710
and I'll go to city staff later on

302
00:24:05,710 --> 00:24:08,730
gets the staff component because apparently we can get back to you.

303
00:24:09,750 --> 00:24:11,650
So during this process.

304
00:24:12,810 --> 00:24:16,830
So what is, what is going to,

305
00:24:16,830 --> 00:24:20,490
what is the threshold, I work in 30 days.

306
00:24:20,510 --> 00:24:21,950
That's how most people work.

307
00:24:22,790 --> 00:24:25,390
This is the only mandated committee

308
00:24:25,390 --> 00:24:31,990
that's required to meet during the election period and usually typically happens two weeks.

309
00:24:32,230 --> 00:24:35,750
So I'm trying to understand how there's so much confusion here.

310
00:24:35,830 --> 00:24:39,770
If you know what meets every two weeks and originally you're okay with it on a delay,

311
00:24:40,490 --> 00:24:45,670
what is the concern that is the chair of committing to every two weeks of planning committee meetings?

312
00:24:45,790 --> 00:24:49,010
Like I'm just trying to balance this out here because I'm having a disconnect.

313
00:24:49,810 --> 00:24:53,110
Sure. I mean, through your chair, the next meeting is canceled.

314
00:24:53,110 --> 00:25:22,670
So the next one would be October 7th, and that's, you know, a week or so before the election. And so we, we were just concerned that it might, so it would actually work over a 30 day cycle over 30 days. Okay, fair enough. Okay, so I'm glad the confusion was resolved because I, this was going to be a super quick meeting today with the deferral. And I just want to make sure we have all the facts in the table. So thanks for coming out today. Thank you very much, Councillor Turner. Councilor Troster. Thank you so much chair.

315
00:25:22,670 --> 00:25:27,850
I understand their significant contamination on the site and that part of this development is committing to

316
00:25:28,750 --> 00:25:30,910
decontamination. I just wonder if you could speak to that.

317
00:25:33,370 --> 00:25:38,470
Yes, we are undergoing a risk assessment process with the MSEP to address the contamination on site.

318
00:25:38,750 --> 00:25:44,570
It's ongoing and it's a several year process. We've been through it for over a year now already.

319
00:25:45,330 --> 00:25:49,950
So it is ongoing and we will continue to provide more updates to staff during the site plan process.

320
00:25:50,750 --> 00:25:54,130
But we plan to address the contamination on site through this project.

321
00:25:54,370 --> 00:25:56,310
Distended curiosity, what was the source?

322
00:25:58,370 --> 00:26:08,710
Through your chair, I'm not able to speak to the exact source or cause of the contamination, but we will be addressing it through our environmental approval process.

323
00:26:09,530 --> 00:26:10,590
Okay, thank you very much.

324
00:26:10,950 --> 00:26:16,370
I can just say the previous industrial use, some of the post-war manufacturing.

325
00:26:17,630 --> 00:26:23,390
their environmental practices were we're not good. Honeywell was the last owner of the site

326
00:26:23,390 --> 00:26:29,190
before the most recent owner they still have an obligation I believe to to clean up the site

327
00:26:29,190 --> 00:26:33,390
but you'll be taking that on when or sorry I guess you have that have taken that on.

328
00:26:33,910 --> 00:26:39,890
There is a big trailer that says believe it's black it's got the writing on it and that has been

329
00:26:39,890 --> 00:26:45,330
slowly sucking some of the stuff out but this is it would take decades to finish this is the

330
00:26:45,330 --> 00:26:48,750
this is our opportunity to get that finally cleaned up.

331
00:26:49,110 --> 00:26:50,530
Councillor Currie.

332
00:26:51,810 --> 00:26:52,550
Thank you, Mr. Chair.

333
00:26:53,030 --> 00:26:55,030
So I'm sympathetic to the community

334
00:26:55,030 --> 00:26:58,390
that would probably like more time on this.

335
00:26:59,030 --> 00:27:00,370
With our accelerated timelines,

336
00:27:00,830 --> 00:27:02,150
it has been very quick.

337
00:27:02,410 --> 00:27:03,390
Something comes forward,

338
00:27:03,610 --> 00:27:05,970
and the community has very little time to react.

339
00:27:06,410 --> 00:27:08,470
I'm just wondering what other opportunities

340
00:27:08,470 --> 00:27:13,210
have the community had to look at this

341
00:27:13,210 --> 00:27:18,810
or weigh in or, you know, I'm just wondering about how this has gone prior to us getting here.

342
00:27:24,540 --> 00:27:25,920
I guess question for you.

343
00:27:26,160 --> 00:27:29,240
What has been your consultation on this one?

344
00:27:29,740 --> 00:27:31,100
I can speak to that chair.

345
00:27:31,200 --> 00:27:33,880
We've had multiple public consultations.

346
00:27:35,360 --> 00:27:37,260
And with the community association,

347
00:27:37,540 --> 00:27:41,820
we've had back and forth feedback with through staff on comments from the community.

348
00:27:42,440 --> 00:27:44,780
So we've done all of the mandatory reviews.

349
00:27:45,780 --> 00:27:46,840
I don't know where if you want to.

350
00:27:47,700 --> 00:27:50,920
Yeah, I'm happy to add to that through you chair.

351
00:27:51,360 --> 00:27:53,040
We've been at this for two and a half years.

352
00:27:53,640 --> 00:27:57,240
That entire two and a half years hasn't been, you know, public facing.

353
00:27:58,140 --> 00:28:01,460
But the project has been ongoing for that amount of time.

354
00:28:02,120 --> 00:28:06,480
In terms of the work that's gone into through consultation with the public,

355
00:28:06,900 --> 00:28:08,980
we have done two trips to the UDRP.

356
00:28:09,240 --> 00:28:15,900
We had a public meeting back in February of this year.

357
00:28:15,900 --> 00:28:21,280
Again, not required under the Planning Act, but of course we wanted to provide the community opportunity to

358
00:28:21,280 --> 00:28:23,520
understand the project better as we're moving forward.

359
00:28:25,100 --> 00:28:30,500
And as part of all that effort, obviously, we've made some rather significant changes to the project,

360
00:28:30,500 --> 00:28:36,580
understanding and hearing the comments from a variety of different sources,

361
00:28:36,740 --> 00:28:40,000
B at UDRP, city staff, city heritage staff, the community.

362
00:28:41,420 --> 00:28:45,560
Okay, thanks for just given that there were changes though, because I'm looking at a filing cannot.

363
00:28:45,560 --> 00:28:48,880
us almost the same thing. We're then they were chained not almost the same thing. You kidding me,

364
00:28:48,920 --> 00:28:52,960
I'd love to have this one in my ward. But because it's beautiful, but this one that's in

365
00:28:52,960 --> 00:28:57,160
Canada, the changes were made. And then the final one, well, the community will have very little

366
00:28:57,160 --> 00:29:03,160
time to react to the very final changes. Has there been consultation based on like pretty much

367
00:29:03,160 --> 00:29:10,800
what we're looking at today? Through you, Chair. What was what has been in front of the community

368
00:29:10,800 --> 00:29:18,800
for maybe three, three quarters of a year now was a 38-story tower with a nine-story podium.

369
00:29:19,240 --> 00:29:23,580
The actual layout of this site still remains the same.

370
00:29:23,980 --> 00:29:29,340
So the only change that was made, you know, approximately a month and a half ago was a

371
00:29:29,340 --> 00:29:32,600
reduction in tower height, a reduction in podium height.

372
00:29:33,340 --> 00:29:38,260
So both very positive changes in terms of responding to comments received to date.

373
00:29:38,260 --> 00:29:46,140
in terms of timelines, you know, for notification, I would defer to staff for that, but I'm

374
00:29:46,140 --> 00:29:52,290
confident those have certainly been that. I don't know staff have a comment, but I think I've

375
00:29:52,290 --> 00:29:56,570
gotten the answer. I want, but I don't know, generally, if you would like any more clarity on that from

376
00:29:56,570 --> 00:29:56,950
anyone there.

377
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:08,120
I know I have some questions for staff regarding the timelines at that point in the debate.

378
00:30:09,220 --> 00:30:16,320
The community has had its statutory six days to look at the report recommending approval of this.

379
00:30:16,320 --> 00:30:21,300
It's really five and a half days, because that came out last Thursday at 2 o'clock.

380
00:30:21,860 --> 00:30:28,560
And I'm disappointed that we couldn't get a consensus around deferring this for another month, but there it is.

381
00:30:28,560 --> 00:30:32,000
So I'll have some more questions about that when we get to the point where we speak in the staff.

382
00:30:32,200 --> 00:30:33,120
Okay, they're away.

383
00:30:34,060 --> 00:30:38,780
Thank you. I don't see any of the questions from other members. So I'll ask, uh, post my own,

384
00:30:39,380 --> 00:30:44,420
the first of which I have heard and agree with a lot of the community concern around the 0.7

385
00:30:44,420 --> 00:30:50,700
parking ratio. I think two weeks ago we were talking about a zero parking building. This one is a

386
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:57,480
0.7, which is actually I think many people feel too high. Hundreds of parking spaces on a very congested

387
00:30:57,480 --> 00:31:08,600
street. We can't impose a cap on you. Our official plan doesn't require any parking in nor does it put in place or you are not bust you know, our maximums.

388
00:31:09,080 --> 00:31:22,880
But why so much parking and is there the possibility as you go through the site plan process, which will presumably be within New Councilor, for turning some of that parking into public parking?

389
00:31:25,200 --> 00:31:40,060
To you, Chair, in terms of the parking ratio 0.7, there's obviously market conditions which lead to that number coming up. Lots of studies go and support behind that.

390
00:31:40,060 --> 00:31:45,920
The reality is a fair amount of excavation needs to take place on the site to deal with the contamination.

391
00:31:46,640 --> 00:31:54,440
This is a requirement through the province, and then the replacement of that below grade four stories will call it.

392
00:31:55,020 --> 00:31:58,120
There are restrictions for what that actually gets used for.

393
00:31:58,300 --> 00:32:06,180
Sensitive land uses would be one that is not viable, so that really leads a rather limited use,

394
00:32:06,180 --> 00:32:13,620
which in this case is going to be parking for both bicycles and vehicles, in terms of, you

395
00:32:13,620 --> 00:32:21,380
know, the, the modal share that our TIA looked at, we're anticipating probably about 67-70%

396
00:32:21,380 --> 00:32:27,740
of mode shared to be by transit, bicycle, and walking. So a rather low share will actually

397
00:32:27,740 --> 00:32:35,040
be allocated towards vehicles and how that relates back to parking, but in terms of the opportunity

398
00:32:35,040 --> 00:32:41,520
for allocating spaces to public parking. We absolutely left the door open for that as part of

399
00:32:41,520 --> 00:32:48,780
the zoning. We have that as a permitted use public parking and there has been interest expressed

400
00:32:48,780 --> 00:32:54,880
by the city for that given that location and of course this is something that will be worked out

401
00:32:54,880 --> 00:33:00,660
in further detail as part of future site plan as you know we're not anywhere near the maximum

402
00:33:00,660 --> 00:33:10,000
permitted parking. We're well below that so it's really a little relevance at this stage but we'll be certainly looked at again at site plan.

403
00:33:10,280 --> 00:33:13,620
Okay, that'll be a discussion for the for the next term of council.

404
00:33:15,020 --> 00:33:20,740
The second one is I share the communities concerned around entry egress on to Spencer.

405
00:33:22,020 --> 00:33:27,160
That's not a decision that we're making today that will finally be decided when this goes through the site plan process.

406
00:33:27,160 --> 00:33:37,640
I just want to make sure, though, that we are not doing anything in the zoning that would preclude a Hamilton entry egress for vehicles and garbage management.

407
00:33:39,320 --> 00:33:41,160
Yes, through you chair, you're right.

408
00:33:41,660 --> 00:33:49,240
We are not doing anything through the zoning, which would restrict the location of that access to the underground parking.

409
00:33:50,460 --> 00:33:53,820
just for a bit of background in terms of the actual location.

410
00:33:55,400 --> 00:33:57,100
This was something that, you know,

411
00:33:57,420 --> 00:34:00,120
the two logical locations would have been Hamilton or Spencer,

412
00:34:00,940 --> 00:34:02,960
given the relationship to Armstrong and Parkdale.

413
00:34:04,040 --> 00:34:06,720
During the early discussions with city staff,

414
00:34:07,500 --> 00:34:11,380
there was a strong preference for Spencer,

415
00:34:11,680 --> 00:34:14,020
given the Heritage Building at seven hinting.

416
00:34:14,620 --> 00:34:18,300
So that location both serves the separation

417
00:34:18,300 --> 00:34:23,680
from the heritage building, but it also provides for a slightly larger separation between the

418
00:34:23,680 --> 00:34:29,700
two nearest intersections along Spencer. Okay, but that's the decision that will need to be

419
00:34:29,700 --> 00:34:37,740
made finally through the site plan process. And finally, I'm I'm quite intrigued by the the

420
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:43,640
Wunner concept for Armstrong. I know that it is controversial and that there would be

421
00:34:43,640 --> 00:34:45,840
position to wound up for example.

422
00:34:47,100 --> 00:34:52,960
But that'll be a discussion that needs to be had through the site plan discussion.

423
00:34:53,860 --> 00:34:59,640
But it is not up to target obviously to determine whether or not Armstrong gets wounder

424
00:34:59,640 --> 00:35:02,560
or the configuration of it change.

425
00:35:03,080 --> 00:35:06,240
I just want to make sure, because this will be an interesting discussion, and again, the

426
00:35:06,240 --> 00:35:13,620
next councilor will have through future discussions, is there, if the city determines the

427
00:35:13,620 --> 00:35:22,780
not to win or for reconfigure Armstrong to tie in with the market and with your privately owned public space.

428
00:35:23,820 --> 00:35:28,500
Is it still your intention to proceed with the configuration of the privately owned public space that you proposed?

429
00:35:30,060 --> 00:35:38,880
Yes, and short it is, and the configuration is also going to be regulated through the zoning amendment.

430
00:35:38,880 --> 00:35:46,780
So that will provide the certainty that that space is going to be what you're seeing today,

431
00:35:47,540 --> 00:35:49,360
as part of the future site plan process.

432
00:35:50,380 --> 00:35:51,240
And you are correct.

433
00:35:51,340 --> 00:35:57,160
I mean, it's really, whether that becomes one or if or not is a matter outside of Tiger's control.

434
00:35:58,360 --> 00:36:02,080
There has been some confusion throughout the application process on that,

435
00:36:02,340 --> 00:36:08,020
as we've shown some images of what could be possible if that were to take place.

436
00:36:08,020 --> 00:36:11,440
But again, ultimately, that's city land, it's a city decision.

437
00:36:12,260 --> 00:36:20,860
Tiggered is simply wanting to make clear that they are open to that discussion if the city is interested in doing that.

438
00:36:22,740 --> 00:36:28,520
So again, that's the next term of council discussion probably, but I'm intrigued by it.

439
00:36:29,140 --> 00:36:36,160
But the private loan public space, you know, will be there, whether it ties into a reconfigured armstrong or not.

440
00:36:36,160 --> 00:36:39,080
I don't see Parkland dedication on this one.

441
00:36:39,180 --> 00:36:41,940
Is it going to be a cash in the year of Parkland?

442
00:36:42,160 --> 00:36:47,680
Yes, through YouTube, cash in the middle of Parkland will be provided, and, you know, it's

443
00:36:47,680 --> 00:36:50,980
additional to the, the, the pops being added on site.

444
00:36:52,340 --> 00:36:53,440
Those are my questions.

445
00:36:53,700 --> 00:36:56,960
Today I want to ask any further questions to the applicant.

446
00:36:57,940 --> 00:36:57,960
No.

447
00:36:58,460 --> 00:36:58,780
Okay.

448
00:36:58,840 --> 00:36:59,840
Thank you very much for your time.

449
00:37:08,570 --> 00:37:11,410
So we'll move to other public delegations.

450
00:37:11,410 --> 00:37:16,810
the first of whom is John Fraser. We'll pull up John's slides and John

451
00:37:16,810 --> 00:37:17,750
I understand you're in the room.

452
00:37:42,210 --> 00:37:51,870
Good morning, Mr. Fraser. If you just want to hit the button on your mic to turn that on, we have your slides ready to go whenever you're ready. You'll have five minutes to make a presentation to committee.

453
00:37:57,500 --> 00:38:05,460
Okay. Thank you. I'm afraid my hearing aids have got a wicked echo in this room. So I'll do my best.

454
00:38:06,540 --> 00:38:14,500
Okay. Thank you very much. I see there's no doomsday clock running here for five minutes, so I'll time it as best I can.

455
00:38:15,760 --> 00:38:22,880
I'll be brief, skipping many of the sides I submitted in my hard coffee submission.

456
00:38:24,520 --> 00:38:35,680
And my basic proposal is that I'm afraid this new building is in the wrong size, the wrong location, and the wrong timing.

457
00:38:36,540 --> 00:38:45,960
We live in Parkdale Market Laws across a narrow section of Spencer Street and a funny

458
00:38:45,960 --> 00:38:46,380
thing.

459
00:38:46,820 --> 00:38:51,020
I don't believe there's been any mention of Parkdale Market Laws in the notice of meeting

460
00:38:51,020 --> 00:38:56,700
where as the Curlton Tavern gets mentioned 33 times.

461
00:38:58,200 --> 00:38:59,100
Slide 3, please.

462
00:39:05,910 --> 00:39:10,310
So, how do I explain to my grandkids that we won't be able to go on in the patio

463
00:39:10,310 --> 00:39:18,710
our building and watch any more eclipses or any conjunction to the planets. However, I do think that

464
00:39:18,710 --> 00:39:21,030
the 18 stories is doable.

465
00:39:23,800 --> 00:39:31,540
Slide 4. This is a forever decision. Past committees have made

466
00:39:31,540 --> 00:39:41,920
some decisions that are bit lacking, turning up the trackstone town. King Edward Avenue used to be

467
00:39:42,920 --> 00:39:59,850
building an arena that lands down park that's smaller than the original one. You need three trains to get down town from the airport on the LRT. Slide 6.

468
00:40:07,400 --> 00:40:07,860
Sorry.

469
00:40:11,180 --> 00:40:17,680
Okay. This approval will set a precedent to turn the area into a shall I say

470
00:40:17,680 --> 00:40:19,800
concrete canyon that we have downtown?

471
00:40:23,280 --> 00:40:25,560
Is that slide five or six?

472
00:40:28,830 --> 00:40:32,130
Yes. We do respect to Starbucks.

473
00:40:33,030 --> 00:40:38,570
We do not want Hintonburg to end up looking like that because this could be easily be seen

474
00:40:38,570 --> 00:40:48,550
as a president to build on many of the existing houses and the wire cloth building.

475
00:40:51,630 --> 00:40:52,990
Slide 9,

476
00:40:57,060 --> 00:41:01,360
the timing is wrong, as shown by a number of recent newspaper headlines that

477
00:41:01,360 --> 00:41:02,180
I've submitted.

478
00:41:04,420 --> 00:41:08,660
This one says the Ottawa market is already saturated.

479
00:41:10,480 --> 00:41:20,500
The mayor has said, and headlines, that there's tough financial times for the city, and the current international situation is not helping.

480
00:41:22,340 --> 00:41:31,740
Another newspaper clipping recently, a developer has hundreds of vacancies and three-free months rent as being offered.

481
00:41:33,020 --> 00:41:39,820
And last but not least, do not follow the example of Toronto where the market has hit bottom.

482
00:41:42,660 --> 00:41:43,380
Slide 14,

483
00:41:48,790 --> 00:41:51,370
this is the Parkdale Market.

484
00:41:52,950 --> 00:41:57,330
The tower and the existing and the proposed building will overwhelm the market.

485
00:41:59,370 --> 00:42:06,950
And will likely go a long way to killing the ambience of the area.

486
00:42:07,610 --> 00:42:10,910
The Parkdale Market is a messy, but it works,

487
00:42:15,300 --> 00:42:17,860
and now I'd like to go to the next slide.

488
00:42:21,340 --> 00:42:22,380
Okay, Spencer Street.

489
00:42:23,980 --> 00:42:25,560
John, get to one minute, sorry.

490
00:42:26,480 --> 00:42:27,480
You've got one minute.

491
00:42:27,940 --> 00:42:28,860
Thank you.

492
00:42:29,240 --> 00:42:33,980
Spencer's seven feet narrow in the front and front of the proposed tower in Parkdale Market laws.

493
00:42:41,320 --> 00:42:45,680
This, this with does not allow a safe access by construction vehicles,

494
00:42:45,680 --> 00:42:50,980
as well as the vehicles needed to access part-tale market laws, and so we're a meter to

495
00:42:50,980 --> 00:42:58,240
narrow. Details are in the submitted PowerPoint material. Does not meet the city requirements.

496
00:43:01,150 --> 00:43:01,910
Slide 17.

497
00:43:04,790 --> 00:43:10,610
Any official notices in error? Location maps such as the one on page 30 do not show

498
00:43:10,610 --> 00:43:16,230
Spencer being seven feet narrow in front of the proposed building. Slide 18.

499
00:43:17,010 --> 00:43:25,070
John, I'm sorry, you are a time. I'll need to ask you to wrap up. You are at a time. I'll need to ask you to wrap up with just a concluding thought.

500
00:43:25,470 --> 00:43:32,250
Okay. We will put the city on notice that it will hold responsibility for any damages.

501
00:43:33,090 --> 00:43:39,890
Any delays in emergency responder access to in case of accidents fire.

502
00:43:40,490 --> 00:43:44,030
A hidden bird visitor is better planning, I'll ensure them by this proposal.

503
00:43:44,830 --> 00:43:45,530
Thank you.

504
00:43:48,350 --> 00:43:52,990
Mr. Fraser, thank you very much. I don't see any questions for you from the members of the committee.

505
00:43:53,470 --> 00:43:53,930
Thanks for your time.

506
00:43:55,010 --> 00:44:02,390
We'll move on to Brian Innis, who is in the room who will be followed by Vivienne K after Brian.

507
00:44:14,660 --> 00:44:15,780
Good morning, Mr. Innis.

508
00:44:16,200 --> 00:44:18,640
Whenever you're ready, a five minutes to make a presentation of the committee.

509
00:44:20,200 --> 00:44:24,080
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the opportunity to present

510
00:44:24,080 --> 00:44:30,340
to you today. My name is Brian Innis. I live 400 meters from the site. I've been a past president

511
00:44:30,340 --> 00:44:35,780
of our Community Association and now I am candidate for Councillor. I'm here today to

512
00:44:35,780 --> 00:44:42,420
share with you how this proposal impacts people who live in and around Parkdale Park. But I think

513
00:44:42,420 --> 00:44:48,580
it's important to first recognize why we're here today. While you are interested to make decisions

514
00:44:48,580 --> 00:44:56,160
on staff recommendations. We're here because what gets built impacts people's lives.

515
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:10,160
Officials. And why are you entrusted with this power? I see that you hear people every day. I see that you're

516
00:45:10,160 --> 00:45:17,020
accountable to those who elect you, and the decisions you make reflect what people vote for or you

517
00:45:17,020 --> 00:45:25,720
are not here. That is very powerful. You're entrusted with the power to make important decisions on planning and zoning.

518
00:45:25,720 --> 00:45:33,540
And today, it's a decision that means that 32 stories is better for people than 18 stories.

519
00:45:35,140 --> 00:45:36,360
So why am I here?

520
00:45:37,180 --> 00:45:39,560
I'm here because I live near the site.

521
00:45:40,380 --> 00:45:44,080
I've played in the sand with my kids, meters from where this tower will be.

522
00:45:44,560 --> 00:45:47,120
I've walked, I've cycle, I've driven on the streets around.

523
00:45:47,580 --> 00:45:54,220
And as a candidate, I've spoken to hundreds of people who use the area who live in the area and will be affected.

524
00:45:55,260 --> 00:45:58,880
So I'm here to bring their voices to you today.

525
00:46:00,420 --> 00:46:03,900
So what am I hearing about this development and how it will impact the neighborhood?

526
00:46:05,200 --> 00:46:07,120
First people want this block developed.

527
00:46:07,520 --> 00:46:11,020
They support building more homes and they also support more intensity.

528
00:46:12,080 --> 00:46:20,220
What they don't support is the size of the tower and how the precedence and design will impact the neighborhood and their lives.

529
00:46:20,920 --> 00:46:30,840
Of the hundreds of people I've spoken to in recent weeks, I've only spoken to one, one person who's in support of this proposal.

530
00:46:31,980 --> 00:46:38,220
It's actually consistent with your staff report, where 93% of respondents are opposed to it.

531
00:46:39,440 --> 00:46:42,880
I want to highlight three things that keep coming up in my conversations.

532
00:46:42,880 --> 00:46:55,820
The first is that the height and scale of this tower is too much for the area, and it does not transition gradually as required by the official plan.

533
00:46:56,980 --> 00:47:04,680
The staff report says 32 stories meets the official plan requirement for height to gradually transition.

534
00:47:06,160 --> 00:47:15,260
Well, we'll see that transition eight stories over 400 meters in the hub, and then it's going to transition 26 stories over 100 meters.

535
00:47:16,380 --> 00:47:24,740
And I don't know about you, but 26 stories over 100 meters seems more like a black diamond ski hill than a gradual transition.

536
00:47:26,340 --> 00:47:31,800
Secondly, the entrances and services on Spencer are misplaced and will create challenges.

537
00:47:32,920 --> 00:47:37,420
Earlier this week I spoke with Claudia who shared what it's like to drive on this street in the winter.

538
00:47:37,880 --> 00:47:50,120
It's already very congested and putting 300 more cars onto that street from the egress plus deliveries will mean a significant amount of congestion and create safety hazards.

539
00:47:51,640 --> 00:47:58,360
Third, a development of this size needs to have a mix of units to meet the needs of people

540
00:47:58,360 --> 00:47:59,780
in various stages of life.

541
00:47:59,820 --> 00:48:02,900
I want to share with you a conversation I had just last weekend.

542
00:48:03,600 --> 00:48:07,020
I was speaking with a mother who was actually visiting her mother and they both live in

543
00:48:07,020 --> 00:48:11,780
the area and she said, you know, my mom is not going to be able to stay in her house much

544
00:48:11,780 --> 00:48:12,260
longer.

545
00:48:12,780 --> 00:48:16,160
She's going to need a place that doesn't have upkeep where will she move to?

546
00:48:16,160 --> 00:48:22,320
Well, these new buildings provide space for my mom to move into, and she confessed that her mom

547
00:48:22,320 --> 00:48:28,460
will need more than a one-bedroom unit. And we've heard today that only 5% of units will be

548
00:48:28,460 --> 00:48:37,740
three bedrooms. 5%. That doesn't meet the needs of the community to have a variety of unit sizes

549
00:48:37,740 --> 00:48:46,140
for people in various stages of life, whether they're 20 or whether they're looking to move out of

550
00:48:47,550 --> 00:48:54,250
I urge you to vote against this proposal and hear the voices of people that I've heard.

551
00:48:55,150 --> 00:48:58,650
It will set a precedent for the neighborhood and ultimately what it becomes.

552
00:48:59,050 --> 00:49:02,750
You're entrusted with power. Use it.

553
00:49:02,850 --> 00:49:06,650
Use it to push back on the scale and height it parked ill park.

554
00:49:07,270 --> 00:49:12,590
And challenge staff on what gradual transition really means.

555
00:49:13,710 --> 00:49:18,690
Use it to ensure residents' concerns on the entrance and unit mixer or her, and of course

556
00:49:18,690 --> 00:49:21,990
they're going to be decided in the site plan, but today's an important opportunity.

557
00:49:22,950 --> 00:49:28,490
And lastly, use your power to make development work for people who live here.

558
00:49:29,530 --> 00:49:30,110
Thank you.

559
00:49:31,920 --> 00:49:33,240
Thank you very much, Mr. Ernest.

560
00:49:33,440 --> 00:49:35,560
I don't see any questions for you from members.

561
00:49:35,860 --> 00:49:36,940
Thanks for making the presentation.

562
00:49:38,060 --> 00:49:42,820
We will move on to Vivian K, who I understand is in the room.

563
00:49:44,930 --> 00:49:49,830
Good morning and then that will be followed by a representative of the social services

564
00:49:49,830 --> 00:49:52,650
users union who is online.

565
00:49:52,810 --> 00:49:55,330
So we'll make sure those slides are ready to go

566
00:49:59,620 --> 00:50:01,320
and good morning is K when every

567
00:50:01,320 --> 00:50:03,900
you're ready to have five minutes to make a presentation to the committee.

568
00:50:10,390 --> 00:50:11,070
Good morning.

569
00:50:11,290 --> 00:50:14,750
I apologize for speed reading given that I only have five minutes.

570
00:50:14,910 --> 00:50:16,830
So good morning chair and members of the committee.

571
00:50:16,850 --> 00:50:20,950
My name is Vivian K. I'm a resident and member of the Board of Directors at Parkdale Market

572
00:50:20,950 --> 00:50:24,530
lofts at 320 Parkdale Avenue and 45 Spencer Street.

573
00:50:25,210 --> 00:50:27,610
55 homes immediately north of the site.

574
00:50:27,970 --> 00:50:29,730
I'm speaking on behalf of those residents.

575
00:50:30,190 --> 00:50:31,870
We are not opposed to growth.

576
00:50:32,410 --> 00:50:35,130
Growth is expected, but good planning is required.

577
00:50:35,570 --> 00:50:37,990
We do not believe what is being presented to you today

578
00:50:37,990 --> 00:50:40,510
is good planning for the Hittenberg community.

579
00:50:41,250 --> 00:50:42,330
Let me show you why.

580
00:50:42,770 --> 00:50:43,750
Can I have my slide, please?

581
00:50:45,810 --> 00:50:48,750
The big picture, the slide on your screen,

582
00:50:48,810 --> 00:50:50,690
shows recent approved and proposed development

583
00:50:50,690 --> 00:50:58,150
within the Tony's pastures hub. 11,671 dwelling units or roughly 17,600 new residents.

584
00:50:58,650 --> 00:51:04,250
The Tony's pastures master plan alone will add 9,000 units with 5,000 units first phase

585
00:51:04,250 --> 00:51:09,450
by 2038. Consent-traded closest to the transportation and in buildings ranging in height

586
00:51:09,450 --> 00:51:15,670
from 21 to 40 stories. Hitler today is about 8,700 people. This represents a threefold population

587
00:51:15,670 --> 00:51:20,010
increase. Clearly this area is absorbing an extraordinary amount of growth.

588
00:51:20,690 --> 00:51:40,370
Notice also how the height stepped down across the hub, 40 stories at the station, 28 to 40 on Scott Street and the East Side of Parkdale, North of Scott, 25 stories at Holland Cross and 16 at Wellington and Parkdale, the southern edge of the hub, and in between in the middle of the low to mid-rise neighborhood, close 32 stories.

589
00:51:40,370 --> 00:51:42,130
That is our concern.

590
00:51:42,330 --> 00:51:47,230
We recognize that intensification and proximity to rapid transit is appropriate, however, it should

591
00:51:47,230 --> 00:51:51,650
not mean that every site must be pushed to the maximum height and density possible.

592
00:51:52,270 --> 00:51:55,910
The official plan is meant to guide growth and not simply accommodate it.

593
00:51:56,190 --> 00:52:00,450
This is precisely why the official plan contains policies covering governing or appropriate

594
00:52:00,450 --> 00:52:05,010
height transition urban design and the relationship between major developments and the

595
00:52:05,010 --> 00:52:06,330
neighborhood around them.

596
00:52:06,750 --> 00:52:10,350
Now that we've seen the staff report, we recognize that the justification for the third

597
00:52:10,350 --> 00:52:15,250
two stories has nothing to do with the city's planning policies but rather as a density transfer

598
00:52:15,250 --> 00:52:18,210
to accommodate the retention of the reimagined Carlton tower.

599
00:52:18,890 --> 00:52:23,870
So to the community is saying disregard perhaps the better term is interpret the official

600
00:52:23,870 --> 00:52:26,870
plan and secondary plan to justify the 32 stories.

601
00:52:30,000 --> 00:52:52,200
Many years in developing these plans, and putting their trust in city council to adhere to them. What is before you today for other erodes this trust? The critical planning question before you was asked of Steve Stath by the Westboro Community Organization. How much density is appropriate and how tall is too tall within this context? This being the significant future growth projected for the tundish pasture.

602
00:52:52,200 --> 00:52:58,040
up. Unfortunately, the staff response did not address this key issue. In the context of this

603
00:52:58,040 --> 00:53:02,660
bigger picture, we are asking the committee to address five matters, one heightened massing.

604
00:53:02,860 --> 00:53:07,160
The official plan directs that the highest density be closest to the rapid transestations

605
00:53:07,160 --> 00:53:11,540
and stays that with respect to high-rise buildings that their height shall be lowest at the

606
00:53:11,540 --> 00:53:17,360
outer edge of the hub and tallest at the center of the hub, which is the LRT station. A 32-story

607
00:53:17,360 --> 00:53:21,620
tower in the middle of a low-to-mid-rise neighborhood does not comply with this direction.

608
00:53:21,620 --> 00:53:34,660
We asked that it be reduced to 25 stories and we would suggest that the same policies and directions from the official plan a zoning by law used to support the proposed 30 suit stories would instead be used to support this reduced height.

609
00:53:35,360 --> 00:53:39,940
This application requires amendments to the official plan the secondary plan and the zoning by law.

610
00:53:40,120 --> 00:53:41,500
These are significant amendments.

611
00:53:42,520 --> 00:53:48,180
And they require compelling planning justification, which in our opinion has not been provided to parking.

612
00:53:48,180 --> 00:53:54,760
At 0.71 per unit parking spaces, this proposal has the highest parking ratio of any recent

613
00:53:54,760 --> 00:53:57,220
approved or proposed development in the hub.

614
00:53:57,740 --> 00:54:04,200
Large amounts of parking encourages automobile use and adds to traffic to already significantly

615
00:54:04,200 --> 00:54:05,460
congested local streets.

616
00:54:06,080 --> 00:54:11,180
If the city grants additional density because the site is transit oriented, the building itself

617
00:54:11,180 --> 00:54:13,020
should actually be transit oriented.

618
00:54:13,020 --> 00:54:20,340
Section 414 of the Official Plan provides the city with the authority needed to reduce the amount of parking proposed.

619
00:54:21,200 --> 00:54:27,860
Transition and design has been spoken to. We are asking for a change to setback stepbacks in the tower floor plate.

620
00:54:28,900 --> 00:54:33,940
To reduce the impact of the neighborhood services, Spencer is a narrow short local residential street.

621
00:54:34,080 --> 00:54:40,420
We feel that moving the main access to Hamilton Avenue would be much better because

622
00:54:40,420 --> 00:54:46,380
the traffic studies are out of date and there are, there's already large congestion on

623
00:54:46,380 --> 00:54:52,340
Spencer Street. There is a large amount of pedestrian traffic cycling, a narrow street,

624
00:54:53,260 --> 00:54:59,240
and then we just feel that adding all of the activities will severely impede that narrow

625
00:54:59,240 --> 00:55:04,780
short congested lock. We asked that the transportation impact assessment, which is based on

626
00:55:04,780 --> 00:55:12,140
of data traffic counts and questionable transit mode share assumptions be updated if the inputs

627
00:55:12,140 --> 00:55:18,360
inputs are unreliable then the conclusion cannot be relied upon either. We all know that

628
00:55:18,360 --> 00:55:23,200
partail is a failed street. In closing we ask that you reduce the height and massing, reduce the

629
00:55:23,200 --> 00:55:27,920
parking, improve the transition through setbacks and stepbacks. We locate the building's

630
00:55:27,920 --> 00:55:33,220
service activity, the Hamilton Avenue, fix the TIA. These are reasonable changes that was still

631
00:55:33,220 --> 00:55:37,940
allow substantial development on this site while producing a project which respects its

632
00:55:37,940 --> 00:55:42,140
neighborhood context and compiles with the city's own key planning policies.

633
00:55:42,920 --> 00:55:44,680
Thank you.

634
00:55:45,280 --> 00:55:48,220
Thank you for a very thoughtful presentation for you again.

635
00:55:49,280 --> 00:55:52,640
I don't see any questions from members.

636
00:55:53,400 --> 00:56:00,240
I am just interested to the one thing that I consider as well within the scope of this committee

637
00:56:00,240 --> 00:56:05,240
to do because there are a number of elements that are probably not given the planning process,

638
00:56:05,760 --> 00:56:11,720
but is the reduction in the height. It is, you know, within the the purview, I think

639
00:56:11,720 --> 00:56:20,620
of this committee to approve it at a lower height. What is the advantage of going from 32 to 25

640
00:56:20,620 --> 00:56:30,060
stories. I think also when now we were talking about changing the setback to, it's the

641
00:56:30,060 --> 00:56:38,580
shading on other buildings. It's the impact of daylight and just, I apologize for not being

642
00:56:38,580 --> 00:56:45,240
the expert. I'm the the delegate, but I believe it's just the impact on the local community.

643
00:56:45,240 --> 00:56:52,020
It's also that we feel that this proposed 32 stories now is like a sore thumb or a middle finger,

644
00:56:52,240 --> 00:56:54,840
if you will, sticking out in the middle of the Hampton-Burke community.

645
00:56:57,120 --> 00:57:02,200
Okay. I don't see any further questions for you. Thank you very much for the presentation.

646
00:57:02,900 --> 00:57:07,560
And we're going to move on to a representative of the social services users union,

647
00:57:07,660 --> 00:57:09,620
who is online and has a slide deck.

648
00:57:12,320 --> 00:57:14,300
Thank you. First slide.

649
00:57:17,660 --> 00:57:23,760
This is full in land and all decisions are this committee amount to active participation in settler colonialism by its members.

650
00:57:24,160 --> 00:57:24,940
Next slide.

651
00:57:26,100 --> 00:57:37,480
However, we proposed that in exchange for the city allowing a variance to build 30 stories or out of proposed 11 units per floor of the tower above the 8 story limit.

652
00:57:37,480 --> 00:58:07,460
330 units over the maximum build height. And that those 330 units have rents permanently zone as low income affordable on an Ontario works rental allowance for the intended occupancy of the unit units constructed with wheel chair accessible doorways as a minimum as well as some units having accessible counter pops and accommodating looking space for postpart bike parking only accounts for one bike per unit whereas many family units are likely to

653
00:58:07,460 --> 00:58:13,180
own more than a singular bike. This is anti-family, anti-feminist, as well as limiting the use of

654
00:58:13,180 --> 00:58:18,160
active green transportation. Credit and employment checks create additional barriers to housing

655
00:58:18,160 --> 00:58:23,480
all low-income rental units should not require credit or employment checks and their rent should

656
00:58:23,480 --> 00:58:31,780
not be subject to increase during or between tenancies. Next slide. According to an auto-emission report

657
00:58:31,780 --> 00:58:38,760
from 2025, homelessness has grown almost 3,000 people up 13% since 2021. However, that number

658
00:58:38,760 --> 00:58:47,860
may actually be much higher. Point and time count data from 2025 says 4,569. According to

659
00:58:47,860 --> 00:58:54,220
data from Maytrees designed to fail, the number of recipients of Ontario were experiencing homelessness

660
00:58:54,220 --> 00:59:05,840
has more than doubled in Ottawa, 1,526 in August 2019 and 3,258 in August 2025.

661
00:59:06,880 --> 00:59:11,200
A similar upward trend can be seen among recipients of ODSB experiencing homelessness from

662
00:59:12,440 --> 00:59:16,180
231 in 2019 to 410 in 2025.

663
00:59:17,280 --> 00:59:21,020
Employing these conditions to this and subsequent variants, applications were grappling

664
00:59:21,020 --> 00:59:25,580
need, auto is current and expanding housing needs, as well as reduced or eliminate the heavy

665
00:59:25,580 --> 00:59:31,100
reliance on subsidies as market rents continue to skyrocket from the alliance and auto

666
00:59:31,100 --> 00:59:40,360
a homelessness website, auto is projected to require, oh my god, 128, that was a 938 new housing

667
00:59:40,360 --> 00:59:42,220
units by 2035.

668
00:59:42,220 --> 00:59:52,160
If the report projects need for 3,150 units of affordable community housing, 350 supportive

669
00:59:52,160 --> 00:59:56,600
housing units, 200 transitional housing spaces and 7,000 housing allowance subsidies.

670
01:00:00,000 --> 01:00:21,320
And Lord and developer profits for an increase in affordable low income housing stocks as standard practice for planning and housing committee approval is a much more easily action than the creation of 7,000 subsidies, but would also serve to decrease market rents overall making housing more affordable for the average rent or potential home buyer next slide.

671
01:00:21,320 --> 01:00:47,900
And while development and real estate interests will likely see having to provide low income rentals as a potential financial loss of approximately a half million dollars per year even with the rent set at the otherwise insufficient Ontario work shelter allowance rate of 343 dollars for a single adult that is still more than a hundred thousand dollars in rental income that would be absent without the city allowing a variance.

672
01:00:47,900 --> 01:00:54,160
A negligible different for a group of companies with average annual revenue of half a billion dollars.

673
01:00:54,160 --> 01:01:00,840
Even if they are half-heartedly concealed behind a numbered shell or holding corporations or a consulting firm.

674
01:01:01,500 --> 01:01:06,820
Taggart not only appear in application materials such as the site location plan,

675
01:01:06,840 --> 01:01:17,380
but they own the majority of the land properties for the proposed development are likely to serve as developers through the construction branch

676
01:01:17,380 --> 01:01:18,920
their empire next slide.

677
01:01:21,320 --> 01:01:24,640
Normally one would expect this would create objections from the developer,

678
01:01:24,880 --> 01:01:28,000
but because Tiger has consistently demonstrated their commitment to supporting nonprofits

679
01:01:28,000 --> 01:01:31,740
and solving the housing homelessness crisis through the work of its charitable organization.

680
01:01:31,980 --> 01:01:35,880
There should be more than willing to extend back commitment by being contractually bound

681
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:39,380
to these conditions and exchange for high-limate variants on the province. Next slide.

682
01:01:39,840 --> 01:01:43,460
Partnerships with housing and housing services include the auto-emission,

683
01:01:43,620 --> 01:01:46,400
Shepers with Good Hope, Cornerstone Housing for Women, Youth Services Bureau,

684
01:01:46,400 --> 01:01:48,560
What community housing foundation in summer set was

685
01:01:49,840 --> 01:01:55,180
Kingston you shall ever as many many other charitable organizations including food banks will add upon by the population

686
01:01:55,180 --> 01:02:01,120
Increasing the force to choose between food and running funds next slide and while much consideration in discussion is taking place regarding

687
01:02:02,780 --> 01:02:07,340
Preservation of the Carlton's have run as the pillar of the community a this development will display

688
01:02:07,340 --> 01:02:12,160
So food security service vital to community in a new space for part-ale food centers should be provided at their currently

689
01:02:12,160 --> 01:02:15,860
amount as well as an alternate location during the demolition construction phase.

690
01:02:16,140 --> 01:02:19,940
There should be a non issue due to the current and past overlap between the members of the

691
01:02:19,940 --> 01:02:23,100
Taggart Park's Family Cartel and the Board of Directors for Parkdale Food Center.

692
01:02:24,040 --> 01:02:26,440
With Steve Parks, co-president of Tamara Combs and Tartan Homes,

693
01:02:26,540 --> 01:02:28,880
remaining on their board today, Parkdale Food Center,

694
01:02:29,020 --> 01:02:30,240
advertised as a partner.

695
01:02:30,760 --> 01:02:34,240
Good jump in, but I need to ask you to wrap up with a concluding thought, please.

696
01:02:34,780 --> 01:02:36,480
Yeah, okay.

697
01:02:37,180 --> 01:02:41,120
Migra charitable contributions made to reduce corporate tax burden and one-door corporate image

698
01:02:41,120 --> 01:02:42,820
will never compare to what they've taken,

699
01:02:43,400 --> 01:02:44,800
what they've been given by this committee.

700
01:02:45,000 --> 01:02:47,160
And until the planning, housing committee gets the memo

701
01:02:47,160 --> 01:02:48,640
that actually, that acting upstream

702
01:02:48,640 --> 01:02:51,060
to prevent homelessness means challenging developers.

703
01:02:51,200 --> 01:02:54,480
No amount of plans, gala's races, challenges, fundraisers,

704
01:02:54,660 --> 01:02:57,440
dinners, photo ops, pledges, or 50 simulations

705
01:02:57,440 --> 01:02:59,560
will ever amount to have more than a drop in the bucket.

706
01:02:59,740 --> 01:03:01,720
Thank you.

707
01:03:02,120 --> 01:03:04,280
Thanks, I've given some added to each other speakers.

708
01:03:05,700 --> 01:03:08,100
So we'll move on to the, oh, sorry.

709
01:03:08,200 --> 01:03:10,040
Are there any questions for the delegation?

710
01:03:10,040 --> 01:03:17,650
I don't see any, so we'll move on to, I'm sorry, I should have given a preview, as Cheryl

711
01:03:17,650 --> 01:03:21,210
Perett with the Hintberg Community Association, who will be followed by Gray and Bar with

712
01:03:21,210 --> 01:03:22,710
the Hintberg Community Association.

713
01:03:35,160 --> 01:03:39,940
Good morning, councillors, I'm here to talk to you about the height, you've heard about

714
01:03:39,940 --> 01:03:45,700
the height from the previous speaker, but it really needs to be reduced, 32 stories is too high.

715
01:03:45,980 --> 01:03:49,520
And we appreciate that it's come down from 38, but it's still too high.

716
01:03:50,440 --> 01:03:54,640
It's across from three story buildings across the street.

717
01:03:55,240 --> 01:03:57,440
It's even in the hub within the hub.

718
01:03:57,620 --> 01:03:59,320
You have very low-rise buildings.

719
01:03:59,560 --> 01:04:02,340
And those buildings were built relatively recently.

720
01:04:02,580 --> 01:04:05,340
They're not going to be redeveloped in our lifetime

721
01:04:05,340 --> 01:04:07,740
or in the lifetime of this building.

722
01:04:08,900 --> 01:04:11,780
The official plan, all the other plans,

723
01:04:12,300 --> 01:04:14,760
stayed about the transition in height.

724
01:04:15,040 --> 01:04:18,360
From highest around Tunney's pastor LRT at 40 stories

725
01:04:18,360 --> 01:04:21,420
and going down to Wellington, which is six stories.

726
01:04:22,840 --> 01:04:25,160
And I did some of the measurements.

727
01:04:25,600 --> 01:04:29,560
I won't go through all of my notes because other people have mentioned it.

728
01:04:30,000 --> 01:04:34,440
But the official plan talks about that transition

729
01:04:34,440 --> 01:04:39,720
outlining a minimum of three stories and up to a high rise of 40 stories are permitted

730
01:04:39,720 --> 01:04:46,000
on sites within 300 meter radius or 400 meter walking distance, whichever is greatest

731
01:04:46,000 --> 01:05:11,060
of a planned LRT. And this site with Google Maps shows the LRT station's 500 meters away from the Hamilton Spencer corner, which is the closest corner, and 600 meters away from Park Del Armstrong, which is the furthest corner, yet it's only a 100 meters away from the low Wellington Street, which is just 6-story height limit.

732
01:05:11,060 --> 01:05:16,840
So it's hardly an adequate transition when it's so much closer to well-intensied.

733
01:05:17,720 --> 01:05:24,040
I also want to talk about the large dwelling units, and we're really disappointed that the applicant

734
01:05:24,040 --> 01:05:31,720
from their initial application decreased the number of three-bedroom units from a total of five units to just four.

735
01:05:31,720 --> 01:05:54,320
So, out of the total of 386 units, this is just 1% of the units as three bedroom, and that doesn't conform with the intent of the official plan, which has a target of 10% in this area and requires 5% and identified a real need for these larger dwelling units.

736
01:05:54,320 --> 01:05:59,180
We've got three primary schools, one middle school, lots of parks.

737
01:06:00,120 --> 01:06:05,600
This building, together with many other new and proposed buildings, are mostly

738
01:06:05,600 --> 01:06:11,340
small units, largely studios, one bedroom units, with a few two bedroom units.

739
01:06:12,060 --> 01:06:16,960
We already have a lot of small apartments available in the area, and we understand the developers

740
01:06:16,960 --> 01:06:22,240
are having some difficulty renting them, and we've seen frequent turnover.

741
01:06:22,240 --> 01:06:28,640
we've seen as someone mentioned the three months free rent and we also have had problems with a legal

742
01:06:28,640 --> 01:06:36,420
short-term rentals in these newer buildings. We do blame the city for providing the escape

743
01:06:36,420 --> 01:06:43,280
clause that's being used here that either three bedroom units or a minimum area of 80 square meters

744
01:06:43,280 --> 01:06:50,140
which is just 862 square feet to fulfill the requirement and that's how you get the difference in

745
01:06:50,140 --> 01:06:57,940
calculations between targets calculation of 17% and our calculation of 1%.

746
01:06:58,860 --> 01:07:00,840
We don't need more smaller units.

747
01:07:01,040 --> 01:07:04,100
We need those three bedroom units that the OP intended.

748
01:07:05,740 --> 01:07:13,000
So amenities, the city is very much succeeding in exceeding the intensification targets, which

749
01:07:13,000 --> 01:07:18,960
we know are just the bottom floor, and in this community, but it's failing to keep up with

750
01:07:18,960 --> 01:07:24,400
provision of the important amenities to keep the community healthy, such as parks and green

751
01:07:24,400 --> 01:07:27,100
space. We only have a quarter of what we should have.

752
01:07:31,220 --> 01:07:40,540
Recreation facilities, erect capacity, and over-capacity. The tree canopy were at 19% and that's also rapidly decreasing.

753
01:07:41,720 --> 01:07:52,160
And I do want to mention that we're really disappointed that this planning report was not made available earlier on DevOps. It was 145 on Thursday, August 27.

754
01:07:52,160 --> 01:07:58,540
we kept refreshing our screens looking for it. It wasn't there. So that's less than six

755
01:07:58,540 --> 01:08:06,120
full days before the meeting. And other reports have been much earlier than this. I when they

756
01:08:06,120 --> 01:08:10,340
come out in the newspaper usually it's available and I did look at the rural affairs committee

757
01:08:10,340 --> 01:08:16,340
which is tomorrow and that report was up certainly by the same time this one came up.

758
01:08:17,280 --> 01:08:19,940
We do appreciate a couple of things.

759
01:08:20,720 --> 01:08:26,100
We do appreciate them exceeding the requirement for private and community a many

760
01:08:26,100 --> 01:08:32,600
to area, reducing the height of the podiums, and that all the balconies are recessed.

761
01:08:32,660 --> 01:08:33,560
Thank you.

762
01:08:35,110 --> 01:08:36,610
Thank you very much, Mr. Herz.

763
01:08:37,410 --> 01:08:39,530
I don't see any questions for you for members.

764
01:08:39,690 --> 01:08:41,150
Thanks for the delegation today.

765
01:08:42,590 --> 01:08:44,890
And so we'll move on to, I think it was Graham Barr.

766
01:08:45,210 --> 01:08:46,550
We'll be followed by the endowed.

767
01:08:56,050 --> 01:09:07,470
My name is Graham Bar and I've been a proud resident of Hinton Burke since 1998 and a member of the Hinton Burke Community Association's Board of Directors for the past two years.

768
01:09:08,490 --> 01:09:11,350
The HCA recently conducted a neighborhood survey.

769
01:09:12,330 --> 01:09:16,550
We wanted to better understand our neighbor's views on a wide range of issues.

770
01:09:16,550 --> 01:09:26,410
85% of survey respondents said they very much enjoy living in Hintonburg. However, the survey identified important concerns.

771
01:09:27,550 --> 01:09:32,130
Residents told us they want to retain the unique character of our neighborhood.

772
01:09:33,010 --> 01:09:41,110
They are also very concerned about traffic. In fact, traffic congestion was the top concern among Hintonburg property owners.

773
01:09:41,110 --> 01:09:49,490
It's with these concerns in mind that I want to address the transportation impacts of the proposed redevelopment of 340 Parkdale.

774
01:09:50,570 --> 01:10:01,290
The HCA is concerned that the transportation evidence currently before the city does not provide a reliable basis for considering the proposed OPA.

775
01:10:01,290 --> 01:10:11,330
The transportation impact assessment or TIA relies on outdated and unrepresentative data and

776
01:10:11,330 --> 01:10:19,470
on overly ambitious assumptions. We have three specific points. Point number one, the TIA data

777
01:10:19,470 --> 01:10:27,110
is out of date. Some traffic counts used in the TIA are 10 years old. Others were collected during

778
01:10:27,110 --> 01:10:33,290
periods that did not reflect normal traffic conditions. For example, some counts were conducted

779
01:10:33,810 --> 01:10:40,730
during COVID-19, during Queensland ramp closures, and during off-peak periods for the

780
01:10:40,730 --> 01:10:49,590
Parkdale market. Point number two, the study area is too limited. The TIA does not adequately

781
01:10:49,590 --> 01:10:55,250
account for the cumulative traffic impacts of existing approved and proposed developments

782
01:10:55,250 --> 01:11:00,270
along the Parkdale corridor from Emerson Avenue to the Queen's Way.

783
01:11:01,750 --> 01:11:07,010
It also does not adequately consider the forthcoming redevelopment of Toneys pasture.

784
01:11:08,170 --> 01:11:10,690
The proponents says they were, or the applicant,

785
01:11:10,970 --> 01:11:15,570
or says they were unable to find a TIA for the Toneys pasture redevelopment.

786
01:11:16,510 --> 01:11:20,550
But in fact, the TIA for Toneys is available on dev apps

787
01:11:20,550 --> 01:11:26,190
And has been discussed within the community and reviewed by the city over the past two years.

788
01:11:26,990 --> 01:11:33,730
Point number three, the TIA should use a transportation mode share methodology that is realistic,

789
01:11:34,450 --> 01:11:38,310
and is consistent with the methodology used for neighboring developments.

790
01:11:39,130 --> 01:11:48,070
The proponents TIA says that only 15% of trips generated by 340 Parkdale will be taken by automobile drivers.

791
01:11:48,070 --> 01:11:54,830
This proportion is unrealistically low, and does not reflect the city's own data for the current

792
01:11:54,830 --> 01:11:58,910
mode share for residential high rises in Ottawa West.

793
01:11:59,830 --> 01:12:05,610
Even the Chinese pasture TIA, which the applicant couldn't find, recognized that an automobile

794
01:12:05,610 --> 01:12:12,350
driver mode share as low as 15%, could not be achieved until 2046.

795
01:12:13,130 --> 01:12:19,830
The TIA for the high rise that is being built at 1186 Wellington used a mode-sharisumption

796
01:12:19,830 --> 01:12:24,550
the 28% of trips generated would be by automobile drivers.

797
01:12:25,390 --> 01:12:30,950
It seems unrealistic for today's applicant to assume the proportion of drivers at 340

798
01:12:30,950 --> 01:12:38,430
Parkdale will be approximately half that of 1186 Wellington, the sites are only 300 meters apart.

799
01:12:38,430 --> 01:12:45,570
Because of these three significant deficiencies out of date data, narrow scope, and unrealistic

800
01:12:45,570 --> 01:12:51,970
assumptions, we ask the city to require the applicant to revise the TIA to provide

801
01:12:51,970 --> 01:12:55,650
a much more accurate representation of the traffic impacts.

802
01:12:56,810 --> 01:12:59,070
This projection not be assessed in isolation.

803
01:12:59,910 --> 01:13:05,330
Before this project proceeds to site plan control stage, we urge the city to undertake an

804
01:13:05,330 --> 01:13:11,730
a Y traffic study, a study should assess the cumulative transportation impacts of existing

805
01:13:11,730 --> 01:13:16,930
approved and proposed developments in the vicinity of Parkdale and Wellington Street.

806
01:13:18,350 --> 01:13:23,770
I'd also like to briefly address the proposed Wunerv on Armstrong Street. I know this decision

807
01:13:23,770 --> 01:13:29,450
is not part of the OPA before you today, and I've just heard that our current councillor is intrigued

808
01:13:29,450 --> 01:13:35,210
by the concept, but we want to give the committee notice that the HCA poses the creation of a

809
01:13:35,210 --> 01:13:41,270
on Armstrong Street as suggested by the applicant. We do, of course, support the occasional

810
01:13:41,270 --> 01:13:47,170
enclosure of Armstrong for special events. But the proponent, the applicant, is suggesting that

811
01:13:47,170 --> 01:13:53,450
traffic currently using Armstrong could be moved to Spencer Street. As my colleague will explain,

812
01:13:53,790 --> 01:14:00,810
Spencer Street cannot handle additional traffic. Thank you. My colleague Linda will now outline

813
01:14:00,810 --> 01:14:05,990
concerns about parking spaces and the location of garbage pick-up. Thank you.

814
01:14:07,710 --> 01:14:10,730
Thank you very much. Does anyone have any questions for this delegation?

815
01:14:12,350 --> 01:14:19,030
Just curious, since it seems like a combined effort here, should we ask this individual

816
01:14:19,030 --> 01:14:24,470
questions or wait for Linda or both stay at the table? Because that's what I'm inferring here.

817
01:14:24,470 --> 01:14:27,590
If Graham, if you want to stay at the table, that would be great. Great.

818
01:14:27,690 --> 01:14:30,430
I'll wait. We'll go to Linda Hode's presentation next.

819
01:14:42,230 --> 01:14:45,570
Good morning. Nice to see you. Has been a long time since I've been here.

820
01:14:46,670 --> 01:14:49,670
Lucky you. Maybe lucky me.

821
01:14:50,930 --> 01:14:55,690
I am going to address some site plan issues, which I know you are not deciding today.

822
01:14:56,210 --> 01:14:57,130
We're disappointed that the...

823
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:03,800
The staff and applicants deliberations.

824
01:15:06,180 --> 01:15:10,720
And I do want to put you on notice that we will expect a response

825
01:15:10,720 --> 01:15:18,380
to these concerns when the site plan process is considered. My first point is the proposed

826
01:15:19,100 --> 01:15:25,520
labi, which is to allow for garbage, to pick up, move in, move out deliveries and passenger

827
01:15:25,520 --> 01:15:34,820
pick up, drop off at the near the entrance of near the parking ramp to the parking garage,

828
01:15:35,360 --> 01:15:42,420
as proposed in the current proposal. The official plan, however, says that, quote, to place

829
01:15:42,420 --> 01:15:45,300
parking, loading, and vehicle access to minimize

830
01:15:45,300 --> 01:15:48,500
impact on the public realm, and, quote,

831
01:15:49,100 --> 01:15:51,200
minimize conflict between vehicles and pedestrians

832
01:15:51,200 --> 01:15:53,920
and approve the attractiveness of the public realm

833
01:15:53,920 --> 01:15:58,020
by internalizing servicing, loading areas

834
01:15:58,020 --> 01:16:01,540
into the design of the building, and by accommodating

835
01:16:01,540 --> 01:16:04,140
space, onsite for trees, where possible.

836
01:16:04,840 --> 01:16:07,500
The proposal before you, if you had looked at the site

837
01:16:07,500 --> 01:16:10,120
plan carefully, intends that all these activities

838
01:16:10,120 --> 01:16:16,360
will occupy the public realm that garbage and movement of furniture etc. will utilize the sidewalk

839
01:16:16,360 --> 01:16:22,440
and the adjacent road. The site plan indicates that the sidewalk near the garage entrance will

840
01:16:22,440 --> 01:16:28,560
have raised planters containing trees. Almost certainly impossible if the sidewalk must accommodate

841
01:16:28,560 --> 01:16:35,370
these other activities. This applicant owns the entire city block and should be required to

842
01:16:35,370 --> 01:16:38,930
to internalize these activities as required by the official plan.

843
01:16:39,190 --> 01:16:40,630
This is a large site.

844
01:16:41,270 --> 01:16:43,350
Surely the proponent can create a space

845
01:16:43,350 --> 01:16:46,450
for these functions within the footprint of the development

846
01:16:46,450 --> 01:16:49,730
rather than expropriate the public realm.

847
01:16:50,750 --> 01:16:52,830
Spencer Street already provides access

848
01:16:52,830 --> 01:16:55,870
for garbage pickup deliveries and the residential parking garage

849
01:16:55,870 --> 01:16:58,810
for 45 Spencer and 320 Parkdale Avenue.

850
01:16:59,410 --> 01:17:01,730
In addition, the signalized intersection

851
01:17:01,730 --> 01:17:08,130
at Parkdale attracts vehicular traffic to the street. The location of these functions as well as the

852
01:17:08,130 --> 01:17:14,170
entrance to the Parking Garage for 340 Parkdale will reside in result in too much activity on a

853
01:17:14,170 --> 01:17:22,770
street of this size and to the east and west of the site, Spencer is a low rise to medium rise

854
01:17:22,770 --> 01:17:29,790
residential area. I'd like to address parking supply, which is already been brought up by a counselor

855
01:17:29,790 --> 01:17:38,390
The parking rate is indeed too high for a transit oriented development within the protected major transit station area.

856
01:17:38,390 --> 01:17:48,570
0.71 spaces per unit does not promote the use of transit and active transportation modes as envisaged in the official plan.

857
01:17:48,570 --> 01:17:54,470
Staff have assured us that this proposed parking supplies below the maximum parking permitted near a

858
01:17:54,470 --> 01:18:03,650
Transistation as per city zoning by law 2008 to 50 for comparison the recently approved site plan for phase one at

859
01:18:03,650 --> 01:18:13,070
951 Gladstone 145 Loretta near the course of a Talia LRT station has a parking ratio of 0.3 spaces per unit

860
01:18:13,070 --> 01:18:16,870
your recent decision to send the early all proposal

861
01:18:16,870 --> 01:18:24,410
to provide zero residential parking spaces was noted by us and you've sent it back to the drawing board.

862
01:18:25,590 --> 01:18:31,710
It confirms our suspicion that city parking policy in your high level transit stations is a failure.

863
01:18:33,090 --> 01:18:42,430
The maximum is too high. The current policies do not provide enough guidance to applicants, leading to anomalies like zero parking in suburban Orlando

864
01:18:42,430 --> 01:18:47,850
and a 0.7 ratio almost downtown at the longest average of Tunis pasture station.

865
01:18:48,450 --> 01:18:53,130
We urge you to request stuff to undertake a review of parking policies in the vicinity of

866
01:18:53,130 --> 01:18:55,150
transit stations as a high priority.

867
01:18:56,450 --> 01:19:03,010
We understand that the applicant must excavate a deep hole in order to deal with serious contamination,

868
01:19:03,430 --> 01:19:06,350
but they do not have to fill the hole with cars.

869
01:19:06,350 --> 01:19:12,190
We have been lobbying about this since 2018 when a previous application was brought forward.

870
01:19:12,990 --> 01:19:19,110
We have been recommending alternatives, not of the parking because that's more cars in the whole.

871
01:19:20,070 --> 01:19:26,610
We have proposed vertical farming, hydroponic systems using artificial light and controlled climate,

872
01:19:27,430 --> 01:19:29,690
taking advantage of what will be a controlled climate.

873
01:19:29,690 --> 01:19:54,130
In fact, geothermal power, distrakeating plant, distrakeating for the building itself, or as a plant which could provide heat as sustainable and what do we call that non-carbon producing heat to other buildings which are going to be built already built or are going to be built.

874
01:19:54,130 --> 01:19:55,590
Linda, I need to ask it around.

875
01:19:55,610 --> 01:19:57,270
This is my conclusion.

876
01:19:58,110 --> 01:20:00,750
There are a lot of tiny apartments already in existence

877
01:20:00,750 --> 01:20:01,630
and to be built.

878
01:20:02,130 --> 01:20:04,450
And the storage provided for most apartments

879
01:20:04,450 --> 01:20:06,270
is not enough for the residents.

880
01:20:06,830 --> 01:20:08,770
So it's a thriving business.

881
01:20:09,430 --> 01:20:11,770
You can make money with your hole in the ground.

882
01:20:12,750 --> 01:20:13,750
Thank you.

883
01:20:18,670 --> 01:20:20,970
If the parking ratio was lowered,

884
01:20:21,150 --> 01:20:24,490
would you support the current proposed height

885
01:20:24,490 --> 01:20:25,910
and density of this project?

886
01:20:28,110 --> 01:20:39,890
Speaking personally, I don't have a big problem with the height, but I understand it is a lot for the community to take on and to accept.

887
01:20:40,350 --> 01:20:43,290
And I do agree. It does not transition appropriately.

888
01:20:44,630 --> 01:20:53,230
But I think, I guess you could say, I'm resigned to the fact that the height will come, but we don't need to take the cars.

889
01:20:57,460 --> 01:21:00,920
Thank you, and thanks, Linde, you always give a really good, thoughtful presentation.

890
01:21:01,240 --> 01:21:02,400
I appreciate that.

891
01:21:03,700 --> 01:21:09,520
But to, since we're doing two and one here at Graham, you mentioned Spencer Street.

892
01:21:09,840 --> 01:21:14,840
Can you expand on what you were referring to, but Spencer Street was about parking on a street

893
01:21:14,840 --> 01:21:16,480
or traffic on a street?

894
01:21:16,720 --> 01:21:17,760
I heard Spencer Street in there.

895
01:21:17,920 --> 01:21:18,740
I just want a little more clarity.

896
01:21:19,860 --> 01:21:20,360
Yeah, thanks.

897
01:21:21,440 --> 01:21:25,360
In the context of my presentation, it was at the end where I was saying that the HCA

898
01:21:25,360 --> 01:21:29,240
the pose is the creation of a winner for basically closing off Armstrong.

899
01:21:30,460 --> 01:21:36,080
My understanding is that the applicant's sort of vision for where traffic would go with

900
01:21:36,080 --> 01:21:40,160
Armstrong as closed off would be onto Spencer Street.

901
01:21:41,900 --> 01:21:45,480
And I agree with them because there's limited streets that they could go onto.

902
01:21:45,960 --> 01:21:53,300
I was just foreshadowing that my colleague here, Linda, and she did talk about how Spencer Street

903
01:21:53,300 --> 01:22:02,620
cannot handle additional traffic from Armstrong plus be the entry and exit point for a 32-story

904
01:22:02,620 --> 01:22:10,760
tower in the garbage and all of that. So sort of shifting traffic on to Spencer to accommodate

905
01:22:10,760 --> 01:22:15,440
an Armstrong Wunerv is not realistic or practical in our view or safe.

906
01:22:16,240 --> 01:22:20,860
Okay. Great. Yeah, I appreciate. I think it's always coming down to traffic and transportation

907
01:22:20,860 --> 01:22:26,980
is always an issue. I heard Spencer and it reminded me of 2017, uh, the county.

908
01:22:30,000 --> 01:22:41,220
About that. And if they would have put it, it would have been literally one lane of traffic remaining. So it's still going to be congestion on Spencer Street with two. So.

909
01:22:41,360 --> 01:22:43,560
Nonetheless, thank you for your delegations today. Thank you, Linda.

910
01:22:45,220 --> 01:22:56,680
Thank you very much, Councillor Fairney. Of course, this was not a part of Spencer, which the bike lane was proposed to go and we determined not to move ahead with that afternoon community consultation. We are clearly in the silly season.

911
01:22:57,960 --> 01:23:04,370
I have a Linda. I have a question for you. I'm sorry.

912
01:23:10,030 --> 01:23:23,810
Yes, the heritage. So what I have heard from the applicant is with respect to putting the entry egress on Hamilton that the concern has been the heritage nature of the capital wire cloth building across the street.

913
01:23:24,930 --> 01:23:28,430
I struggle to understand that as a constraint.

914
01:23:28,650 --> 01:23:29,690
Undo we not.

915
01:23:31,170 --> 01:23:35,170
I think you and your colleagues have argued for Hamilton entry egress.

916
01:23:35,570 --> 01:23:38,810
Do you consider that that would have any effect on the heritage?

917
01:23:39,190 --> 01:23:44,010
We know you well obviously from your heritage Ottawa obligations.

918
01:23:44,510 --> 01:23:50,810
I did struggle with this and we're not actually, it really is related to the internalization.

919
01:23:50,810 --> 01:23:58,550
We don't want the garbage pick up and all the rest is happening on the sidewalk on Hamilton or on Spencer.

920
01:23:59,110 --> 01:24:08,170
If all of that activity can be internalized, in other words, the vehicles drive in, everything, all the shifting around,

921
01:24:08,370 --> 01:24:15,550
and the flipping of garbage containers, then I don't think it would have that much impact.

922
01:24:15,550 --> 01:24:23,470
If it's happening on the sidewalk, as is currently proposed, it will, in fact, impact the heritage building.

923
01:24:23,710 --> 01:24:28,550
I think the real solution to the problem is to internalize it.

924
01:24:29,450 --> 01:24:33,750
And it could be in either location, I think.

925
01:24:34,330 --> 01:24:42,170
When you think about, you know, all those garbage trucks are going to have to drive up to the place where they're going to be taking their garbage.

926
01:24:42,170 --> 01:24:48,330
If they're already on Spencer, so they're not likely to go back up and go out on Hamilton.

927
01:24:48,470 --> 01:24:53,150
They're going to go out to Parkdale, not necessarily a good solution.

928
01:24:53,490 --> 01:25:00,130
If they're on Hamilton, theoretically they could go to Holland or Scott, they have more

929
01:25:00,130 --> 01:25:03,150
choice, I think, and perhaps better choices.

930
01:25:03,510 --> 01:25:10,870
However, I'm not a transportation engineer, but I do think the internalization of those functions

931
01:25:10,870 --> 01:25:24,730
would go a long way towards making the whole thing work better and have less impact on the neighbors, either the heritage neighbor, or the Spencer, or the, yeah, just 45 Spencer through 20 Parkdale.

932
01:25:25,090 --> 01:25:29,710
Thank you. Just for the clarity of members and gallery knows watching.

933
01:25:29,710 --> 01:25:36,350
And the concern is that if it is not fully internalized as you describe it, garbage trucks

934
01:25:36,350 --> 01:25:37,230
will be pulling up.

935
01:25:37,370 --> 01:25:43,550
They will winch bins out of the garage and then take care of the loading unloading on

936
01:25:43,550 --> 01:25:43,770
the street.

937
01:25:44,010 --> 01:25:48,270
So, not the way it's laid out at the moment, unless they can winch round corners.

938
01:25:49,550 --> 01:25:53,650
As I say, I think there's a lot of work needs to be done on that whole issue.

939
01:25:54,290 --> 01:25:59,330
As you know, I live in an intensified site, 54 units.

940
01:25:59,330 --> 01:26:05,730
we have two big blue bins, one big yellow bin, they come twice a week to collect them.

941
01:26:05,790 --> 01:26:11,970
They are hauled out by the garbage collectors picked up by the truck, which is sitting on the street,

942
01:26:13,310 --> 01:26:19,650
blocking the traffic and they you know, hoist them in. I forgot I'm having a unit so

943
01:26:19,650 --> 01:26:24,290
are here. If you look at that site plan when they show you the garbage room, it's scary.

944
01:26:25,450 --> 01:26:28,530
A lot of thought needs to go into this. Thanks, Linda.

945
01:26:29,590 --> 01:26:31,390
All right, we will move on.

946
01:26:31,510 --> 01:26:32,690
I see no further questions.

947
01:26:33,690 --> 01:26:34,230
You're in Hogan.

948
01:26:34,650 --> 01:26:35,450
Is next?

949
01:26:35,730 --> 01:26:36,950
Who will be followed by Joyce Giles?

950
01:26:57,700 --> 01:26:58,220
Thank you, Chair.

951
01:26:58,440 --> 01:26:59,140
Committee members.

952
01:26:59,440 --> 01:26:59,800
Good morning.

953
01:27:00,920 --> 01:27:01,800
I'll jump right in.

954
01:27:01,900 --> 01:27:02,880
Next slide, please.

955
01:27:04,400 --> 01:27:04,580
Sorry.

956
01:27:04,720 --> 01:27:06,200
I should say, my name is Jürgen Hogan.

957
01:27:06,200 --> 01:27:08,100
And I live at 175 Carothers.

958
01:27:09,100 --> 01:27:12,420
I have three main areas of concern that I wish to address.

959
01:27:12,920 --> 01:27:15,220
One is corrections to calculations that were used.

960
01:27:15,900 --> 01:27:18,400
Proposal scale and the planning framework expectation.

961
01:27:18,400 --> 01:27:24,320
expectation. My other areas of concern have been per the detail comments that have submitted

962
01:27:24,320 --> 01:27:31,560
previously. Next slide. The first is to use the floor space index. It's clearly defined

963
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:37,500
as a growth floor area over the lot size. It is not the number of stories, because it accounts

964
01:27:37,500 --> 01:27:42,760
for the required setbacks from front rear and side yards. Thus the night story building is typically

965
01:27:42,760 --> 01:27:50,800
recorded an FSI of 6.0. Next slide. This is the massing diagram that was submitted by the applicant.

966
01:27:51,580 --> 01:27:57,990
However, it shows eight full floor plates over the entire consolidated site, stating eight story plus FSI of eight.

967
01:27:58,640 --> 01:28:09,440
Get the applicant correctly in the report references that the site is split zoned with the L-shaped portion being at six FSI of six in the corner block at FSI of two.

968
01:28:09,440 --> 01:28:14,560
Their published FSI massing diagram is thus a wrong and misleading. Next slide.

969
01:28:15,320 --> 01:28:20,320
This is actually what it should look like. The L-shaped portion should drop from the eight

970
01:28:20,320 --> 01:28:25,720
floor plates to six, and the corner block should not be at eight. It should be at two. So that

971
01:28:25,720 --> 01:28:32,320
calculation equivalent floor space index of 5.0 for the entire site, not the stated FSI of eight.

972
01:28:32,720 --> 01:28:38,880
Next slide. The next correction is the calculation permitted GFA. The applicant states on

973
01:28:38,880 --> 01:28:45,780
That same diagram that they have existing permanent GFA of over 28,000 square meters, suggesting

974
01:28:45,780 --> 01:28:51,560
that their proposal fits within their right, quote unquote permitted and proposed design

975
01:28:51,560 --> 01:28:53,560
align density align.

976
01:28:54,040 --> 01:29:01,340
However, there's the calculations that total as a right allowable GFA is 17,694 square meters,

977
01:29:01,640 --> 01:29:03,940
not over 28,000 square meters.

978
01:29:03,940 --> 01:29:09,160
The applicant has overstated their allowable GFA by 60%.

979
01:29:09,160 --> 01:29:14,920
The current proposal of just over 24,000 square meters still exceeds the actual existing

980
01:29:14,920 --> 01:29:17,800
rights by 37% next slide.

981
01:29:20,020 --> 01:29:26,320
Correcting the existing allowable building height, when a former proponent Tiga Holmes

982
01:29:26,320 --> 01:29:30,840
sought to develop a 36-story tower on the L-shaped portion of this site,

983
01:29:30,840 --> 01:29:38,060
The city rejected that proposal and the OMB directed the city to remove the height restriction and instead

984
01:29:38,060 --> 01:29:41,480
constrain the development with an FSI of 6.0.

985
01:29:42,300 --> 01:29:50,420
The zoning that implemented that ruling very specifically designated 2, 5, 7, 9, and 18 stories,

986
01:29:51,080 --> 01:29:55,200
limitations with the 18 story height restriction on the northwest corner.

987
01:29:55,200 --> 01:29:56,980
that 18th story.

988
01:30:00,000 --> 01:30:29,540
Current site. It is not correct to suggest that the entire site is already zone for 18 stories anyways. So what's 32? By that logic, it would be equally correct to state the entire site is zone for two stories anyway. So there's the difference. The implication of these misstatements, which were not refuted by the staff report, suggest that the application is reasonably within the existing rights, which is simply wrong.

989
01:30:30,580 --> 01:30:38,000
leaving these assertions, uncorrected, might mislead the public to think that there's no basis to objective this proposal.

990
01:30:38,880 --> 01:30:45,280
Next slide. Next is the scale of the proposal itself. The city secondary plans disignate the area

991
01:30:45,280 --> 01:30:52,220
bounded by Scott, Holland, Wellington and Parkdale as part of a hub with Wellington Street itself as a main street.

992
01:30:52,220 --> 01:30:58,060
The second aircraft plans clearly speak to concentrating the density near and north of Scott

993
01:30:58,060 --> 01:31:01,700
and transitioning density and building height from Scott down the Wellington street

994
01:31:01,700 --> 01:31:04,980
to respect the pedestrian scale scale of the Main Street.

995
01:31:05,600 --> 01:31:08,620
Building heights are explicitly listed out in the secondary plan.

996
01:31:09,160 --> 01:31:12,060
The hub continues north of Scott Street to include Tony's pasture,

997
01:31:12,400 --> 01:31:18,600
which is actually the heart of the density focus. Next slide. Here you can see the plan layout

998
01:31:18,600 --> 01:31:32,800
that shows from six stories with two to three story podiums on Wellington Street, going up to six stories at Armstrong, going up to eight stories at Spencer, and then from Spencer to Scott, eight, 12, 15, and 25 stories.

999
01:31:33,400 --> 01:31:44,200
Next slide. This is what that looks like in Section View, and this is scaled correctly. You can see the stepping that is intended for this portion of the hub.

1000
01:31:44,200 --> 01:31:52,360
It is intended to go gradually from Wellington up to Scott, and there in the red you can see what a 32-story tower looks like.

1001
01:31:52,380 --> 01:31:58,940
It is not even close to the planning intent of this hub. It sticks out like a sore thumb. Next slide.

1002
01:31:59,880 --> 01:32:12,320
Staff suggested a 32-story tower on the site is an adequate transition, yet immediately adjacent is two-story residential, zero-story grain space, two-story commercial and three-four and eight-story residential.

1003
01:32:12,320 --> 01:32:19,620
Next slide, and as my final slide, planning framework expectations, the city's planning framework

1004
01:32:19,620 --> 01:32:22,020
frankly, it's very good.

1005
01:32:22,420 --> 01:32:27,040
It should be the default to direct future development and it should be enforced by the city.

1006
01:32:27,700 --> 01:32:33,620
Any exception should only be granted if the positive benefits are received outweigh the negatives

1007
01:32:33,620 --> 01:32:39,420
of ignoring the planning constraints, it is not a developer's right to expect to be granted

1008
01:32:39,420 --> 01:32:41,240
an exception to the planning framework.

1009
01:32:41,240 --> 01:32:56,620
Thank you. Thank you very much, you're again. I don't say any questions from my colleagues, but I do have do have one. One of the factors that I've been considering with this close sort of the mic.

1010
01:32:56,840 --> 01:33:00,500
One of the factors that I've been considering with this is four years ago.

1011
01:33:00,500 --> 01:33:13,660
My colleague supported me in refusing an application for the 16th story building on Wellington at Parkdale, which was then subsequently approved by the land.

1012
01:33:14,160 --> 01:33:18,040
So we have 16 stories at Hamilton and Wellington.

1013
01:33:19,000 --> 01:33:25,480
What factors should this committee think about in determining whether or not the secondary plan is still relevant?

1014
01:33:26,400 --> 01:33:31,040
I think there's a very clear precedent that is already set on this site.

1015
01:33:31,220 --> 01:33:38,940
This site went to the OMB at the time, the OLT now, and the OLT did not assign any additional

1016
01:33:38,940 --> 01:33:39,580
GFA.

1017
01:33:40,100 --> 01:33:46,040
They simply allowed the developer to write to not respect the H-story height limit, but instead

1018
01:33:46,040 --> 01:33:51,060
use that equivalent mass that they had and re-apportion it however they wished.

1019
01:33:52,060 --> 01:33:59,620
And that means that the site currently, that allowed for the 18th story, again, 17% of the current site,

1020
01:34:00,320 --> 01:34:03,100
that allowed that as an exception to the plan.

1021
01:34:03,660 --> 01:34:04,980
So there is a ready and exception.

1022
01:34:05,720 --> 01:34:09,400
So now what is being asked is to add an exception on top of an exception,

1023
01:34:10,080 --> 01:34:14,060
and that exception that was granted that was forced onto the city by the OLT,

1024
01:34:15,420 --> 01:34:19,800
already basically pointed out that this density is appropriate for this area,

1025
01:34:19,800 --> 01:34:23,880
because they did not have density. They just allowed for it to be reshaped.

1026
01:34:27,110 --> 01:34:32,330
Thank you very much and we'll move on to our next delegation. Who is Joyce Giles?

1027
01:34:32,450 --> 01:34:37,050
We'll be followed by Patrick Corrival. Lauren Reed, David Pepper.

1028
01:34:53,150 --> 01:34:54,850
Good morning, chair and members of

1029
01:34:54,850 --> 01:35:01,210
committee. My name is Joyce Giles. I have lived on Hamilton Avenue, north for 25 years.

1030
01:35:01,210 --> 01:35:09,450
I guess the normal disclaimer, I am not opposed to development and intensification in fact

1031
01:35:09,450 --> 01:35:14,870
I have lived through it and witnessed this over the last 25 years in my community.

1032
01:35:15,650 --> 01:35:20,430
My concern is whether this particular proposal represents good planning for this particular

1033
01:35:20,430 --> 01:35:21,190
location.

1034
01:35:22,050 --> 01:35:27,550
In March I submitted a detailed response identifying nine specific concerns with the proposed

1035
01:35:27,550 --> 01:35:28,250
development.

1036
01:35:28,250 --> 01:35:33,810
But after reviewing the city's current report, I have reached a troubling conclusion.

1037
01:35:34,610 --> 01:35:40,910
The city has responded to many of our concerns, but it has not necessarily addressed them.

1038
01:35:41,130 --> 01:35:43,810
This is a recurring pattern throughout the report.

1039
01:35:44,450 --> 01:35:50,590
Residents raise specific concerns, and the city's response sites a general policy conformity,

1040
01:35:50,950 --> 01:35:54,710
and then the detailed issue is deferred to site plan control.

1041
01:35:54,710 --> 01:36:02,710
This is not sufficient when those issues may materially affect whether this development is appropriate in the first place.

1042
01:36:03,350 --> 01:36:07,690
So I'll give you four examples. First height we've already talked about this.

1043
01:36:07,850 --> 01:36:14,690
The city is asking you to approve 32 stories, but that does not answer the fundamental planning question.

1044
01:36:15,030 --> 01:36:18,950
Why is 32 stories appropriate for this particular block?

1045
01:36:18,950 --> 01:36:27,850
Second parking, the current proposal contains 318 vehicle spaces, 276 residential.

1046
01:36:29,230 --> 01:36:30,010
But that answers.

1047
01:36:30,170 --> 01:36:35,310
The city's response is that the parking supply is below the maximum permitted near

1048
01:36:35,310 --> 01:36:38,590
rapid transit, but that answers the wrong question.

1049
01:36:39,190 --> 01:36:46,710
If this is truly transit planning, first, transit, first planning, why her 276 residential

1050
01:36:46,710 --> 01:36:48,470
parking spaces necessary.

1051
01:36:50,550 --> 01:36:54,750
And so they also talk about four levels of underground parking.

1052
01:36:54,990 --> 01:37:00,690
That means a deeper and longer excavation immediately beside the Parkdale Market, the Park,

1053
01:37:00,870 --> 01:37:06,970
and Residential Streets. And if the parking supply were dramatically reduced, could the excavation

1054
01:37:06,970 --> 01:37:13,050
be reduced as well. And that question matters because it leads directly to my third concern.

1055
01:37:13,050 --> 01:37:20,890
It's traffic on Hamilton Avenue North, and this is the issue I believe deserves the greatest attention from the committee.

1056
01:37:21,690 --> 01:37:27,130
Hamilton Avenue is designated a local residential street, yet residents are all rich.

1057
01:37:30,000 --> 01:37:47,080
On Parkdale and Wellington, particularly toward Highway 417. My marks submission identified the combined effect of the mental development, which we just mentioned, is currently being constructed at Wellington and Parkdale and this proposed development.

1058
01:37:47,080 --> 01:37:55,580
And together these two developments introduced just shy of 500 parking or vehicles into a very small space.

1059
01:37:56,320 --> 01:38:01,640
And for both of these developments traffic will eventually find its way onto Hamilton Avenue.

1060
01:38:02,780 --> 01:38:08,940
I asked the city to consider the cumulative traffic rather than examining each development in isolation.

1061
01:38:09,820 --> 01:38:12,160
I also asked for something very reasonable.

1062
01:38:12,160 --> 01:38:15,740
Measure what actually happens after these developments.

1063
01:38:16,920 --> 01:38:17,700
Our occupied.

1064
01:38:18,540 --> 01:38:23,480
Six months and 18 months traffic counts, defined thresholds,

1065
01:38:23,540 --> 01:38:28,520
and mitigation of Hamilton becomes carrying traffic volumes

1066
01:38:28,520 --> 01:38:31,700
inconsistent with the residential local street.

1067
01:38:32,240 --> 01:38:35,040
The city's report does not commit to those measures.

1068
01:38:35,700 --> 01:38:39,080
So I ask committee, has the city modeled what happens

1069
01:38:39,080 --> 01:38:42,180
if Hamilton Avenue becomes a de facto collector,

1070
01:38:42,500 --> 01:38:46,600
because Parkdale is congested, if not, why not?

1071
01:38:47,160 --> 01:38:49,360
And if the city cannot predict with confidence,

1072
01:38:49,540 --> 01:38:53,240
what will happen, why would it not agree to monitor the situation

1073
01:38:53,240 --> 01:38:55,180
and establish mitigation triggers

1074
01:38:55,180 --> 01:38:57,560
before the problem becomes permanent?

1075
01:38:59,400 --> 01:39:03,200
So I guess what I'm really asking you guys to consider,

1076
01:39:04,140 --> 01:39:07,940
a clear evidence-based justification for 32 stories,

1077
01:39:07,940 --> 01:39:14,800
a substantial reduction in residential parking, consistent with a genuinely transit first development.

1078
01:39:15,720 --> 01:39:23,580
Cumulative traffic analysis or binding post occupancy monitoring and mitigation triggers for Hamilton Avenue North.

1079
01:39:24,400 --> 01:39:30,400
A construction management plan that protects the Parkdale Night Market, an Armstrong Street events,

1080
01:39:30,400 --> 01:39:38,360
And enforceable public realm and market benefits rather than relying solely on a privately owned public space.

1081
01:39:38,640 --> 01:39:41,520
And I didn't have enough time to go into those last two issues.

1082
01:39:41,780 --> 01:39:42,980
But I know they've been raised.

1083
01:39:44,000 --> 01:39:44,980
Thank you.

1084
01:39:49,300 --> 01:39:51,600
So guys, thank you very much for the comments.

1085
01:39:51,720 --> 01:39:54,660
I don't see any questions for you from residents.

1086
01:39:55,560 --> 01:40:00,080
And just speaking as someone who lives like three doors down from you,

1087
01:40:00,080 --> 01:40:05,980
The future of Hamilton Avenue North is something very much on my mind as well. Thank you

1088
01:40:07,440 --> 01:40:10,160
So we'll move on to Patrick Cordibot.

1089
01:40:14,580 --> 01:40:18,940
Hi, Mr. Cordibot. Whenever you're ready, you'll have five minutes to make a presentation to the committee

1090
01:40:18,940 --> 01:40:21,080
Great. Thank you very much

1091
01:40:21,080 --> 01:40:28,900
so I'm I'm I'm here today as the property owner of 224 arm shroud

1092
01:40:30,520 --> 01:40:31,800
and also

1093
01:40:31,800 --> 01:40:34,180
I just wanted to

1094
01:40:34,500 --> 01:40:39,420
the highlight, the fact that I'm

1095
01:40:41,530 --> 01:41:01,330
conversant in the economics of development through my role as a director at RBC, but also that there's no conflict of interest between our souls and Tiger Group, we don't do business with them for real-state or property management.

1096
01:41:01,330 --> 01:41:11,770
And so I just wanted to highlight that more as there's a lot of experts here that have brought up a lot of really good points as far as land planning is concerned.

1097
01:41:12,430 --> 01:41:25,770
And as it relates to transportation usage and all sorts of other points, I think I'd bring a perspective of economic reality of private sector projects.

1098
01:41:26,870 --> 01:41:32,270
One thing that we're excited about for this project is the ability to reinvigorate the neighborhood.

1099
01:41:32,830 --> 01:41:39,430
You know, this project has, as everyone will know, one of those, a lot of contamination issues,

1100
01:41:39,890 --> 01:41:43,970
but spread throughout the neighborhood. It's not located just on the site,

1101
01:41:44,350 --> 01:41:50,890
which is the reason that the developers have to have to dig so deep to deal with the contamination.

1102
01:41:50,890 --> 01:41:56,930
It's been an ongoing issue for quite a number of decades since dating back to when Honeywell

1103
01:41:56,930 --> 01:42:04,490
had their factory back then. And the reality is that these cleanups are quite costly and

1104
01:42:04,490 --> 01:42:12,890
their quite risky as well. It's unknown until you actually get, get, get digging and start to,

1105
01:42:13,470 --> 01:42:20,030
start to move the soil and get down to the bedrock. What the actual cost will be and what the

1106
01:42:20,030 --> 01:42:28,650
with it. And I would imagine that that is part of why they're looking at this type of a scale

1107
01:42:28,650 --> 01:42:35,570
of project is because the cost to bring something like this to market just hasn't really been

1108
01:42:35,570 --> 01:42:43,780
palatable under the old planning structures. So that's what we've seen a site for a number of

1109
01:42:43,780 --> 01:42:52,300
in a primary, close to highway access has a great farmer's market to live in the neighborhood.

1110
01:42:52,620 --> 01:42:56,640
And we've seen a number of towers go further down the Parkdale block.

1111
01:42:57,460 --> 01:43:04,040
But this corridor has been a bit of a development dead zone.

1112
01:43:05,240 --> 01:43:09,760
And this fight having large land that would be easier to redevelop.

1113
01:43:09,760 --> 01:43:16,660
So, I imagine that part of the impetus to go so high is for that.

1114
01:43:16,980 --> 01:43:19,740
You know, it also going high also brings additional costs.

1115
01:43:19,820 --> 01:43:22,780
And I think everybody would be quite surprised

1116
01:43:22,780 --> 01:43:28,500
at the thin negligible profitability of a project like this.

1117
01:43:28,660 --> 01:43:35,660
It costs quite a lot, you know, especially in the face of cost pressures from COVID.

1118
01:43:35,660 --> 01:43:44,120
I think another big thing to consider is the fact that everybody at the city of Ottawa, I think

1119
01:43:44,120 --> 01:43:50,020
right fully, is sensitive to avoiding urban sprawl, one in where possible.

1120
01:43:51,040 --> 01:43:58,620
This site is transit oriented, close to highway access, it's in a neighborhood that people

1121
01:43:58,620 --> 01:44:06,420
want to live in, and so if people are given access to new housing, I think that's nothing

1122
01:44:06,420 --> 01:44:13,680
but positive for the city and avoid the sprawl issue to certain extent. As it relates to

1123
01:44:13,680 --> 01:44:24,040
parking, we understand the challenge. The parking is already a challenge in the neighborhood as

1124
01:44:24,040 --> 01:44:32,840
as repark into concern. I'm an urban guy myself, you know, I understand that just because you

1125
01:44:32,840 --> 01:44:36,560
have a car and you have access to parking, it doesn't mean you're using a car every single day,

1126
01:44:36,660 --> 01:44:42,380
I think that's also something that we need to consider. It's just because you have access to

1127
01:44:42,380 --> 01:44:46,740
a parking and a car, maybe you're using it on the weekend to go grocery shopping, but, you know,

1128
01:44:46,800 --> 01:44:53,640
myself, my daily commute, I'm doing by bike, foot or transit to go into the office,

1129
01:44:53,640 --> 01:44:56,860
So to do kind of my, my every the activity.

1130
01:45:00,000 --> 01:45:09,680
I think it'll be just great to have the neighborhood change from some low rise industrial complexes to a visually appealing

1131
01:45:10,520 --> 01:45:20,000
high rise with some commercial that will continue to reinvigorate the street. So that's kind of what I want to say. Thank you for the time.

1132
01:45:21,980 --> 01:45:33,060
Thank you very much, Mr. Court of O. I don't see any questions for you for members, so thank you very much for the presentation.

1133
01:45:34,580 --> 01:45:39,060
We'll move on to Lorraine Reed, who I believe was online, Highloring, Nary R.

1134
01:45:39,740 --> 01:45:42,940
And then David Pepper will be our final speaker.

1135
01:45:43,660 --> 01:45:49,480
David, we think we have you identified as an unnamed iPad user.

1136
01:45:49,480 --> 01:45:54,100
If that's you could you just let the clerk know because otherwise we're having difficulties finding you

1137
01:45:54,700 --> 01:45:56,120
Lorraine, sorry about that

1138
01:45:56,120 --> 01:45:59,800
Please have whenever you're ready. Have five minutes make a presentation of the committee

1139
01:46:04,990 --> 01:46:06,530
and you're on mute.

1140
01:46:09,940 --> 01:46:10,220
Thank you

1141
01:46:10,700 --> 01:46:12,240
Now you can hear me

1142
01:46:12,240 --> 01:46:18,560
My name's Lorraine Reed. I live in the Holland station home town homes diagonally across from the proposed building site

1143
01:46:19,080 --> 01:46:23,760
I'm on speaking on behalf of myself and several homeowners in the Holland station community

1144
01:46:23,760 --> 01:46:33,180
You would have received a letter signed by the majority of our homeowners, as well as individually submitted responses in the spring, which is my first encounter with this proposed amendment.

1145
01:46:33,940 --> 01:46:37,360
Despite the changes that have been made, our concerns remain.

1146
01:46:37,360 --> 01:46:42,760
They are continuous disregard for approved official plan and urban secondary plans and

1147
01:46:42,760 --> 01:46:47,420
precedence for future proposed amendments, height of the building proposed an impact on

1148
01:46:47,420 --> 01:46:51,020
our residential neighborhood within the Scott Street secondary plan.

1149
01:46:51,620 --> 01:46:56,880
Impact of increased congestion on Parkdale Avenue, impact of increased traffic on the

1150
01:46:56,880 --> 01:47:02,300
side streets, Armstrong, Hamilton and Spencer, and location of the parking garage entrances,

1151
01:47:02,300 --> 01:47:06,680
egresses and service and utility vehicle access to the proposed

1152
01:47:06,680 --> 01:47:10,760
ability that would turn Hamilton Avenue North into effectively a service

1153
01:47:10,760 --> 01:47:15,840
road. Commitments made and laid out in the current official plan and both the

1154
01:47:15,840 --> 01:47:19,060
Scott Street and Wellington Street West secondary plans must be

1155
01:47:19,060 --> 01:47:22,780
respected. Continued requests by developers to amend these plans be

1156
01:47:22,780 --> 01:47:26,380
little and ignore the intent and objectives of the effort by the city,

1157
01:47:26,740 --> 01:47:29,360
plans and the vision they lay out for our neighborhoods.

1158
01:47:30,120 --> 01:47:35,080
Significant investment in effort by the city, community associations and individuals when

1159
01:47:35,080 --> 01:47:37,840
it to creating, agreeing, and approving these plans.

1160
01:47:38,240 --> 01:47:41,700
Because they are well beyond the approved zoning, our obvious attempts to manipulate

1161
01:47:41,700 --> 01:47:45,700
a compromise-built building height that is still well above the approved limit.

1162
01:47:46,280 --> 01:47:50,880
The modification of the proposed amendment to 32 stories is still four times the approved

1163
01:47:50,880 --> 01:47:53,520
height of eight stories and not an acceptable compromise.

1164
01:47:54,180 --> 01:47:58,260
The resultant light and noise pollution will be disruptive, and there is also concerned that

1165
01:47:58,260 --> 01:48:03,820
city infrastructure will not support this level of densification, especially given the number of severe

1166
01:48:03,820 --> 01:48:05,860
weather events that we are now experiencing.

1167
01:48:07,360 --> 01:48:11,460
The revised proposal has moved the major tower to be at the corner of Hamilton Avenue,

1168
01:48:11,480 --> 01:48:12,880
North and Spencer Street.

1169
01:48:13,460 --> 01:48:18,000
In the response to the Hintonburg and Wellington Community Association, the city states that

1170
01:48:18,000 --> 01:48:23,980
it was moved as not to impact the nearby residential neighborhood and that quote, the proposal

1171
01:48:23,980 --> 01:48:29,340
appropriately located greatest building height in density in closest radial proximity to the rapid

1172
01:48:29,340 --> 01:48:34,880
transit station where it is sensitively accommodated furthest away from the stable low-rise

1173
01:48:34,880 --> 01:48:40,740
neighborhood to the east within the Hintonburg neighborhood. So why is our at least 30-year-old

1174
01:48:40,740 --> 01:48:46,600
neighborhood to the north and west of the proposed tower being ignored and excluded? We deserve

1175
01:48:46,600 --> 01:48:52,720
equal consideration and status as an established stable residential neighborhood that will be impacted.

1176
01:48:52,720 --> 01:48:57,880
I disagree with the city staff assessment that given the center of the hub can generally

1177
01:48:57,880 --> 01:49:03,200
be anticipated to develop to heights of 40 stories, the proposed height of 32 stories

1178
01:49:03,200 --> 01:49:10,380
is an adequate transition plane. 32 stories is in the midst of town homes, single family homes,

1179
01:49:10,580 --> 01:49:15,560
low and mid-rise residential dwellings, and it's not an adequate transition. Given the condo

1180
01:49:15,560 --> 01:49:20,380
immediately to the north is only six stories, it is a significant break in the existing plane

1181
01:49:20,380 --> 01:49:25,440
site line. A approval of this request will set a precedent and greatly increase the risk that future

1182
01:49:25,440 --> 01:49:30,280
developments in the Scott Street mixed use zone will be a greater or similar height. This

1183
01:49:30,280 --> 01:49:35,400
would negatively impact our privacy, light and sky views by creating a visually jagged and

1184
01:49:35,400 --> 01:49:40,960
physical barrier, whereby our homes will be dwarfed and cut off from the broader Hintonburg community.

1185
01:49:42,400 --> 01:49:47,140
The proposed changes still increase the number of vehicles accessing the building by about 300,

1186
01:49:47,140 --> 01:49:50,640
based on the number of residential and visitor parking spaces.

1187
01:49:51,220 --> 01:49:53,780
Parkdale is already in gridlock for most of the day.

1188
01:49:54,020 --> 01:49:57,020
Vehicles regularly use Spencer, Armstrong, and Hamilton

1189
01:49:57,020 --> 01:49:59,180
often cutting through the beer store parking lot

1190
01:49:59,180 --> 01:50:02,320
to bypass the traffic on Parkdale, Holland, and Wellington.

1191
01:50:03,320 --> 01:50:06,320
In addition, the additional vehicles were further congested

1192
01:50:06,320 --> 01:50:08,220
the area, especially where building entrances,

1193
01:50:08,500 --> 01:50:10,440
egresses, and service areas are located.

1194
01:50:10,960 --> 01:50:13,080
That combined with the number of vehicles using

1195
01:50:13,080 --> 01:50:16,460
side streets increases safety risks to pedestrians and cyclists

1196
01:50:16,460 --> 01:50:18,820
and compares the ability of emergency service

1197
01:50:18,820 --> 01:50:20,840
to vehicles to navigate the area.

1198
01:50:21,460 --> 01:50:23,900
It is very difficult to be a walkable neighborhood

1199
01:50:23,900 --> 01:50:26,200
when your head is on a pivot watching for cars

1200
01:50:26,200 --> 01:50:27,800
and in a tent of dangerous drivers,

1201
01:50:28,240 --> 01:50:29,420
which is the case now.

1202
01:50:30,120 --> 01:50:32,400
The traffic studies on which the application space

1203
01:50:32,400 --> 01:50:36,500
were done depending on the intersection between 2017 and 2024.

1204
01:50:37,180 --> 01:50:39,920
Spencer and Parkdale was done in April 2024

1205
01:50:39,920 --> 01:50:42,980
after the pandemic and prior to the federal workforce

1206
01:50:42,980 --> 01:50:45,240
for us being required to return to office

1207
01:50:45,240 --> 01:50:48,240
for a minimum of three days a week, now four days a week.

1208
01:50:48,880 --> 01:50:51,400
A new traffic study should be conducted for the area,

1209
01:50:51,760 --> 01:50:55,180
and as proposed by the Westboro and Hinderburg Community Association,

1210
01:50:55,700 --> 01:50:59,200
include a more detailed analysis of how the additional traffic

1211
01:50:59,200 --> 01:51:01,420
from the proposed development will affect queuing,

1212
01:51:02,100 --> 01:51:03,520
spill-back from adjacent intersections,

1213
01:51:03,840 --> 01:51:06,860
and the cumulative effects of multiple developments in the vicinity.

1214
01:51:07,860 --> 01:51:09,920
I, and the homeowners I speak for,

1215
01:51:10,020 --> 01:51:11,680
believe that our voices are not being heard,

1216
01:51:11,780 --> 01:51:14,160
and that our neighborhood to the north and west of the development

1217
01:51:14,160 --> 01:51:16,740
is being ignored when it comes to assessing impact.

1218
01:51:17,260 --> 01:51:22,300
We argue the amendments should firmly be rejected by the city of Ottawa, but that consultation

1219
01:51:22,300 --> 01:51:28,660
should continue to further modify the proposed development in a strategic and sensitive

1220
01:51:28,660 --> 01:51:30,160
manner for all neighborhoods.

1221
01:51:30,640 --> 01:51:31,920
Thank you.

1222
01:51:33,140 --> 01:51:34,620
Lorraine, thank you very much for that.

1223
01:51:35,360 --> 01:51:41,340
And certainly I'm very cognizant that the shift in the building has moved a closer to your

1224
01:51:41,340 --> 01:51:48,400
homes. You're in an interesting location there in the heart of the hub and I know that's going

1225
01:51:48,400 --> 01:51:55,820
to be challenging. I don't see any questions for you. I do have one question. The residents,

1226
01:51:55,960 --> 01:51:59,560
I think it was the part-to-market loss of suggested that the building should be brought down

1227
01:51:59,560 --> 01:52:05,100
to 25 stories. Do you consider that that makes any difference for your development?

1228
01:52:06,020 --> 01:52:12,360
on the base, I still think it's too high. I thought from three or four years ago the proposed

1229
01:52:12,360 --> 01:52:19,920
16 or 18 stories was too high. But again, with further design elements or discussions that

1230
01:52:19,920 --> 01:52:26,600
we could be involved in, maybe my views would change, but right now I'd say it's too high.

1231
01:52:32,360 --> 01:52:36,760
And I think we are on to our last speaker, David Pepper. I don't know if we found them.

1232
01:52:39,070 --> 01:52:39,490
Yes.

1233
01:52:39,730 --> 01:52:41,290
Oh, hey, David. Hi.

1234
01:52:41,390 --> 01:52:42,130
When are you here?

1235
01:52:42,510 --> 01:52:49,430
And like Linda Hode, you probably are not may not be happy you found me, but hopefully you will be.

1236
01:52:49,750 --> 01:52:58,550
My name is David Pepper. I've actually lived across the street at 222 Larms Strong, which makes me a direct neighbor of 223 Larms Strong, the Carlton Tabard.

1237
01:52:58,550 --> 01:53:06,430
for the past 35 years so I would say that I know from my front porch I know this particular

1238
01:53:06,430 --> 01:53:11,950
city block very very well. I'm just going to make some comments for the record and then I have

1239
01:53:11,950 --> 01:53:19,650
three asks at the end of my presentation. I'd like to thank city staff, Jack and Kelly for making

1240
01:53:19,650 --> 01:53:25,570
this process easy for me. I don't necessarily agree with Jack's assessments but thanks for helping.

1241
01:53:26,250 --> 01:53:29,450
And thanks to my hardworking HCA,

1242
01:53:29,450 --> 01:53:34,630
Hindenburg Community Association of Friends and who've done so much work and keeping us informed.

1243
01:53:35,450 --> 01:53:44,530
My comments, it's nice to do mop-ups so that I can just say the lack of support in all of the public submissions should be telling to the committee.

1244
01:53:45,110 --> 01:53:54,830
The parking and the argument, I would agree with so many of the folks is really disingenuous in terms of just saying that it agrees with the policy.

1245
01:53:54,830 --> 01:53:57,970
but without bringing any challenge, function to it.

1246
01:53:58,470 --> 01:54:03,290
The height is obviously an issue, which I generally

1247
01:54:03,290 --> 01:54:05,810
concur with people's overall concerns.

1248
01:54:05,910 --> 01:54:08,770
The one thing I didn't see, I saw it in one slide from

1249
01:54:08,770 --> 01:54:10,970
Taggart was shadow impacts.

1250
01:54:11,670 --> 01:54:14,630
They had been north of Armstrong, but not my side of Armstrong.

1251
01:54:15,350 --> 01:54:18,290
When they did the Minto building on Wellington,

1252
01:54:18,770 --> 01:54:22,170
we saw some very good shadow studies in terms of its impact,

1253
01:54:22,170 --> 01:54:25,870
and not shadow at one point of the year, but all kinds of the year.

1254
01:54:25,870 --> 01:54:30,850
I haven't seen those, I mean, I ought to found them, so I'll give them a break on that.

1255
01:54:31,310 --> 01:54:37,790
I also support overall concerns about access to affordable housing, which is much more needed

1256
01:54:37,790 --> 01:54:45,150
in our neighborhood. My three asks, the first is the deep hole, but Linda has branded the hole,

1257
01:54:45,250 --> 01:54:50,390
I think that's not a bad term, is the blasting that will be coming from that.

1258
01:54:50,390 --> 01:54:57,730
When the Minto development at Wellington Hamilton came about they actually came to my house

1259
01:54:57,730 --> 01:55:07,190
two streets down and they did videotaking because of concerns about the impact of blasting on my 125-year-old house.

1260
01:55:08,150 --> 01:55:19,490
I found that mildly concerning because we were so relatively far away but obviously it's heightened my concern about the depth of four layers on this blasting.

1261
01:55:19,490 --> 01:55:39,410
So, the question there will be if and when this blasting goes forward, I will want some sort of mechanism where I have a blasting 311 or blasting 911 ability to call one person or one place without getting the run around.

1262
01:55:39,690 --> 01:55:47,790
Already I've noticed we have had one slight impact from the Wellington development, so that has heightened my concern.

1263
01:55:47,790 --> 01:55:54,690
So, I would ask for some sort of ability for us to have easy access to a

1264
01:55:54,690 --> 01:56:01,730
Helpline and a concern line. It but it blasting comes about. I don't know if my other two issues have come for site plan

1265
01:56:02,810 --> 01:56:08,430
Issues, but I'm gonna throw them out here because I'm talking to you. The second one is about the

1266
01:56:08,850 --> 01:56:12,410
impact of the removal of the environmental degradation

1267
01:56:13,050 --> 01:56:17,770
Any questions? I assume will be answered around any dust that come

1268
01:56:17,790 --> 01:56:22,650
from blasting the stuff that happens in the neighborhood, those of us across the street and

1269
01:56:22,650 --> 01:56:23,170
so on.

1270
01:56:23,510 --> 01:56:30,690
The removal of it and so on will there be, and how will we be informed of any potential impacts

1271
01:56:30,690 --> 01:56:31,410
of that?

1272
01:56:31,830 --> 01:56:40,050
And my final ask, and I know that the folks in the audience from the HCA, I'm sure we'll

1273
01:56:40,050 --> 01:56:46,490
support this, is that if this development does go ahead and the aspects of its relationship

1274
01:56:46,490 --> 01:56:54,170
the market. The city seriously and for once and for all make a true capital investment in the

1275
01:56:54,170 --> 01:56:59,950
Parkdale Market. The Parkdale Market has so much potential. We've seen that over the many years

1276
01:56:59,950 --> 01:57:05,190
at the Humberc Community Association's been working with the market and the potential to develop

1277
01:57:05,190 --> 01:57:10,770
some capital infrastructure there to make it a year-round market. We have many vendors who are

1278
01:57:10,770 --> 01:57:19,370
and some one-bender in particular, Cornel, our egg farmer who comes every Saturday, 52 weeks

1279
01:57:19,370 --> 01:57:26,170
a year in the winter. There are many examples of winter markets, which with a little bit of

1280
01:57:26,170 --> 01:57:32,950
infrastructure could transform, part-dell market into an even better market than it has become.

1281
01:57:33,550 --> 01:57:39,170
And with any development at this site, obviously, that would allow those people to not have to

1282
01:57:39,170 --> 01:57:43,830
grocery shopping with their car, they could just go down to the market. So those are my

1283
01:57:43,830 --> 01:57:46,030
comments, my three asks. Thank you.

1284
01:57:49,060 --> 01:57:55,640
Thank you very much, David. I don't see any questions for you.

1285
01:57:56,080 --> 01:58:01,140
My office would be happy or I know Jack would also be a happy dancer offline. Some of the questions

1286
01:58:01,140 --> 01:58:07,120
around blasts, etc. They're not in play as questions today with the zoning and official plan

1287
01:58:07,120 --> 01:58:17,080
amendment, but we'd be happy to walk you through that and, you know, so without other questions

1288
01:58:17,080 --> 01:58:22,860
to the public delegations, we'll move on to questions of city staff.

1289
01:58:27,010 --> 01:58:27,490
Councillor Brock

1290
01:58:27,490 --> 01:58:28,050
and said,

1291
01:58:30,680 --> 01:58:34,060
how tall would this building have to be for you to say no?

1292
01:58:38,420 --> 01:58:40,460
Chair, our role is to

1293
01:58:40,460 --> 01:58:46,000
respond to the application before us, so we assess the final product which in this case was

1294
01:58:46,000 --> 01:58:52,100
32 stories. I can't speculate as to what height would change that threshold.

1295
01:58:54,990 --> 01:58:58,290
This is a question I've asked before in other files and planning staff

1296
01:58:59,990 --> 01:59:05,170
give me that answer. So it's difficult for me and it's difficult for the public to know

1297
01:59:05,170 --> 01:59:12,570
what is the threshold? I'm dealing with 40 story towers, butting the central park neighbor

1298
01:59:12,570 --> 01:59:17,150
that's an active file right now and we're having very similar conversations about

1299
01:59:19,150 --> 01:59:23,450
the appropriateness of height and density and I'm a huge supporter of density and height

1300
01:59:23,450 --> 01:59:28,750
near transit stations, near Tony's pastor station, we should have height. And density,

1301
01:59:29,230 --> 01:59:35,550
the question that we're hearing is what's the appropriate height and density inside a residential

1302
01:59:35,550 --> 01:59:45,710
community, again, a topic that's being discussed in my word as well. The traffic study references

1303
01:59:45,710 --> 01:59:52,090
that we heard from many delegates cited sort of aged data could please could staff just

1304
01:59:52,090 --> 01:59:57,090
please talk about the traffic studies that were done. And the years.

1305
02:00:00,000 --> 02:00:01,260
So,

1306
02:00:15,940 --> 02:00:25,580
TIA would have been submitted in support of the application and circulated to transportation engineering services for the transportation project manager to coordinate the review of that application.

1307
02:00:26,640 --> 02:00:37,880
Of that document, through the review of the application, the transportation project manager was satisfied with the report for the purpose of the official plan amendment and zoning bottom amendment.

1308
02:00:39,510 --> 02:00:51,090
Okay, but do we have a requirement or a threshold that data can't be too old and obsolete

1309
02:00:51,090 --> 02:01:00,310
before we require the proponent to refresh the data or restart the data as opposed to using data that already exists?

1310
02:01:01,050 --> 02:01:07,550
Are you suggesting that the city's traffic specialist was satisfied with the age of the data?

1311
02:01:07,550 --> 02:01:09,690
that was submitted as part of the study?

1312
02:01:12,570 --> 02:01:14,250
Yes, so in this instance,

1313
02:01:14,370 --> 02:01:17,210
they would have reviewed the data that was in the report

1314
02:01:17,210 --> 02:01:19,050
and they would have provided comments back

1315
02:01:19,050 --> 02:01:22,970
to the planner as well as the applicant for response.

1316
02:01:24,150 --> 02:01:27,910
Just from my knowledge of the transportation review,

1317
02:01:28,190 --> 02:01:30,750
the age of a traffic count can be considered

1318
02:01:30,750 --> 02:01:34,990
as adequate, depending on the location and context,

1319
02:01:35,410 --> 02:01:38,770
as well as in consideration, for example,

1320
02:01:38,770 --> 02:01:43,490
the COVID year is traffic might have been lighter and it's actually better to use older data

1321
02:01:43,490 --> 02:01:46,690
and that instance as it's more reflective of post COVID traffic.

1322
02:01:47,050 --> 02:01:53,530
So how do these studies include more recent developments in the neighborhood and even proposed

1323
02:01:53,530 --> 02:01:59,810
developments that council maybe has not yet approved are those factored into these assessments?

1324
02:02:03,950 --> 02:02:08,570
Chair's best is possible. Yes, it's not always the case depending on timing. Certainly

1325
02:02:08,570 --> 02:02:15,210
transportation and practice assessment will contemplate approved developments as part of assumptions

1326
02:02:15,210 --> 02:02:20,310
and targets that are happening in that neighborhood. I said the kind of half yes, if you will,

1327
02:02:20,610 --> 02:02:25,970
because if a time of submission comes in another project comes online, that may not be contemplated,

1328
02:02:26,390 --> 02:02:31,430
but in scenarios like this, where today we've got official plan amendment and zoning

1329
02:02:31,430 --> 02:02:35,950
by law amendment and that TIA is based on information available at the time of this application

1330
02:02:35,950 --> 02:02:41,790
submission. The expectation is that when this comes back for site plan, whether that be within the next few

1331
02:02:41,790 --> 02:02:46,930
months or a few years from now, that TAA is going to have to be updated to be more relevant to

1332
02:02:46,930 --> 02:02:52,830
what other additional information has come online, I, other projects, approvals, projects,

1333
02:02:53,350 --> 02:02:59,010
and get the more relevant data as it becomes available. So, the TAA that we have now is not necessarily

1334
02:02:59,010 --> 02:03:03,490
the final version. It will be looked at again through site plan one in when that comes in.

1335
02:03:04,790 --> 02:03:11,610
Okay, and so the city has the right to ask the proponent to refresh the data if that is believed to be warranted.

1336
02:03:13,230 --> 02:03:18,430
Chair, it's an expectation that it'd be updated to be current at the time of site plan submission.

1337
02:03:18,850 --> 02:03:19,790
Okay, very good.

1338
02:03:20,450 --> 02:03:26,070
And just parking, what is the minimum parking ratio for this development that the city is asking for?

1339
02:03:31,010 --> 02:03:34,410
I would need to refer to the zoning for the maximum parking requirements,

1340
02:03:34,410 --> 02:03:46,350
But the site remains compliant with the required minimum and maximum parking. Okay, but is 0.7 the minimum request or is the proponent adding more parking and the minimum?

1341
02:03:46,950 --> 02:03:51,210
The proponent would be adding more parking within the minimum. And what is the delta?

1342
02:03:53,910 --> 02:04:07,340
Is the city of Iowa saying 0.5 and they're offering 0.7 or can refer to this chair? The current zoning by-law does not require parking in the or in the

1343
02:04:07,340 --> 02:04:17,530
application. Yes. Okay. So I'm trying to understand it's like a chicken and egg. This is close to

1344
02:04:18,600 --> 02:04:28,640
Tony Spaster LRT station. We want people, particularly new developments within 600 meters of stations to be tall and dense.

1345
02:04:28,640 --> 02:04:42,100
And we want those residents, as in everyone else, to take transit, so you offer parking and incentivize people to move in and drive and rely on their car.

1346
02:04:42,600 --> 02:04:47,780
And there'll be less pressure to become a ongoing transit user.

1347
02:04:47,980 --> 02:04:56,420
So how do we explain this to the public that despite your close vicinity to an LRT station,

1348
02:04:56,420 --> 02:05:00,780
we're going to permit through a higher parking ratio than what's necessary.

1349
02:05:04,210 --> 02:05:05,890
Sure, that's a great question.

1350
02:05:06,170 --> 02:05:10,990
And it's obviously one that's really important depending on site context, location,

1351
02:05:11,150 --> 02:05:12,590
the specific site and the surroundings.

1352
02:05:13,350 --> 02:05:18,110
And what I mean by that is if you look at a transportation impact assessment and talk to

1353
02:05:18,110 --> 02:05:22,810
our transportation colleagues who obviously have more expertise in this than I do,

1354
02:05:23,290 --> 02:05:27,530
there's always a conversation of those modal shares and assumptions that are made.

1355
02:05:27,530 --> 02:05:33,810
And in that conversation, when you look at a location like this that is categorically a very

1356
02:05:33,810 --> 02:05:38,210
walkable neighborhood, you know, we've heard that 15 minute neighborhood, this site definitely

1357
02:05:38,210 --> 02:05:45,010
fits that context. It has great access to a number of local goods and amenities that are walkable.

1358
02:05:45,230 --> 02:05:50,530
It has really good access to a number of cycling infrastructure, local bus routes, it's 450

1359
02:05:50,530 --> 02:05:58,150
meter walking distance to a rapid transit station. Where that factors into a TIA in translation is

1360
02:05:58,150 --> 02:06:04,070
if a parking space is provided, it doesn't necessarily mean that every trip generated is going

1361
02:06:04,070 --> 02:06:10,490
to be by personal car. Those are those other active transit options are available, and there's

1362
02:06:10,490 --> 02:06:15,950
a certain assumption that a high percentage of trips, whether it be commuting to work or walking

1363
02:06:15,950 --> 02:06:20,710
to the Parkdale Market in this case to grab some eggs as we heard a delegation, those

1364
02:06:20,710 --> 02:06:27,650
factor into that parking space not necessarily generating 100% of vehicle trips because

1365
02:06:27,650 --> 02:06:30,170
it is well served by that active transit community.

1366
02:06:33,760 --> 02:06:35,000
Okay, I appreciate that.

1367
02:06:35,740 --> 02:06:39,120
I may have some other questions, Chair, but I'll certainly yield to my colleagues.

1368
02:06:43,660 --> 02:06:44,760
Thank you so much.

1369
02:06:46,100 --> 02:06:48,260
I just want to know that we've been talking about the parking here.

1370
02:06:48,280 --> 02:06:49,620
I just want to be a bundle in clear.

1371
02:06:49,620 --> 02:06:57,900
So do we have any recourse, people are seeing the ratios too high, but it's still below the thresholds, correct?

1372
02:06:59,120 --> 02:07:07,700
So you would have sort of no tool at your disposal to say put in less parking if they're already below the maximum.

1373
02:07:10,750 --> 02:07:18,750
Through our commenting of the cyclone control application, we could certainly engage in further conversations on the adequate amount of parking for this specific site.

1374
02:07:18,750 --> 02:07:21,810
But that is right, that it does remain zoning compliant.

1375
02:07:22,430 --> 02:07:23,530
Okay, so it is zoning compliant.

1376
02:07:23,970 --> 02:07:26,990
Like, this is so frustrating because obviously, the near book.

1377
02:07:30,000 --> 02:07:57,420
But traffic in part del, which I totally get, part del is disaster. But we consistently have this problem at planning. This chicken and egg issue in counter kits has sort of been the number one person highlighting this, where it's like, what comes first, the transportation infrastructure or the housing. Now this is a contaminated site that currently has no housing. So generally speaking, it's supportive of putting housing there. But what can be done through the site plan process to mitigate those very real traffic concerns?

1378
02:07:57,420 --> 02:08:02,420
because that's still adding a lot of cars to a very tight area that's already really hard to navigate.

1379
02:08:06,140 --> 02:08:11,320
Chair, I don't know that we can directly answer that question today. It really depends on the timing

1380
02:08:11,320 --> 02:08:16,320
of when that cyclone application comes in. Part of the transportation impact assessment,

1381
02:08:16,420 --> 02:08:20,560
there's a component of it called transit demand strategies. There's a number of different things

1382
02:08:20,560 --> 02:08:27,120
that a developer can propose to offset the need to use a vehicle, everything from preloaded

1383
02:08:28,020 --> 02:08:46,480
Presto cards adding more bicycle parking, just to name a few examples, we're probably not going to get that level of detail of what they're specifically doing in their building and, you know, setting up their project to be more active transit support of in friendly to offset the desire to choose a car.

1384
02:08:46,820 --> 02:08:50,860
So I hear the point, I'm there with you in terms of a conversation.

1385
02:08:50,860 --> 02:08:57,360
I don't know that we can fully realize what that looks like until this project progresses through that site plan process.

1386
02:08:57,920 --> 02:08:59,060
Okay, yeah, and just a comment.

1387
02:08:59,280 --> 02:09:02,800
This just speaks to the frustration of the kind of siloization of the two issues,

1388
02:09:02,800 --> 02:09:05,680
because the transportation planning stuff comes up.

1389
02:09:05,880 --> 02:09:08,700
Public Works and Infrastructure Committee is part of our transportation master plan,

1390
02:09:08,960 --> 02:09:10,720
but then these projects are approved,

1391
02:09:10,920 --> 02:09:16,080
one by one, at planning, where we don't have jurisdiction to improve transportation relief.

1392
02:09:16,380 --> 02:09:18,260
So I just want to say I really share that frustration,

1393
02:09:18,260 --> 02:09:23,800
and it might be worth a rethink with our governance review coming up to figure out how we can

1394
02:09:23,800 --> 02:09:28,500
more closely tie these issues together, so these decisions are being made so that when you

1395
02:09:28,500 --> 02:09:33,280
approve something that you know is probably going to take a decade to build, how do you ensure

1396
02:09:33,280 --> 02:09:39,360
that at the same time you're you're ensuring the transportation infrastructure is built into the

1397
02:09:39,360 --> 02:09:43,340
transportation master plan, and I know that's not your jurisdiction, but it's just two committees,

1398
02:09:43,340 --> 02:09:48,320
these two silos, but the impact of one building on the community, and that's, I just want

1399
02:09:48,320 --> 02:09:50,600
to agree with you all that it's very frustrating.

1400
02:09:51,220 --> 02:09:55,440
We had a very similar conversation around 267 O'Connor, where my residents were really unhappy

1401
02:09:55,440 --> 02:09:56,140
about that too.

1402
02:09:56,720 --> 02:10:02,360
And the answer is, we don't have an answer here because our job is just to decide if we approve

1403
02:10:02,360 --> 02:10:07,820
a zoning amendment or not, but it's actually worth so much more to the community, so thank

1404
02:10:07,820 --> 02:10:08,340
you very much.

1405
02:10:10,510 --> 02:10:17,630
Thanks, Chair. I just had a clarifying question because I was a little bit confused in the staff report.

1406
02:10:18,170 --> 02:10:25,050
On page 9 it references a height limit of 8 stories and on page 25 it references a height limit of 18 stories.

1407
02:10:26,150 --> 02:10:31,770
What is the actual height limit currently that needs to be amended?

1408
02:10:33,500 --> 02:10:40,940
So, it's too pronged within the second area, within the official plan, generally 40 stories

1409
02:10:40,940 --> 02:10:45,260
are contemplated within the hub designation, within the inner urban transect, within

1410
02:10:45,260 --> 02:10:53,200
the secondary plan, two of the sites being, let me just pull this up here, being 233 Armstrong

1411
02:10:53,200 --> 02:10:58,480
and 3 Hamilton Avenue North are subject to a site-specific policy, which permit the development

1412
02:10:58,480 --> 02:11:04,980
of a floor space index that is generally equivalent to eight stories without being subject to a maximum height.

1413
02:11:05,060 --> 02:11:06,560
That's within the secondary plan.

1414
02:11:06,880 --> 02:11:11,700
So a majority of the site is not subject to a maximum height just that FSI.

1415
02:11:12,220 --> 02:11:18,180
With the remainder of the two properties being subject to a general policy of an eight story of max.

1416
02:11:18,820 --> 02:11:27,540
Within the zoning by law, given historic OMB decisions, a maximum of 18 stories is permitted on

1417
02:11:27,540 --> 02:11:33,300
on two, three, three arms strong and three Hamilton Avenue North, given that file history.

1418
02:11:34,520 --> 02:11:39,120
So those zoning schedule would have been established at the time of going to the OMB

1419
02:11:39,120 --> 02:11:42,300
for that previous contemplated 18-story built form.

1420
02:11:42,940 --> 02:11:51,100
Okay. And on the FSI, there was one of the delegations who brought forward some calculations and said

1421
02:11:51,100 --> 02:11:55,480
that stats calculations are the applications were incorrect.

1422
02:11:57,540 --> 02:11:58,920
Have you respond to that delegation?

1423
02:12:00,280 --> 02:12:00,560
Yes.

1424
02:12:01,340 --> 02:12:04,900
So the zoning by law amendment for those two specific properties

1425
02:12:04,900 --> 02:12:07,020
subject to the site specific policies

1426
02:12:07,700 --> 02:12:13,800
are subject to a six point OFSI within the zoning by law,

1427
02:12:14,080 --> 02:12:16,400
which is reflective of that 18 story design,

1428
02:12:16,460 --> 02:12:18,480
which was previously approved by the OMB.

1429
02:12:19,060 --> 02:12:21,160
However, when you read the parent policies

1430
02:12:21,160 --> 02:12:24,360
being the secondary plan, it's actually based on,

1431
02:12:24,360 --> 02:12:26,800
there's direction within that document

1432
02:12:26,800 --> 02:12:35,140
that permits that eight story FSI on the site. So when you take into account eight stories within

1433
02:12:35,140 --> 02:12:39,720
the parent document instead of six stories within the zoning you do come out to it of Proximit

1434
02:12:39,720 --> 02:12:45,800
28,000 square meter GFA across the site when you take in all the permissions and the proposed

1435
02:12:45,800 --> 02:12:53,120
development includes approximately 24,000 square meters of GFA. So coming in below that GFA calculation.

1436
02:12:53,120 --> 02:13:02,540
So you're asserting that how staff calculated the FSI for the evaluation of this proposed zoning

1437
02:13:02,540 --> 02:13:07,000
amendment is accurate and aligned to policy.

1438
02:13:08,100 --> 02:13:08,520
That's right.

1439
02:13:08,660 --> 02:13:14,020
We would have done our calculation based on the policies of the secondary plan, whereas the

1440
02:13:14,020 --> 02:13:20,460
delegate earlier would have been referring to the zoning which established a six FSI of six.

1441
02:13:21,500 --> 02:13:31,700
I can't say I completely follow this and I can't blame residents for their confusion and concern about the amount of time they had to review the report.

1442
02:13:32,400 --> 02:13:40,800
The mix and the intersection of policies and historical issues with this site is really confusing.

1443
02:13:41,720 --> 02:13:45,080
So I do want to acknowledge that concern from residents.

1444
02:13:46,180 --> 02:13:46,820
Thank

1445
02:13:50,690 --> 02:13:51,330
you.

1446
02:13:51,370 --> 02:13:52,550
Great to have thank you chair.

1447
02:13:54,030 --> 02:13:56,790
So I'll just go straight simple questions.

1448
02:13:58,270 --> 02:14:01,950
Did it meet the targeted communications

1449
02:14:04,640 --> 02:14:07,960
under the provincial legislation where we have to get out?

1450
02:14:08,360 --> 02:14:08,880
That's correct.

1451
02:14:09,080 --> 02:14:13,560
We would have notified the public both of the circulation of the application.

1452
02:14:13,940 --> 02:14:21,400
Posted public science garnered their feedback and then provided correct notice under the planning act with respect to today's meeting here today.

1453
02:14:21,640 --> 02:14:32,820
Okay, and I know it's very tough because we see these applications all the time and I actually have a tremendous amount of high-rise intensification in my area, so I deal with this on a regular basis.

1454
02:14:33,540 --> 02:14:43,960
I guess to Tim Mark, if this went anywhere, if we just decided to block it or try to stop, it's the same question as usual, what happens at the next level.

1455
02:14:45,820 --> 02:14:57,000
Mr. Chair, this one actually, as has been indicated by the planning staff, this matter went to the OMB as it then was back.

1456
02:15:00,000 --> 02:15:08,660
This is where staff had recommended a particular approach, zoning, which was ultimately approved by the OMB.

1457
02:15:09,200 --> 02:15:11,340
And Council had taken a different position.

1458
02:15:12,720 --> 02:15:19,640
And so, in that case, the OMB relied on the staff view.

1459
02:15:23,680 --> 02:15:30,400
I'm not going to say that they're going to happen today, but this property does have a history to it, Mr. Chair.

1460
02:15:30,400 --> 02:15:37,220
I know. And that could repeat itself. Yeah. And I believe the chair is actually well documented

1461
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:44,700
by the way on your blog or some stuff. I don't know what it is. The history of this file is quite

1462
02:15:44,700 --> 02:15:49,760
extensive and long. And it's unfortunate I thought that there would have been that opportunity,

1463
02:15:50,100 --> 02:15:53,760
but it sounds like the applicant's quite pressed on time now and after so many years,

1464
02:15:54,100 --> 02:15:59,340
I think we're in a position where we know what's going to happen here at the end of the day.

1465
02:15:59,340 --> 02:16:05,280
it's about making sure the residents actually hear some of their concerns addressed whether it's

1466
02:16:05,280 --> 02:16:09,360
transportation or the garbage pickup. These are the things that we could actually focus on.

1467
02:16:10,980 --> 02:16:16,240
Desowning, we all know that that's a fit of complete. That's probably not going to change.

1468
02:16:17,820 --> 02:16:23,540
So a lot of these notes I think have been taken here today and should be brought back to staff.

1469
02:16:24,440 --> 02:16:28,120
And my colleague to the left of me is quite correct. We deal with this even in the east and

1470
02:16:28,120 --> 02:16:32,120
There's not even the rogue infrastructure now that exists now where you could actually put a road.

1471
02:16:32,580 --> 02:16:38,920
There is no place to put a road when you're building downtown because we made a commitment to build up to intensify.

1472
02:16:39,660 --> 02:16:41,240
These are the challenges for experiencing.

1473
02:16:41,660 --> 02:16:47,120
So for this, I mean, there's no real option we have to support proceeding with this.

1474
02:16:47,480 --> 02:16:54,360
I don't see unless we just want to make this a political thing, but anyway, thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

1475
02:16:54,360 --> 02:16:54,840
Okay,

1476
02:17:01,310 --> 02:17:06,030
these might be repetitive questions, but I am still trying to wrap my head around the parking.

1477
02:17:07,230 --> 02:17:11,830
So, when you're asked the question about the parking minimums, I understand they're in zoning compliance,

1478
02:17:13,170 --> 02:17:17,070
but then you list it off all the amazing amenities in the area, the walkability.

1479
02:17:17,330 --> 02:17:21,150
I mean, I have a doctor's office that I go to regularly on Grant Street,

1480
02:17:21,170 --> 02:17:25,210
so I walk right through this area, get off the tines, take the walk through,

1481
02:17:25,210 --> 02:17:28,090
was at the Parkdale in the night market the other day.

1482
02:17:28,630 --> 02:17:30,310
Once again, there's not a lot of parking,

1483
02:17:30,490 --> 02:17:31,890
there's not a lot of room for cars.

1484
02:17:33,730 --> 02:17:37,810
So if we wanted to push back, I'm not saying to climb

1485
02:17:37,810 --> 02:17:40,810
this application, but if we wanted to push back

1486
02:17:40,810 --> 02:17:42,970
and have the community's voice heard,

1487
02:17:43,050 --> 02:17:46,010
but limit the amount of parking that is being included

1488
02:17:46,010 --> 02:17:47,230
in this application.

1489
02:17:47,830 --> 02:17:49,950
I'm sorry, you said that that is a possible conversation

1490
02:17:49,950 --> 02:17:51,090
that could be had.

1491
02:17:52,330 --> 02:17:54,330
And I'm also going to note that we very recently

1492
02:17:54,330 --> 02:17:57,150
had an application that nearly came before us for

1493
02:17:57,150 --> 02:18:01,370
center of that had zero parking. So, I mean, I'm really confused by this.

1494
02:18:01,430 --> 02:18:04,790
We got zero parking at a place that deserves parking, and we've got ample

1495
02:18:04,790 --> 02:18:08,810
and excessive parking at a place that doesn't need it.

1496
02:18:10,870 --> 02:18:15,410
Chair, I do not believe there would be an appropriate tool that could

1497
02:18:15,410 --> 02:18:21,130
require us to cap a maximum parking rate that is less than what is in our

1498
02:18:21,130 --> 02:18:25,930
current zoning bylaw. I think the comment that was made was when this

1499
02:18:25,930 --> 02:18:31,310
application comes in for site plan and we're having a conversation about what is the amount

1500
02:18:31,310 --> 02:18:37,090
of parking proposed and why there's an opportunity to have a discussion to say do you need

1501
02:18:37,090 --> 02:18:42,490
this much parking or what else are you doing to have transit demands strategies to help support

1502
02:18:42,490 --> 02:18:48,890
those other active modes like preloaded presto cards, put displays within the building lobby about

1503
02:18:48,890 --> 02:18:53,270
key walking and cycling routes or sometimes they could have displays about when the next local

1504
02:18:53,270 --> 02:18:58,870
buses coming on the nearby street, it's conversations of that nature that can help get into

1505
02:18:58,870 --> 02:19:04,130
the how much parking is provided and what's going to be, you know, the impact, if there is

1506
02:19:04,130 --> 02:19:09,830
an impact in that application, but to go back to the question of, would we have a tool that

1507
02:19:09,830 --> 02:19:16,570
would say limit the parking to X? Council and its will, I would say, would have the authority to

1508
02:19:16,570 --> 02:19:23,070
potentially reduce the amount of maximum parking. In my personal opinion, I don't think we'd be

1509
02:19:23,070 --> 02:19:31,710
good grounds to do so. I appreciate that. I know the applicants in the room. I think there's

1510
02:19:32,250 --> 02:19:36,210
an opportunity to have a conversation about whether you need that much parking or not. I'm just

1511
02:19:36,210 --> 02:19:42,450
putting that out there because you're sexy and listening to me. I just being in that area on

1512
02:19:42,450 --> 02:19:49,030
many, many occasions with myself, my family, there is not much more room than is already there.

1513
02:19:49,030 --> 02:19:53,350
And that, and I'm somebody who's coming from another community to visit the space.

1514
02:19:53,410 --> 02:19:58,210
I can't even imagine moving that many cars through that community going forward.

1515
02:19:58,670 --> 02:20:04,070
Now having more people living in the area, you know, beautifying it and identifying it in a way

1516
02:20:04,070 --> 02:20:06,410
that is impactful but beneficial to neighbors.

1517
02:20:07,550 --> 02:20:12,990
There's opportunity there, but adding more cars to the street, it's completely counterintuitive

1518
02:20:12,990 --> 02:20:17,470
to everything we've been doing in terms of transit investment and trying to get people on

1519
02:20:17,470 --> 02:20:27,650
bikes and on to buses. So again, I'm very, very confused by why we've got this much parking

1520
02:20:27,650 --> 02:20:32,250
on the table on this particular development and I really do hope that the applicant is listening

1521
02:20:32,250 --> 02:20:37,450
as we say that this is an opportunity to change the narrative on this. Thank you.

1522
02:20:43,320 --> 02:20:46,300
Thank you very much, Councillor. Do you guys consider gifts?

1523
02:20:47,000 --> 02:20:53,520
Thank you, Chair. I was not going to comment, but I can't help myself. I found that conversations

1524
02:20:53,520 --> 02:20:58,780
today are very interesting because a lot of the issues being raised by delegates and by colleagues

1525
02:20:58,780 --> 02:21:05,860
are ones that I often bring forward as Councilor Troster mentioned. And I said at Transportation

1526
02:21:05,860 --> 02:21:11,500
Committee, the last one, or sorry, P-Wick, the last one, that for a period of time, I think

1527
02:21:11,500 --> 02:21:17,660
sort of lost the plot on. How we talk about planning in this city and we've become so intensely

1528
02:21:17,660 --> 02:21:24,180
focused on units, unit count, that we stopped asking enough questions about what actually

1529
02:21:24,180 --> 02:21:30,560
makes those units part of a functioning community. You know, we look at one application,

1530
02:21:30,580 --> 02:21:35,580
one intersection, one transportation study at a time, and then residents experience the cumulative

1531
02:21:35,580 --> 02:21:41,480
impact of what we approve, which has been a theme in the delegation today. So, you know,

1532
02:21:41,480 --> 02:21:46,720
And I want to acknowledge that this application is very different from many of the files that

1533
02:21:46,720 --> 02:21:47,640
I take on wrist width.

1534
02:21:47,740 --> 02:21:53,720
In my word, because this is a downtown development, but I order transit very close by, so I think

1535
02:21:53,720 --> 02:21:59,040
the parking conversation is very relevant, but that underlying conversation is very familiar.

1536
02:22:00,660 --> 02:22:07,300
And when the transportation impact assessment guidelines were being refreshed recently, and before

1537
02:22:07,300 --> 02:22:15,400
it came to P-Wick. I, you know, with staff question, whether our thresholds make sense

1538
02:22:15,400 --> 02:22:20,260
everywhere in the city, whether we should be evaluating developments individually when we

1539
02:22:20,260 --> 02:22:26,520
know there are 10, 15, 20 other applications coming in the same area, whether we should be modeling,

1540
02:22:30,000 --> 02:22:39,220
Is there, or that is simply theoretical, pushed for more conservative forecasting alongside aspirational

1541
02:22:39,220 --> 02:22:46,160
mode share targets, and then if the predicted travel behavior doesn't materialize, should

1542
02:22:46,160 --> 02:22:51,980
we do better monitoring around that. So I was successful in getting some of these changes, but

1543
02:22:51,980 --> 02:22:57,060
I was not successful in getting all of them. So when I hear colleagues and delegates today saying

1544
02:22:57,060 --> 02:23:02,200
perhaps we need to rethink some of the assumptions built into our transportation planning process.

1545
02:23:02,580 --> 02:23:08,320
I just wanted to say, I agree and I hope that we can remember this conversation,

1546
02:23:09,600 --> 02:23:14,920
but context has to matter. We can't plan downtown Ottawa as though it was a greenfield

1547
02:23:14,920 --> 02:23:20,480
suburb and we shouldn't plan a greenfield suburb as though it was downtown Ottawa. So for those of

1548
02:23:20,480 --> 02:23:25,740
us that are fortunate enough to be back around this table next term, I hope we can take this conversation

1549
02:23:25,740 --> 02:23:32,140
and do something with it, because we know that the answer can't be to approve fewer homes.

1550
02:23:32,600 --> 02:23:38,440
So it has to be getting much better at planning the communities that those homes are going into.

1551
02:23:38,780 --> 02:23:39,640
Thank you.

1552
02:23:43,330 --> 02:23:44,490
Thank you very much, Councillor.

1553
02:23:44,950 --> 02:23:48,140
I think we have Councillor Currie. Yeah, thank you very much.

1554
02:23:49,470 --> 02:23:53,470
So a lot of different perspectives for sure when I just simply look at this development

1555
02:23:53,470 --> 02:23:59,110
for this location, I honestly I repeat what I'd said in my opening comments there that I

1556
02:23:59,110 --> 02:24:01,030
would love it if this development were in Canada.

1557
02:24:01,730 --> 02:24:03,810
And what it's going to do to that Parkdale Market,

1558
02:24:03,990 --> 02:24:05,590
it is going to be a beautiful thing.

1559
02:24:05,650 --> 02:24:06,450
What is all finished?

1560
02:24:06,730 --> 02:24:09,910
I mean, how lively it will be in that area

1561
02:24:09,910 --> 02:24:11,650
when this is all done as it's done.

1562
02:24:12,010 --> 02:24:15,010
And there are attempts to keep that Carlton tavern.

1563
02:24:15,330 --> 02:24:17,410
I know it isn't exactly the same thing,

1564
02:24:17,410 --> 02:24:18,830
but it is a nice thought.

1565
02:24:19,530 --> 02:24:21,890
I think the community will love it.

1566
02:24:21,890 --> 02:24:24,170
I think there will be enough people to certainly go in there

1567
02:24:24,170 --> 02:24:27,390
along with all the shops along Parkdale and at the market.

1568
02:24:27,390 --> 02:24:31,810
I think that, you know, the changes that were made over time when I look at how this evolved,

1569
02:24:31,910 --> 02:24:33,150
I think were thoughtful.

1570
02:24:34,070 --> 02:24:38,110
And, you know, people's feedback, residents' feedback was taken into consideration.

1571
02:24:38,710 --> 02:24:42,770
As for the parking, I guess, you know, I always am shocked that I have to say this again

1572
02:24:42,770 --> 02:24:43,230
and again.

1573
02:24:43,870 --> 02:24:48,970
But, you know, the people who live there will probably use transit predominantly, like they

1574
02:24:48,970 --> 02:24:51,450
will, like they have amazing opportunities there.

1575
02:24:51,710 --> 02:24:55,930
But they still might own a car, and they need to store that car somewhere.

1576
02:24:55,930 --> 02:25:02,650
And that is the reality of why you include parking and often a unit will not be rented out if there's no parking available.

1577
02:25:03,550 --> 02:25:10,090
So I just think, you know, the parking spots, if they were never used, they could be repurposed at some point.

1578
02:25:10,130 --> 02:25:14,390
But if they are used, then that is an amenity that some people would appreciate.

1579
02:25:14,930 --> 02:25:19,550
Because yes, people use transit to get around town, of course you can't really get out of that well.

1580
02:25:19,550 --> 02:25:25,670
But, you know, you could get around town, other places, and then you could drive to see your friend in Metcalf.

1581
02:25:26,210 --> 02:25:30,090
You know, you could drive to see your friend in Elmont if you ever wanted to do that.

1582
02:25:30,330 --> 02:25:32,130
But, you do have many options.

1583
02:25:32,230 --> 02:25:34,870
And I think that's what a great place to live offers.

1584
02:25:35,830 --> 02:25:37,570
I honestly would love to live there.

1585
02:25:37,870 --> 02:25:40,230
I mean, Councillor Leaper, you have such a lovely ward.

1586
02:25:40,990 --> 02:25:42,610
And, you know, I think this will be a great addition.

1587
02:25:42,870 --> 02:25:47,010
I understand that people are frustrated with some of the components of this.

1588
02:25:47,010 --> 02:25:56,370
But and maybe they could have had a little bit more time to react, but I do think there have been ample opportunities so far for people to give their feedback and it was listened to.

1589
02:25:56,930 --> 02:26:04,690
So I will be supporting this file and I don't think if it weren't a supported it would have any chance that the OLT anyway. So those are my thoughts.

1590
02:26:07,020 --> 02:26:08,580
Thank you very much, Councillor Curry.

1591
02:26:09,440 --> 02:26:16,060
Did any other members wish to speak to before I think pose a couple of questions myself.

1592
02:26:17,740 --> 02:26:25,060
And then I am likely to bring a motion now, directing staff, to reconsider parking

1593
02:26:25,060 --> 02:26:29,960
maximums in the next turn of council, so I should have some wording on that in

1594
02:26:29,960 --> 02:26:34,680
the next couple of minutes, but in the meantime, I'm going to ask city staff, can you

1595
02:26:34,680 --> 02:26:42,620
just confirm what I can ask Tegert, which is that the entry and egress from the building and

1596
02:26:42,620 --> 02:26:47,360
It's location won't be decided today, but that will be a cycline consideration.

1597
02:26:51,200 --> 02:26:52,060
Yes, that's right.

1598
02:26:52,660 --> 02:26:56,640
So right now the vehicular access is conceptualized along Spencer Street.

1599
02:26:59,180 --> 02:27:02,620
However, through the subsequent cycline control process,

1600
02:27:02,800 --> 02:27:08,480
there will be opportunities to further review the appropriate location of the parking ramp.

1601
02:27:08,480 --> 02:27:09,290
Thank you.

1602
02:27:11,720 --> 02:27:13,400
Sorry, just to subtract it.

1603
02:27:13,400 --> 02:27:18,500
And secondly, the decision to reconfigure or close arms strong

1604
02:27:18,500 --> 02:27:20,380
to become an interface between the market

1605
02:27:20,380 --> 02:27:23,440
and the private developers space.

1606
02:27:23,920 --> 02:27:26,540
That is not a decision that we are making today, either.

1607
02:27:28,080 --> 02:27:29,180
Yes, that's correct.

1608
02:27:29,340 --> 02:27:31,900
We don't presently have plans for the pedestrianization

1609
02:27:31,900 --> 02:27:34,540
of arms strength street, but there will be ongoing discussions

1610
02:27:34,540 --> 02:27:37,640
internally and with the applicant, as part

1611
02:27:37,640 --> 02:27:39,180
of the cyclone control process.

1612
02:27:39,180 --> 02:27:46,200
Okay. There was an assertion made by one of the delegates, and I'm sorry I forget which

1613
02:27:46,200 --> 02:27:49,020
that the

1614
02:27:51,130 --> 02:28:00,070
divergence from the secondary plan concept of a mid-rise wellington or south-end

1615
02:28:00,070 --> 02:28:07,030
going to a very high-rise Scott Street. One of the grounds upon which, or I think it was kind

1616
02:28:07,030 --> 02:28:13,550
suggested the main grounds upon which that was being accepted by staff as supportable by the

1617
02:28:13,550 --> 02:28:22,830
official plan was because of a density transfer. I'd love to hear from you about how you justify going

1618
02:28:22,830 --> 02:28:31,050
from that mid-rise wellington to a high-rise Scott with 32-story tower essentially mid-block.

1619
02:28:31,550 --> 02:28:36,990
Can I just hear from you about how you are supporting that in your recommendation to us

1620
02:28:36,990 --> 02:28:39,410
to improve this OPA.

1621
02:28:40,110 --> 02:28:44,710
Yes, so as noted, the official plan contemplates up to 40 stories and hubs within the

1622
02:28:44,710 --> 02:28:50,110
inner of the transect further the secondary plant policies permit an FSI generally equivalent

1623
02:28:50,110 --> 02:28:54,810
to eight stories across the majority of the site without being limited to a maximum height

1624
02:28:54,810 --> 02:29:00,950
limit, which generally support the direction of the hub policies when considering citywide

1625
02:29:00,950 --> 02:29:05,730
policies that a city may permit the transfer of density potential from one site to another

1626
02:29:05,730 --> 02:29:09,790
to facilitate the retention of built heritage resources in those areas, which have an established

1627
02:29:09,790 --> 02:29:12,330
FSI requirement under the zoning vial law.

1628
02:29:12,630 --> 02:29:17,230
So in this instance, given the prioritization of the pop, some of the tavern space, some of

1629
02:29:17,230 --> 02:29:21,770
the south and south eastern edge of the site, which provide retention of the community asset

1630
02:29:21,770 --> 02:29:26,530
and contributions to the public realm, staff considered the density transfer policy to make up

1631
02:29:26,530 --> 02:29:32,210
for that GFA, lost on that portion of the site for public benefit to be provided to the

1632
02:29:32,210 --> 02:29:39,090
hour. Never the last we do believe that 32 stories is an adequate transition from the center

1633
02:29:39,090 --> 02:29:41,310
of the hub being Tony's pastor station.

1634
02:29:45,050 --> 02:29:48,130
I have very significant sympathy for the the community's

1635
02:29:48,130 --> 02:29:53,950
point of view that it is not that we're going from 40 stories or I have to assume that

1636
02:29:53,950 --> 02:29:57,130
This craft is going to come in for 40 stories when they finally do it.

1637
02:30:00,000 --> 02:30:08,040
8, but that was done 6, 7, 8 years ago now. So you're going from 40, the site next to it will probably

1638
02:30:08,040 --> 02:30:16,140
ask for 40, then you're going to have 32 and then bam, you're down to the no-rise part-del market,

1639
02:30:16,680 --> 02:30:24,120
and then a mid-rise at Wellington Street. And I'm just not sure that I've heard the justification

1640
02:30:24,120 --> 02:30:31,380
and clearly as to why we are, or why you are supporting such a divergence from that transition.

1641
02:30:32,920 --> 02:30:38,880
Cheryl, maybe add some context to that. I'm going to take a bit of a step backwards to answer

1642
02:30:38,880 --> 02:30:45,380
that, but I do think we have to remember that the secondary plan was completed in 2011 and

1643
02:30:45,380 --> 02:30:51,020
well, a lot of the intent in terms of hub versus corridor or neighborhood is still relevant.

1644
02:30:51,020 --> 02:30:53,680
It is important to flag that at that time,

1645
02:30:54,060 --> 02:30:57,260
high rise was a maximum of 30 stories, not 40 stories.

1646
02:30:57,580 --> 02:31:01,200
So, it can actually, the expectation for height has evolved.

1647
02:31:01,840 --> 02:31:03,240
That's evident in the new OP.

1648
02:31:03,480 --> 02:31:05,960
So, when we talk about heights within a hub,

1649
02:31:06,160 --> 02:31:08,180
you have to remember that the secondary plan,

1650
02:31:08,360 --> 02:31:11,320
previously, was with a 30 story sort of expected

1651
02:31:11,320 --> 02:31:13,440
height limit we've now gone up to 40.

1652
02:31:13,900 --> 02:31:16,720
The policy framework has changed in that regard.

1653
02:31:16,720 --> 02:31:19,900
So when we think about that gradual transition,

1654
02:31:21,280 --> 02:31:23,600
if we wanna bring up that map or not,

1655
02:31:24,000 --> 02:31:26,700
between Wellington and Scott,

1656
02:31:27,140 --> 02:31:28,720
this is a bit of a unique hub

1657
02:31:28,720 --> 02:31:32,260
in that the main hub is a long Scott at Tony's pasture

1658
02:31:32,260 --> 02:31:33,920
and everything north of that.

1659
02:31:33,920 --> 02:31:36,720
And then this block framework kind of pulls in

1660
02:31:36,720 --> 02:31:39,540
and it's flanked by some of those local right neighborhood.

1661
02:31:40,160 --> 02:31:44,060
So if the expectation is that 40 stories is permitted

1662
02:31:44,060 --> 02:31:50,880
by policy at Tony's pasture, which is two blocks away from the site, 450 meters walking distance.

1663
02:31:51,660 --> 02:31:56,740
This being one of the last sites before Parkdale Market, within that sort of hub designation

1664
02:31:56,740 --> 02:32:02,840
itself, we see that as being an appropriate gradual transition down from 40 stories.

1665
02:32:03,720 --> 02:32:05,580
Transition is also done in other ways.

1666
02:32:05,760 --> 02:32:12,740
When we look at the neighborhood designation east of Parkdale, the tower itself was oriented

1667
02:32:12,740 --> 02:32:17,220
towards the northwest corner of the site to kind of place the tower one for the

1668
02:32:17,220 --> 02:32:22,000
way from the closest neighborhood designation. And I mean by way of policy, not

1669
02:32:22,000 --> 02:32:25,880
existing. I'm sympathetic to the delegation that said there's also a low-rise

1670
02:32:25,880 --> 02:32:31,040
neighborhood directly north, but that is within the hub designation. That tower is

1671
02:32:31,040 --> 02:32:35,960
getting somewhere close to 80 meters away from that neighborhood designation east of

1672
02:32:35,960 --> 02:32:40,880
Parkdale. If you put that in context of our policy framework of where

1673
02:32:40,880 --> 02:32:46,520
rises are permitted on corridors next to a low-rise neighborhood the way the

1674
02:32:46,520 --> 02:32:51,220
policies been set up is that you generally apply an angular plane but once you're

1675
02:32:51,220 --> 02:32:56,720
more than 25 meters away from that that angular plane stops and you can go up to

1676
02:32:56,720 --> 02:33:02,460
in theory 40 stories on certain corridors so having that tower 80 meters away from

1677
02:33:02,460 --> 02:33:07,460
the nearest neighborhood designation is an appropriate transition from that

1678
02:33:07,460 --> 02:33:13,880
guard and then I would say a key part of this application looking at the site specific context

1679
02:33:13,880 --> 02:33:19,880
and what's surrounding it was the move to reduce the podium heights down to five stories from

1680
02:33:19,880 --> 02:33:24,620
the initial sort of large eight and nine story block. That was also part of an appropriate

1681
02:33:24,620 --> 02:33:30,300
story in addition from a policy framework to make sure that the at great experience was more in

1682
02:33:30,300 --> 02:33:35,460
line with sort of call it the existing context versus the plan function and I know I'm getting

1683
02:33:35,460 --> 02:33:42,280
to complicated planning, but it's a balance of understanding what's existing around you, what

1684
02:33:42,280 --> 02:33:47,320
policy supports, and where does this site fit within it? This site is uniquely situated

1685
02:33:47,320 --> 02:33:51,740
in that you've got to kind of consider all those factors, but I hope that helps kind of frame

1686
02:33:51,740 --> 02:33:59,860
how it landed at 32 stories. Thank you very much for that. It raises the question

1687
02:33:59,860 --> 02:34:04,440
is the secondary plan compliant with the official plan.

1688
02:34:05,260 --> 02:34:10,800
And right across the city, we see secondary plans that are not compliant with our most recent

1689
02:34:10,800 --> 02:34:13,700
addition of the official plan.

1690
02:34:13,980 --> 02:34:18,660
And I think that this is something that we're going to have to address in the next term of council

1691
02:34:19,340 --> 02:34:23,440
is the unrealistic expectations that are raised.

1692
02:34:24,440 --> 02:34:50,360
Genuine and honest expectations, but, unfortunately, on practical ones, that our secondary plans are going to guide growth when we don't update those when the provincial policy statement changes, the official plan changes, and then you have the secondary plans, and I think if you are listening to this debate and you are wondering what's going to happen to your neighborhood, my suggestion would be, look at what the official plan says.

1693
02:34:50,360 --> 02:34:55,920
because ultimately that is going to be the document that guides growth moving forward.

1694
02:34:58,020 --> 02:35:03,040
I do have, sorry, I'm asking Vice Chair Gower, I'm not allowed to move motions,

1695
02:35:04,060 --> 02:35:12,500
but Vice Chair Gower has a motion. Where is the zoning by-lot? 2026-50 provides a maximum

1696
02:35:12,500 --> 02:35:17,880
parking ratio of 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit at three Hamilton Avenue North,

1697
02:35:17,880 --> 02:35:25,520
and 223-229 and 233 Armstrong, and whereas this site is within walking distance of the

1698
02:35:25,520 --> 02:35:30,020
Tennis Passure Rapid Transit Station. Therefore, be it resolved that planning and housing committee

1699
02:35:30,020 --> 02:35:36,120
recommend council direct staff to reconsider the parking maximums and proximity to rapid transit

1700
02:35:36,120 --> 02:35:38,860
stations in the next term of council.

1701
02:35:44,340 --> 02:35:46,460
Please go ahead. So just on that note,

1702
02:35:49,480 --> 02:35:50,200
is there anything in

1703
02:35:50,200 --> 02:35:50,740
Thank you.

1704
02:35:50,760 --> 02:35:55,200
Next term of council to review parking with respect to developments.

1705
02:35:56,440 --> 02:36:01,780
The Oralines case comes to mind that I think we need to reflect this.

1706
02:36:01,860 --> 02:36:07,940
I was just talking with Councilor Chaucer, I think my preference would be something like

1707
02:36:07,940 --> 02:36:19,900
any development that is under a certain threshold could have a parking waived 12, 16, 20 units.

1708
02:36:19,900 --> 02:36:27,460
or within a certain transect, but as you get larger and larger, I think the demand for parking presents itself.

1709
02:36:28,340 --> 02:36:34,100
But I just want to make sure that Councillor Leapers not jumping in the queue.

1710
02:36:34,360 --> 02:36:38,860
And if we're going to talk about parking, we should talk about all the issues related to the parking,

1711
02:36:39,040 --> 02:36:48,960
not just the one that he's identified. So is there anything that staff are already considering bringing forward to committee or council next term of council related to parking?

1712
02:36:50,880 --> 02:37:18,180
Through the chair, so I would just say that this is a motion because we do not have a plan right now to reopen the zoning bylaw, as it relates to parking, staff would look at it comprehensively, and I would remind everyone that under planning legislation we are not allowed to have a minimum, but we are allowed to have a maximum, and what we're seeing in this case is they came in under the maximum and yet it still feels too much.

1713
02:37:18,840 --> 02:37:25,300
In many cases we're arguing about no parking at all so I think it depends I think it was

1714
02:37:25,300 --> 02:37:26,980
Councillor Kitt's point about them.

1715
02:37:30,000 --> 02:37:39,320
Really, really important. So we would look at this holistically citywide and what the parking

1716
02:37:39,320 --> 02:37:46,000
maximums are and how they work against the parking minimum that is now not in zoning by

1717
02:37:46,000 --> 02:37:47,000
law at all.

1718
02:37:48,950 --> 02:37:53,230
Yeah, and just on the leapermotion, what I appreciated is in the context of its proximity to

1719
02:37:53,230 --> 02:37:58,050
transit hubs, which I think is very important. So I'm not pushing back, but I just wanted to

1720
02:37:58,050 --> 02:38:01,390
make sure we're taking a holistic view with respect to parking.

1721
02:38:01,770 --> 02:38:02,630
Thank you.

1722
02:38:04,070 --> 02:38:04,530
Thank you.

1723
02:38:04,670 --> 02:38:05,250
Councillor Vittos?

1724
02:38:06,950 --> 02:38:10,510
I think I'm pretty much in line with Councillor Brockington.

1725
02:38:10,670 --> 02:38:14,410
I just want to make sure, you know, we're not that far away from a new term of council with

1726
02:38:14,410 --> 02:38:15,070
the new council.

1727
02:38:15,830 --> 02:38:21,430
I'm sure that this will be a conversation that is had at many, many committee meetings going

1728
02:38:21,430 --> 02:38:21,770
forward.

1729
02:38:22,530 --> 02:38:28,590
And I'm just wondering with this particular motion and staff indicating that this is likely something

1730
02:38:28,590 --> 02:38:36,030
that they'll be looking at is this I understand it's not it's not specific to this development.

1731
02:38:36,230 --> 02:38:42,210
I'm just wondering do we really need this or if it does go forward which you know on paper

1732
02:38:42,210 --> 02:38:47,730
I'm happy to support it but are we tying our hands do we need a more you know a couple more

1733
02:38:47,730 --> 02:38:52,630
rare as is to give you more direction or can we play on it a little bit I just think there's a lot to

1734
02:38:52,630 --> 02:38:59,590
to unpack about this topic and making sure that it reflects the entirety of the city and

1735
02:38:59,590 --> 02:39:04,290
the areas that we're going to be seeing developments in the next four years.

1736
02:39:05,070 --> 02:39:09,090
So I'm just wondering, does it need to be parked right now, or if we pass it, are you

1737
02:39:09,090 --> 02:39:12,310
open to interpretation after the next term starts?

1738
02:39:12,810 --> 02:39:17,050
Chair, certainly taking the point that there's not a lot of ware, as I think it was drafted

1739
02:39:17,050 --> 02:39:21,250
fairly quickly and not as comprehensive a discussion as sometimes works into these.

1740
02:39:21,250 --> 02:39:25,410
Um, you know, I think when I read the motion, I, I look at that as being on those

1741
02:39:25,410 --> 02:39:29,430
attached those rapid transit stations, which is where we have the maximums.

1742
02:39:29,470 --> 02:39:33,790
We don't have maximums in some of our further flowing areas of the suburbs.

1743
02:39:34,410 --> 02:39:38,310
And so that, I mean, would not necessarily play a role into this unless there's, you know,

1744
02:39:38,390 --> 02:39:41,450
need to dive into that in a, in a, in a greater detail.

1745
02:39:42,350 --> 02:39:47,370
I also point out that I think, I think it's a worthwhile discussion, you know, this is obviously

1746
02:39:47,370 --> 02:39:53,570
right in the downtown. We also have maximum, you know, next to the Pine Crest station or in some

1747
02:39:53,570 --> 02:39:59,330
of our more suburban. And there may be a need to have a different maximum there than there is

1748
02:39:59,330 --> 02:40:04,910
right in such a walkable community as this is. I like, I think this is a worthwhile conversation.

1749
02:40:04,990 --> 02:40:10,170
I just want to make sure we're not, you know, pre, pre disposing in the next term of council to

1750
02:40:10,170 --> 02:40:14,790
anything. So, but no, I'm happy to support it. Thank you, Chair. Thanks for your support on that

1751
02:40:14,790 --> 02:40:18,910
Councilor Duda's. When I take a look like even in Kichasipper, where we

1752
02:40:18,910 --> 02:40:23,050
Kichasip B, where we are starting to run out now of primed development

1753
02:40:23,050 --> 02:40:27,570
parcels, there are still more to come. And we have seen, I'm trying to

1754
02:40:27,570 --> 02:40:34,170
remember the uniform development at Kichasipi station. I'm trying to remember,

1755
02:40:34,170 --> 02:40:38,310
but I think they've got like a point eight parking ratio. And there will be

1756
02:40:38,310 --> 02:40:43,390
more parcels to come parcels that have not yet been zoned. And the feeling that

1757
02:40:43,390 --> 02:40:48,430
committee has and the feeling of the community has that allowing a 0.7 just a couple hundred

1758
02:40:48,430 --> 02:40:55,090
meters away from a transition. I do think it's worthwhile to talk about without prescribing

1759
02:40:55,090 --> 02:41:05,850
what the outcome will be. Okay, so with that I would any no further questions, so we will

1760
02:41:06,490 --> 02:41:07,050
please.

1761
02:41:10,540 --> 02:41:14,320
Oh, sorry, is the, uh, the Lee promotion, or sorry, the Gower Motion Pass?

1762
02:41:14,760 --> 02:41:22,720
Great. Great. Thank you. Is the, um, oh, and then, yes and yes on the, uh, the substantive motion, please.

1763
02:41:24,280 --> 02:41:34,240
Councillor Brockington? Yes. Councillor Curry? Yes. Councillor Dudes? Yes. Councillor Johnson? Yes.

1764
02:41:38,220 --> 02:41:45,760
Councillor Kelly, Councillor Kits, Councillor Lowe, Councillor Tierney,

1765
02:41:49,010 --> 02:41:51,310
Councillor Truster, yes,

1766
02:41:52,170 --> 02:41:57,570
Vice Chair Gower. Yeah, Chair Leaper. Yes. 11, yes.

1767
02:41:59,590 --> 02:42:01,630
Okay, thank you very much.

1768
02:42:02,450 --> 02:42:07,310
I want to thank my neighbors for coming out today. I do understand the discomfort.

1769
02:42:07,930 --> 02:42:12,190
We'll say that you feel with this, and I'm happy to chat about it more moving forward.

1770
02:42:13,990 --> 02:42:16,770
We will move on and conclude today's agenda.

1771
02:42:23,500 --> 02:42:26,980
North's motion has anyone got to know the motion for, how many?

1772
02:42:27,360 --> 02:42:28,820
Do we have one meeting left?

1773
02:42:29,220 --> 02:42:31,200
Two meetings. We have two meetings left.

1774
02:42:32,080 --> 02:42:33,380
No notices of motion.

1775
02:42:34,260 --> 02:42:35,940
Are there any inquiries?

1776
02:42:37,280 --> 02:42:39,680
Nope. We have no other business.

1777
02:42:39,860 --> 02:42:42,580
We are adjourned until October 7th.

1778
02:42:42,580 --> 02:42:43,440
Thanks all.