[10:16] Afternoon, everyone. We have a motion by Councillor Albano and
[10:23] it has been seconded by Councillor brass that. The Councillor
[10:27] for the town of Holton Hills reconvened this meeting in
[10:30] open session. All in favor? That's carried.
[10:41] And we will now stand for O Canada, please.
[12:11] And we begin by acknowledging that the land on which
[12:14] we gather is part of the treaty lands. And territory
[12:17] of the Mississaugas of the credit. Are there any disclosures
[12:24] of pecuniary interest or conflict of interest? Councilor Ingles. Thank
[12:32] you, worship. Yes, I have one, and it is on
[12:34] the general committee. Part of the agenda, item 9.2, point
[12:39] e. It's referring to a development as report number. 20240
[12:45] 64. My family owns a farm abutting the property being
[12:50] discussed. Okay, thank you very much. And Councillor Fogle. Yes,
[12:57] I declared a conflict. In the closed session meeting regarding.
[13:05] An issue where my property is near the issue, okay?
[13:11] Sufficiently vague. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much.
[13:20] Okay, so we have a couple of announcements today. And
[13:25] one of them is staff recognition. And I'd like to
[13:30] announce that the association of Ontario Road Supervisors has been
[13:35] serving public works professionals since 1961. And in 1996. The
[13:44] exclusive right to use the designation certified road supervisor was
[13:49] provided. The four levels of certification. Associate certified road supervisor,
[13:56] intermediate and senior have mandatory experience. And education criteria established
[14:02] by the AORS Education Committee and Certificate Board. And I'm
[14:08] pleased to announce that two town employees have reached new
[14:11] levels of certification and on behalf of Councillor would like
[14:15] to congratulate Brian Kraft. Check for his recent associate roads.
[14:21] Supervisor certification and Dan King for his certified road supervisor
[14:27] cert. Certification. Their ongoing commitment to broaden their knowledge through
[14:32] training and education will help them both continue to serve
[14:35] the public more effectively. Congratulations, Brian and Dan, on your
[14:41] certifications. And with winter coming up, We're very glad that
[14:47] we have people who know what they're doing on our
[14:48] roads, plowing and maintaining them. My second announcement is from
[14:55] the library that it is hosting a winter wonder on
[15:00] Saturday, November 30. From ten to 03:00 p.m. At the
[15:04] Acton and Georgetown branches, families are invited to meet the
[15:09] popular tv characters Louie and Bingo. Take family photos, write
[15:15] a letter to Santa, and enjoy crafts and activities. All
[15:19] ages are welcome and for more details, please visit the
[15:23] library website. At hhpl, ca. Are there any other members
[15:29] of Councillor who have other announcements? Councilor norris. Thank you,
[15:34] Madam Mayor. And actually, This announcement falls along with the
[15:39] library one. So on Saturday, November 30, the downtown Georgetown
[15:43] BIA is having a holiday market, which will be all
[15:47] of Main street south. And we'll also have. Some vendors
[15:51] inside the Knox Presbyterian Church. And it also, as I
[15:55] said, it ties in completely same time frame as with
[15:58] the library and as the BIA is saying, join us
[16:02] for a holly, jolly good time at this year's. Holiday
[16:05] market with over 90 fantastic vendors. The streets will be
[16:09] alive with festive cheer and holiday magic and also hop
[16:13] aboard the trackless train. As it chugs down main street,
[16:16] bringing smiles to all ages. Enjoy the sweet sounds of
[16:19] Kerala. Serenading the crowd, filling the air with holiday spirit.
[16:23] Plus, don't miss out on our amazing photo op. Capture
[16:26] the moment with friends and family. Come celebrate the season
[16:29] with us and make unforgettable memories at the downtown Georgetown
[16:33] holiday market. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Bacinski.
[16:40] Thank you, madam. I want to invite the community to.
[16:42] The Glenn Williams Christmas market as well, which happened on
[16:46] December 1 from one to 04:00 p.m. They've expanded it
[16:50] this year. It should be great. So I encourage people
[16:53] to come to the Glenn on December 1. Thank you
[16:57] very much. Councilor Somerville. Well, since we're talking about wonderful
[17:04] Christmas events, I'd be remiss. If we didn't mention the
[17:08] stocking auction that the act in town hall. Center hosts
[17:11] on December 1 as well and gets underway about 11:00
[17:15] and it's a lot of fun. And local merchants and
[17:18] politicians and members of the public have donated. A wide
[17:23] variety of items, and it's always such a great time.
[17:27] Having Doug Donaldson as the auctioneer as well. So hopefully
[17:31] everyone can attend if you have any. Money left from
[17:34] your other markets that you're at. I'm hoping you can
[17:36] attend. For that one. It's a lot of fun. Good.
[17:41] Thanks very much. Yes. It's great. The christmas season is
[17:45] upon us. And with two great parades over the weekend,
[17:51] And. That's all. Holton Hills is a great place to
[17:53] be at Christmas time. That's. For sure. I'm wondering if
[17:58] I could have. A motion from a member of Councillor
[18:03] to waive the rules. We have a delegate who wants.
[18:08] To comment on an item that is coming up. With.
[18:14] The next series of reports. And so could I have
[18:17] someone waive the rules? Councillor Garno? To be able to
[18:21] hear a delegation regarding one of this group. Of recommendations.
[18:28] Okay. All in favor? That's carried. Thank you. Okay. So
[18:34] is Jameson champ in the audience?
[18:48] Good afternoon, sir. Madam Mayor. Councillor. I was here in
[18:53] May to talk to the fireworks. Ban. And my concern
[18:59] was the lack of due process. And there was a
[19:03] bit of a debate about whether we should. Use the
[19:07] public engagement access we talked about the $25,000. It's a
[19:11] lot. Of money. And my concern now is that we've
[19:15] actually done the process. Got a result that seems to
[19:20] suggest that the public does not want the ban yet.
[19:23] We're going to put the ban through. So I've reviewed.
[19:29] This survey. I find that the number of calls is
[19:34] statistically valid. But the report is seriously biased. And by
[19:41] biased, I mean. To start with. The findings to discussion
[19:47] are usage and awareness. Concerns and issues and preferences for
[19:51] regulation. There isn't a point for benefits and positive nonexistent.
[19:59] As I said, the numbers are fine. Usage and awareness.
[20:03] 60% are aware of the current laws, which actually, I
[20:05] think is a pretty good number that are aware of
[20:08] where we are now and what's expected. Fireworks related activities.
[20:12] People participate? Not a surprising number. Concerns and issues. First
[20:20] one is the concerns about fireworks. We have. Not concerned
[20:23] at all. Not very concerned, somewhat concerned and very concerned.
[20:27] And what I'm concerned with is if you had asked
[20:30] me, I would have vote somewhat concerned. I think we
[20:33] can concede that there are some risks involved with fireworks,
[20:36] but there's risks involved. With biking, dogs, driving cars, everything.
[20:41] So the question is, what's reasonable? The real concern comes
[20:46] into when we then take a fraction of the sample
[20:49] size. We eliminate the people that have no concerns. And
[20:53] we dive deep into and ask them which of these
[20:56] concerns do you have. We're suggesting concerns to these people
[21:01] and then asking them to answer up to three. Of
[21:05] them. I don't know how I use statistics daily, but
[21:08] I'm pretty sure that promoting. Six or eight possible safety
[21:14] concerns, asking them to say if they're concerned about them
[21:17] and then saying, They can respond positively to up to
[21:21] three of them seems like a flawed way to do
[21:24] a report. Then when we get in preference for regulations,
[21:28] we go through. Actually, 60% of respondents want no ban.
[21:37] And if we have a bias report, Or even if
[21:40] we assume it could be, we still have 60% that
[21:44] don't want the ban. Even as a result of a
[21:47] biased report. So we don't really need to talk about.
[21:50] Whether it's biased or not, and if anybody has any
[21:53] questions on the bias of it. Whether. It is biased
[21:56] or not. I have a little example for you. If
[22:00] we flip the fireworks to dogs and we ask the
[22:02] same question and we say, not very concerned. Concern. I
[22:06] suspect we'll get similar numbers. When we ask about are
[22:10] you concerned about personal safety with dogs? Are you worried
[22:13] about noise with dogs? Are you worried about responsible dog
[22:18] owners? Are you worried about. Destruction to pets and wildlife
[22:21] with dogs running through the forest or barking. Are you
[22:25] worried about the time of day, too late at night.
[22:27] It seems that they all apply to dogs. Property damage,
[22:31] destruction. Of private property. Physical injury. Now, I think we
[22:35] can agree. That nobody's going to want to ban dogs.
[22:41] The point is, we're talking something. Similar. We've gone out
[22:45] here looking specifically. To produce a result. And in statistical
[22:51] speaking, that's what's known as a statistical bias. Systemic favoritism.
[22:57] That is present in the data collection process, resulting in
[22:59] lopsided, misleading results. Omitted variable bias. Nowhere in here does
[23:05] it say, List your top three reasons. That are good
[23:10] reasons to keep it. Nowhere in here does it say,
[23:14] Do you like it? If I do have a picture,
[23:17] if we could put it up a slide. Slide number
[23:21] one. And when I say good things, I mean. Children's
[23:29] wonderment of what's going on. I mean, them questioning how
[23:32] you get it to go that high. How do you
[23:34] get it to be red and blue? These are the
[23:36] future physicists, engineers and chemists. Teaching an eight year old,
[23:41] teaching them how to respect the rule, how to read
[23:43] it and say, the concerns are stay back this far.
[23:46] No, you can't light it. Because of this? Because. Of
[23:48] that. And on top of that, I am worried about
[23:57] the fact that we seem to have trouble enforcing the
[24:00] bylaws as they currently stand. I would submit to you
[24:03] that most people that have a problem with fireworks have
[24:05] a problem with the 02:00 a.m. Fireworks after 11:00 we
[24:08] have days we can use it. Hours you can use
[24:11] it and permits for other occasions. I wonder how. Much
[24:15] of this would die. Down if. We could enforce those.
[24:20] The one thing I do worry about is it's a
[24:23] call based complaint for bylaw. So you're asking neighbors to
[24:27] squeal on neighbors now? Some of these neighbors might celebrate
[24:30] Victoria Day. Some of these neighbors might celebrate dwaly. I
[24:33] would suggest everybody here that a neighbor celebrating dwaly that
[24:37] invites the neighbors. To sit and do it with them
[24:39] respectfully. To have conversation, to have a drink and some
[24:43] food is a far better use of this, but. Number
[24:46] one, we have spent $25,000. If we were going to
[24:49] end up here. The eight that voted for it should
[24:53] have declared that it will not change my mind. And
[24:55] we should have bought food for the food bank or
[24:57] worked on housing. It's an incredible waste. Of $25,000, 60%
[25:02] of. People. Don't want the ban. And when it comes
[25:06] right down to it, I could refer to the vision
[25:10] statement public engagement democracy makes its best decisions when people
[25:13] express their will and become involved they did. They had
[25:16] their say. Your code of conduct. Council members should recognize
[25:22] the need to uphold both the letter and the spirit
[25:25] of the law, including policies before the Councillor. Now, I
[25:28] would suggest to you that if we have 60% that
[25:31] don't. Want it, then the spirit is not being upheld
[25:34] here. There is a picture. Are we unable to get
[25:38] the pictures? Sir, I'm going to ask you to wrap
[25:44] it up, please. We're getting close to you. That's fine.
[25:48] I'm wrapping up. I just wanted to show the one
[25:51] picture that we submitted for. Anyways. It's a picture of
[25:58] a group of kids from the shot from behind them
[26:01] celebrating with people all around, all respectable distance and even
[26:05] from behind. It's really sad. We can't. Get it up
[26:07] there, because even from behind and in shadow, you can
[26:10] tell that these five or six children are completely bewildered
[26:13] by what they're seeing. And there's people all around. It's
[26:18] a beautiful one. It's actually, you know what? Let's do
[26:20] this. Even the front page of here is beautiful picture
[26:24] displaying what will not be allowed. The picture that I
[26:29] would like to put up here is from your report
[26:32] tendered to Councillor. That has the pictures of a fountain
[26:35] going off in the middle, everybody around it, it's actually
[26:38] in your brochure that you publish to the public on
[26:42] the background of where this came from. It actually depicts
[26:45] a beautiful picture that nobody will ever take again in
[26:48] this town. Nobody will be bewildered, nobody by the fountain.
[26:55] Burning schoolhouse, which is a chuckle for us older people,
[26:58] because I don't know why we remember it so fondly
[27:00] because it was the silliest bundom. So we need to
[27:02] wrap it up, please. Thank you. Well, I would really
[27:04] like to see the picture. I was told. Well, I
[27:08] think the clerk isn't able to put it up. We're
[27:11] having a technical problem with that, so I thank you
[27:14] for. Well, that's pretty unfortunate. That would be part of
[27:17] my presentation. Can we still work on it? If we're
[27:21] going to discuss it, can they put it up while
[27:22] the discussion comes up? Well, no. I don't think. We're
[27:27] capable. There. We got it. Look at that picture there.
[27:30] If you zoom in on it. Right out of the
[27:32] publication from here. Those kids, you can't see their face,
[27:35] but you. Can tell what they're thinking. Everybody's respectfully distance.
[27:41] That will not happen in this town again with this.
[27:43] And we waste $25,000 and we don't respect the spirit
[27:48] of the public engagement charter. Thank you. Okay. Are there
[27:58] members of Councillor who have a question or comment? Question,
[28:02] I should say. Okay. I don't see any, so thank
[28:06] you very much, sir. So I have a resolution, moved
[28:16] by Councillor Brass, seconded by Councillor Albano, to adopt the
[28:19] general committee items from the October 20 eigth Councillor meeting.
[28:24] The details of these items can be found in section
[28:26] five of today's agenda. The recommendations are contained in the
[28:35] following reports and memorandum from Monday, October 28, 2024. General
[28:41] committee meeting are hereby adopted as presented. Report cs 20
[28:47] 24 35. Report PD 20240. Eight one. Report pd 20240
[28:56] 90. Report tpw 20240. Zero eight. Report tpw 20240. Two,
[29:05] one. Memorandum CSE 20240. Zero eight. A memorandum library
[29:15] 20240. Zero two. Report admin. 20 24 00:25. And further,
[29:23] that the following report is hereby adopted as amendment at
[29:27] amended admin 20240. 114 all in favor? That's carried. Thank
[29:34] you very much. We now have confirmation of minutes from
[29:44] previous Councillor meetings. It has been moved by Councillor Albano.
[29:48] Secreted by Councillor Brass that the following minutes are hereby
[29:52] approved. 6.1 minutes of. The Councillor workshop held on Monday,
[29:57] October 21, 2024. Six two to confidential minutes of the
[30:04] Councillor held on Monday, October 28, 2024. 63 minutes of
[30:10] the Councillor held on Monday, October 28, 2024 6.4 confidential
[30:17] minutes from the. Council workshop held on Monday, November 11,
[30:22] 2024. And 6.5 is minutes from the Councillor workshop held
[30:28] on Monday, November 11, 2024. All in favor. That's carried.
[30:41] Okay. Now we have a public presentation. Holden Regional Police
[30:48] Services is here for a presentation to Councillor about what's
[30:53] happening in the. Police force these days. So welcome, Chief
[30:57] Tanner and your team.
[31:10] Your worship. And thank you, members of Councillor. It's always
[31:13] great to be back here. It's been a little while.
[31:17] We've lived through Covid. We've lived through a few other
[31:19] things. We've. Lived through virtual presentations, so it's great to
[31:22] be back in person. I'm going to turn most of
[31:25] the presentation over to what we call our executive command
[31:28] team here in the north end, Milton and Halton Hills.
[31:31] And that'll be superintendent co areepta. And Inspector Anita la
[31:34] Fromois. They are really, for many intents and purposes. Your
[31:40] assistant chief and assistant deputy chief when it comes to
[31:43] all things that are policing in Halton. Hills. So we've
[31:46] asked them to do a presentation which touches on some
[31:50] specific Halton. Hill statistics and some of the work that's
[31:52] going on. In this great municipality here for the specific
[31:57] knowledge of your members of council. I do recognize that.
[32:03] I've met several of you recently at the occasion of
[32:06] Peter Barrel's funeral, so. It was great to see everyone
[32:08] there, and of course, it's a great loss to both.
[32:11] Our Halton Hills Fire Department and Halton police, where Peter
[32:13] served us and our members for many, many years. We're
[32:16] celebrating our 50th anniversary. Peter predated that. I think clerk
[32:21] Somerville predates that, too, but. We won't necessarily say that
[32:25] here at the end of the presentation, if there are
[32:28] any more general questions. I'm certainly here to assist in
[32:31] any way I can or to discuss some things that
[32:34] are happening more on the regional stage. There are some
[32:37] alarming crime trends in the region of Halton, still much
[32:41] lower than our neighboring municipalities. But auto theft and home
[32:46] invasions and things that are happening. Disproportionately in the south
[32:49] end of the region. Thankfully for the folks here, but
[32:54] these sorts of crime trends are coming to us from
[32:56] our neighbors. Most of. Those more dangerous and serious of
[33:00] criminals tend not to be homegrown, so we know they're
[33:04] coming from Pl to and often from Montreal. I also
[33:09] want to thank this Councillor and your CEO for all
[33:12] the work that staff did as well to move along
[33:16] the new station. I'm reminded as I sit here. I
[33:20] think I used to look over this direction and answer
[33:22] a bunch of questions about where this future police station
[33:25] would be going. That questionnaire is not here today. But
[33:30] feel free to ask any questions. But it is underway
[33:33] now on steals Avenue. Nice to see some of the
[33:36] steel work now up and things starting to take shape.
[33:39] So this command team behind me. Hopefully, we'll be moving
[33:43] into that new facility, I hope, during 2025 and. We'll
[33:48] certainly push our regional partners and construction people to get
[33:51] that done for us, so great to be here. Great
[33:53] to be here in your town and to assist you
[33:57] in any way. That we can. And I'll turn it
[33:59] over to Cole and Anita. Thank you. Thank you for
[34:03] having us here today. This is just a high level
[34:08] overview of the police department in one district. And more
[34:13] of an introduction to you, Nita and I, who are
[34:16] new to the district kind. Of. In. April to May,
[34:23] we had a transfer of leadership, and Anita and I.
[34:26] I'm the superintendent. Of the district and he is the
[34:28] inspector. Came up to one district. Now, if you're not
[34:32] aware, one district is a combination of Milton and Halton
[34:36] Hills. The majority of the resources do work out of
[34:41] the twelve division in Milton, but we do share those
[34:43] resources with Halton Hills. And there is, as you know,
[34:46] a station in Georgetown. The station. That act and all
[34:49] the resources, like investigative resources, are triaged out of Milton
[34:53] to those two. Districts. There is a set number of
[34:57] people, mostly uniform officers, working. Out of eleven division and
[35:02] a few officers working out of ten division on a
[35:04] full time basis. I moved up in April, but I
[35:08] do have a background. Working up in one district that
[35:12] was stationed for my first four years of policing in
[35:15] Georgetown and acting back, then you would transfer between. The
[35:20] different stations and do three months in one, three months
[35:23] in the next. And then I came back. It was
[35:26] up there for four years and went back to. Went
[35:28] to. A tactical background for the next 15 years or
[35:30] so, and then I came back in 2000. And 16.
[35:37] As a staff sergeant and worked up again under Milton
[35:40] and Georgetown. And Anita's background is vastly investigative. She's worked
[35:45] all different investigative units across the region. From. The drug
[35:51] investigator. And so I think we have a perfect combination
[35:54] when we put us together. You have operational background. And
[35:58] a bit of a planning background, then investigative background through
[36:01] Anita. In the whole region. We have just over 1100
[36:08] sworn and civilian members. We're going to get to it
[36:11] in. I think we have 172 just in our district.
[36:15] Just do it quicker. If you take a look now,
[36:19] you don't have to read through all the slide, but.
[36:21] This is what we look like as a police service.
[36:24] We're over on the left. We have three districts, one
[36:27] district, two district and three district. That's Oakville and Burlington.
[36:33] And really, all you need to know is, although we
[36:34] have limited resources in our district, 172 members, all of
[36:40] those other areas are there to support us at the
[36:43] front line, and if we needed a tactical resource. They're
[36:48] available to come support us if we needed. Regional investigators,
[36:51] high level drug investigators, they're there to support us auto
[36:54] theft teams. So they're triaged out to the district when
[36:58] there's a bigger concern. So although. We're small in size.
[37:04] We have the available resources of 1200 members. And 172.
[37:09] As I said, in our district alone, the district. Is
[37:13] divided. Milton and Holton Hills. And as I said, we
[37:15] have a station that act in Georgetown. About half our
[37:19] resources end up in both of those areas, Holton Hills
[37:22] and Milton. On a daily basis. So half the members
[37:25] working end up in both places, and that's scalable. To
[37:28] where. The problem is that if there's an event in
[37:30] acting, more resources go. To act. And if there's. An
[37:33] event in Holton Hills. More resources go to Holt Hills,
[37:36] but we start every morning with roughly the same amount
[37:38] of people in both areas. Within our own district. This
[37:43] is all how we divide all our resources. We have
[37:50] investigative resources. And although you see summer reporting directly to
[37:53] me, and some are reporting to Anita. We're really a
[37:57] team, and all decisions go through both of us. If
[38:01] Anita has something coming up. She advises me she makes
[38:03] her own decisions, but she'll run it past me. Anita
[38:07] looks after our uniform officers and I look after our
[38:09] investigative and our community mobilization officers, but really, it's a
[38:13] team effort entirely. We do have 24/7 coverage, obviously. We
[38:20] do have a uniform. Sergeant on ground at all times,
[38:22] and a team of people in Georgetown. And acting. We
[38:26] do have a pilot. Right now we're running where we
[38:28] have a third. Sergeant on ground at all time. The
[38:31] reason why that is is that person can go between
[38:33] Milton and Halton Hills. If we need a second sergeant
[38:37] in one of those locations, we're piloting that now. We
[38:40] expect that to take effect at some time through 2025
[38:43] because it has been successful. I think everyone here has
[38:52] probably been introduced to the community safety and well being.
[38:55] The pillars are important to us. What I will say
[39:00] about this is this came into effect across the province
[39:02] a few years back. But we were way ahead of
[39:04] the curve in Holton, not only in the Holton region.
[39:07] But the Halton police as well. And we rely on
[39:10] these four pillars. I like to think of these four
[39:12] pillars as. A decision making tool. So if something comes
[39:16] up and there's a problem, we make sure. All these
[39:19] points are touched on, all these areas are looked at
[39:22] before we decide the solution. In which direction we're going
[39:24] to go. And this works into every decision we make,
[39:28] right from frontline officers up to the decisions I make
[39:31] as a superintendent of the district. So it's really ingrain.
[39:33] Ingrained in our service and our district. And it's something
[39:37] that's because we were head of the curve is why
[39:38] we're so successful at it today. And you'll? See throughout
[39:41] the presentation. This is woven into every unit we have.
[39:46] Within the unit. Where we break up within the district,
[39:49] we're broken up into specific units. One of those units
[39:53] is a district response team where many of you may
[39:55] have communications with this. Used to be called traffic. Or
[39:59] now it's half traffic, half community concerns. But ten years
[40:07] ago, we would call this the traffic. And they do
[40:11] look at traffic enforcement as a large part of what
[40:13] they do. That also means responding to regional and provincial
[40:20] projects. But why that's important is because when we have
[40:22] a big event. We can rely on those resources coming
[40:25] back to help us, which happens quite often for street
[40:28] racing. For example, which is a problem through the Holton
[40:31] hills, and we can rely on the resources. Not only
[40:33] from the rest of Halton, but rest of the province.
[40:35] Really? And we do that? Quite often. We have our
[40:39] yearly projects that touch on traffic. Things like a project
[40:42] safe start. Canada safety, Canada Road Safety Week, which happens.
[40:47] In the fall and the spring. And other projects almost
[40:52] on a monthly basis. Of course, ride is an important
[40:56] part of what we do. We ramp up our ride.
[40:59] Program. In December, in the summer. Not really because of
[41:04] the holidays, but more because that's when more people are
[41:05] on the road. And that says, you know, that's coming
[41:08] up in December, and our efforts have already ramped up.
[41:11] We do that in the district, we apply more resources
[41:14] to rise. I do have some stats that will tell
[41:17] you about 2023. Rise statistics. When they're not. Doing reactive
[41:26] things. They do proactive things. And this combination of responding
[41:30] to motor vehicles, reactive, we assist our front line, but.
[41:35] We attend lots of community events. In the last couple
[41:38] of years, we've shifted from almost. Solely based on traffic
[41:42] to a combination of event based, with protests being one
[41:45] of the primary things. We respond to. And it's this
[41:48] unit that goes to those things primarily. They have more
[41:51] training and more experience dealing with members of the public.
[41:54] And they're there just. As. Overwatched in case a problem
[41:59] happens. They don't interfere unless there's actually. An issue that
[42:02] happens. They do liquor license check up in Holton Hills.
[42:06] It hasn't. Been a big issue. In 2024 for us.
[42:11] The closure of the national north used to take up
[42:13] a lot of our time. It hasn't in the recent
[42:16] this year. And of course, they go to priority calls
[42:19] for service. If there's an emergency incident, they have to
[42:23] drop everything and go to that. And the assistor frontline.
[42:27] In 2023. Just this unit, which is the traffic unit,
[42:31] is an eight person unit. They went to over 2200
[42:37] calls for service. As you work your way down 2500.
[42:42] Provincial offense notices, which are tickets. They give out about
[42:45] an equal number of warning tickets, which aren't captured the
[42:49] same with provincial offenses are and probably an equal amount
[42:52] of stops where they just educate people and just talk
[42:54] to people. 3100 traffic stops conducted by jew. But that's
[42:59] only related to the Pos. And every stop, they may
[43:03] give one pond or more. So you have to work
[43:07] your way through. The numbers, they don't all add up.
[43:09] It's because every stop could equal one. Education piece. One
[43:13] mourn and a few tickets. The complaints traffic related come
[43:19] through a different way as well. A variety of ways
[43:21] it can be officer generated, which is the majority of
[43:24] those traffic stops. It can be through traffic complaints that's.
[43:27] A member of the public. We call them nine. Nine
[43:30] one occurrences. In 2024. That was only up to August.
[43:38] We had just about 800, so they look to be
[43:39] trending to vote the same as 2023. Numbers. That's members
[43:43] of the public call us. That the calls you're going
[43:45] to receive quite often. And then. We do an analysis
[43:50] of those calls and we'll send resources to hot spots.
[43:55] Another way it comes to is through our road watch,
[43:57] which is through our website. We don't. Get nearly as
[44:00] many, but we do get some. We're trending of a
[44:02] bit. Less this year than in other years, but numbers
[44:05] seem to be the same this year for traffic as
[44:07] they do in years ago past. When you have a
[44:13] specific concern. We are as well as changing a need
[44:17] and I, in terms of. The hierarchy. In 2025, we
[44:22] will have a new person in charge of this unit.
[44:26] And our cab. And traffic will continue to be a
[44:29] concern, but they'll introduce you to that person when they
[44:32] start. And that will be your primary contact. It's going
[44:35] to be a girl named Kathy Walker. She's a staff
[44:37] sergeant and she'll be a staff sergeant in this unit.
[44:42] And just, this just shows that. We do have kind
[44:46] of yearly things that come up. We try to divide
[44:49] them up to each quarter each quarter, there's usually two
[44:51] or three things, kind of the standard enforcement projects we
[44:54] do every year. You can see project noise maker is
[44:56] always an interest to you. Canada Road safety week. The
[45:02] commercial motor vehicle blitz is important. That shows the truck.
[45:07] Those things happen every year, and we divide them up
[45:09] throughout the year by quarter. If you're not aware, we
[45:18] have recently changed the way we've taken traffic complaints. And
[45:22] we communicate to the public. It used to be that
[45:24] Burlington, Oakville, Halton Hills, Milton would all have their own.
[45:29] X account or Twitter account. And we would communicate to
[45:32] people that way and people would communicate to us that
[45:34] way, would get confusing for people. And the feedback we
[45:37] got is if someone had a complaint, they wouldn't. Know
[45:40] where to go. To make a complaint on Twitter or
[45:44] X, and they wouldn't know where to get information. So
[45:47] we've put that all into one account, so everyone throughout
[45:50] the region goes the same. Account. It's monitored by all
[45:53] the districts, and we found that it's more productive. For
[45:56] us. We get more information that way, and we're able
[45:58] to get information out to our public much quicker in
[46:01] all the districts, including all mills. The other half of
[46:11] the district response team. At community mobilization team. So between
[46:16] the Drew team and the community mobilization team, that's one.
[46:20] Office of people that work for us. This is where
[46:23] community, safety and well being is. Bread and butter. They
[46:27] get out into the public, the public events continuously. We
[46:32] have a group of people, including high school liaison officers
[46:36] and. They're educating the public on things that are important
[46:40] to us and also getting feedback from the public are
[46:43] most important to us. Although our high school officers aren't
[46:46] embedded in the schools. They do have a really close
[46:50] relationship with our youth, and. With the teachers and the
[46:54] principals. And on a daily basis, they're in communication with
[46:58] people from the Holton Hill schools. And if there's an
[47:01] incident. They're the ones who will go investigate that. So
[47:04] they build that rapport with the youth because they're the
[47:06] face the youth see on a daily basis. We have
[47:10] a social worker attached to that team. It really is
[47:13] an advisor and gives us a civilian. Lens to look
[47:19] through. And it's more of a help to our officers
[47:22] than to anybody. To be honest with you. Community mobilization
[47:26] officers. I have some examples coming up of what the
[47:28] things they did in 2024. But they're really out in
[47:31] the public and running programs for youth, running programs for
[47:35] adults. Some of the initiatives in 2024. These are the
[47:43] things that you will see us out at 2024. You
[47:46] saw us in 2023. Same things. The importance of this
[47:49] is there's dozens and dozens more, and I'll tell you.
[47:52] Each one of these comes with. We just don't show
[47:55] up. It comes with a very fulsome operational plan. It's
[47:59] not going to be the same as the one from
[48:00] 2023 we look at. Every incident. Every event on its
[48:05] own. We debrief the one from the year before and
[48:10] say, what do we need to do? Better in the
[48:11] next year. I am a critical engine commander, which is
[48:15] the highest level you can get. In terms of event
[48:18] planning in the police, and I view every plan that
[48:22] comes through, so every plan that comes through our office,
[48:24] we make sure that there's the right amount of resources.
[48:26] We took lessons from 2023, and we apply them to
[48:29] 2024. And there's dozens and dozens. Every event you go
[48:34] to there is a plan for. A few of those.
[48:41] In 2024. April 27, officer james dedu. Gave a lesson
[48:48] to the community on Sept. Which really what that is,
[48:52] is teaches people about target hardening their environment, their home,
[48:56] their business. Highlights things they should do to deter burglars
[49:00] or people from breaking into their homes. We had members
[49:04] of our CIB unit district response team there to answer
[49:08] questions. Those are things like places that should be really
[49:12] well lit, where you should cut shrubs, making sure you
[49:16] have two layers of security on every doorway, and it
[49:20] was well attended. And that septa training blood over to
[49:25] other. Initiatives we looked at in 2024 as well, including.
[49:31] The act in graffiti cleanup. There was a problem with
[49:34] graffiti enact and we applied those principles. To the graffiti
[49:39] problem. To help deter that, we had an officer, Chris
[49:44] David, who then took part in the blitz to clean
[49:47] up the graffiti and act during the summertime. Another similar
[49:52] event that the community mobilization team was involved in. We're
[50:00] partnered with Proaction, which is an organization that helps kids
[50:04] and provides funding. To youth, specifically youth at risk at
[50:07] times. One event just to highlight was a summer skate
[50:12] and. This is a high school liaison officer. Took youth
[50:16] out to do a skating program and that's? Paid for
[50:18] by proaction cops for kids. And just recently, we just
[50:23] completed a drive for clothing. This drive started in 2022.
[50:32] Our 2024 program just ended, and I believe we raised
[50:36] just over 300. Winter jackets and pants for kids in
[50:41] the region. And he's going to take over now. Michael.
[50:48] So I'm going to refer to our criminal Investigations Bureau.
[50:52] So we do have regional units. That. Take, for the
[50:57] lack of a better word, those higher level investigations. Anything
[51:01] that we can manage within the district. Will maintain a
[51:04] level of control over unless it exceeds the capacity or
[51:08] the KSAs of those teams. So this is the makeup
[51:12] of our CIB unit. Right now, there are six different
[51:16] portfolios. Now, it's important to say that although they have
[51:20] specific areas that they focus on, They are generalists. So
[51:24] if they are working, they are the ones that are
[51:26] responding on the ground supporting our front line, and that's
[51:30] the expectation, and they do it very well. However, when
[51:34] it comes to their specific portfolios, they're the ones that
[51:40] assume control of the investigations. So oftentimes. With missing persons,
[51:47] especially persons that we don't locate immediately. They'll take control
[51:52] of that and make sure that they're exhausting all the
[51:55] additional efforts. In locating that person. So just high level.
[52:01] Are missing. Our person's team. They deal with missing persons,
[52:05] assaults, criminal harassment, sex tortion. Online based. Interactions and crimes
[52:14] against seniors. We should have a member that's solely dedicated.
[52:19] To senior related investigations because they are very complex. Our
[52:24] second team is a robbery team. We also. Have a
[52:29] member that's embedded in that team that manages all of
[52:32] the calls that come. Through Maple hearst, which is? You
[52:34] can imagine there are quite a few that come to
[52:37] our team. And it's our responsibility to attend and ensure
[52:41] that. We're conducting a criminal investigation. In consultation with the
[52:48] staff at Maplehurst. An auto theft team. We do have
[52:52] a regional auto assess team now. And this team will
[52:56] maintain control of anything that doesn't really involve. Home invasions,
[53:01] anything that isn't organized crime related. Now, they do have
[53:05] some level of involvement. In those investigations, but ultimately we
[53:08] will send it off to our regional investigative services to
[53:12] manage our break and enter team. Any type of break
[53:15] and enter. To. Any buildings, whether it's residential. Commercial, they'll
[53:24] take over that. And our offender management warrants have suffered
[53:28] from vehicles this is a risk mitigation team. Offender management
[53:34] works again with a regional unit, and anybody that's living
[53:37] in our area. They'll manage anybody that's high risk for
[53:43] reoffending anybody that's on the sex offender registry, anything that
[53:48] requires some sort of diligence through probation and parole. And
[53:53] they'll also deal with some other matters that come up,
[53:56] and they'll assist. The other teams and our street crime
[53:59] unit. Again, it's our mini drug. Team that we use
[54:02] in the district, so they'll manage those street level drugs.
[54:06] They'll respond oftentimes to overdoses, and they'll manage those types
[54:09] of investigations. This is a very pretty slide, but the
[54:15] numbers that I want. To draw your attention to are
[54:20] the bolded numbers. 89%. Those are our clearance rates, and
[54:26] unfortunately, we don't have the breaking enters as far as
[54:28] broken up between. Milton and Halton Hills, but we do
[54:33] have them kind of broken up elsewhere, so our assaults
[54:36] we do have a high clearance rate for salts, as
[54:40] you can see in Holton Hills there. Were 101 that
[54:43] occurred specifically in Holton Hills. There is a slight increase
[54:48] and there's anecdotal reasons for any. Increase and decrease. And
[54:54] we can obviously do a deep dive with our analytics
[54:57] team, discuss with or regional investigative services. But we don't
[55:00] often make utterances based on what we believe. Those anecdotal
[55:05] purposes are because. It can be misleading. There are a
[55:09] lot of things that are impacted by the global climate
[55:13] in our region as well. So there are differences year
[55:17] to year. Or missing persons. We do have a very
[55:21] high success rate, and actually we credit probably the last
[55:25] few. To the use of drones. When a loved one
[55:29] goes missing and it's reported to us. And because we
[55:33] have a lot of rural property in this district. We're
[55:38] getting the drones up. We're deploying our canine dogs. We're
[55:43] utilizing all the resources that we have. So luckily, we've
[55:46] had a very high success rate in locating persons that
[55:49] have gone missing. Break. And owners, they do fluctuate. Our
[55:56] robberies. We do have a high clearance rate as well.
[55:59] There's a very small percentage up in Halton Hills. We
[56:03] have had one home invasion. I believe that one is
[56:06] still being investigated. And we did have an incident that
[56:11] was reported as a carjacking. It ended up being. False
[56:16] report. For various reasons. Vehicle thefts, and we'll have some
[56:23] slides that'll speak to those later on. Those have increased.
[56:29] In the recent few years. And. Vehicle theft from vehicles.
[56:36] As you'll see with. The blue bar. Those are unlocked
[56:40] vehicles. So 141 of the occurrences are based on the
[56:44] fact, and it goes back to what Cole was referring
[56:47] to as that sept head is target hardening. What are
[56:50] the actions that some homeowners need to take to ensure
[56:54] that they're not victimized. Unlocking their cars. It's always an
[56:57] educational piece for a lot of people. And then our
[57:00] overall stats. We have had some very fulsome discussions around
[57:04] stats because when you look at these bars. They are
[57:06] very misleading. When you see 3200 investigations. And only 380
[57:13] reps or 421 charges. When we look at investigations, we're
[57:18] also looking at. Those occurrences coming through Maple Hearst, which
[57:23] takes a significant toll on our cib unit. We're looking
[57:27] at overdoses, we're looking at other incidents that don't necessarily
[57:31] result. In an arrest, but requires some level of investigation.
[57:35] So that's why, on the surface, that can look somewhat
[57:38] misleading. And this is auto thefts for Halton Hills. Our
[57:46] percentage increased since 2019. I don't think. It's going to
[57:51] be a shock to anybody in this room because. The
[57:54] media is heavily covering it. Every region has been impacted.
[57:58] It's gone up 165%. It's a trend that we're very
[58:02] live. To that. The province is very live too that
[58:06] we've specifically received funding to address. We have had, on
[58:11] average, about 13 vehicles get stolen in a month. And
[58:16] about. 62 recovered, so. There are some top vehicles. Again,
[58:20] I'm not going to make any inferences. My husband actually
[58:23] works at Toyota, and I told me he's not allowed
[58:25] to buy a Toyota. But there's various reasons for why
[58:30] they're being targeted. How marketable that vehicle may be. So
[58:35] this is just what we're seeing. Up in Holton Hills
[58:39] specifically. And are very comprehensive, and it goes far beyond
[58:43] this. Again, it goes back to that CSWB model that
[58:50] Cole is referring to. Enforcement. Isn't enough for something like
[58:57] this. There needs to be collaboration. There needs to be
[59:01] some level. Of thought put into education for the public.
[59:07] And we need to partner with other services. So our
[59:09] instant response and a lot of these investigations when they
[59:13] do involve organized crime, we are partnering with. Other services.
[59:18] As you can imagine, there's a slide coming up next.
[59:22] It takes a significant amount of resources, takes a lot
[59:25] of time and energy. As somebody that has done surveillance,
[59:28] it takes a lot of hours to make observations, to
[59:32] make inferences. From those observations. And to actually develop a
[59:38] case that's strong enough to be able to prosecute. So
[59:42] the time, money, resources is definitely a significant factor, but
[59:47] it is a priority. So the services are very collaborative
[59:50] when we do work together because. It's a very transient
[59:54] type of crime. We do have a regional auto theft
[1:00:00] task force. That has been able to lift a lot
[1:00:04] of the work and a lot of the pressure. And
[1:00:07] the time constraints off of our CIB unit. We are
[1:00:10] looking at reorganizing. Our CIB portfolios. There's a need because
[1:00:15] the trends have changed. The environment has. Changed. We now
[1:00:19] need to adapt to some of those changes within our
[1:00:22] CIB, and we do provide our officers training. I was
[1:00:27] on frontline patrol quite a few years ago, and it
[1:00:29] has changed significantly since that. Time. So our frontline officers
[1:00:34] are experiencing. A very different environment than the rest of
[1:00:38] us ever have. So it's ensuring that everybody, including our
[1:00:42] level, have the same level of training to appreciate what
[1:00:45] those trends are at the current time. Our partnerships. Are
[1:00:50] anybody and everybody that will join us equit. We do
[1:00:55] see some revenning. We saw revenning and then. We didn't
[1:00:59] see it as much, and now we're starting to see
[1:01:00] it again. And so Equita is a national company that
[1:01:04] comes in. I don't know if it's in partnership with
[1:01:06] the insurance companies. But because there are markers within the
[1:01:10] vehicles to be able to identify what the true Vin
[1:01:12] is, within that vehicle. We collaborate with the Crown's office
[1:01:16] all the time. Our members have a very close working
[1:01:20] relationship with our local crowds. Other police services, obviously. And
[1:01:25] then we do host. An annual summit to ensure that.
[1:01:30] Everybody from local jurisdictions have the same information. Communication strategy.
[1:01:36] Communication is essential to us. We use our corporate communications
[1:01:40] team to educate the public. And we're constantly looking at
[1:01:46] means of doing that so that it is catching their
[1:01:49] attention. As delivering the proper message. They did work on
[1:01:52] a crime Stoppers reenactment recently as well. We work with
[1:01:57] our regional community mobilization team, and they do assist with
[1:02:01] some of the youth based groups. And part of this
[1:02:05] is education, but ensuring that we're targeting some of those
[1:02:09] youth. Before. They kind of go down a trail. That
[1:02:15] maybe would be concerning. So we're utilizing. Our school liaison
[1:02:20] officers to help mitigate some of those issues. Network intervention.
[1:02:27] Or community mobilization office. Is we stand them up quite
[1:02:31] regularly. Every time we have something, we sort of redeploy.
[1:02:35] Them. And we try to be present. At as many
[1:02:39] events as we can. And again, So personalized letters to
[1:02:43] owners. Through the MTO, we determined these high risk vehicles,
[1:02:48] and we personally delivered letters to some of those residents
[1:02:52] to ensure that they had an awareness that they could
[1:02:55] potentially be targeted and what to do to limit the
[1:02:58] likelihood. These are just a couple of joint forces operations.
[1:03:04] I personally was not involved in any of them. But
[1:03:07] as you can see on the right hand side, There
[1:03:10] are quite a few services that were including the port
[1:03:14] of Halifax. The chief potential could probably speak to it
[1:03:19] when he does get up. But September 2023 to March
[1:03:23] 2024, was one of them, and. It was a group
[1:03:28] of individuals that was targeting members of the public. And
[1:03:33] taking their vehicles while they were operating the vehicle. So
[1:03:35] it did escalate at times. To a level of violence.
[1:03:39] And similarly, there was another one, project vector, and they
[1:03:43] ended up. Locating a number of recovered vehicles. At the
[1:03:48] poor. To my understanding, it was quite. The undertaking. Trying
[1:03:53] to search some of the sea cans because there are
[1:03:56] quite a few of them, and they ended up locating
[1:03:58] 598 vehicles, 19 of which were stolen from our region.
[1:04:02] So that was a significant project. Our mental health response.
[1:04:08] We have two levels of response. We have m cert,
[1:04:12] which is on this side, and then we have coast
[1:04:14] m cert is our emergency response. Somebody is. In a
[1:04:22] state of unwell that they need to seek medical assistance,
[1:04:27] and this is through a partnership with St. Joe's Hospital.
[1:04:31] So it's one of our officers that has very specific
[1:04:33] training, partnered with a healthcare professional. And the whole purpose
[1:04:37] is to have them attend because they have the requisite
[1:04:41] knowledge, skills, and abilities to be able to try to
[1:04:44] de escalate. And oftentimes they're able to divert that person
[1:04:49] away from the hospital and then engage our second mental
[1:04:52] health. Program or group that we have embedded in the
[1:04:55] service. Crisis intervention training all of our officers that are
[1:05:00] assigned to that team. Have that training in many of
[1:05:04] our frontline do as well. We have a cohort program.
[1:05:09] For our recruits. That is now embedded in their training,
[1:05:12] that within the first. Years of their service, they do
[1:05:15] receive that very specific focus training on mental health. Our
[1:05:21] second team is our coast crisis outreach and support team.
[1:05:25] Again, this was something. That I didn't necessarily exist when
[1:05:30] I was on the front line, and it's a partnership
[1:05:33] with the Canadian Mental Health association. And again. It's member
[1:05:38] of our team that's partnered with a crisis intervention specialist,
[1:05:43] and they go out after. When we respond to a
[1:05:45] call, they'll get a referral from our front line and.
[1:05:49] They will go and visit the person. So it could
[1:05:51] be a person that's living in a state that's concerning
[1:05:54] but not necessarily necessitating an immediate course of action to
[1:05:59] bring them in to get assessed. And so this team
[1:06:02] goes in and makes sure that. They're providing them with
[1:06:05] a proper assistance, resources, et cetera. So it's very tailored
[1:06:09] to the needs of the individual. Hate crime and hate
[1:06:13] incident response. This is another sort of evolving.
[1:06:22] Area for service. And the reason being the demographics have
[1:06:27] changed. There's tons of growth. In our community. And within
[1:06:33] our service. So our focus. In the last five or
[1:06:38] six years is to really focus on our internal well
[1:06:40] being, and then externally, how we're responding to the community.
[1:06:44] So we do have an organizational strategy. There is a
[1:06:47] provincial investigative team to share information between the services. Anybody
[1:06:53] that's committing any type of hate crime oftentimes is transient
[1:06:57] and going from region to region, or if investigatively we're
[1:07:01] looking at employing certain strategies coming across a specific group.
[1:07:06] They'll discuss it at that table. We do have an
[1:07:09] internal hate crime group to ensure. That our three districts
[1:07:12] and our regional investigative services are communicating. And we have
[1:07:17] mandatory. Service wide training. There is a difference in the
[1:07:22] criminal code. As far as a hate related incident and
[1:07:26] a hate crime. There are some misconceptions. With how to
[1:07:32] address certain incidents. Our approach as a service is that
[1:07:36] hate crime in isolation. Is not for one specific person
[1:07:42] to investigate. All of our investigators need and our frontline
[1:07:46] need. To know how to manage and how to deal
[1:07:49] with. Any incident. They hate crime. So our CIB unit.
[1:07:54] Will typically flag that with the crown, that there's an
[1:07:56] element to hate, whether it's. Hate related or whether it
[1:08:00] classifies as a hate crime. Edi engagement. We do have
[1:08:04] an EDI team and an extended ADI team. Each district
[1:08:08] has members that it's to ensure that they have a
[1:08:11] current awareness of what the climate is. The political climate,
[1:08:14] the global climate, maybe some items of interest. The demographics
[1:08:18] within each district are very different. And some of the
[1:08:21] incidents that we're dealing with can be very different. So
[1:08:24] this group helps navigate some, and many of the people
[1:08:28] in this room have probably dealt with more recently. KeitH
[1:08:31] Nakahara who is working. In that unit. He will meet
[1:08:35] with community partners. He will meet and he will discuss.
[1:08:40] Legislation if he needs to, and he will discuss. What
[1:08:45] our policies and procedures are, so it's ensuring that there's
[1:08:48] a shared understanding. And leveraging provincial funding. Our budget is
[1:08:53] limited to what it's limited to, and so we do
[1:08:56] apply for community. Grants recently. We had a community safety
[1:09:00] and well being. Grant. It was just under a million
[1:09:04] dollars that we were able to leverage that and utilize
[1:09:07] it. Towards hiring experts in the field. Hosting a community
[1:09:13] event. Two years in a row. And through that, we
[1:09:16] were able to determine some things that we are the
[1:09:19] do need improvement. And one of them goes back to
[1:09:21] something as simple as. Social media. Is if there are
[1:09:25] any posts that we post that. Have. An EDI sort
[1:09:30] of perspective or lens is not allowing members of the
[1:09:33] public to use it. As a form for hate. So
[1:09:36] we do shut down the opportunity for people to comment,
[1:09:40] and it wasn't necessarily. Something that we had thought of,
[1:09:43] so there was tons of value in getting that feedback,
[1:09:47] and then tracking mechanisms. We actually have internal mechanisms to
[1:09:50] now track how many hate incidents, hate crimes, and we're
[1:09:53] able to present to the board every year. So as
[1:09:57] of 2023, we did have 146 related hate occurrences. 70
[1:10:03] of which resulted in criminal charges, and that's in Holme
[1:10:06] Hills. Our opioid strategy.
[1:10:17] So this is in partnership with regional health. This has
[1:10:19] been quite a few years. And what we've done is.
[1:10:24] Each one of our frontline officers and ourselves included, have
[1:10:27] do carry Narcan, and we use it regularly. As recent
[1:10:32] as this morning, we had an officer come into our
[1:10:35] office and she had administered two in a row, and
[1:10:39] so our officers are using it on a regular basis.
[1:10:45] To date, we've had 32. Now. We did host an
[1:10:51] opioid awareness. Education forum for members last week. And our
[1:10:57] drug unit advised that they have seen a 40. I
[1:11:00] believe it's 46%. Decrease. Of fatal deaths with overdoses, and
[1:11:07] that's region wide. So again, there can be anecdotal reasons
[1:11:12] for that, but it could be an indication that. Distributing
[1:11:16] an arcan is a life saving measure. Promise. I am
[1:11:20] not a talker, so this is killing me. And then
[1:11:24] our new one district. Facility, which everyone here is well
[1:11:29] aware of, and we're very excited to move into her.
[1:11:32] Current building. Is not necessarily in the best state of
[1:11:39] affairs. A groundbreaking. I know I saw many people here
[1:11:44] on May 8, which was wonderful to see, and these
[1:11:48] completion dates, you probably have way more awareness as far
[1:11:52] as. The completion date probably stands. Do you want to
[1:11:57] wrap it up? No. Thank you so much. There's a
[1:12:03] lot of information to go through, but I know. Different
[1:12:06] counselors always have particular interest in those different areas in
[1:12:09] Autosft and home invasion. Certainly. Is a big topic for
[1:12:15] us these days. But. We sometimes lose sight of the
[1:12:19] fact that police service is not just ours. Across Canada,
[1:12:22] we tend to say that 75%, maybe more, of what
[1:12:26] our officers do on the front line is not crime
[1:12:28] related. So the 25% is the robberies and the breaking
[1:12:32] enters and we had 1500. Vehicles stolen last year. We're
[1:12:37] down about eleven or twelve. Percent so far this year.
[1:12:39] I hope that continues. Probably down 34% in the last
[1:12:43] month part of that might be because the port of
[1:12:45] Montreal has been closed. So when the federal government orders
[1:12:48] them to open up again. I'm not sure what's going
[1:12:50] to happen, but that auto theft issue really is. And
[1:12:56] for the members of Councillor that are on regional Councillor
[1:12:58] have had police services board. Exposure. The port of Montreal.
[1:13:05] Is. A leaking huge port out of this country. The
[1:13:08] federal government does not prioritize exports from the country. When
[1:13:12] it comes to CBSA, the only thing they really prioritize
[1:13:15] on an export basis is drugs and firearms, and we
[1:13:19] are an import company when it comes to stolen firearms.
[1:13:22] I could go on about that for quite some time,
[1:13:24] but 85% of our. Crime guns when they're handguns in
[1:13:28] Ontario. Are stolen. Or smuggled here from the United States.
[1:13:35] We even know it's from four particular states. So there's
[1:13:38] no doubt about. Where some of our issues are at
[1:13:41] the border. Our crime trends, we are still the lowest
[1:13:46] crime severity index crime rates of all the large municipalities
[1:13:50] in Canada. That's over 100,000 in total as a region.
[1:13:55] And certainly, I think there are statistics here in Halton
[1:13:58] Hills are favorable when you compare to Oakville and Burlington
[1:14:02] Oakville. Is certainly sort of the center for our auto
[1:14:06] theft, more of our auto thefts, and certainly our home
[1:14:09] invasions are happening in Oakville. Bottom line, I believe most
[1:14:12] of our criminals don't. Have to go any further than
[1:14:15] Oakville when it comes to some of those vehicles that
[1:14:18] are being targeted, particularly the Toyota Trendra's Range Rovers and
[1:14:23] different types of vehicle. Vehicles. We are very wealthy region,
[1:14:27] as we all know, generally speaking, and we are certainly
[1:14:31] target rich when it comes to our criminals that are
[1:14:34] coming from outside of Halton to commit some of these.
[1:14:37] Crimes here. I'm glad that Anita mentioned the fact that
[1:14:42] Narcan was used as recently as today to save an
[1:14:46] overdose situation here in Halton Hills. We've also began to.
[1:14:52] Give Narcan out. To at risk individuals when we release
[1:14:57] them from custody. So if we have prisoners, sometimes overnight
[1:15:01] or they're released in the morning or bail hearing in
[1:15:02] the morning, and there is an issue. There. We will
[1:15:06] provide an arcan to them, too. I never thought a
[1:15:08] police service would do. That thinking back to 1982. When
[1:15:13] I started. But it's certainly a different world. And the
[1:15:17] mental health issues. Certainly places a different level of priority
[1:15:22] on our missing persons, sorts of incidents and why we
[1:15:25] have to do some of the extensive work that we
[1:15:29] do around every missing person call that we have. Now
[1:15:31] because they are generally people at risk. Or at some
[1:15:35] sort of elevated risk. Great to see the drone technology
[1:15:38] and that sort of thing. We actually had. An 85
[1:15:43] year old. Lady. I think it was just a couple
[1:15:46] of months ago that went missing in Burlington for a
[1:15:49] day and a half and was found with drone technology
[1:15:53] in a ravine where she probably never would. Have been
[1:15:55] found, so. She was returned safely in that situation. So
[1:16:00] the technology needs to be leveraged. It's not a secret.
[1:16:05] The Police Services Board has approved a budget increase for
[1:16:08] 2025 at 13.8%, which. Will be going to regional Councillor.
[1:16:13] I think it's worth mentioning that amount. Because 11.9%. Is
[1:16:20] just keeping the lights on the way they are now.
[1:16:24] It's a combination of the compounding of collective agreement settlements
[1:16:29] from 2023, four and five. You will see, I would
[1:16:34] say. You will see in the not too distant future
[1:16:36] the same sorts of numbers when it comes to collective
[1:16:39] agreements for municipal fire departments and the paramedics. Are impacted
[1:16:44] to a similar level. But 9.9% is to absorb the
[1:16:51] salary benefit and related costs of collective agreements or arbitrations,
[1:16:57] which are cross Ontario trending that way. I can also
[1:17:02] tell you pl police Services board just approve their 2025
[1:17:06] budget at over 20%. And they're asking for 300 additional
[1:17:12] officers. We're asking for 26. So I say that to
[1:17:15] keep it in perspective. It is an expensive business. It
[1:17:18] is an expensive year. It will be higher than any
[1:17:23] previous recent year or future year, looking ahead. But that
[1:17:28] is where. We are at financially because of some of
[1:17:32] those impacts. The other thing, and I'm sure Mr. Mills
[1:17:35] would see it here in Halton Hills. Is the horrifically
[1:17:39] escalating cost of information technology. Everything that we do in
[1:17:44] the. It world it seems these days. We don't go
[1:17:48] out and purchase a system now, pay for it with
[1:17:51] capital dollars. And then keep it going for relatively little
[1:17:56] money every year. Everything is license based, everything is Sas.
[1:18:01] Server as you. Use these devices and as you use
[1:18:06] the technology. So when you think about. The level of
[1:18:09] analytics that we need to do, the records management systems
[1:18:13] that we need to have. In place to manage everything
[1:18:16] that the police service does. The computer aided dispatch types
[1:18:19] of systems which we sometimes share some of our technology
[1:18:22] with our municipal. Police or fire services and with our
[1:18:27] paramedics, when they can, are becoming increasingly expensive. I think
[1:18:32] the superintendent and the inspector touched on. There are a
[1:18:35] variety of resources that are available. To Halton Hills or
[1:18:39] to any of our municipalities on a regional basis. I
[1:18:43] know that members of regional Councillor will remember last year.
[1:18:48] We increased some budget dollars to enhance. Our homicide. Or
[1:18:53] major crime type of area, and that was to take
[1:18:56] some of that work away from the district criminal investigation
[1:19:00] bureau. So a year ago, if there had been a
[1:19:02] shooting in Halton Hills, and it was not a fatal
[1:19:06] shooting. The resources here in Milton and Halton Hills would
[1:19:10] have dealt with the majority of that investigation. But the
[1:19:14] reality is that shooting. Was probably just as difficult to
[1:19:18] investigate and solve as if the person had passed away.
[1:19:22] A homicide or an attempt homicide is the same investigation.
[1:19:27] Increasingly, its organized crime coming from out of town with
[1:19:29] a lot of technical things that have to be done
[1:19:32] on the investigative side. Now we can take those investigations.
[1:19:38] I use an example of just last week we had
[1:19:40] a shooting in Oakville. We have had very few. This
[1:19:43] year, thankfully. Something that. Would. But that will be handled
[1:19:49] by regional resources, not by the Oakville detectives. So. They're
[1:19:56] no longer being drawn away to do the shooting. And
[1:19:59] not able to do the break and endorse and the
[1:20:00] auto thefts in the local area. So again, just an
[1:20:04] example of how our regional resources and capabilities. Are greater
[1:20:10] than each of us would have been individually back in
[1:20:13] pre 1974. The Georgetown Police Department back then. Would not
[1:20:21] be able to do the level of investigations that we
[1:20:24] are now required to do by provincial legislation when it
[1:20:27] comes to homicides and sexual assaults and very technically in
[1:20:32] depth incident, so. That's just sort of a top up
[1:20:35] to what the command team had to say. I'm certainly
[1:20:38] here along with them to answer any questions. I know
[1:20:41] we've taken a fair bit of your time, but thank
[1:20:43] you for the invitation, and we'll come anytime that you
[1:20:46] want us here on any topic. Thank you. Well, thanks
[1:20:51] very much, chief. And I'll be very surprised if there
[1:20:55] aren't lots of questions. You're always welcome. To come and
[1:20:59] visit us, and there's a huge amount of interest in
[1:21:02] the kinds of services the police are providing. So I
[1:21:06] think. Councillor Rosinski, I saw you first. Thank you, Madam
[1:21:10] Mayor. And thank you. Chief superintendent and inspector for coming
[1:21:14] and giving your presentation today. Really appreciate it. As you
[1:21:18] know, the province is pushing for bail reform, and I
[1:21:22] was at an event organized by Councillor Hilsen a few
[1:21:25] months ago about domestic abuse, and an officer was there
[1:21:28] giving a presentation. He was sharing some of the issues
[1:21:32] that they have. In keeping people, repeat offenders off the
[1:21:38] streets and the work that you put in to prosecute.
[1:21:42] As was mentioned by the inspector and then have them
[1:21:44] do out on the street. Soon after that. Is discouraging
[1:21:51] for your officers and for the people involved in those
[1:21:53] investigations, so I just. Wondered if you could comment on
[1:21:56] that and how you're dealing with repeat offenders in Hamilton.
[1:22:00] Region? I'd love to. How long do I have? It's
[1:22:04] such a complicated situation. We thank the provincial. Government for
[1:22:10] their position on bail reform. To the extent that they
[1:22:14] can control that, it's sort of a multilevel government issue
[1:22:18] and concern. Where criminal laws are made by our federal
[1:22:22] government. Our provincial government is responsible for policing and the
[1:22:25] attorney general's office provincially. We do very much have what
[1:22:30] you will hear, Premier Ford. General Kirsner say is a
[1:22:35] catch and release type of justice system. Most people. That
[1:22:39] if we hold them in custody, most people are let
[1:22:42] out on some form of bail. For violent offenders. I'm
[1:22:46] not at all a fan of ankle bracelets and how's.
[1:22:49] The rest? Because they can be removed. And we've had
[1:22:52] horrendous situations. Happen, even involving some citizens from Halton Hills
[1:22:58] in a tragic circumstance a few years ago. So it
[1:23:01] definitely needs to change. Having said that, maple hear. Hearst
[1:23:05] is pretty much full, I think they say 97% full.
[1:23:10] They may be having. More than one inmate in a
[1:23:13] cell area. That's only made for one I don't feel
[1:23:17] particularly sorry about that. In and of itself. But the
[1:23:21] provincial government also knows they will have to. Build increased
[1:23:26] incarceration facilities, which come with huge expense. I think they
[1:23:31] can prioritize. Some non criminal. Individuals who are incarcerated and
[1:23:38] save those positions for the ones that need to stay
[1:23:40] in jail. It's horrendous that a repeat auto theft offender
[1:23:46] is released and then goes and steals another vehicle. Every
[1:23:51] time a vehicle stolen, it presents a great threat to
[1:23:54] our police officers and to anyone else. Who's driving on
[1:23:57] the road because. They're completely reckless, abandoned. They'll ram our
[1:24:02] police cars, and we know that, and. We certainly have
[1:24:06] our limitations on what we can do because we have
[1:24:09] to look after public safety. Frustrating when we cannot do
[1:24:14] more to apprehend some of those people in those situations,
[1:24:16] but. We also can't. Have a pursuit lead to innocent
[1:24:21] people being killed. I will say that the situation in
[1:24:25] Durham where the U Haul ban was pursued on the
[1:24:28] 401 and was going in the wrong direction. That person
[1:24:31] had been arrested and charged twice in Alton region. With
[1:24:35] similar liquor store types of robberies and stuff if they
[1:24:39] had still been in custody only my opinion, that never
[1:24:43] would have happened. Never should have happened. So we do
[1:24:45] need to have a system that keeps more people in
[1:24:47] jail. I think there will be another election sometime in
[1:24:51] the next year, and there may be a change. In
[1:24:55] some priorities from a federal perspective. We'll wait to see
[1:24:58] when that happens. Thank you. For sharing your perspective. I
[1:25:01] agree completely, and I really appreciate that. Thank you. Thank
[1:25:04] you. Councilor brass. Thank you, madam Mayor, through you to
[1:25:10] the chief. And thanks again for being here today. Chief,
[1:25:13] with your team. My question is more of a Halton
[1:25:18] Hill specific question, and. That would be. We are very
[1:25:22] rich in aggregate in Halton Hills, and as a result
[1:25:25] we have a lot of truck traffic. Not just regular
[1:25:28] but also commercial truck traffic that really goes through all
[1:25:32] wards. And we're seeing an increase in. Trucks. That? If
[1:25:38] I can say, some of them are quite lawless. And
[1:25:42] we see such an uptake on trucks using no truck
[1:25:45] roads. Or their trucks are unsafe. We constantly getting complaints
[1:25:51] about that. And I know you do an annual commercial
[1:25:55] truck blitz which I've attended, and it was fantastic. It
[1:25:57] was really great. But can you maybe comment or someone
[1:26:00] from your team on. Is there going to be more
[1:26:04] resource or more focus on cracking down on commercial vehicles
[1:26:08] that are literally put citizens at risk because they're barreling
[1:26:12] through no truck roads. Where they're not just no truck
[1:26:15] rollers, because we don't want them on. There, it's because
[1:26:17] they're not safe to be on there. So I wonder
[1:26:20] if you might comment on that. Well, absolutely. And thank
[1:26:23] you for the question. I absolutely agree with you. There
[1:26:27] is a great concern with truck traffic in particular, even
[1:26:30] more in the north end, I believe. Milton and Halton
[1:26:33] Hills and Oakfront, Burlington. Things that sienne may or may
[1:26:37] not do, and the status of that may even increase
[1:26:40] that. And worsen things. Not all gravel aggregate hauling companies,
[1:26:46] but certainly some. There is more profit. In overloading some
[1:26:52] vehicles than following the law. We do have a commercial
[1:26:55] motor vehicle unit who are exceptionally busy. I can't believe
[1:26:59] what they do. I would not be able to do
[1:27:01] what they do. I don't understand the things that they
[1:27:04] understand about trucks. They can observe a truck on a
[1:27:08] highway and they know that it's offending and they can
[1:27:11] then pull it over and do the enforcement. They do
[1:27:14] do an annual blitz, which you refer to where we
[1:27:18] bring in the opp in York and Durham and Peele
[1:27:20] and Hamilton. And they all do things on the same
[1:27:22] day, and then our people go there as well, but.
[1:27:25] They're also. Working daily. I honestly would double or triple
[1:27:30] the size of our commercial motor vehicle unit if we
[1:27:32] could. But having said that, I will say. In the
[1:27:37] 1.9% which is to hire additional stop this year. That
[1:27:41] includes 26 police officers. That will allow us to put
[1:27:45] 16 of those on frontline platoons. There is no extra
[1:27:50] officers there to put specifically into commercial vehicles units, but
[1:27:54] we could use them. Here. Absolutely. They would be busy.
[1:27:57] They would be busy 24 hours a day. So I
[1:28:00] hope that that is a commitment that we can make
[1:28:02] moving forward. We will have our officers and we have
[1:28:05] officers in the district who train. And work alongside of
[1:28:10] our full time, fully accredited. Commercial motor vehicle enforcement people.
[1:28:16] We just can't make them. All a part of a
[1:28:18] larger regional. Unit at this point. Absolutely share your concerns.
[1:28:24] Great. Thank you very much. Councilor Somerville. Yes. Thank you,
[1:28:28] Madam Mayor. You to the chief. And I agree about
[1:28:31] the commercial. Vehicle unit. You and I have chat about
[1:28:34] that a number of times. That it's absolutely incredible that
[1:28:40] they go in every day with their plan of being
[1:28:42] as dirty as they can as they crawl in under
[1:28:44] the trucks. But it's surprising for one of the statistics
[1:28:48] that was put up that shows the calls to people.
[1:28:53] Who didn't have their vehicle locked. The break in. I
[1:28:58] can't believe I have to ask this question. In 2024,
[1:29:02] how do we remind people to lock your door. Lock
[1:29:06] the car up. And do that as well. It just
[1:29:10] seems so foreign to me that we have to do
[1:29:12] something. As simple and basic as that. Yeah. There are
[1:29:14] a lot of common sense things that certainly all of
[1:29:17] us as citizens could do better at that is one
[1:29:20] of them. I drive a police vehicle. That doesn't look
[1:29:24] like a police vehicle. I don't. Leave it anywhere without
[1:29:26] a club on it and having a mobilizer in it
[1:29:29] as well. Because I would not want to come here
[1:29:32] and say that my truck was stolen personally. But the
[1:29:36] immobilizers are expensive. There's the other tag systems, and certainly
[1:29:40] locking the vehicle. I think some people. Have the perception
[1:29:43] that. If they don't lock it, somebody will go into
[1:29:47] it and steal something. But they won't. Smash the window
[1:29:49] out. So I think some people are under that impression
[1:29:55] that maybe they'll result in less damage. I think the
[1:29:58] reality is, most times if a criminal we're talking about,
[1:30:02] the less sophisticated person walking down the street that decides
[1:30:06] to steal some change in sunglasses out of a vehicle
[1:30:10] are not going to smash the window. So. It becomes
[1:30:16] more of a crime of opportunity. But on a larger
[1:30:20] scale, we also see it. With. There's so many homes
[1:30:24] here in Halton Hills and throughout the region that have
[1:30:26] two or three car garages. That are full of things.
[1:30:31] And arrange rovers, and the Toyota Tundras and the f
[1:30:33] 150s are sitting in the driveway where criminals can just
[1:30:37] drive by and basically shop for them. It would be
[1:30:40] a great deterrent if we could educate people to put
[1:30:44] particularly these high end vehicles, and they are being targeted.
[1:30:47] Because they are worth $50 to $75,000. In Africa or
[1:30:51] East Europe, which is where they're going to on these
[1:30:54] ships, if they were inside the garages, I think our
[1:30:57] auto theft problem would be significantly reduced. I agree. They
[1:31:02] need to clean out their garage, I guess is what
[1:31:04] I'd say to them. My last comment is we had
[1:31:07] the meeting with the ward two councilors. And when Councillor
[1:31:11] Debo did the septid, and it was tremendous, and I
[1:31:15] would urge any of the other Councillor. If they want
[1:31:17] to have a community meeting like that, set it up
[1:31:19] and. Work together and have the police in because. You
[1:31:25] stop looking. At landscaping rocks as being rocks, but instead,
[1:31:30] it's a key for someone to get into. Your house,
[1:31:32] and they're saying it's the easiest thing to pick up
[1:31:34] if I. Need to get in the house. I throw
[1:31:35] a rock through a window and you really start thinking,
[1:31:39] of it differently when you see the presentation. So thank
[1:31:42] you for that as well, because. It was for the
[1:31:45] folks who attended. It was very enlightening to hear some
[1:31:48] of the very simple things people can do that can
[1:31:52] help secure their home. Thank you. It's great. To hear
[1:31:55] and thank you. And we use that term septid, I
[1:31:58] think, for the last 30 years, crime prevention through environmental
[1:32:01] design. Cole referred to it as target hardening, which really
[1:32:04] is what it is. I think th was taken. Thank
[1:32:08] you, Councillor Garnell. Thank you. And through you, Madam Mayor,
[1:32:17] to the chief. Thank you for coming here today. And
[1:32:21] it's always nice to hear what's happening and to hear
[1:32:24] from you and. Your colleagues. In particular. The new station
[1:32:29] is exciting, and I'm just wondering if you can confirm
[1:32:32] what's going to happen with the existing stations, long term
[1:32:37] or short term? Yeah. There are some things that are
[1:32:40] up in the air, I've always said, and I've said
[1:32:42] this to. I've been back here as a chief now
[1:32:44] in Halton for. Twelve years, and I think we've talked
[1:32:46] about it for ten or eleven. Our plan is still
[1:32:51] to use the station here. As a storefront type of
[1:32:56] environment for people because it's still a fair distance for
[1:32:58] some of your citizens to travel down to the other
[1:33:01] part of your town. But although it's not in milton,
[1:33:06] But. I think that presence is still important. I'm not
[1:33:09] sure what level of staffing that will be. We also
[1:33:13] probably have some use for that building and storage or
[1:33:16] different things. It's interesting. All of these buildings are regional
[1:33:20] assets. They're bought for and paid for by regional tax
[1:33:25] dollars, which ultimately come from all of your Councillor, and
[1:33:28] we have to budget for them in our operating budget
[1:33:31] to pay for them, so. These buildings are paid for
[1:33:35] in Halton Hills and the one in Milton. We may
[1:33:38] actually. At the end of or going into 2026, we
[1:33:42] may have to use the station in Milton. To do
[1:33:46] some specific police training that we do. If you can
[1:33:50] picture. Some of the terrible situations we tend to see
[1:33:55] south of the border, active shooter types of situations. Every
[1:33:58] one of our frontline officers have to be trained in
[1:34:01] that dynamic type of response. We're having a really hard
[1:34:05] time finding facilities to do that in. We've historically. Won't
[1:34:10] get off topic. Historically, we've used vacant schools. Vacant businesses.
[1:34:16] There are no schools available right now that are appropriate
[1:34:19] for us to use. We may look at keeping that
[1:34:22] for as long as we can, because I think. There
[1:34:25] is a longer term commitment that that's going to move
[1:34:28] into an expansion of Allendale and. It's going to be
[1:34:32] retail and commercial. And there are probably millions of dollars
[1:34:36] involved there outside of the police business. But we will
[1:34:40] certainly keep those buildings going in different capacities for the
[1:34:44] coming couple of years. And let me add to that.
[1:34:51] I have also always said to this Councillor that while
[1:34:54] the current location is where this facility is, going to
[1:34:57] go. In the next eight to ten years, we are
[1:35:00] going to start to outgrow that facility. And at that
[1:35:03] point in time, I think there should be a separate
[1:35:06] facility. Probably, I always say, in Georgetown proper, but back
[1:35:12] more in central Halton Hills, and at which point, the
[1:35:16] districts would be separated. So we would go to four
[1:35:19] districts as opposed to three. With your population now. Oakland,
[1:35:25] Burlington were this size when I started in 1982. They've
[1:35:28] always been their own district, but it's always been this
[1:35:30] proportionality thing, so. Halton hills. I'm not sure what I'll
[1:35:36] be doing ten years from now. But Halton Hills should
[1:35:40] be its own district, in my opinion. Have their own
[1:35:43] superintendent and inspector. And units that coal and Anita just
[1:35:47] spoke to. Thank you, Councillor Keane. Thanks, Madam Mary. Through
[1:35:57] you to the chief. Thanks, chief. We're all addressing, I
[1:35:59] guess our pet projects here. But following up on Councillor
[1:36:02] Garnos comment, I've certainly heard feedback from the constituents that
[1:36:04] there's a concern that we're not getting the same kind.
[1:36:07] Of coverage up here through our police station that we've
[1:36:10] had in the past. And specific area of concern that
[1:36:13] I wanted to get your thoughts on. Is the vast
[1:36:16] increase in what appears to be a vast increase in
[1:36:19] street racing. It's been going on. You hear it here
[1:36:21] every night, picking on the weekends. Just outside the outskirts
[1:36:25] of town. I had just anecdotally told to me a
[1:36:30] few months ago that basically the words gotten out on
[1:36:32] the street with the younger generation that if you want
[1:36:35] to get your hot rod come up from Milton or
[1:36:37] Oakville, go up to Halton Hills, because there's no popo
[1:36:40] around, you're more likely to get away with it on
[1:36:43] their Instagram accounts. Or whatever they're using, right? So I
[1:36:46] don't know if you could comment on that. Or if
[1:36:48] you had some ideas on how we could maybe do
[1:36:50] a blitz of some sort on the evenings to try
[1:36:53] and put a little scare into these kids so they
[1:36:54] don't get themselves killed, frankly. Thank you. That's one of
[1:36:59] the greatest risks. On top of. The risk. That it
[1:37:04] presents to all of your citizens when it's going on.
[1:37:06] And the noise of it and everything else. We have
[1:37:09] seen more of it in York Region has been really,
[1:37:12] really bad for street racing and parts of Durham worse
[1:37:15] than we have here, but we've had it. I think
[1:37:19] it's a combination of frontline staffing. We're one person on
[1:37:26] a shift starts to make a little bit of a
[1:37:28] difference, so. When we're looking at these 16 frontline officers
[1:37:32] that are in the 13.8%. Budget that we're talking about.
[1:37:37] That, ideally, is one officer per platoon in Halton Hills
[1:37:41] and in Milton. So it's actually two per platoon in
[1:37:43] the north end and one per platoon. And Oakland, Burlington,
[1:37:47] that's the general plan. That's why it's 16 instead of
[1:37:50] twelve. Because we actually have twelve platoons across the region
[1:37:54] working twelve hour shifts. If there were another twelve officers.
[1:37:59] In addition to that, it would probably just be one
[1:38:02] to the district up here. But it is important to
[1:38:05] increase our presence in every community as much as we
[1:38:08] can as far as the location of the station. If
[1:38:12] the location of the station was our biggest issue, there's
[1:38:15] another issue with that, because our frontline officers, I don't
[1:38:18] want them in the stations unless they are there for
[1:38:21] lunches or for some reason that. They have to. They're
[1:38:24] dealing with a prisoner or dealing with reports. Our front
[1:38:27] line officers. Their office is actually the patrol cars. So
[1:38:32] they will be out here in Halton Hills and. Milton
[1:38:35] just as much as they would be when we had
[1:38:37] the old station here, if I can. Call it that.
[1:38:41] Soon to be the old station. So we will adjust
[1:38:43] the staffing here in this municipality as much as we
[1:38:46] can going forward. Blitzes are always something, and certainly the
[1:38:50] superintendent and the inspector are here, they can look at
[1:38:53] that with their district response teams and different ways that
[1:38:56] we can blitz things. We're doing that in a different
[1:38:59] way. Just last week. We had two auto theft situations
[1:39:04] in Oakville. Just use this as an example. One was.
[1:39:08] Two stolen cars that came to Oakville to steal other
[1:39:10] cars that were observed by officers and because we put
[1:39:15] this blitz sort of approach in place. There were additional
[1:39:18] resources there to follow those people and address that situation
[1:39:22] and make the arrest and the other incident, the same
[1:39:25] night was a home invasion where someone was injured and
[1:39:28] a car was stolen. And because the blitz type of
[1:39:32] thing was happening that evening, we were able to make
[1:39:34] arrests. And locate that car in another jurisdiction. And make
[1:39:38] arrests the next day through a very complicated. Investigation. So
[1:39:42] the Blitz approach and the project approach is something that
[1:39:45] we will definitely do. Here and Colon, Anita and others
[1:39:50] will definitely be looking at that with you. Thank you.
[1:39:58] Councilor hill. Thank you, madam mayor, through youth of the
[1:40:02] chief. Thanks for coming, making the trip today, and thank
[1:40:05] you good to listen to the presentation. As Councillor Keane
[1:40:09] said. My pet project. This year. This was noted in
[1:40:16] the presentation. You mentioned some of the work you did.
[1:40:20] Councillor Arbano knows better than I do with. The graffiti
[1:40:22] in downtown act and thank you for your support in
[1:40:25] that as a force. But. I think there's also. Been
[1:40:31] a bit of a shock that there's obviously break and
[1:40:33] enters and vehicle thefts. All over the region. But. Representing.
[1:40:39] A smaller suburban area. Smaller, with rural pieces. We just
[1:40:44] had a particularly severe attempt at a home evasion a
[1:40:47] couple of weeks ago. And I think there's people. It's
[1:40:50] those things that people. It's the stories that scare people,
[1:40:55] right? They don't necessarily see the numbers, but. They see
[1:40:59] the news headline and they say, hey, that could have
[1:41:00] been me. With persons beating the door with a gun.
[1:41:04] So I'm just curious how. We communicate the work that's
[1:41:09] being done and wondering if you could comment on that.
[1:41:12] To let the people know. People don't necessarily know until
[1:41:16] they know it. Right? And then. When something happens. They're
[1:41:20] concerned. Nothing's being done to address it, which we know
[1:41:21] isn't. The case, so I'm just curious if you could
[1:41:24] comment on that. Yeah. Thank you. I think it perfectly
[1:41:28] mirrors what we're seeing in part of Oldfill right now,
[1:41:31] because the majority of the auto thefts that are of
[1:41:33] the home invasion auto thefts are happening in one part
[1:41:36] of Oakville so similar to what you're talking about here.
[1:41:40] And. Those two instances last week happened in that neighborhood.
[1:41:45] All the talk is of these terrible incidents which is
[1:41:47] true, and we share that concern. The talk isn't that
[1:41:52] individuals were arrested for both of those, and that's understandable.
[1:41:55] Too, because the people were still threatened or injured. It
[1:42:00] happened after the crime. It would be better if that
[1:42:02] never happened. It's hard to. Stop them from happening. Sometimes
[1:42:07] our officers are there. And time to do that and
[1:42:11] more of a proactive way. I think we have to
[1:42:13] get the message out. On the success of some of
[1:42:17] those investigations. We can say in that Oakville situation. There
[1:42:23] were, I want to say only x number of these
[1:42:25] incidents. Because one is too many. But we also have
[1:42:30] to keep it in perspective that we do have. It
[1:42:35] doesn't matter to a citizen whose house was broken into
[1:42:38] or you live next door. To that person that we
[1:42:40] have the lowest crime severity index, because that still threatens
[1:42:43] your safety and security. So we do a lot through
[1:42:46] social media. We try to educate through town halls and
[1:42:50] different municipalities and in particular in that part of Oakville
[1:42:54] to educate people. On what they could do to target
[1:42:56] Harden, those homes and those vehicles. But that's a message.
[1:43:01] I think what we often say in policing and other
[1:43:03] businesses is if you think you've communicated enough, say it
[1:43:07] ten more times. Because if you can put it out
[1:43:10] on, get used to calling it X. Or whatever social
[1:43:15] media platform we use. And if the citizens aren't on
[1:43:19] that particular platform, it doesn't matter. So we have to
[1:43:21] get it out. We also don't have local media assistance
[1:43:25] that we used to have. There's no oak phobia. Burlington
[1:43:29] Post. All the newspapers that most of us were used
[1:43:33] to. Years gone by. It's either social media or someone
[1:43:38] freelancing. And the Toronto media are so busy. They tend
[1:43:42] not to come out here to help us get those
[1:43:44] messages out, so we have to do more on a
[1:43:47] corporate communications perspective. We're looking at adding a couple of
[1:43:52] staff in that particular area for that reason. So. Certainly
[1:43:56] all of you. When you hear presentations such as Today
[1:44:00] from Colon, Anita can help to get that message out
[1:44:02] as well, but the citizens that are living there still
[1:44:05] feel more threatened than they did two years ago. And
[1:44:09] that's going to take some bigger changes to make them
[1:44:11] feel safer. Through the mayor. Yeah, you raised lots of
[1:44:16] good points, and I think we know. In national media,
[1:44:21] provincial media, There has been a significant increase. It's just
[1:44:25] when you have a small community that maybe hasn't been
[1:44:27] targeted the same way. That's why people get the sense
[1:44:30] that things are getting worse. In many ways, they're not.
[1:44:33] They're getting better. When you look as a region as
[1:44:36] a whole, So I did have one other quick question.
[1:44:41] I know there's been a lot said, but there was
[1:44:43] a couple of times Maple Hearst. Was mentioned in different
[1:44:46] ways. I'm just curious what percentage. Of our police. Power
[1:44:50] of the Holton Regional Police is actually sort of dedicated
[1:44:53] to Maplehurst. It seems like it takes quite a bit
[1:44:56] of work. To keep things safe. Could you comment on
[1:45:01] that? Yeah, it's Maple. Hearst keeps us very busy. We
[1:45:07] have a shockingly high number of. Addiction issues there and
[1:45:10] overdoses and sudden deaths and assaults. The province up until
[1:45:17] about. Two and a half years ago, funded us for
[1:45:21] about $200,000 to have. Two, three full time officers working
[1:45:27] right there, so. They were there working in the institution.
[1:45:31] The provincial government. More on the attorney general side and
[1:45:35] other areas decided to save those dollars. And with the
[1:45:40] idea that they would do more of their own investigations.
[1:45:43] At the time. And still I say that's not really
[1:45:45] possible because. We have great correctional officers, but if they're
[1:45:50] involved in a situation where there's a death that they
[1:45:53] really shouldn't be investigating that any more. Than we investigate
[1:45:58] a police shooting type of situation. We have the special
[1:46:01] investigations unit for that. I don't want to say we
[1:46:05] are kicked out of Maplehurst, but. That funding was removed.
[1:46:10] We said, okay, you do what you can do, and
[1:46:13] we will go. When we need to. So that's the
[1:46:15] way we've been doing it, probably for the last two
[1:46:18] years. Is that a variety of officers will respond there
[1:46:22] to those overdoses or to do those assault. Investigations. The
[1:46:26] reality is, once in a while, those things are on
[1:46:28] video and they're so serious. That charges are possible and
[1:46:31] charges are pursued by our officers. A lot of times
[1:46:36] you can imagine when people are in custody. They may
[1:46:39] not want to give evidence against the person who injured
[1:46:42] them. So there are some situations that go unsolved because
[1:46:46] of that, because of the ongoing safety concern of the
[1:46:49] victim, which we certainly understand, but the maple hearst. Is
[1:46:55] a complicated facility, and it is a huge provincial facility.
[1:46:58] There's 1200. Something like 1200 inmates at May 1. And
[1:47:03] Banya is huge in and of itself. So. It's a
[1:47:08] very complicated issue. Thank you, Chief. Appreciate it. I actually
[1:47:12] suggested that the OPP should do all provincial correctional facilities.
[1:47:16] And that hasn't taken up on that yet. Cancer, Albano.
[1:47:25] Thank you very much, Madam Mayor. Through you to the
[1:47:28] chief and the superintendent and the inspector. Thank you for
[1:47:31] being here. You provided a lot of information, last statistics
[1:47:34] and so on. I'm particularly interested in. You talked about
[1:47:39] online hate crimes and so on. I'm just wondering. What
[1:47:46] kind of difficulties do you have with social media? Companies
[1:47:51] bringing down posts and going after them and resolving. I
[1:47:56] can't imagine that it would. Be like an easy task
[1:47:58] to do that. I'm just wondering. What some of the
[1:48:02] things that you're facing, the difficulties that you're faced dealing
[1:48:05] with those types of crimes. Yeah, it's really sort of
[1:48:09] a multifaceted. Area. Of a number of issues. So, for
[1:48:16] one, social media becomes complicated or the Internet becomes complicated.
[1:48:21] Because what is a crime or what isn't a crime
[1:48:22] is very technical when it comes to the criminal code.
[1:48:27] So the actual hate crime, if it's absent of an
[1:48:31] assault or a threatening death or something else along with
[1:48:34] it. Is not necessarily a crime. So then we're limited
[1:48:38] on what we can do as far as search warrants
[1:48:40] and types of things. Some social media platforms are more
[1:48:44] helpful when it comes to police investigations. We still need
[1:48:47] to do some form. Of jurisprudence, official judicial approval for
[1:48:53] us to do some things because of privacy laws in
[1:48:55] Canada, which. Are probably even stronger than they need to
[1:48:59] be, or should be, in my opinion. So it can
[1:49:02] be complicated. But we do get a fair bit of.
[1:49:08] Cooperation. From the major providers when it comes to technical
[1:49:12] investigations. But I think there's also a shortage. Of laws
[1:49:18] or legislation when it comes to what I think, and
[1:49:21] I'm going to speak on. I think it's tomorrow night.
[1:49:25] On an online event about hate crime. And while right
[1:49:29] now we just have the criminal code, and it is
[1:49:32] a crime or it isn't. A crime. And provincially. We
[1:49:36] have the Highway Traffic act, which isn't criminal, it's other
[1:49:38] things, and we have the liquor License act and the
[1:49:40] trespass the Property act, and I think there might be
[1:49:44] a time in the not too distant future, we should
[1:49:47] look at some sort of provincial hate crime. Or hate
[1:49:50] legislation. So other things would become some form of an
[1:49:55] offense, at least for enforcement purposes, which are short. Of
[1:50:00] someone having to be assaulted or threatened or injured. But
[1:50:04] that's a whole different level of. Legislation that might be
[1:50:09] possible. So the short answer is yes. These investigations are
[1:50:13] complicated. And there's a lot of different. Well. There's even
[1:50:19] a change federally when it's now more difficult for us
[1:50:23] to come. Up with an IP address for someone. When
[1:50:28] they're dealing with situations like human trafficking or child pornography
[1:50:33] because of the right to privacy, and the IP addresses
[1:50:37] were never that level of privacy before. So if you
[1:50:41] can imagine. There are so many of those investigations. Headed
[1:50:46] up to a degree by the rcmp and the opp
[1:50:48] working. With. We have Internet child exploitation officers within our
[1:50:52] regional investigative area. Who do those local child pornography types
[1:50:57] of investigations, even those have become, I think, unnecessarily. Complicated.
[1:51:03] Thank you very much. And it's a fluid sort of
[1:51:06] problem, isn't it? I don't know if you all ever
[1:51:10] catch up to where you want to be, but. I
[1:51:13] appreciate all your efforts and thank you for addressing the
[1:51:18] graffiti enact. And I know that the via was very
[1:51:21] supportive and I was out along with Councillor Norris and
[1:51:25] some of the other Councillor from ward one doing the
[1:51:28] cleaning. Up, so we really appreciate that. Your reference. Thank
[1:51:32] you very much. Well. I'm conscious of time, but I
[1:51:39] do have a couple of questions I don't. See any
[1:51:42] from any other counselors. And my questions have to do
[1:51:46] with. A couple of areas that I don't think you
[1:51:49] touched on. And I'm wondering if you can talk a
[1:51:53] little bit about human trafficking. And kind of where that
[1:51:57] is right now. It was in the news a lot.
[1:52:01] I think about a year ago. And I'm wondering if
[1:52:05] you can comment on the status. Of. That issue. Because
[1:52:11] it's my understanding that it was a significant one in
[1:52:13] Holton. Yes. No, absolutely. I know we've talked about it
[1:52:17] a little bit at regional Councillor. Probably the last budget.
[1:52:22] Human trafficking. Is one of the most horrendous crimes, I
[1:52:27] think, that we can imagine, short of. Homicide and a
[1:52:31] couple of others, maybe. But. It's complicated because the federal
[1:52:37] government a few years ago made prostitution legal, which I
[1:52:40] can see on certain levels. An individual's right to do
[1:52:44] what they do if it is what they want to
[1:52:46] do. But in the human trafficking, when it comes to
[1:52:49] the prostitution side of human trafficking, because there's. Also a
[1:52:52] labor side, but on the prostitution side of Ht. It's
[1:52:58] incredibly complex. It's organized crime at its finest. It's extremely
[1:53:05] profitable. I would hazard just say. Three to $500,000 per
[1:53:12] year per. Victim that's forced to work in that industry.
[1:53:17] Often against their will, but sometimes not knowing that it's
[1:53:21] against their will because. The individuals, whether it's organized street
[1:53:27] gang types of individuals or. Traditional organized crime are very
[1:53:31] coercive. And how they manipulate young people who are vulnerable
[1:53:37] to get them into that industry in the first place
[1:53:40] and then they're moved around. From hotel to hotel with
[1:53:44] limited resources on their own, so they really are unable
[1:53:47] to leave. But often when our investigators encounter them and
[1:53:51] are in a position. To help them, the individuals. Either.
[1:53:57] Don't want to say something about their person that's handling
[1:54:01] them because they really think they're friends? Or they're afraid
[1:54:04] to in some circumstances, so. We are on the 401
[1:54:08] on the QEW corridor here. All through Halton, we have
[1:54:13] a multitude of hotels. Human trafficking I won't say is
[1:54:17] going on at every hotel, but I'd be surprised if
[1:54:19] it isn't. There might be one or two somewhere. But
[1:54:23] it is a very prolific. Issue for us here in
[1:54:27] Halton and across Ontario and Canada. Again, organized crime at
[1:54:33] its highest levels, extremely profitable. Extremely dangerous. And risky for
[1:54:39] those individuals that are in those situations. Sorry, I should
[1:54:44] say. We do have. A very capable, full time human
[1:54:50] trafficking unit that do nothing but human trafficking investigations, sometimes
[1:54:54] proactively. Through social media and otherwise. Most of. These if
[1:54:59] things are publicly advertised or on the Internet now, so
[1:55:02] our investigators are able to intervene. Sometimes. Even sometimes do
[1:55:07] more of an undercover type of operation into some of
[1:55:10] these situations. We have arrested professional individuals. Including university professors
[1:55:17] who have been trying to meet. With a young female
[1:55:21] who they think is 15 years of age. I mean,
[1:55:24] it is quite disturbing. And alarming. What's going on out
[1:55:27] there? But our investigators are doing great work when it
[1:55:31] comes to some of those situations. But it's, something that.
[1:55:35] Other than being in every hotel every day and going
[1:55:39] to every hotel room. It's so prevalent, it's very difficult
[1:55:44] to address. Well, one of my questions. And I'm glad
[1:55:48] to hear that you have a dedicated unit. That is
[1:55:53] specifically looking at this. The other question I have is
[1:55:57] regards innovate partner violence. And. I remember hearing that there
[1:56:05] were many calls a day. That were being received. By
[1:56:11] the force regarding innocent partner violence. And domestic abuse and
[1:56:17] so forth, and I'm wondering if you could make a
[1:56:19] comment on kind of the prevalence of that. And how
[1:56:25] you're tackling it. Yeah. It is extremely prevalent as well.
[1:56:32] I would say that it's on the rise from a
[1:56:34] reported crime perspective. The difficulty with intimate partner violence. We
[1:56:39] used to call it domestic violence. So we have now
[1:56:41] an intimate partner violence unit full time. I think that
[1:56:45] is 26 full time detectives who do nothing but specialize
[1:56:50] in intimate partner violence situations, so assaults between spouses, common
[1:56:56] law. Partners, whatever the intimate situation relationship may be. So
[1:57:01] when the frontline officers here in Halton Hills. Go to
[1:57:03] a domestic violence situation, they will intervene. Make sure someone.
[1:57:08] Isn't at further risk. But then the experts from this
[1:57:12] intimate partner unit will come and. Take over the investigation.
[1:57:17] Lay the charges and see it through bale hangings or
[1:57:21] whatever happens. The complication with intimate partner. Violence is. It's
[1:57:25] so underreported, as is human trafficking. So you may hear
[1:57:30] me make this point on Wednesday. But I have with
[1:57:33] our police services board. Ironically. I would rather see. Increased
[1:57:40] numbers in some of those areas because. Unless they're reported
[1:57:44] to us, we're not going to know about them. So
[1:57:47] I use drug investigations as an example. Unless we're doing
[1:57:50] an investigation and find drugs. Or find someone trafficking in
[1:57:53] drugs. There is no offense that's reported in human trafficking.
[1:57:58] Unless. Something's reported directly to us, which is rare, or
[1:58:01] we uncover a victim in that situation. There is no
[1:58:06] human trafficking occurrence, but there's hundreds of them going on.
[1:58:11] The intimate partner. Violence. I know. Estimates are violence happens
[1:58:15] seven to ten times before in most cases. The female
[1:58:19] partner reports that to the police, so we would rather
[1:58:22] see those reports go up. Which would look like we're
[1:58:27] having an increased crime trend, but we'd actually be helping
[1:58:31] more victims. So we've said purposely. The police services board
[1:58:35] and the strategic plan. While we say. We want to
[1:58:39] lower autofafter. We want to decrease auto theft by 50%
[1:58:42] in the next four years, which the federal government should
[1:58:45] have to do on their own. We actually may want
[1:58:49] to see an increase in the reported intimate partner violence
[1:58:52] incidents because we know the reality is eight to ten
[1:58:57] times higher, so. We want to intervene in more of
[1:59:00] those situations sooner, so they are very complicated. More often,
[1:59:06] I would say in the last couple of years or
[1:59:08] a few years, certainly. I think more people. We're at
[1:59:12] least holding more people for bail hearings and whether that
[1:59:15] means the person's. Kept in custody or they're released with
[1:59:19] conditions. In addition to the. 26 intimate partner violence investigators
[1:59:26] we have risk. Mitigation teams. In each of our districts
[1:59:29] who are going out and purposely looking for people who
[1:59:32] are contravening or their conditions that they're released on and
[1:59:37] then arresting them again to try to hold them accountable
[1:59:40] to what the courts are trying to tell them they
[1:59:42] have to do or not. Do. I think that's a
[1:59:45] tremendous proactive initiative from our investigative areas, so. It's very
[1:59:50] multifaceted. And Ipvu will always be complicated. And there's so
[1:59:54] many reasons. Why? One partner may be so reliant, dependent,
[1:59:59] or fearful of the perpetrator that it's underreported. I think
[2:00:05] I heard there are ten calls a day or something
[2:00:08] in that neighborhood, I would think. It's probably that much
[2:00:11] or more. Across. The region. Yeah. Okay, so that's a
[2:00:20] lot. All right. Thank you for that. Are there any
[2:00:24] further? Comments. Okay. Well, it was worth the drive. Thank
[2:00:31] you. It always used to be worth the drive to
[2:00:33] act in. Where my uncle owned the restaurant, but I'm
[2:00:36] just kidding. It's always a pleasure to be here. Thank
[2:00:39] you very much. Thank you very much for coming in.
[2:00:48] Okay. Well, we have another delegation. People are very patient.
[2:00:55] The commentary is always interesting. But. It makes for a
[2:01:01] long meeting. We have a delegation from Alex Herriman. I
[2:01:08] think perhaps via zoom. Regarding provincial overreach into municipal decision
[2:01:15] making. Can everyone hear me? Yes.
[2:01:25] Alexis. Yes. All right. Thank you very much. And thank
[2:01:28] you for your patience. We were able to hear you,
[2:01:32] so go ahead. Wonderful. Good afternoon. Madam mayor and councillor,
[2:01:37] thank you for allowing me to speak today. My name
[2:01:40] is Alexis Harriman. And I grew up in Georgetown. After
[2:01:45] a university, I moved to Toronto in roughly 2008 and
[2:01:49] worked at a downtown hospital, always taking the TTC as
[2:01:53] biking at that time had never crossed my mind. In
[2:01:57] 2016, I settled down on Dublin line in Acton and
[2:02:01] I'm lucky to work fairly close to home in the
[2:02:03] great town of Georgetown where I grew up. My parents
[2:02:08] didn't ride bikes very much. They fully prioritized driving around
[2:02:12] town, and so biking sort of slipped away from me
[2:02:16] when my first son was born roughly seven years ago.
[2:02:19] Before I knew it, I was teaching him to ride
[2:02:21] a bike. Kyle learned to ride a bike at three
[2:02:24] years old. And at the age of three, I actually
[2:02:27] wrote 5 km with my husband and I at point.
[2:02:29] Peeley national park. People ride bikes for different reasons, including
[2:02:34] exercise, sports, leisure and commuting. I have experienced all of
[2:02:39] those, but I have to say, the one I enjoy
[2:02:42] the most is riding a bike for commuting and running
[2:02:45] errands. When I drive to work, it takes me 15
[2:02:48] minutes. My way home is roughly the same when I
[2:02:52] ride my bike to work from Acton to Georgetown. It
[2:02:56] takes me 35 minutes, and then roughly 50 minutes to
[2:03:00] get home as it's all uphill. So that's almost an
[2:03:04] extra hour out of my day. Used for comm. Commuting.
[2:03:08] While some of you might be thinking about all of
[2:03:11] the time that I lost by riding my bike or
[2:03:14] the things that I didn't get done because I made
[2:03:17] the choice to ride. A bike. I look at it
[2:03:19] differently. When I show up at work after the morning
[2:03:24] bike ride, I really can't begin to describe the feelings,
[2:03:28] but I will try. It's joy, love, connection. Connection to
[2:03:34] the earth, connection to myself, my mind and my body.
[2:03:38] Connection to others. As bikers wave at each other, they
[2:03:41] say hello and chat with one another. I find myself
[2:03:45] frequently saying thank you. And thank you for the choice
[2:03:48] that I had to ride. My bike today. Sometimes when
[2:03:51] I'm riding against the wind uphill on 22nd side road,
[2:03:55] I think there are so many people and patients that
[2:03:58] I know that would probably give anything to trade spots
[2:04:02] with. Me right now if they had the choice. I
[2:04:06] feel connected to the creatures and the biodiversity that we
[2:04:09] share this town with, and I show up to work
[2:04:12] with a smile on my face, rejuvenated and relaxed and
[2:04:16] ready to take on the day. My employer has also
[2:04:20] allowed me to modify my work hours in order to
[2:04:23] accommodate riding a bike to work, which is huge. Both
[2:04:26] of my sons have asthma symptoms, and their respiratory symptoms
[2:04:31] are aggravated. By viruses and the environment and knowing that
[2:04:36] I am reducing emissions by riding a bike as a
[2:04:39] source of pride. In addition to saving money on gas.
[2:04:44] My kids love riding their bikes to school. However, our
[2:04:47] road does not have a bike lane or a very
[2:04:50] good shoulder, which worries me. In terms of safety, I
[2:04:55] feel comfortable on the road with my bike lights, reflective
[2:04:59] vest, helmet and staying as far over as possible. Unfortunately,
[2:05:04] there are so few bike lanes that my commute isn't
[2:05:06] really benefiting from. Them. Aside from the lanes on Queen
[2:05:10] and Churchill that eventually disappear, turning into the treacherous Glen
[2:05:14] Lawson Road my route is roughly 80% unmarked. Bike lanes
[2:05:19] bring more structure, less likelihood of someone biking out in
[2:05:24] traffic or riding two and three. Across. Green paint and
[2:05:29] more visual markers of the bike lane would be better
[2:05:32] as well as actual barricades. I would absolutely love to
[2:05:37] see more people running errands on their bikes. However we
[2:05:40] live in or believe that we live in a time
[2:05:44] where cars are prioritized. And have difficulty seeing the value
[2:05:49] added as we are blinded by the extra time or
[2:05:52] time taken. Away from our busy day in order to
[2:05:54] bike instead of drive. With regards to the limitations set
[2:05:58] forth in bill two one two regarding provincial approval prior
[2:06:03] to impacting car lanes with bike lanes. I am very
[2:06:06] hopeful that you are respected elected officials will honor and
[2:06:11] acknowledge the importance of biking and bike lanes and continue.
[2:06:17] To build them into current and future urban plans. I
[2:06:21] hope that cycling will be valued as an essential and
[2:06:24] preferred method of commuting and transportation. Within town in order
[2:06:29] to give people safe, affordable and fun options for running
[2:06:34] errands going to school, going to work and also leisure.
[2:06:39] I hope you will advocate for these options in the
[2:06:41] face of the province's plan to remove some of the
[2:06:46] Toronto bike lanes and override municipal planning decisions. I fear
[2:06:51] Toronto is only the beginning. With all due respect, people
[2:06:55] that are injured or killed while biking are often blamed.
[2:07:00] They're blamed for being on a busy road riding during
[2:07:04] what others think are unsafe conditions. However, I think it's
[2:07:08] a result. Of poor urban planning and dying while riding
[2:07:13] a bike should be a very rare or never event.
[2:07:17] Again, thank you sincerely for your time today. I hope
[2:07:21] that you all have a moment to hop. On a
[2:07:22] bicycle the next time you are running errands and let
[2:07:26] me know about your experience. Thank you. Thank you very
[2:07:30] much. Ms. Herriman, are there members of Councillor who have
[2:07:34] a question or comment? For the delegation, Councillor Rzinski. Thank
[2:07:41] you, Madam Mayor, through you to the delegation. Thank you,
[2:07:44] Ms. Herriman, for sharing your personal experiences. First, I was
[2:07:49] wondering, what percentage of the time would you say you
[2:07:52] commute to? Work by biking in a year, a percentage
[2:07:57] of right now. With my schedule. It's about one to
[2:08:03] two times per week. I also invested in winter biking
[2:08:08] gear. So the goal. The goal is five days a
[2:08:11] week. But I definitely, on the weekends, do my. Errands.
[2:08:19] I prefer to do my errands on a bike. That's
[2:08:22] helpful. Thank you. And then what percentage of your coworkers
[2:08:26] you think commute? To work. I do ride with one
[2:08:32] other coworker that I know of, and I know of
[2:08:36] another. Nurse that rides a bike too. I think it's
[2:08:40] not many right now. I appreciate that, and you are
[2:08:44] an anomaly. And again, kudos to you for doing that.
[2:08:47] It's fantastic. And I think it is important that we
[2:08:49] have good shoulders on our roads, not just for bikers,
[2:08:52] but for walkers, for farmers. It's important to think about
[2:08:56] our infrastructure. In that way and to build it well.
[2:09:01] But when we look at this motion, And this bill.
[2:09:05] It's about restricting. A lane of vacator traffic specific to
[2:09:09] that instance. And you're saying that most people don't commute
[2:09:13] that way. But you want to restrict their mobility. So
[2:09:17] I think there's a disconnect there between. Allowing for biking
[2:09:21] for those that want to do it, and that's fantastic
[2:09:23] that you do. But. Actually increasing, gridlock increasing. And we
[2:09:27] have to, as counselors. And respected decision makers need to
[2:09:31] look at the whole community. And not individuals again as
[2:09:36] commendable others like yourself that are more of an anomaly.
[2:09:40] I don't know if you have anything. Any thoughts on
[2:09:42] that? I definitely recognize that. Not many people ride a
[2:09:50] bike in Georgetown. And in Acton there are few. I
[2:09:59] also acknowledge that. The way our community is designed. It
[2:10:06] is time consuming to consider riding a bike the way
[2:10:11] that it's designed. I don't know all the reasons why
[2:10:14] people aren't riding a bike. It could be safety. It
[2:10:17] could be time. But if. Those issues were addressed, I
[2:10:23] would imagine more people would be riding a bike. I
[2:10:27] don't. Know that we have to prioritize. Cars for everything.
[2:10:33] I again think it's good to take safety considerations and
[2:10:37] making it possible for people like you to do what
[2:10:39] you want to do, but at the expense of Hicula.
[2:10:42] Traffic is what this bill is looking at, and that's
[2:10:44] the difference, in my opinion. But thank you for coming
[2:10:47] in for your answers. Okay. Thank you. Are there. Any
[2:10:55] other Councillor fogle. Good question of the delegation. Yes, thank
[2:11:00] you. I hope she's not gone. No, I'm still here.
[2:11:07] Okay, well, thanks for being here. And for sharing with
[2:11:12] us. Your love of getting to work by a bike,
[2:11:16] that's fantastic. The feeling that you have and the health
[2:11:21] benefits and so on, that you're probably getting. So, yes,
[2:11:25] this bill is about for me, anyway. About. Who should
[2:11:29] be making the decisions. About which. Lanes. Have the bike
[2:11:35] lanes or whether we're going to have a lane of
[2:11:37] traffic or not. Which level of government do you think
[2:11:40] is best suited for making those decisions? Are you asking
[2:11:45] me? Yeah. What do you think? Should it be the
[2:11:51] province that decides on the streets? Or maybe the local
[2:11:54] municipality. Local municipality. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you for that. Okay.
[2:12:06] So thank you very much. Ms. Herriman, I don't see.
[2:12:11] Any other members of Councillor who have a question? But
[2:12:14] I do recognize that. You were speaking to an item
[2:12:19] that. Is identified as being later on in our agenda.
[2:12:24] And I would ask members of Councillor if we could
[2:12:27] waive the rules in order to address the resolution that
[2:12:32] is brought forward. Councillor Brzinski. All in favor? That's carried.
[2:12:38] Thank you. So. We'll now then, jump. To a resolution
[2:12:45] that has been moved by Councillor Fogel and seconded by
[2:12:48] Councillor Hilson. Regarding provincial overreach into municipal decision making. And
[2:12:57] I'll read it to you. It says, whereas the government
[2:13:00] of Ontario has introduced legislation that would require municipalities to
[2:13:06] apply for and receive approval from the province before the
[2:13:11] installation of new cycling lanes where the installation would cause.
[2:13:17] The reduction of vehicle traffic lanes. And whereas part of
[2:13:22] this approval, municipalities would be required to demonstrate that the
[2:13:27] proposed cycling lanes will not have a negative impact on
[2:13:32] vehicle traffic. And whereas the town of Holton Hills has.
[2:13:39] An approved active transportation master plan that was developed with
[2:13:43] significant public consultation. And expert transportation expertise. And whereas. The
[2:13:52] Holton Hills Active Transportation Master plan does not recommend. Converting
[2:13:58] any lanes of traffic to cycling lanes. We still reserve
[2:14:03] the responsibilities to make future traffic decisions based on local
[2:14:09] input from residents and local. Circumstances without seeking permission from
[2:14:16] the province. And whereas the association of Municipalities of Ontario
[2:14:22] is urging the province to respect local decision making, when
[2:14:28] considering transportation improvements. And whereas Amo has indicated there has
[2:14:34] been no indication of local. Consultation in the province's arbitrary
[2:14:41] decision to remove bike lanes in the city of Toronto.
[2:14:47] Therefore, be it resolved that the Councillor for the Town
[2:14:50] of Halton Hills expresses its support for. Amos position, urging
[2:14:56] the province to respect local decision making and jurisdiction. As
[2:15:02] set out in the municipal act. And further, that the
[2:15:05] Councillor of the town of Holtson Hills does not support
[2:15:09] the provisions in Bill 212 with respect to the installation
[2:15:14] of cycling lanes. And further, that this resolution. Be circulated
[2:15:19] to Premier Ford, Minister of Transportation Prabmi Ting, MPp Ted
[2:15:25] Arnett Leaders of the opposition parties and the association of
[2:15:29] Municipalities of Ontario. Councilor Frogle, do you have some comments?
[2:15:37] Yes. Thank you very much. So this bill 212 the
[2:15:41] reducing gridlock and saving you time. At it is a
[2:15:45] proposal at this stage. And input. Is still. Invited until
[2:15:54] pretty much the end of the month. So. We are
[2:15:58] invited to make comments about. The bill. And so I
[2:16:04] think we should. So this proposed act is a significant
[2:16:09] overreach into municipal jurisdiction. Amo said as much in its
[2:16:13] statement, although the act has been amended to also target
[2:16:18] three Toronto streets. It requires all municipalities to seek permission
[2:16:23] to convert a vehicle lane to provide safe cycling infrastructure.
[2:16:29] For a premier who hates red tape, it's hard to
[2:16:32] understand why it would add this. Particular red tape to
[2:16:34] our process. It comes with a requirement to prove that
[2:16:38] removal of a lane will not cause delays in traffic.
[2:16:43] How exactly does one do that in advance of installing
[2:16:46] the bike lane? So for a government that isn't interested
[2:16:50] in data, the studying of an issue in advance. Of
[2:16:53] a decision. This is pretty surprising, and it raises the
[2:16:56] question of whether any amount of data would make any
[2:16:58] difference in their decision making. So in my mind, it's
[2:17:03] quite likely that it wouldn't matter what data we came
[2:17:07] back with it would be turned down. It's particularly unacceptable.
[2:17:12] There's no proof whatsoever to back up the claim that
[2:17:15] the bike lanes on Bluer Street. University Avenue in Young
[2:17:18] street cause gridlock. Toronto is full of gridlock, whether it's
[2:17:24] streets, whether there's a bike lane. Or not. And there
[2:17:28] is evidence that separating cyclists from the traffic is not
[2:17:32] only safer for the cyclists, but also helps the flow
[2:17:35] of traffic. This is proven on Lori Avenue in Ottawa
[2:17:40] for a pilot on Laurier. They measured before. The pilot
[2:17:44] on Lori Avenue. They measured travel times before and after
[2:17:48] the installation of the bike lanes. And found improvement in
[2:17:52] travel times when the bike lanes were installed. And with
[2:17:56] that data, Ottawa made the separated bike lanes permanent, and
[2:18:00] businesses along the route also found a positive impact on
[2:18:04] their business. Businesses, even though they didn't expect it before
[2:18:06] they were there. Likewise, Toronto has generated years of study
[2:18:11] on these roads. Before investing in bike lanes, they invested
[2:18:14] in the bike lanes to provide a safe cycling network
[2:18:17] and to save lives. Toronto has a car problem, not
[2:18:21] a bike problem. As more development occurs in the core,
[2:18:25] it will attract more people who need to commute. One
[2:18:28] way or the other. But there's no way to widen
[2:18:30] any of those roads. So the city is rightfully encouraging
[2:18:33] more commuters to choose cycling for their commute. Something that
[2:18:38] isn't taken into consideration is that in Ontario it is
[2:18:41] mandatory to leave a meter space. Between. A passing vehicle
[2:18:47] and a bike. That means in Toronto, where there are
[2:18:52] no shoulders on the roads, wherever there is a bike
[2:18:55] in a lane, they take up the whole lane. Now
[2:18:59] the vehicles have to move over to the adjacent lane.
[2:19:03] Now there are hundreds of bikes every day on these
[2:19:06] same roads. Mixing of bikes and vehicles flows. Traffic and
[2:19:10] tragically, sometimes causes loss of life. Although the premier claims
[2:19:15] that only 1.2% of torontonian cycle that number wherever it
[2:19:20] came from is wrong and very misleading. A 2019 survey
[2:19:27] showed that 10% of Torontonians spiked to work and another
[2:19:30] 25% reported cycling for other reasons. Other cities have chosen
[2:19:35] to invest in cycling with the twin goals of offering
[2:19:38] a safe alternative to driving and to clean up the
[2:19:41] air. And you can look to Montreal or New York
[2:19:43] City as prime examples. In 2020, Mount Sinai hospital's chief
[2:19:49] executive officer told the city that 63% of his staff
[2:19:53] bike to work. He and other downtown hospital leaders have
[2:19:58] been strong advocates to have. The bike infrastructure to make
[2:20:02] their staff commute safer. The truth is that cycling is
[2:20:06] growing. With the investment in safer cycling infrastructure. It's another
[2:20:10] case of build it and they will come. Mayor Chow
[2:20:13] recently remarked in an interview that Toronto's. Bike share program
[2:20:17] had 665,000 trips. In 2015. This year it is on
[2:20:23] track to hit 6 million trips. It cost the city
[2:20:28] of Toronto millions of dollars to install these bike lanes.
[2:20:31] The city estimates it will cost $48 million to remove
[2:20:34] them. The city is demanding not only that the city
[2:20:38] be compensated for the removal, but also for all the
[2:20:41] costs that went into researching and holding public input sessions
[2:20:45] and stakeholder consultations. As part of the installation process. What
[2:20:49] a waste of taxpayers money. Obviously, there is support for
[2:20:53] bike lanes and evidence to support that separated bike lanes
[2:20:56] are much safer. Than mixing bikes and cars in one
[2:20:59] lane, especially in terms of rider safety. There was also
[2:21:04] a claim that the bike lanes slows down the traffic
[2:21:09] and slows down. In particular, emergency vehicles. However, the deputy
[2:21:14] fire chief for the city of Toronto says that, in
[2:21:16] fact response times have improved with the bike lanes. The
[2:21:21] point is, the city sea cycling is a way to
[2:21:24] combat gridlock and a way to save lives. Every cyclist
[2:21:27] could be a driver. They know that as the network
[2:21:30] improves, more people will choose cycling when safe infrastructure is
[2:21:34] provided. To take the opposite view and foist it upon
[2:21:37] a city that is the size of a small province
[2:21:40] is totally unacceptable. Consultation is something that municipalities do in
[2:21:47] person with stakeholders. We know how long it takes to
[2:21:50] make a decision on changes to our infrastructure and that
[2:21:53] public input. Is actually prescribed by the same provincial government.
[2:21:59] Why doesn't the government need to do the same thing.
[2:22:02] Amel, representing all municipalities, has protested, calling it an overreach,
[2:22:07] and I think that's sort of a nice way to
[2:22:09] put it. And I have to wonder where this is
[2:22:13] going next. First the province changed up all of the
[2:22:17] municipal land use planning. Then they cut our DC funding.
[2:22:21] Then they reduced our ability to provide parks. And now
[2:22:24] they're saying when we make a decision about transportation systems.
[2:22:28] Is the. Province doesn't like it, they'll just swoop in
[2:22:31] and change it, which we've spent years studying. The issue
[2:22:35] is not the bike lanes, though. The issue here is
[2:22:38] the meddling and municipal decision. Making in an ad hoc
[2:22:41] sort of way. All the changes that have been coming
[2:22:45] at us have been made have made our jobs much
[2:22:47] harder. And made it more difficult to provide for our
[2:22:49] residents the services and infrastructure that we believe they want.
[2:22:55] So I hope all of you on Councillor can support
[2:22:57] Amos position that this is an overreach. By the province
[2:23:00] into municipal jurisdiction and stand up for local decision. Making.
[2:23:04] Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hilson. Yes. Thank you, Madam
[2:23:11] mayor. Councillor Fogle. That made many of the comments that
[2:23:16] I maybe would have. Started with the province. Bring forward
[2:23:20] Bill 212. Through that there is the potential for the
[2:23:25] province to have oversight over municipal bike lanes, not just
[2:23:28] new ones, but ones. That exist. And it could require
[2:23:33] municipalities to remove those. So these are on municipal roads.
[2:23:37] There are roads that we pay for. They're using contractors
[2:23:40] that we'll have to pay for, and it's based upon
[2:23:43] feedbacks and studies that we also are paying for. So
[2:23:47] the position the AMO has put forward is that this
[2:23:49] is an overstep. And we're asking Councillor to support Amos
[2:23:54] position. On this. So in Holtzon Hills, we have an
[2:23:59] active transportation master plan that was done between 2018, 2020.
[2:24:05] Cost just for the plan itself, $137,000. I said with
[2:24:09] Councillor Fogel on the act of transportation committee. I'm not
[2:24:13] an avid cyclist. I'm not very good at all, actually,
[2:24:16] but I. Have learned through my time on that committee
[2:24:19] that it is important to members of our community, particularly
[2:24:21] for those who don't have vehicles, who don't drive. So
[2:24:26] I think that's the position that the talent has held
[2:24:29] over the last couple of years, and I hope we
[2:24:31] can continue to support that. I have heard. I chatted
[2:24:34] with some of my fellow counselors beforehand. As you would
[2:24:39] know. Some of the things I heard was that this
[2:24:42] was just an attack on the province. I don't look
[2:24:45] at it that way at all. I think that. We're
[2:24:48] communicating, as Councillor Fogel mentioned. It is on the environmental
[2:24:52] registry. Our staff do communicate with the province on different
[2:24:56] issues when they see them. So we're communicating as a
[2:24:59] business partner, which is what we are with the province.
[2:25:02] We're small compared to them, but. If we don't make
[2:25:06] a comment now, then when are we going to make
[2:25:08] a comment? Because it will impact us and impact our
[2:25:11] business. Something else that I've heard is Bill 212 is
[2:25:16] just aimed at larger municipalities and possibly that's true. There's
[2:25:20] the piece about. Changing vehicle lanes into bike lanes. I
[2:25:27] think, as we know, the devil is in the details
[2:25:30] with all these things. And those pieces haven't come out,
[2:25:33] but I think. We need to. Based on the direction
[2:25:38] that our municipalities held, it would be the right thing
[2:25:40] to do. To talk about our support in the parse
[2:25:44] at the very least, and to talk about the municipality's
[2:25:48] position as far as managing roads compared to provincial pieces
[2:25:53] of responsibility. So. Echoing Councillor Fogel. I hope we can
[2:25:59] agree on this and support it and send it out.
[2:26:02] Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hilson. I see Councillor Somerville.
[2:26:10] Well, I'll be briefer than the previous two speakers. I
[2:26:12] know we're supposed to have a five minute limit for
[2:26:15] speaking, but I will respect that to make sure. We're
[2:26:19] in the town of Halton Hills. We're not in the
[2:26:20] city of. Toronto. So all the comments about what is
[2:26:23] going on with Toronto are kind of a moot. Point
[2:26:25] to this. I have tremendous difficulty with this motion. The
[2:26:32] province, the municipalities. Under Article two of the constitution lays
[2:26:37] out. That municipalities are the creature of the province. A
[2:26:40] province can decide. It's not really overreach that they're deciding
[2:26:45] that bike lanes are going to be reported in this
[2:26:48] way. This really doesn't affect Halton Hills because. There is
[2:26:54] not recommending that any of the lanes of traffic be
[2:26:57] changed to cycling lanes. This is as Amos said today
[2:27:01] in a meeting I was in with them. This is
[2:27:03] aimed at. Toronto, Ottawa. And they figured it could be
[2:27:08] a Mississauga. This isn't really anything that we have here.
[2:27:13] While I respect that we can bring items forward to
[2:27:16] this that we discuss. This one I can't support because
[2:27:21] of it. The second operative clause that says in further
[2:27:25] that Councillor does not support the provisions in Bill T.
[2:27:29] Twelve. With respect to the installation of cycling lanes, I
[2:27:34] would actually like to amend that that be struck because
[2:27:37] I can support the other part of it, because I
[2:27:39] agree we have to go to the province about respecting
[2:27:42] local decision making. But we better also remember that the
[2:27:46] province does actually have that say, so I will put
[2:27:49] that on the floor that we strike that, because if
[2:27:52] that one's out of there, it is. About the only
[2:27:54] way I could even look at entertaining, supporting this. Okay.
[2:28:02] Somerville. Are you making a motion? And it is one,
[2:28:08] two, three, clause four. It is a second operative clause.
[2:28:13] And further, that the Councillor of the town of Hill,
[2:28:15] Alton hills. Does not support the provisions in 212 with
[2:28:19] respect to the installation of cycling liens. It's. On the
[2:28:22] operative clause, not on the preamble. The preamble doesn't. Matter.
[2:28:25] It's too long anyways. But it's just on that operative
[2:28:29] clause, I'm suggesting be removed. Like I said, I do
[2:28:32] not have a seconder for that. So I would need
[2:28:34] someone for that to be on the floor. Councilor Albano,
[2:28:38] you'll second that amendment? Yes, I will support that.
[2:28:51] Are there any speakers to the amendment? Okay, Councillor Fogle.
[2:28:57] Okay, well, I object to a lot of what's just
[2:29:00] been said. We are still a legitimate. Level of government.
[2:29:09] With responsibilities. For keeping our citizens safe. And we've had
[2:29:16] that for a long time. We're invested in that. This
[2:29:19] is brand new. Out of nowhere with no justification. Whatsoever.
[2:29:26] And all the facts line up against. What the province
[2:29:29] is doing. I think. The association of Municipalities of Ontario
[2:29:37] represents all of us, all of the municipalities. They don't
[2:29:42] come out with a statement like this. Just willy nilly,
[2:29:48] they consider it. They've got their own lawyers. This is
[2:29:52] a serious problem. And the problem in this case? Deals
[2:29:58] with bike lanes. And all this paragraph says is that.
[2:30:03] Of the whole bill to twelve, which has a lot
[2:30:07] of other things in it, including 413. This one thing.
[2:30:14] About swooping in and changing the decision of the local
[2:30:18] municipality. That's what we object to that part. You take
[2:30:23] this one out. There isn't. Much left. I hope people
[2:30:27] can see through this, that it just disembowels the entire.
[2:30:36] Resolution by taking that one out. So I guess that's
[2:30:39] the point. What you want to do, you could just
[2:30:41] vote. Against. The resolution without doing that. I'll leave it
[2:30:49] there. Councilor Garno, did you have something on the amendment?
[2:30:59] Okay. I'm just wondering. If so, Councillor Somerville, you mentioned
[2:31:04] you'd consider supporting it. I'm just wondering if. We do
[2:31:09] pass the amendment. Are you going to support the amended
[2:31:12] motion or not? Well, I guess we'd have to wait
[2:31:15] and see, won't we? No, you don't have the answer.
[2:31:20] Because I haven't said my answer. I said. You would
[2:31:21] have to wait and see Councillor Fogle. But no. I
[2:31:29] have so much difficulty at this point. I probably would,
[2:31:32] but it would also depend on what the other discussion
[2:31:34] is that Councillor has come up. That would make my
[2:31:37] mind finally up. I support Amo as they're doing their
[2:31:43] positioning to the province. I don't. Support us poking the
[2:31:46] province in the eye every few weeks. I don't support
[2:31:48] that, but. I also don't support that. This one is
[2:31:52] aimed specifically at the installation of cycling lanes. When it
[2:31:58] does not affect us. That's the big thing. It does
[2:32:01] not affect us. So I would have to wait and
[2:32:03] see what the other discussion is from other members of
[2:32:05] Councillor. If I would support it. If the amendment passes
[2:32:09] at this time, I don't know. I'm sorry.
[2:32:19] On a recorded vote. So, Councillor Garno, did you
[2:32:29] have anything further? On the amendment. Well.
[2:32:39] No. Not right now. Councilor keane. Just on the amendment.
[2:32:48] Clarification. I'm tending towards. Leaning towards. The Councillor Somerville's amendment.
[2:32:55] I agree. With what? He's very strong with what he's.
[2:32:58] Saying, but then. The other part of the resolution. I'm
[2:33:02] having real trouble with this whole resolution, the way it's
[2:33:03] been written, and it's asking us to Halton Hills to
[2:33:08] express support. For Amos position, urging the province. Is that
[2:33:12] a most specific position? What's the wording of there? Have
[2:33:14] they issued an official statement. Is that the exact wording?
[2:33:19] They're asking us for that. Okay. I'll just leave it
[2:33:23] at that. I'll support the amendment at this time, but.
[2:33:26] I'm not sure I'm going to support the resolution. Councilor
[2:33:30] Vzinski to the amendment. Thank you, madam Mayor. I will
[2:33:36] not be supporting this amendment as I don't believe it.
[2:33:38] Goes far enough, and I will not be supporting the
[2:33:41] motion. I agree with Councillor Fogle that this motion is
[2:33:46] not about supporting amo. It is about. Attacking the province.
[2:33:50] All due respect, Councillor Hilson, I have no idea. How
[2:33:53] you can say what you just said. And after hearing
[2:33:55] what Councillor Fogle just said in her preamble. That was
[2:33:58] clearly an attack on the province. I cannot support either
[2:34:02] this amendment or the motion. Thank you. And I'll remind
[2:34:07] members of Councillor to keep their comments. Objective. Please do
[2:34:15] not refer to whether counselors by name. Councilor brass. Thank
[2:34:24] you, Madam Mayor. Just listening to some of the comments,
[2:34:26] and I would like to chime in with a couple
[2:34:28] of my own. And about a year and a half
[2:34:31] ago. I'm also not a cyclist, but about a year
[2:34:33] and a half ago, I decided to take activity more
[2:34:36] seriously in active transportation, and I started walking ten to
[2:34:41] 15 day and have done so far and have not
[2:34:44] missed a day in a year and a half, and
[2:34:46] I often take the opportunity to walk to work or
[2:34:48] to walk home. From work, which. Is a pretty good
[2:34:51] walk. And the benefits of that for me have been
[2:34:55] enormous. For mental and physical health. So when I hear
[2:35:01] comments about cyclists getting benefits from it, I really take
[2:35:05] that to heart as well, because I have those same
[2:35:07] results but with a different mode. And being somewhat well
[2:35:12] traveled and had the pleasure of and the privilege of
[2:35:15] being to a lot. Of big cities around the world,
[2:35:18] one of them being Tokyo. And that is one of
[2:35:22] the biggest and busiest cities in the world. With very,
[2:35:26] very effective bike lanes. And that city moves like clockwork.
[2:35:31] And cyclists are safe. So that was a great example
[2:35:35] of a city that hasn't got it right, and it
[2:35:37] works. I don't think the debate is about Toronto at
[2:35:40] a care less. We represent Halton. Hills. The motion. I
[2:35:46] don't know what all the fuss is about it. Aside
[2:35:50] from maybe the argument of the attack on the province.
[2:35:55] That I can see, and maybe there's a little bit
[2:35:56] of merit to that. But the motion is just trying
[2:36:01] to do good by the citizens of Halton Hills. By
[2:36:06] protecting our rights to put bike lanes in the way
[2:36:09] these councillor see fit to do so. And I want
[2:36:13] to support this motion. Simply to keep more control over.
[2:36:19] Our decisions from municipal perspective. So I really don't want
[2:36:24] to support the amendment because I don't see the point
[2:36:26] to the amendment. So we'll see how it plays out.
[2:36:32] But I won't support the amendment and I'm going to
[2:36:34] support the motion. I will withdraw the amendment and just
[2:36:38] vote against the whole thing. Okay. Thank you. So.
[2:36:48] I'm going to go to first time speakers even though.
[2:36:53] We were on the amendment earlier. We will. Now then,
[2:36:57] speak to the motion. Okay. All right. I see. Councillor
[2:37:04] Ingles. Thank you, worship. Yeah. I am going to support
[2:37:09] this. I take it? Somewhat, I think, Councillor Summerville, it's
[2:37:13] kind of a moot point. There's very little here that
[2:37:15] affects us. Except for. Where the decision making power. Will
[2:37:22] lie in the end. And I believe it should lie
[2:37:25] here. Streets, roads. They are our mandate. Per se. It
[2:37:30] eliminates red tape. It's an extra. Probably it's an extra
[2:37:34] step which would turn into, I believe. Dealing with the
[2:37:38] province into weeks, months, maybe longer. Just to handle. Something
[2:37:46] like this. So much more efficient being at the municipal
[2:37:49] level. I have no problem here poking. The government. They're
[2:37:53] big boys and girls. They can take it. If they
[2:37:55] can't handle this, they probably shouldn't be. They probably shouldn't
[2:37:58] be in the chamber to start with. So I'm fine.
[2:38:03] I will be supporting this as it's put forward. Thank
[2:38:07] you. Thank you. Are there other first time speakers? Councilor
[2:38:13] norris. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I admit that I
[2:38:19] didn't spend a lot of time before the meeting going
[2:38:22] through. This. And listening to the commentary on that. I
[2:38:29] also picked up that this was an attack on the
[2:38:31] Ontario government. I have to admit, I was very encouraged
[2:38:34] earlier when we had. The speakers from the police department
[2:38:38] that we're actually saying positive things about our provincial government.
[2:38:42] We don't get to hear that in this chamber very
[2:38:45] often, and, in fact, never. So I was encouraged to
[2:38:48] hear that. I did also hear nothing but. Attacks on
[2:38:53] the provincial government. So while that was going on over
[2:38:57] the five minute limit, that was allowed for speakers. I
[2:39:01] chose to take a look online and I found an
[2:39:03] Ipso poll that was done in. March 25 of this
[2:39:07] year, 2024. But Canadians to work. Now I'm hearing that
[2:39:11] it's not about the bike lanes, but it is about
[2:39:13] the bike lanes. The numbers that were being thrown around
[2:39:17] do support the 3%. According to Ipso, 54% people reported
[2:39:23] taking cars, 19% take public transit. 5%. Take car and
[2:39:29] carpools. 9% walk and only 3% cycle. So I think
[2:39:36] the number that's coming out of the provincial government is
[2:39:38] accurate. I just heard this. It doesn't seem like it
[2:39:42] was really intended to be anything more. Than. An attack
[2:39:47] on another level of government, and I'm sorry, that's not
[2:39:50] appropriate. We shouldn't be having that here in the Councillor
[2:39:53] chambers. I think if we're going. To be discussing and
[2:39:57] debating things at different levels of government. There should be
[2:39:59] more objectivity to it. I didn't see that. I don't
[2:40:02] hear it. I can't support. This. Thank you. Okay. Thank
[2:40:07] you. Well, I will provide my comments as a first
[2:40:13] time speaker and then. We'll go again around the table.
[2:40:18] And I'm supporting this motion. And the reason why I'm
[2:40:22] doing so is. Largely because of the comments made by
[2:40:27] Amo. And I think that this has to do absolutely
[2:40:33] with overreach by the provincial government. There is something called
[2:40:37] the Municipal Act. That is legislation that indicates the kind
[2:40:42] of rule that municipality should play. And we are responsible
[2:40:48] for designing transportation systems in our municipality, whether they include
[2:40:53] bike lanes or not. It is clearly a responsibility of
[2:40:57] this level of government. And the province. Enacted the municipal
[2:41:03] act. Furthermore, the province has now on their environmental registry.
[2:41:11] Asked for commentary. Commentary. Not attack. But the province has
[2:41:18] asked for commentary. On. This piece of proposed legislation. So
[2:41:26] this is providing a commentary. From one level of government
[2:41:31] that has the municipal act that is determining how it
[2:41:35] behaves. And it is absolutely within the rights of this
[2:41:40] Councillor to provide that commentary. On the legislation that. We
[2:41:48] have been. For many years been asked. To provide, so.
[2:41:57] It is absolutely within our jurisdiction. It is absolutely a
[2:42:01] request that has been received from the province. To hear
[2:42:05] back what we think of this legislation. And. This is.
[2:42:12] Simply a resolution that describes how this Councillor feels about
[2:42:17] the proposal by the provincial government to move in this
[2:42:20] direction. We've been asked to do this. And so we
[2:42:30] shall. Depending on the results of this resolution. So I
[2:42:36] will be supporting it. Absolutely. And I will also be
[2:42:40] supporting. Our association of Municipalities, which gives guidance to us
[2:42:47] and assists us in some of the important work. That
[2:42:50] we do. Okay. Are there any further second time? Speakers.
[2:42:55] All right, Councillor Rosinski. Thank you, Madam Mayor. As my
[2:43:02] comments on the motion. Now, as first time speaker to
[2:43:04] the motion. First of all, I find it interesting that
[2:43:08] counselors choose to focus on this issue while our neighboring
[2:43:11] municipalities and Amo are working together with the province to
[2:43:15] tackle the issue of homelessness. A very big, important issue.
[2:43:18] And there hasn't been a word out of this Councillor
[2:43:20] on that issue. Now, according to this motion, the province
[2:43:23] is asking for a sober second look. To look at
[2:43:26] bike lanes that actually restricts. Vehicular traffic, which, of course,
[2:43:31] is not happening in Halton Hills, nor most likely will.
[2:43:34] Ever happen in hall to the hills? Hopefully not. So
[2:43:38] I really don't see. What the big deal is. How
[2:43:43] does this affect our municipality? It's really not a priority.
[2:43:48] And clearly there are municipalities that are pushing. This they're
[2:43:53] pushing. A radical ideological agenda rather than prioritizing. Efficient, effective
[2:44:00] flow of traffic, which is what we should be doing.
[2:44:05] We heard last year about traffic issues from when? Mountain
[2:44:08] View and Trafalgar. And there's construction and zipper merging, and
[2:44:13] they even got emails from Ward two residents about those
[2:44:16] traffic. Issues, traffic issues are real, and they're going to
[2:44:19] continue to grow as we continue to grow. And with
[2:44:22] all due respect to Councillor fogle and their preamble, she.
[2:44:25] Said that reducing a lane of traffic. Doesn't affect gridlock.
[2:44:30] And then later on she said that in Toronto and
[2:44:33] why we're talking with Toronto? I don't know. But in
[2:44:35] Toronto you can't increase. Delanes. But if lanes don't contribute
[2:44:38] to gridlock, then that's irrelevant. So I was a little
[2:44:41] confused there. I think this is just. Really not something
[2:44:46] we should be spending our time on and I can't
[2:44:48] support. Okay. Are there any other Councillor
[2:44:57] Somerville? Well, I appreciate Councillor Zinsky mentioned about homelessness and.
[2:45:02] The other one that Amos unlowed a lot of work
[2:45:03] on we've never raised. Here is about encampments, but that
[2:45:07] doesn't seem to matter because. Save the bike. Lanes. I
[2:45:11] said I'm not supporting it. I wish people would have
[2:45:14] been of this impassioned by the other municipal overreach. Things
[2:45:18] such as strong mayor powers or the absolutely terrible budget
[2:45:23] process that we now have forced on us with the
[2:45:25] mayor's budget where a budget is not even passed by
[2:45:28] council. That's the ridiculous things that we are pretty selective.
[2:45:33] But let's keep poking our nose at the province and
[2:45:37] we will know what the result will be as we
[2:45:39] keep asking for funding, and we won't get it. Well,
[2:45:41] no wonder. So I am opposed, and we'll be very
[2:45:46] glad to stand up for that on this. One. I
[2:45:49] do appreciate and respect the work amo does, because I
[2:45:52] do spend a lot of time talking to them, and
[2:45:55] I agree with them on the local decision making. It
[2:45:58] may be in the municipal act. But go back to
[2:46:00] article two of the constitution. Any act or that the
[2:46:04] province wants to give to the municipalities and take away,
[2:46:06] they can do. Very easily because that is their purview
[2:46:10] under the canadian charter, rights and freedoms. It's actually the
[2:46:15] constitution, but anyway, Councillor Keane.
[2:46:28] Thank you, Madam Mayor should come. As no surprise to
[2:46:30] Councillor, I will not be supporting this resolution. I'm thrilled
[2:46:34] about the introduction of Bill to twelve. Having visited a
[2:46:39] friend for lunch a month or so ago down in
[2:46:41] Yorkville and driving on Bluer street. I can say unequivocally,
[2:46:45] it's a disaster. And. This kind of politically and ideologically
[2:46:54] charged decision to put bike lanes where there's no way
[2:46:57] or reason they should be. There is nothing more than
[2:46:59] a thinly veiled attack continuing. Attack the war on the
[2:47:01] car. It's just like the mobility master plan to be
[2:47:04] discussed. Many of our local residents came and saw through
[2:47:07] that initial attack and made their views known, but apparently
[2:47:10] that isn't important. Certain members of council. You talk about
[2:47:14] the responsibility of paying attention to the municipal act? Well,
[2:47:17] the municipal act. Also dictates that counselors should be listening
[2:47:21] to the concerns of their residents, not telling residents what
[2:47:24] they think is best for them. This is another example
[2:47:27] of an elite. Nanny state approach to our town, saying,
[2:47:32] we're going to force you to get healthy by riding
[2:47:34] a bicycle. I don't need to be told to ride
[2:47:37] a bicycle to be healthy. I go to the gym
[2:47:39] three times a week. That's my choice. It's the choice
[2:47:41] of my residence. This is not provincial overreach. This is
[2:47:46] counteracting municipal overreach. Fellow counselors. And if towns are not
[2:47:52] going to behave responsibly and they're going to start pushing
[2:47:55] their agendas, we're going to continue to have the province
[2:47:57] interject themselves. As it's been pointed out, is their right
[2:48:01] under the municipal act and under legislation of this promise.
[2:48:03] So we need to stop promoting these kind of irresponsible
[2:48:06] policy decisions that go against the wishes of our constituents
[2:48:09] that are not practical for the way this to. Town
[2:48:13] is designed. And I can tell you that when every
[2:48:14] time we order these new bike lanes, in Georgetown. South
[2:48:18] ward four. It's one of the largest sources of complaints
[2:48:20] I've received for my constituents. They're angry about them. They
[2:48:23] don't use them. They don't. Know why they're there. They
[2:48:25] want their money back on their taxes, so I'll not
[2:48:27] be supporting this resolution. It is not worthy of support.
[2:48:31] Thank you. Okay. Are there any further comments? Recorded vote.
[2:48:40] Okay, Madam clerk. On the resolution. Thank you, Madamaran. Through
[2:48:46] you. When I call your name, Councillor, please say yes
[2:48:49] that you are. Supporting the motion or no, that you
[2:48:50] are not supporting the motion, Mayor Lawler. Yes, Councillor Fogle.
[2:48:59] Yes. Councilor Garno? Yes. Councillor Norris. No. Councillor Ingles. Yes.
[2:49:08] Councillor Keane. No. Councillor Somerville. No. Councillor Hillson? Yes. Councillor
[2:49:16] Rosinski? No. Councillor Albano. No. Councillor Brasst. Yes. That motion
[2:49:24] carries.
[2:49:39] It's 06:00. Now there are several people in the gallery.
[2:49:48] We also have a lot of items. And we also
[2:49:53] have a public meeting that we are required to do
[2:49:56] at 06:00. The clerk tells me. Can you tell us
[2:50:03] how we're going to proceed? Through you, Madam mayor. So
[2:50:10] if you wanted to call for recess. Just for a
[2:50:16] quick stretch and all that stuff to come back. I
[2:50:18] don't know. 615. 620 whatever time you want. We will
[2:50:22] have to do the public meeting first and then after
[2:50:24] the public meeting. We will resume with the rest of
[2:50:26] the councillor agenda.
[2:51:32] All right, so. We're going to take a ten minute
[2:51:35] break right now, and when we come back there will
[2:51:38] be a public meeting. Okay. And following the public meeting.
[2:51:45] We will reconvene into general committee. And we will then
[2:51:51] receive some reports at that point. And there will be
[2:51:57] a couple of delegations. But. It wouldn't surprise me if
[2:52:04] it's 630 before we get to general committee. Okay, so
[2:52:10] ten minute break now and then back into a public
[2:52:14] meeting. Thank you.
[3:12:34] Well, good evening, everyone. And I'm sorry, that was a
[3:12:36] bit of a long ten minutes. But hopefully. We move
[3:12:44] forward. So it's not midnight when we're out of here
[3:12:49] tonight. So I'd like to open a public meeting. It
[3:12:56] regards southeast Georgetown's secondary plan. And the purpose of this
[3:13:01] public meeting is to inform and provide the public. With
[3:13:06] an opportunity to ask questions or express views. With respect
[3:13:12] to an official plan amendment pertaining to the southeast Georgetown
[3:13:16] draft secondary plan. The Councillor are here to observe and
[3:13:22] listen. To comments. However, they will not make any decisions
[3:13:27] this evening. As chair, I am informing you that when
[3:13:31] Councillor makes a decision, the Planning act provides individual landowners.
[3:13:36] Within the secondary plan area with an opportunity to appeal
[3:13:41] the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal for a hearing
[3:13:46] subject to tribunal valid. Validation of the appeal. Please note
[3:13:52] that if a person or public body does not make
[3:13:55] oral submissions at a public meeting, or written submissions to
[3:14:00] the town of Holton Hills before the decision is made,
[3:14:03] the person or public body is not entitled to appeal
[3:14:07] the decision of the town of Holton Hills to the
[3:14:10] Ontario. Land tribunal. In written comments. In written comments to
[3:14:18] the town of Holton. Public. And you may also not
[3:14:23] be added as a participant to the hearing. If an
[3:14:26] appeal before the Ontario land tribunal unless. In the opinion
[3:14:31] of the tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so.
[3:14:35] You may wish to talk to planning staff regarding further
[3:14:38] information. On the appeal process. The Planning act requires that
[3:14:44] a statutory public meeting be held for a proposal to
[3:14:48] amend the official plan. In the format of this public
[3:14:53] meeting is as follows. Josh Salisbury, senior policy planner, will
[3:14:59] provide an overview of the Southeast Georgetown draft secondary plan.
[3:15:05] Then Shika Jaguani, the senior urban designer landscape intern at
[3:15:12] SGL planning and design. The lead consultants for the study
[3:15:17] will go over the draft secondary plan policies. Next, the
[3:15:23] public will have the opportunity to obtain clarification. Ask questions.
[3:15:29] And express their views on the proposed amendments. The town's
[3:15:33] consultants and staff will attempt to answer questions or respond
[3:15:38] to concerns this evening. If this is not possible, staff
[3:15:42] will follow up and obtain the information. Responses will be
[3:15:48] provided when the matter is brought forward and evaluated by
[3:15:51] Councillor at a later date. I now invite Josh Salisbury
[3:15:57] to come forward. And while Josh is coming up, I'll
[3:16:01] comment that this is being streamed, and there may be
[3:16:05] individuals online who are joining. This public meeting.
[3:16:22] Can you guys hear me? Oh, here we go. Thank
[3:16:24] you very much, madamarin. Good evening. To you, Madamor, as
[3:16:27] well as good evening to the rest of Councillor. I
[3:16:29] also want to. Say good evening to those from the
[3:16:31] public who are here in attendance and who are also
[3:16:33] joining. In virtually tonight. Tonight, I am joined by shika
[3:16:38] jaguani of sgl planning and design, inc. Incentive Plan amendment
[3:16:44] number 59, which is also references OPA 59, which is
[3:16:48] to establish a secondary plan that will guide land use
[3:16:51] and future development on lands abutting 10th line and 10th
[3:16:54] side. Ode in Georgetown, which has become more commonly known
[3:16:58] as southeast Georgetown. Town Councillor endorsed the preferred land use
[3:17:02] plan for southeast Georgetown through report PD 20 24 62,
[3:17:08] which helps steer the preparation of the draft secondary plan.
[3:17:12] This statutory public meeting is yet another key milestone in
[3:17:15] progressing to a completed OPa 59 southeast Georgetown secondary plan.
[3:17:27] The following presentation is going to be delivered in seven
[3:17:29] sections. First I will be speaking to what has been
[3:17:32] completed to date and then Shika will be. Discussing the
[3:17:35] vision and guiding principles. The land use schedule the key
[3:17:39] secondary plan policies the key urban design guidelines the status
[3:17:44] of the technical studies required for this report. And the
[3:17:48] next steps. So what has been done to date?
[3:17:58] Currently, we are in phase four of this process. Over
[3:18:01] the past couple of months, town staff have met with
[3:18:03] a technical advisory committee, which is made up of internal
[3:18:06] town staff and external reviewing agencies. To present the draft
[3:18:10] official plan Amendment 59, southeast Georgetown secondary plan and gather
[3:18:14] feedback for the proposed policies as well as the key
[3:18:17] urb. Urban design guidelines and the land use schedules. Also
[3:18:21] during this phase, town staff have met with the steering
[3:18:24] committee for the southeast Georgetown Secondary Plan. Which is made
[3:18:28] up of counselors, the mayor, a member of the public,
[3:18:32] the landowner and town. Staff. And the purpose of this
[3:18:36] meeting was to gather their feedback on the draft secondary
[3:18:40] plan policies. The key urban design guidelines and land use
[3:18:43] schedules. After the completion of the statutory public meeting, it
[3:18:48] is the intent of town staff to review all feedback
[3:18:51] and comments that have been provided for the draft. Secondary
[3:18:53] plan policies and to submit. The town Councillor. A recommendation
[3:18:57] report for a finalized official plan. Amendment 59, southeast Georgetown
[3:19:01] secondary plan. We anticipate that this report will come forward
[3:19:06] to Councillor in early of 2025. So we are there.
[3:19:21] This is just a bit of a timeline of some
[3:19:22] of the consultation that we've had. In phase four to
[3:19:26] date. So, as I noted, we had the TAC presentation
[3:19:28] on October 24. Of 2024. And then we had the
[3:19:31] steering committee presentation on October 29 of 2024 on November
[3:19:36] the fourth of 2024. We had our public open house,
[3:19:42] which I believe a majority of town Councillor were there.
[3:19:45] It was actually quite well attended. We had a number
[3:19:47] of people from the public attendant as well, which was
[3:19:49] awesome. And that's just a picture of Catherine J. Who's
[3:19:53] one of our consultants working. From Sgl, interacting with the
[3:19:57] public and how the open house looked there. I also
[3:20:01] want to make note that we do have also an
[3:20:04] online ongoing survey happening right now. In this report that's
[3:20:09] being used for this meeting, which is PD 20240 95.
[3:20:14] There is a link on the second page that the
[3:20:16] readers can click on. I think it says link here
[3:20:19] and it can direct them right to the. Let's talk
[3:20:21] Halton Hills, Georgetown. Southeast secondary plan page, and on that
[3:20:26] page you can actually provide. Comments or you can provide
[3:20:30] feedback from the November 4 open house. And you can
[3:20:34] also ask town staff questions, and we do respond to
[3:20:37] those questions as well. If you guys need to know
[3:20:40] the link as well, it's, let's talkhaultonhills. Caso. Casotownsecondaryplan. And
[3:20:48] I will ask Shika to come up. Thank you, Josh.
[3:21:00] No. So, as Josh mentioned, we will go over the
[3:21:09] vision. Just a general overview. The vision for southeast Georgetown.
[3:21:16] Is that it will foster a healthy, sustainable lifestyle, balancing
[3:21:20] the need for economic, environmental and social sustainability. It will
[3:21:25] be designed to be resilient, compact and contribute to surrounding
[3:21:29] community in a manner that respects the natural and cultural
[3:21:32] heritage features as well as the surrounding neighborhood. Just a
[3:21:37] quick overview of the principles as part of the plan.
[3:21:42] It's to provide a mix of built form as well
[3:21:45] as a street and block pattern. That provides a walkable
[3:21:49] community. Provides for a mixed use area to accommodate the
[3:21:53] daily needs of residents, respects the natural cultural heritage that
[3:21:57] currently exists within and adjacent to the site. Locates appropriate
[3:22:03] land uses adjacent to these natural heritage features and also
[3:22:08] incorporating them in parks and open space, which we'll illustrate
[3:22:11] later on. Providing for sustainability measures as well as urban
[3:22:16] design best practices, which we'll also go over. Parks and
[3:22:20] trails connections both within throughout the plan and also in
[3:22:24] the adjacent natural heritage features. Creating a sense of place
[3:22:28] by enhancing views to these natural heritage features as well
[3:22:32] as. The cultural heritage features nearby and ensuring that new
[3:22:37] communities are accessible for all ages and abilities. This is
[3:22:42] the first kind of overview of the land use plan.
[3:22:45] And we'll go step by step in the different elements
[3:22:49] of the plan, starting with a breakdown of the land
[3:22:52] uses, then jumping into the parks and open space structure,
[3:22:57] active transportation structure, the road network. Discussing. The impacts of
[3:23:04] the Norval west bypass. As well as sustainability and location
[3:23:08] of stormwater management features, as well as lastly, incorporation of
[3:23:14] natural heritage features and cultural heritage features. So, firstly, starting
[3:23:20] off with. The local commercial mixed use area that's located.
[3:23:27] Alongside road ten and a portion of road b. You
[3:23:30] could see it in this purple area over here. To
[3:23:34] the south side. This is intended to include. Live work
[3:23:40] units stacked, townhouse dwellings and an apartment. So. Either a
[3:23:45] mixed use structure or a mix of uses. A retail
[3:23:51] commercial needs analysis by tape. Research found that the maximum
[3:23:55] gross leasable floor area should be between 1802,300 m² density
[3:24:01] of 60 to 150 units per hectare. And up to
[3:24:06] eight stories in height. Next, we're illustrating the medium
[3:24:15] density land uses, which take out about. Take up about
[3:24:20] half. Of the study area, as you can see. In
[3:24:26] the orange coloring. This area would include stock townhouses as
[3:24:32] well as back to back townhouses, including all the permitted
[3:24:35] uses in the op policy. Up to a max. Density
[3:24:40] of 80 units per hectare, heights of three to six.
[3:24:44] Up to six. Stories. And using the massing of any
[3:24:50] taller buildings at gateway features such as the entrance to
[3:24:53] the community itself. And collector, road a and 10th line.
[3:24:59] And framing collector roads in general, with some taller built
[3:25:02] form. Low density residential uses are concentrated to more the
[3:25:08] northern portion of the study area or of the community.
[3:25:12] This includes. Singles and stacked. Sorry. Single and semi detached
[3:25:18] housing permitted by the op. The policy D 1.3.1 .1.
[3:25:27] Density of 24 to 30 units per hectare and a
[3:25:29] height of up to three stories. Next, coming into parks
[3:25:34] and open space. We have three different parks. That are
[3:25:42] included within the secondary plan area. This includes a neighborhood
[3:25:47] park on the west side of the Norva west bypass,
[3:25:50] which is the larger central green square you can see
[3:25:54] in the middle. Of the study area as well as
[3:25:57] two parquets, one located along road sea. Again. West of
[3:26:02] the Norva west bypass. You can see there's an arrow.
[3:26:06] And where the road c label is itself. And on
[3:26:09] the east side there is also a parquet, and the
[3:26:12] little plus illustrates the cultural heritage feature. There's a Russell
[3:26:19] farm complex, which I'll mention later on. But the intent
[3:26:23] is that that could be integrated into the design of
[3:26:26] the parquet going forward. In terms of active transportation and
[3:26:31] connection. Throughout this community, there is multiple types of active
[3:26:35] transportation features one of them is a multi use path,
[3:26:40] a three meter wide pathway along. 10th line just on
[3:26:45] the west side of the study area. As you can
[3:26:47] see with the black dashed line. As well as trails
[3:26:52] within the green belt that I had mentioned earlier. That's
[3:26:55] some brown line. That is. On the northeast side of
[3:27:00] the study area, and it connects to Green street over
[3:27:04] the bypass. Lastly, looking at some pedestrian connections, and this
[3:27:10] can take the form of openings. Between. Built form and
[3:27:17] providing access to and from collector roads, sidewalks and parks.
[3:27:22] Internal land uses you can see that? Those highlighted in
[3:27:26] the green arrows. Also connecting over the Norval west bypass.
[3:27:33] In a way that connects the eastern half of the
[3:27:35] community with the western half. Conceptually. The road network is
[3:27:42] also conceptual. It shows three collector road systems. Road a,
[3:27:50] road b and road C. All. Collector roads will provide
[3:27:55] sidewalks from both sides of the streets, and local roads
[3:27:57] can provide sidewalks. On at least one side of the
[3:28:00] street, and we have general policies that speak to street
[3:28:03] trees. Within boulevards, allowing for sufficient soil volume. Having nice
[3:28:08] big tree canopies embedded in the policies. And in the
[3:28:13] plan. Speaking a bit to the Norva west bypass itself.
[3:28:21] It's a future transportation corridor. The final size and alignment
[3:28:25] will be determined by Halton Region. We have policies in
[3:28:29] the secondary plan that state that no development would be
[3:28:32] approved within the bypass. Until the final alignment is determined.
[3:28:36] And also a caveat in those pallet policies that lands
[3:28:40] not required for transportation. Once the alignment is approved, we'll
[3:28:44] assume the adjacent land use designation. Speaking a bit to
[3:28:49] sustainability and stormwater. The secondary plan speaks to promoting stormwater
[3:28:54] best practices. Low impact development features, such as illustrated in
[3:28:59] these pictures here with bioswales. You can see at the
[3:29:05] bottom. Southeast portion of the plan itself. We have a
[3:29:10] conceptual stormwater pond located, and it is located. In the
[3:29:17] area that receives the most drainage. Speaking a bit to
[3:29:20] the existing natural heritage feature. The scope subwatershed study identified
[3:29:26] a vegetation community. You can see that in this purple
[3:29:32] blob. To the northern part of the site. With a
[3:29:37] yellow line. At the bottom. The decision for the wetland
[3:29:42] to be removed and replicated. So that's speaking to that
[3:29:46] blob itself. And it should be guided by future technical
[3:29:51] study following ecosystem offsetting guidelines and approved by the responsible
[3:29:57] authority. Speaking to the cultural heritage features that I mentioned
[3:30:07] earlier on the site. There's the Russell farm complex that
[3:30:11] includes a barn, main residences. This was studied as part
[3:30:15] of the southeast Georgetown secondary plan, study process. We have
[3:30:20] policies that state that the town will consider whether designation
[3:30:24] should be. Pursued for this farm complex. And integrated in
[3:30:29] long term conservation strategy. And heritage impact assessment is required
[3:30:35] to identify conservation and mitigation strategies. As well as determining
[3:30:41] how this complex can be integrated into the parquet that
[3:30:45] I mentioned earlier. On the east side of the bypass.
[3:30:50] Jumping into some key urban design guidelines that we have
[3:30:54] prepared, including, again, sustainable design features that are key to
[3:30:59] this plan, such as ensuring. There's a range of low
[3:31:05] impact development features, no mo zones, for example, adequate topsoil
[3:31:09] volume to allow those large canopies to flourish, ensuring enough
[3:31:14] soil volume for each tree. Implementing again, low impact development
[3:31:18] features or having options to implement those features such as
[3:31:22] green roofs or light roofs. Including other sustainable features such
[3:31:26] as trees and parking lots to help with shade. In
[3:31:29] terms of the design of the public realm. Forwarding the
[3:31:33] town's direction. To complete it in a complete streets approach
[3:31:39] short street and block sizes to encourage walking and connection
[3:31:43] throughout the community. Addressing gateways and key intersections. As illustrated
[3:31:50] earlier on. With gateway features such as public art, flowering
[3:31:55] trees, taller buildings at those intersections that I mentioned earlier.
[3:32:00] Preserving views to the Russell Farm complex. Is another integral
[3:32:05] part of the public realm design. And should help secure
[3:32:10] an idea of a sense of place in this area
[3:32:12] and then also ensuring. Guidelines for Septen, which is crime
[3:32:17] prevention through environmental design principles. In terms of the design
[3:32:22] of the private realm. Including guidelines such as front doors
[3:32:28] of building facing the main roads, such as collector road
[3:32:31] b and ten side road with active uses along the
[3:32:34] streets. Having guidelines that call for high quality, durable, energy
[3:32:39] efficient building materials. Again, trying to hone in on those
[3:32:42] sustainability policies. Incorporating lid features that align to the town's
[3:32:48] green development standards. Using something like a 45 degree angular
[3:32:54] plane to ensure transition. Is achieved. You're not having really
[3:33:00] tall buildings right next to really short buildings. And. Creating
[3:33:05] more of those active frontages with outdoor patios. Spill out
[3:33:11] space within these areas in the private realm and then
[3:33:14] ensuring that things like parking are located at the rear
[3:33:16] of the building, so you maintain that active frontage along
[3:33:20] the main streets. In terms of the status of technical
[3:33:24] studies, a majority of the studies have been completed, including
[3:33:28] the preferred land use alternative report Urban design memo, which
[3:33:32] is the guidelines? Cultural heritage resource assessment, fiscal, agricultural impact
[3:33:38] assessment transportation report, as well as. The scopes of watershed
[3:33:43] study and the area servicing plan is still in progress.
[3:33:48] And that's pretty much the presentation. As Josh mentioned, a
[3:33:55] recommendation report should be prepared by early 2025. Any comments
[3:34:01] that we receive from. This statutory public meeting will be
[3:34:05] reviewed and addressed. For the upcoming term. Thank you.
[3:34:16] There you go. Thank you. That's very helpful. It is
[3:34:22] now the public's opportunity. And so I would ask if
[3:34:29] there are any persons who have questions require further clarification.
[3:34:34] Or information. Or wish to present their views on the
[3:34:38] proposed official plan amendment. If you are assigned in via
[3:34:42] zoom. Please raise your hand by clicking on the raise
[3:34:45] my hand button, typically on the bottom right side of
[3:34:50] your panel or if you join the meeting by phone.
[3:34:54] Press star nine to raise your hand and staff will
[3:34:59] permit you to unmute yourself when it is your turn
[3:35:02] to speak. So I will ask first if there is
[3:35:07] anyone online. Who is. No. Okay. Are there people in
[3:35:13] the gallery? If you want to make a comment on
[3:35:16] this or ask a question, please raise your hand. And
[3:35:21] then come to the podium. Hello. Okay. Would you please
[3:35:31] give your name and address? Yes, certainly. My name is
[3:35:34] Heidi Noyes. And I'm that. 69 Gollip Crescent. My name
[3:35:38] is Susan Forrester. I'm. At 67 gallup present. And I'm
[3:35:42] Cammy Pierce, and I'm at 63 Gallup Crescent. Okay. So
[3:35:46] you're doing this together? You don't get five minute seat
[3:35:50] each, necessarily, but. If you could address your comments in
[3:35:56] five minutes, that would be great. Thank you. So maybe
[3:36:01] I'll start, and then if anyone has anything to add.
[3:36:04] So thank you very. Much for your consideration. We wanted
[3:36:07] to mention a couple of things that we wanted on
[3:36:09] the record. We know that your team has been very
[3:36:16] supportive of us, and they've listened to our concerns. They
[3:36:19] responded to our emails. We've had meetings, including yourself, so
[3:36:23] for that, we want to. Thank you very much. We
[3:36:26] did have a couple of comments about. The secondary plan
[3:36:30] that we noticed when it came in, some of us
[3:36:33] were not able to attend. The last meeting. Should I
[3:36:38] just list them? Okay, great. So, first of all, the
[3:36:43] wetlands are a bit of a concern for us because
[3:36:46] these are wetlands. Like the farmer never. They still are
[3:36:51] not farmed because it is a wetland, and I understand
[3:36:55] that they're going to relocate. In the corner, but. I
[3:37:01] think as a sustainable community that cares about their environment.
[3:37:06] Why are we actually taking away from that original wetland?
[3:37:09] So I think. That would be for everyone's consideration. We
[3:37:15] all back out onto that property, and I'm sure you
[3:37:18] can appreciate. We have multiple animals. Deers, coyotes, ducks. All
[3:37:27] sorts of wildlife that use. That wetland, so. We'd like
[3:37:33] to, for you guys to consider to keep it, make
[3:37:34] it into a parquet. Park, whatever. You can do. We
[3:37:40] did notice. As part of your vision, and I'm not
[3:37:47] sure where it is on the website, but. You do
[3:37:50] speak about building, like, for, like, homes. We appreciate that
[3:37:55] people have really looked at and owned in on these
[3:37:57] drawings. And are having. Single dwelling homes. South. Is that
[3:38:05] south? No. North of Danby Road. I need to learn
[3:38:09] my north and south here. North of Danby. Road, but.
[3:38:16] In the provisions, it does state that there is three.
[3:38:20] Stories. To be allowed. As well as semidetach. I know
[3:38:25] the builder is here and he spoke with us. Already,
[3:38:27] and we appreciate his voice. But we do want it
[3:38:33] noted that we do want, like, for, like, houses to
[3:38:37] be. Single, detached, two story houses. And no semi, so
[3:38:44] we're asking for that to be included. Into our town
[3:38:48] vision. And for that to be included in the drawings.
[3:38:53] And then the last thing that I have is behind
[3:38:57] us, we have a green belt. When we originally came
[3:39:02] to Councillor, we talked about that we would be able
[3:39:05] to maintain that green belt as well as the trees
[3:39:09] that are there. They're historic trees. They've been trees that
[3:39:11] we've planted. It is a beautiful area. In this drawing.
[3:39:19] For everyone who. I don't know if we want to
[3:39:22] note this, but just for those records. It does show
[3:39:26] that there is a multi use trail that goes behind.
[3:39:33] The six, seven houses on Gollip, but. It just ends.
[3:39:38] There's no purpose for it. And that's actually not what
[3:39:41] we spoke about during the original meeting, so we would
[3:39:45] like to ask that. This multi use. Path. Be behind
[3:39:51] the green belt. Be reconsidered. Yes, please. Okay, go ahead.
[3:39:59] So the point we were making is that when you
[3:40:02] look at the trail system coming from Green, street going
[3:40:05] right through. The green space in behind the proposed development
[3:40:11] area. It comes up. At the top of the field.
[3:40:18] And ends, but the trailhead is right. At Argar World
[3:40:24] and 10th line. So if a trailhead is starting there,
[3:40:30] it makes no sense to have, we feel makes no
[3:40:32] sense to have a multipurpose path. That's paved behind there
[3:40:37] instead. Have that strip of land. The trail continue. So
[3:40:43] the existing trails, now that we have that go off
[3:40:46] of goodterham. It's all that crushed stone. And it's basically
[3:40:52] for walkers and people on their bicycles, not. A multipurpose
[3:40:58] pathway like on 8th line with a wide strip of
[3:41:02] paved area plus lighting. And all the rest that we
[3:41:05] want it for the trail to continue up around there
[3:41:09] and down. To the trailhead. And then. Have the traffic
[3:41:14] barrier. At the bottom of the trail here head there
[3:41:19] is just to allow for pedestrians and anybody who wants
[3:41:23] to access it with their bicycle. But. Not this huge
[3:41:29] thing. And also, the trail that exists meanders naturally through
[3:41:34] the existing trees. No matter where you go on the
[3:41:38] trail system, which is so beautiful, through Georgetown. So. That's
[3:41:43] what we're looking for. In that strip there for the
[3:41:47] trail to continue as it is everywhere else, not. A
[3:41:52] big, paved multipurpose, and it is a very small area
[3:41:56] that we're talking about. And. If I may. My husband
[3:42:02] and I are original owners, so we've been in that
[3:42:05] house from day one. Watch being built 31 years. And
[3:42:12] that whole strip of land behind. The builder originally then
[3:42:17] had left this huge mound of topsoil. And the neighbors
[3:42:23] all spread it. We threw grass seed. We've maintained that
[3:42:26] land for 31. Years. We mow it every week. There's
[3:42:32] no weeds back there. It is beautiful. People come there
[3:42:36] to walk their dogs, so. It's already a beautiful natural
[3:42:40] pathway for. Yeah, and there is a Marsha back there.
[3:42:45] So we would really want to make that point that.
[3:42:50] Stays as natural as possible. So I think we're good.
[3:42:57] Did you have something else? No. I'm supporting that. So
[3:43:02] they spoke wonderfully, and I'm pleased with that. Okay. Thanks
[3:43:05] very much. Okay. Thank you. Hi there.
[3:43:15] My name is. Good evening, Wilson. I'm at ten two
[3:43:18] four eight, 10th line. So I'm literally the last house
[3:43:22] on 10th line before the Argyle bend. The question that
[3:43:27] I have. And I'm not sure if it was ever
[3:43:30] clarified, but right across the street from us. There's mature
[3:43:36] trees in a line all the way along tent line,
[3:43:41] and I don't. Know what's going to happen with those
[3:43:43] trees, whether. They're going to be. A truck one day
[3:43:46] is going to come by and totally destroy all of
[3:43:49] that, or if it's going to be a multi path
[3:43:52] that I've heard which was going to happen. I just
[3:43:56] would like to have it clarified if those trees are
[3:43:59] staying or if. They're going and if they're going. I
[3:44:03] really don't want to have condos of six to eight
[3:44:08] stories right in front. Of my house. So if anybody
[3:44:11] could clarify that, that would be wonderful. Thank you. So.
[3:44:19] I'm going to ask that everyone who has a comment
[3:44:21] to come up and make it. Or their question. And
[3:44:25] then after that, staff. Or. The consultant will
[3:44:34] provide some of those answers. Okay, are there any other
[3:44:38] members of the public who have a comment to make.
[3:44:48] Sorry. One of the other things that, besides what's right
[3:44:51] behind us is the bypass. As a community. These group
[3:44:58] of neighbors and other people we've been talking to. Can't
[3:45:03] see the logic of this bypass when people who are
[3:45:08] going to go to Brampton. Are still going to go
[3:45:12] through Norville. And they take this bypass and hit. 10th
[3:45:18] side road and to go. Where? The logic of that.
[3:45:28] That's a huge cost. And. We just don't understand the
[3:45:33] logic behind this bypass. That's a question that staff may
[3:45:39] be able to make reference to generally. Good afternoon. My
[3:45:45] name is artist Snow and I live at 63 Gallup
[3:45:48] Crescent. In your plan. It actually said that? The plan
[3:45:57] itself wouldn't be approved until the bypass is approved. Am
[3:46:00] I reading that correctly? Or is that being presented in
[3:46:03] that way? Because I'm thinking that there's going to be
[3:46:08] a vote on this plan, but. In your presentation, it
[3:46:12] actually said that? The plan wouldn't be approved until the
[3:46:16] bypass is approved, so I would like somebody to clarify
[3:46:20] that also, please. I think staff will be able to
[3:46:24] reference. That. Are there any others who have a comment
[3:46:29] or question? Okay. Thank you very much then, Mr. Salzbury,
[3:46:37] your turn again. I'm going to be asking a few
[3:46:42] different people to come up. I guess there's a couple
[3:46:45] that I can answer right off the top. With regards
[3:46:51] to. The bypass. So that policy itself. Is underneath. I
[3:47:00] guess we don't have the image up there. I can't
[3:47:04] really see this, but on the land use plan that
[3:47:06] we have, you'll. Notice underneath where. There's this. There it
[3:47:12] is. Okay. Yeah, we can go with that. So where
[3:47:16] you see that hatched? Area of where it's the proposed
[3:47:21] Norval west bypass route. If you notice how there's colors
[3:47:25] underneath that. So you'll see that orange you see, the
[3:47:27] purple you see. The green for the park. So what
[3:47:30] that means is that, and we have policy within the
[3:47:33] draft. Secondary plan that whenever the region has decided their
[3:47:37] final design and where and how they're going? To build
[3:47:40] it that those areas underneath that hatching that are that
[3:47:43] color of land use designation. That they will then be
[3:47:47] able to be built as that land use designation. We
[3:47:49] just have to wait until the region has decided what
[3:47:52] that road is actually going to look like, but that
[3:47:54] doesn't prevent this secondary plan from being able to be
[3:47:57] passed. We just have to wait and see the final
[3:47:59] design. From the region, but that's what that is, so
[3:48:02] I hope that helps with clarification. Perfect. In terms of.
[3:48:09] Another question that we had with regards to the trail,
[3:48:13] so that's. The one that was referenced just north of
[3:48:18] Argyle on ten line there. So. This just proves that
[3:48:24] sometimes municipalities work really quickly. I was able to talk
[3:48:28] to one of our transportation guys, and he confirmed that
[3:48:31] that was actually an incorrect. Dotted line that was put
[3:48:34] up there, so there's. I don't know who to. Speak
[3:48:37] to. So there's not actually. A plan for that multi
[3:48:40] use path to go that far north anyways. So thank
[3:48:43] you all for actually pointing that out, because that's really
[3:48:46] good thing for us. To know about. And that's the
[3:48:48] point of meetings like this is stuff like that to
[3:48:50] get determined. That's excellent. Next I'm going to ask regarding
[3:48:57] the wetland question I'm going to ask Aaron. To come
[3:49:01] up. He's one of the engineers that is dealing with
[3:49:04] the servicing and water. Engineer, I guess, is the best
[3:49:08] way to describe. Thank you, Josh. Good evening, Madam Mayor,
[3:49:17] members of council. Just to maybe clarify. My role and
[3:49:22] my credentials. I was the project manager, project engineer, and
[3:49:27] water resources engineer for the scopes of watershed study. Which
[3:49:31] was the multidisciplinary environmental study undertaken in support of the
[3:49:36] overall secondary plan. We did have an ecologist on our
[3:49:40] team, Steve Hill from Dugan and associates. And with respect
[3:49:46] to the full. Technical rationale and support. If there's further
[3:49:50] questions. We can certainly reach out to Steve for some
[3:49:55] further clarification, but at this point, I can speak to
[3:49:59] my understanding in the context again, as my role in
[3:50:03] that project. The comments with respect to the wetland. There
[3:50:08] was fundamentally a question. Why was wetland being removed? And
[3:50:12] some questions about the rationale for bringing it into the
[3:50:18] location. Toward the north limit in that one corner. But
[3:50:23] also some comments about. The fauna in the area. And
[3:50:29] a suggestion to incorporate into a parquet. So first to
[3:50:33] speak to the rationale about. Why? To move it. From
[3:50:38] the work that Dugan and associates completed, they found that
[3:50:42] the wetland is rather isolated from the broader system. We
[3:50:46] have surrounding the site. The Silver Creek main branch and
[3:50:52] portions of the credit main branch. By contrast, the wetland
[3:50:57] itself is toward the middle of the property. So localized
[3:51:02] within. The agricultural lands. And it's the opinion of our
[3:51:08] ecologists that it would be more sustainable to have the
[3:51:11] wetland right adjacent to the silver creek, right adjacent to
[3:51:16] that broader system. It's got a better chance of survival
[3:51:20] fundamentally. And you can see just from this graphic it's
[3:51:23] to where the top. It's that kind of purple triangle
[3:51:27] that you can. See on the land use plan. So
[3:51:32] that was the rationale for moving it. It's to put
[3:51:35] it in a location. Where it has got a better
[3:51:38] chance of really thriving. And surviving. With respect to the
[3:51:44] comment about. The fauna in the area. The fauna. Largely
[3:51:51] using, again, those broader systems. So it's moving that feature
[3:51:55] toward. Where? The animals are going to be using it
[3:52:00] and where they're actually going to be in a safer
[3:52:02] position and moved away from a lot of the traffic
[3:52:05] that would be going on through. There. The suggestion that
[3:52:08] was put forward about incorporating the wetland into a parquet.
[3:52:13] It's an interesting suggestion. And what we have put forward
[3:52:17] in the scopes of watershed study is a recommendation, and
[3:52:20] the rationale, but there are requirements for further studying and
[3:52:25] assessment as part of the next stages of planning. So
[3:52:29] through those next stages of planning, there is the opportunity
[3:52:32] to review other alternatives for the ultimate management of this
[3:52:35] feature. There's a recommendation put forward by our team, but
[3:52:39] there's certainly other options that can be investigated and explored
[3:52:42] at the next stages. I hope that answers the question.
[3:52:47] Is the conservation authority involved in this study. So the
[3:52:52] question that was put forward is whether or not the
[3:52:54] conservation authority is involved, and the answer is yes. And
[3:53:03] they think it'll survive moving it. So the question is
[3:53:07] whether or not the conservation authority is in agreement with
[3:53:10] our recommendations and findings. And my understanding is yes, the
[3:53:15] conservation authority has not voiced any disagreement.
[3:53:25] All right. Thanks, Aaron. So there's a couple of other
[3:53:28] questions that were asked as well. That. I just want
[3:53:31] to provide some comment to. First one being. The building
[3:53:39] lake for lake houses and the two stories, no semis.
[3:53:43] So. That's good information to receive from the public. And
[3:53:48] as we're finalizing the final. Secondary plan itself. We do
[3:53:52] take. Those comments into consideration. We're all sitting at the
[3:53:57] last table, I guess is the best. Way to put
[3:53:58] it. To figure out what the strap or what this
[3:54:01] final plan is going to. Look like, so I do.
[3:54:02] Thank you guys for those comments. There was another comment
[3:54:06] about what was the logic behind the bypass? Just for
[3:54:10] clarity, and I'm sure you understand the background of what's
[3:54:13] going on. With the bypass. So that's something that the
[3:54:16] region has determined has to go in this particular location.
[3:54:21] They're continuing to run studies to determine the final design
[3:54:24] and the feasibility for any other sort of connections that
[3:54:27] they believe are going to help for traffic to flow
[3:54:30] better, that's the best explanation we've really been given. But
[3:54:34] unfortunately, we don't have anything really to add in addition
[3:54:38] to that. We can happily take your questions and I
[3:54:40] can certainly forward them onto the region. But. That's the
[3:54:46] best answer that we can give right now for the
[3:54:47] bypass. And the last question that I did take down
[3:54:52] here, it was to do with the mature trees. That
[3:54:55] are along ten line. I believe it was 10th line
[3:54:58] there. Specifically across the more southern part of 10th line.
[3:55:02] I'm going to ask one of our transportation coordinators, Ivan,
[3:55:07] to come up to speak to that in the multi
[3:55:08] use path. Madam mayor and councillor. So when we do
[3:55:18] the design of the multiuse path through the design. We'll
[3:55:20] preserve the trees as much as we can.
[3:55:31] Okay. Yeah, that's it from our end. So I'm not
[3:55:33] sure if there's. Any other comments or questions, but we're
[3:55:37] here, and I can give anybody my contact. Details after
[3:55:40] we're done here today. If you have any further questions
[3:55:42] or you want to. Talk further, anything like that. It
[3:55:47] is on the record. About the mature treat. Like, just
[3:55:52] say we'll do the best we can, but we just.
[3:55:55] Want to notice. Those are all mature trees that have
[3:55:58] been there a long time, and it is. Big barrier.
[3:56:06] And across the street from where? Your business. And when
[3:56:13] you have trees. Are massive. It just creates this wall.
[3:56:20] I believe there. I want to retire there. I don't
[3:56:23] want to see condos. I'm sorry. I really don't. And
[3:56:28] I know you'll be the best. You can. I do
[3:56:31] understand that. But if it was your house. You'd want
[3:56:37] to do absolutely the best you can. And I just
[3:56:39] want to voice my opinion and the neighbors do. That.
[3:56:45] We would like it to be considered. All right, thank
[3:56:49] you, ma'am. Yeah. Thank you very much for that comment.
[3:56:51] We do appreciate it. Commissioner Andrews, did you have some
[3:56:55] comments? Yeah, go ahead, please. Thank you. And through you,
[3:56:58] madam. Mayor, just to radiate what Ivan mentioned, it is
[3:57:02] really early in this process. To really comment on the
[3:57:06] detailed design, what's going to happen there? But concerns are
[3:57:08] noted. We do try to avoid taking down trees whenever
[3:57:11] possible, so it is something we'll take. Very seriously. It's
[3:57:14] just way too early in the process, so we have
[3:57:16] more to come. On that in the future. Also with
[3:57:19] regard to the Norval west bypass, as jaw should noted,
[3:57:22] it is a region project. They're currently in the process
[3:57:24] of finalizing their class EA, so there is an opportunity
[3:57:28] for public to continue to comment on it, but I'll
[3:57:31] also note that. It does look a little bit odd
[3:57:35] at this point in time, but. Consider this to be
[3:57:38] sort of a first phase of a longer term project.
[3:57:42] It is a regional road. And the Winston Churchill is
[3:57:44] also boundary Road with Halton and peele. So there are
[3:57:47] plans in the future for addressing transportation south of ten
[3:57:50] side road that the region will be initiating. It sort
[3:57:54] of goes back to. What we had referred to as
[3:57:58] HP bats, which is sort of to address. The broader
[3:58:01] transportation scheme in that area, sort of north, southeast, west.
[3:58:05] So this is sort of the first phase of it.
[3:58:06] So on its own, it looks a little bit odd,
[3:58:08] but in the fullness of time. It'll make a little
[3:58:10] more sense, but we encourage you to reach out. To
[3:58:12] the region if you do have any concerns, and we're
[3:58:14] happy to pass along any contact information we can. Thank
[3:58:18] you. That's helpful. Okay, so I don't see anything further.
[3:58:25] Ten. Steph, did you have any closing comments? Or anything
[3:58:28] further. Okay, good. All right, then I am going to
[3:58:35] declare. This public meeting closed, Councillor will take no action
[3:58:40] on the proposed official plan amendment for the draft. Southeast
[3:58:44] Georgetown secondary plan tonight. Staff will be reporting at a
[3:58:49] later date with a recommendation for council's. Consideration if you
[3:58:54] wish to receive further information regarding. This project, please. Contact
[3:58:59] planners Melissa Ricci or Josh Salisbury following the meeting. If
[3:59:05] you wish to make a written submission, the deadline for
[3:59:08] comment is December 9, 2024.
[3:59:23] So I have a motion from Councillor Ingles, seconded by
[3:59:27] Councillor Rozinski. That report. PD 20240. Nine five, dated November
[3:59:34] 6, 2024. Regarding the statutory public meeting for the draft
[3:59:39] southeast Georget. Georgetown secondary Plan OPA 59, attached as appendices
[3:59:48] a, B and C to this report. Be received. And
[3:59:52] further, that all agency and public comments be referred to
[3:59:57] staff to be addressed in a final recommendation report to
[4:00:00] Councillor on the disposition of these matters. And further the
[4:00:05] Town clerk forward a copy of Report PD 20240. Nine
[4:00:10] five to the ministry. Of municipal affairs and Housing, the
[4:00:13] Region of Holton, Credit Valley conservation and all local school
[4:00:18] boards for information. All in favor? That's carried. Thank you.
[4:00:29] Okay now, and I'm glad to see this one. I
[4:00:31] have a motion from Councillor ingles. Seconded by Councillor Somerville.
[4:00:36] The Councillor do now convene into general committee and I.
[4:00:39] Believe. Councillor Rozinski, you're in the chair. All in favor?
[4:00:47] That's carried.
[4:01:16] Good evening. I recognize it is late in the evening,
[4:01:21] so we will try and keep this as efficient as
[4:01:23] possible. I will begin by. Betting the reports committee will
[4:01:31] begin by biting the reports. First report is report number
[4:01:36] Cs. 20240 30 regarding 2025 personal policy manual.
[4:01:47] Moved by Councillor Summerville. All in favor? Raise. Item b,
[4:01:53] report number CS 2024. 36 regarding 2025 interim taxes. Moved
[4:02:03] by Councillor Hilson. All those in favor? Carried. Report number.
[4:02:13] Cs 20 24 00:37 regarding temporary borrowing of funds to
[4:02:17] meet 2025 current operating expenses moved by Councillor Keane. All
[4:02:22] those in favor? Carried. Report. Numbers. Report number
[4:02:32] d is going to be deferred. Pulled from the agenda.
[4:02:38] Sorry is the correct term. It's been pulled from the
[4:02:41] agenda, so. Item e, report number PD 240 64, regarding
[4:02:48] the proposed zoning Byla amendment draft plan subdivision to permit.
[4:02:51] 28 single detached lots on an extension of Bishop Court
[4:02:54] and Glenn Williams is an automatic. Hold. Report number PD
[4:03:01] 20240 70. Regarding intention to designate five key in Georgetown.
[4:03:09] Moved by Councillor Norris. All those in favor? Carried. Report
[4:03:15] number PD 2024. 88 regarding Georgetown Ghost station area, Mill
[4:03:23] street corridor secondary plan review preferred land use plan and
[4:03:27] policy direction is an automatic hold. Report number PD 20240
[4:03:33] 80 regarding proposed official plan and zoning bylaw amendments to
[4:03:37] permit the expansion of an existing self storage facility onto
[4:03:41] 13, three, seven, six, highway seven, and the construction of
[4:03:44] two new self storage buildings in additions to existing self
[4:03:48] storage buildings. At 13. Three nine, four and 13. Three
[4:03:53] seven, six. Highway seven. Moved by Councillor Brass. All those
[4:03:57] in favor? Carried. Report number PD 20 24 92 regarding
[4:04:05] award of consulting services for the Gulf street corridor secondary
[4:04:08] plan. Moved by Mayor Lawler. All those in favor?
[4:04:18] Carrying. Report number PD 20 24 94 regarding Heritage Halton
[4:04:24] Hill's recommendations for prioritized research and evaluation. Moved by Councillor
[4:04:29] Somerville. All those in favor? Carried. Report number PD 20240.
[4:04:37] Nine three. Regarding additional residential units. Moved by Councillor Albano.
[4:04:43] All those in favor? Carried. Report number. TPW 20 24
[4:04:51] 00:25 regarding uniform traffic control bylaw schedule amendment. Go ahead,
[4:04:57] Councillor Albano. Thank you much, Mr. Chair. I just want
[4:05:02] to thank staff for acting so quickly bringing this report.
[4:05:05] Forward. I know that I mentioned this in the summer,
[4:05:09] and I'm happy to see this. Happening now. With the
[4:05:14] construction going down Acton, down Mill street, it'd be great
[4:05:18] to have a couple. Of new parking spots. So I
[4:05:20] appreciate the quick response and thank you to staff. Thank
[4:05:24] you, Mr. Chair. And would you like to move that
[4:05:27] to Councillor Habino? I'd be happy to move. It. And
[4:05:30] all those in favor? Carried. All right. So the first
[4:05:37] report on the agenda, that was automatic cold item e.
[4:05:45] Report number PD 2024. Okay, we're actually going to move
[4:05:50] item g forward to go first, if that's all right
[4:05:53] with council. And then, so said Jackie, planning. On. Report
[4:06:02] number PD 240 88, with opening remarks by Keith Hamilton,
[4:06:08] senior planner. Good afternoon. I should say good evening now.
[4:06:24] Madam mayor and Councillor today. We're here. And we've reached
[4:06:29] a milestone in the Georgetown Go station area mill. Street
[4:06:32] corridor secondary plan review project. Where we are prepared to
[4:06:36] present to you a preferred land use plan for the
[4:06:38] area. The existing secondary plan was adopted in 2010 through
[4:06:43] local. Official plan amendment seven, which established land use designations
[4:06:48] and policies for the Georgetown go station area in Mill
[4:06:51] street corridor. In 2021 through regional official Plant Amendment 48.
[4:06:57] A major transistation area surrounding the Georgetown Ghost station was
[4:07:00] delineated, which included the existing secondary plan area. And areas
[4:07:04] to the south and northeast, as illustrated in appendix two
[4:07:07] to the staff report. A terms of reference was later
[4:07:11] brought in November of 2021 for a revised Georgetown ghost
[4:07:15] station area. Mill Street Court or secondary plan based on
[4:07:18] the newly delineated major transistation area boundary. The secondary plan
[4:07:23] review officially began in April of 2022, when the town
[4:07:26] retained Sajeki planning to act as the lead consultant for
[4:07:29] the review. Today we have Davis Ajacki and Mishi McCloskey
[4:07:34] here from Sajeki. Planning to present the preferred plan. Their
[4:07:37] presentation will go into more detail on how we got
[4:07:40] to today, including public consultation and technical review and analysis
[4:07:45] that went into the draft preferred land use option. Report,
[4:07:48] which is currently posted on let's talk Holton Hills. For
[4:07:52] public view. Before passing it over to our project consultant,
[4:07:55] I would like to clarify what's being presented. Today for
[4:07:58] endorsement is a land use plan that will guide the
[4:08:00] phase four policy directions and preparation. Of the draft secondary
[4:08:04] plan. As noted in the staff report, key items associated
[4:08:10] with the designations identified in this land use plan including
[4:08:13] density, height ranges, and policy directions are preliminary and subject
[4:08:17] to change in the next phase of our project through
[4:08:19] further review and analysis and feedback. Gathered. The designations in
[4:08:25] the draft preferred land use plan largely reflect the current
[4:08:27] designations in place. With density and high permissions either matching
[4:08:32] or proposing modest increases. Meas and other policy directions. Including.
[4:08:39] The encouragement of mixed uses in our policies will be
[4:08:42] further assessed in the next phase of the project when
[4:08:44] policies are drafted and a secondary plan is prepared. Before
[4:08:48] a secondary plan is ready. Before the draft secondary plan
[4:08:52] is ready, the project team will further engage the public,
[4:08:54] community, associations, and technical advisory committee to gather input. The
[4:08:59] plan being presented for endorsement today does reflect over two
[4:09:02] years of coordinated effort between. Town staff, project consulting team
[4:09:07] and various departments. Various departments at the town, agencies as
[4:09:12] well as multiple. Engagement efforts with the public and neighborhood
[4:09:16] associations, and with that, I will pass it over to
[4:09:19] David. To will take you through the presentation. Thank you.
[4:09:22] Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Your worship and members
[4:09:28] of committee. My name is David Sidreki. I'm a partner
[4:09:34] at Sujacki Planning and. I'm joined by my colleague Mishi
[4:09:38] McCloskey, senior associate with their firm. We're grateful to speak
[4:09:43] to you tonight. About what we've come. To. Learn is
[4:09:49] a very special place. And that's Georgetown. In terms what
[4:09:56] we'll speak to tonight. It's a short presentation. As Mr.
[4:10:01] Hamilton mentioned, is dividing to three sections. It begins with
[4:10:05] an overview of the project to date. It includes a
[4:10:08] summary of recent consultation efforts, and then it'll be turning
[4:10:11] it over. To Mishi who will speak to the preferred
[4:10:15] land use option and what the preferred land use option
[4:10:19] is. It's intended to form the basis for updating the
[4:10:23] secondary plan. Specifically the policies and the schedules in the
[4:10:27] existing plan. How did we get here? The existing secondary
[4:10:36] plan was adopted by town Councillor in 2010. It was
[4:10:42] approved by Halton Region in 2011 with a small portion
[4:10:46] of the secondary plan. Specifically 60 John street. That remains
[4:10:50] part of an ongoing appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
[4:10:55] In 2021, the region adopted. Ropa, or regional official Plan
[4:11:02] Amendment 48, which delineated the boundaries of the major transit
[4:11:06] station area, and it added an additional 52 study area
[4:11:13] that includes. The area identified on the screen in red.
[4:11:18] Within major transit station areas. The provincial planning statement identifies
[4:11:23] densities. It's identified as 200 people in jobs per hectare
[4:11:28] for areas with the subway. 160 people in jaws per
[4:11:32] hectare for areas that are served by light rail transit
[4:11:35] or bus rapid. Transit and 150 people in jobs per
[4:11:39] hectare for lands that are served by commuter or regional
[4:11:43] rail. Such as go transit. However, it does include a
[4:11:47] policy as well, too, that says that a municipality may
[4:11:50] make a request to. The minister to lower the density.
[4:11:54] The targeted density within specific major transit station areas. In
[4:12:00] terms of Georgetown, it served on the metrolinx's kitchener corridor.
[4:12:08] Metrolins is expanding service to two way all day, and
[4:12:13] it's also looking at making travel times 20% more efficient.
[4:12:19] This is a game changer. It will provide direct connections
[4:12:22] to Kitchener to Guelph to downtown Toronto, as well as
[4:12:26] direct connections to the uni. Union, Pearson Express into Pearson
[4:12:30] Airport. In terms of our direction for the plan itself
[4:12:36] and the preferred land use option that you'll. See tonight.
[4:12:41] Overall, our goal was to create a strength and planning
[4:12:43] framework for this area through the updated secondary plan, but
[4:12:47] we also adopted six key principles. The first one is
[4:12:51] around bringing forward a strategic and thoughtful approach to growth.
[4:12:56] The second one is utilizing the town's direction around an
[4:13:00] environment first approach. So that's really looking at how do
[4:13:03] we enhance natural heritage system? And within Georgetown, that's looking
[4:13:07] at how do we enhance. Protections around the Silver Creek
[4:13:11] subwatershed as well existing wood lots. We also want to
[4:13:16] bring forward a plan that supports a diverse mix of
[4:13:20] land uses and that also supports healthy community building. We're
[4:13:25] looking to protect and enhance the local context and heritage
[4:13:29] for the area. One thing that is unique to Georgetown
[4:13:33] is that there are 126 known or potential heritage properties.
[4:13:38] Within the study area, of which five of those are
[4:13:40] designated, and those are primarily focused along Queen Ed McNabb
[4:13:44] Street. Another principle is enhanced connections. And that's not just
[4:13:49] to the go station, but that's. Throughout the study area
[4:13:51] itself. And really bringing forward a vibrant and inclusive public
[4:13:55] realm. So how do all the public spaces work? Together.
[4:13:58] And again, that also speaks to connections, as people don't
[4:14:02] think about this often, but 80% of the public realm
[4:14:05] are the streets and the rights of ways. Within our
[4:14:09] communities. I'll quickly just walk through what we've heard to
[4:14:13] date. It's been a study that's been ongoing since June
[4:14:18] of 2022. We're presently. Towards the end of the third
[4:14:24] phase. Which is developing the preferred land use option. The
[4:14:29] first phase really focused on background and policy review. We
[4:14:33] started this with a visioning session. We then created two
[4:14:38] land use alternatives that was brought out to public open
[4:14:41] house number one. We also met with the neighborhood group,
[4:14:46] we met with the technical advisory committee, and we conducted
[4:14:49] an online survey. All of that input, as well as
[4:14:52] some of the initial technical studies, helped us to inform
[4:14:55] the development of the draft preferred land use option that
[4:14:59] was taken forward to public open house. Number two again.
[4:15:03] We conducted another. Online survey where we see feedback. Met
[4:15:06] with a neighborhood group. We met with the technical advisory
[4:15:10] committee. And that brings us to the Councillor meeting tonight.
[4:15:14] The fourth phasers will go into more detail. On is
[4:15:17] really around. How do we take the basis of this
[4:15:20] preferred land use alternative and turn into the draft secondary
[4:15:23] plan. Itself. In terms of some of the consultation that
[4:15:29] has occurred, what we really heard at the public open
[4:15:32] house number three, which was attended by. About approximately 60
[4:15:41] residents is a few of the key highlights. There is
[4:15:45] support for sustainable growth, especially in the context of mixed
[4:15:48] use development. They wanted us to look at enhancing the
[4:15:51] integration of civic and mixed use elements. They're looking at
[4:15:55] improved sidewalks and walkability. With the focus on Mill street
[4:16:00] between downtown and the ghost station. How do we enhance
[4:16:04] Silver Creek? There was discuss around. Enhancing the pedestrian access
[4:16:11] via the cemetery. Ensuring appropriate building transitions and also looking
[4:16:17] at focusing the density around the ghost station. This next
[4:16:22] slide just identifies the existing land use plan. And it
[4:16:29] speaks to a few of the items that we took
[4:16:31] forward as principles as we worked. At developing the preferred
[4:16:33] land use option. That includes looking at with the greatest
[4:16:37] density around the ghost station. How do you transition down
[4:16:40] to that? Do existing low rise areas. We really looked
[4:16:45] at what were some of the stable residential neighborhoods. So
[4:16:48] that's in the south precinct south of the ghost station,
[4:16:51] and limiting redevelopment of that area. We looked at. How
[4:16:55] do you permit development, but still be respectful? A heritage
[4:16:58] features protecting employment lands. And also ensuring how can we
[4:17:06] integrate with limited opportunities really within this area? How can
[4:17:09] we take a focus at integrating community amenities into new
[4:17:13] development. So in terms of where we are today, as
[4:17:18] I mentioned, we're towards the end of phase three. This
[4:17:25] just identifies some of the technical studies that have been
[4:17:27] underway. So we've conducted a natural heritage gap analysis. A
[4:17:32] cultural heritage resource assessment, and in phase two, we also
[4:17:35] prepare the terms of reference for traffic and servicing, and
[4:17:39] that was done at the time. Of our draft land
[4:17:42] use alternatives, and we use that information to inform. The
[4:17:46] direct preferred land use alternative. As we were doing that,
[4:17:50] though, we then commenced on the work. Around the scope
[4:17:53] traffic study, the area servicing plan. The scope natural heritage
[4:17:57] system analysis and the fiscal impact analysis. We took that
[4:18:01] in a very qualitative level initially. To further inform. The
[4:18:07] drop referred land use alternative. From that, we identified what
[4:18:11] our density projections and once we had those numbers, those
[4:18:15] fed into the models for all the technical studies and
[4:18:18] that identified areas where from a technical perspective around transportation
[4:18:23] and servicing. We'd have to look at improvements and then
[4:18:27] use that input to refine the preferred. Land use option,
[4:18:31] and that's the version that I'm going to turn over
[4:18:33] to. My colleague Mishi, and she'll walk us through our
[4:18:35] findings from that work. Thank you. All right. Thanks,
[4:18:44] David. Just get this the right way here. All right,
[4:18:49] so moving on to the preferred land use option. To
[4:18:54] begin. As of 2021. According to the region of Halton,
[4:19:00] the secondary plan area has a density of approximately 36
[4:19:03] people in jobs per gross hectare, and this is based
[4:19:07] off the region's joint best planning estimates. Turning to, I
[4:19:13] guess, currently as well as the future. So we're dealing
[4:19:16] with a horizon. Year of 2051. And basically what this
[4:19:21] table shows is a breakdown of the short, medium and
[4:19:23] long term projections. And this was done, as David mentioned,
[4:19:28] based on. A density analysis that was undertaken by our
[4:19:34] team. So, looking at, I guess, the full build out
[4:19:38] to 2051. We are targeting. A maximum density target of
[4:19:43] 126 people in jobs per gross hectare. And this considered
[4:19:50] a number of different factors, including regional population and employment
[4:19:54] data. As mentioned. Ongoing development activity in the town. And
[4:20:00] the potential for redevelopment of certain sites. Here is a
[4:20:05] summary table of the proposed changes to density, and this
[4:20:08] just focuses on medium medium high and high density residential
[4:20:14] and mixed use designations within the study area, as you
[4:20:18] can see here. In the second column. It shows the
[4:20:24] existing density permissions and the. Proposed on the far right.
[4:20:29] It's a bit tricky to see on this screen, but
[4:20:32] basically. Where the bolded text is mixed use. There are
[4:20:35] three. Designation changes to the medium density residential, what's now
[4:20:41] called, which adds mixed use area to it, as well
[4:20:45] as the medium, high and high density residential. So the
[4:20:48] idea here is to add a greater mix of uses
[4:20:50] and encourage those greater mix of uses in these three
[4:20:54] designations. So, yeah, as mentioned, Previously. There's not a ton
[4:21:00] of changes when you look at the plan holistically. However,
[4:21:02] there are some key changes. That allow for higher densities
[4:21:07] and heights in some of these designations. Okay, so looking
[4:21:12] at it for more of a visual standpoint, Here are
[4:21:17] the. Existing land use schedule and the draft or the
[4:21:21] proposed land use schedule. So looking at the side by
[4:21:25] side comparison. As you can see, the existing schedule shows
[4:21:28] the outline of the existing secondary plan. Area. And the
[4:21:33] proposed actually combines three different schedules from the existing Op
[4:21:37] or official plan. Which adds the additional. 54 study area.
[4:21:45] The majority of land use designations within the updated secondary
[4:21:49] plan area reflect existing permissions with several key updates, the
[4:21:54] first being a greater mix of uses, the second. A
[4:21:58] greater heights and densities at strategic locations and third. Encouraging
[4:22:04] community assets in these areas, which will be reflected in
[4:22:07] the secondary of plan policy. All right, moving along to
[4:22:11] heights, here is our draft height schedule. As you can
[4:22:14] see there's. Three circles with the arrows kind of popping
[4:22:18] out, and those are the three height peaks being. Around
[4:22:21] the go station. So the highest heights that we're contemplating.
[4:22:28] And we'll call it, I guess, closer to Mountain View.
[4:22:29] Over there is in the range. Of eight. To 16
[4:22:34] stories. And then closer to the ghost station, we have
[4:22:36] eight to twelve stories. There is. A second sort of
[4:22:41] peak for heights down at the bottom of the study
[4:22:44] area and that's. Near Gulf street in Maple Avenue. That
[4:22:49] contemplates up to ten stories. Here is. And just to
[4:22:53] kind of flip between the two. So here you see
[4:22:56] the height schedule. And this one here shows what's changed.
[4:23:03] So the gray areas are more or less the same.
[4:23:06] The ones that remain. Where we're proposing increase in heights.
[4:23:11] Okay, here's our transportation and mobility draft schedule. And this
[4:23:19] schedule reflects existing roads, existing and proposed active transportation networks.
[4:23:26] Per the town's active transportation master plan. And really here,
[4:23:30] the goal is to support an integrated system that prioritizes
[4:23:34] safety and connectivity throughout the site. It is important that
[4:23:38] as this area grows, links to and from the Go
[4:23:40] station and to strategic areas like the downtown are enhanced.
[4:23:46] And seek to support multimodes of transportation throughout. Moving along
[4:23:51] to our parks and open space schedule. So one of
[4:23:56] the primary objectives here is to ensure that every resident
[4:23:59] has convenient access to high quality parks and open spaces,
[4:24:02] ideally within a short walking distance. And as you can
[4:24:05] see here, we have included parts outside of the study
[4:24:08] area, but what we wanted to highlight that it's really
[4:24:10] important that those connections to those areas. Are really critical,
[4:24:15] even though. They are perhaps like right outside of the
[4:24:18] study area. For instance, Dominion park to the south and
[4:24:21] then also the trails along the different water courses as
[4:24:25] well. Moving along. So this is a bit of a
[4:24:28] different map, and it doesn't form part. Of the actual
[4:24:31] secondary plan. It's a conceptual. So we have the schedules,
[4:24:35] but this is. Sort of a second layer, and it
[4:24:37] looks at the conceptual. Parks that could be offered or
[4:24:45] privately owned public spaces known as pops, that you'll see.
[4:24:49] Indicated through stars throughout the study area. And the idea
[4:24:53] is that as these areas grow and change, and potentially
[4:24:56] redevelop that there is an opportunity. For these spaces to
[4:25:00] occur, these green spaces. And we've been working really closely
[4:25:03] with park. Staff to ensure that. We identify these opportunities
[4:25:08] as we move forward through the process in identifying strategic
[4:25:12] locations for potential parks. And pops. All right, just a
[4:25:16] few more slides. So the next one is our draft
[4:25:19] urban design. Principles. And this was something we brought forward
[4:25:26] to at the public open house number two back in
[4:25:29] October. Not much has changed here. We just wanted to
[4:25:33] note that as part of phase four, we are. Developing.
[4:25:37] A set of draft urban design guidelines that will be
[4:25:39] paired with the secondary plan. And that will build on
[4:25:43] the urban design policies that are in the secondary plan
[4:25:46] and provide further direction, especially because we're dealing with seven
[4:25:51] precincts now that are each unique in character. And this
[4:25:55] will give more specificity to how we want to see
[4:25:57] these places grow and change. In the future. All right,
[4:26:02] looking ahead. So we do have a public open house
[4:26:06] scheduled for the end of November. And this is to
[4:26:11] look at the draft, I guess, sort of recap on
[4:26:14] what's been done to date again with the public, how
[4:26:17] their information has been considered and really look towards draft
[4:26:20] policies for secondary plan and following that, we are targeting
[4:26:25] a draft secondary plan in the new year, which will
[4:26:29] go through a number of. Consultation iterations, we'll call them,
[4:26:33] as well as meeting with our neighborhood groups and the
[4:26:37] technical advisory committee. And with that. That's the end. And
[4:26:45] we are happy to take questions. Thank you very much.
[4:26:50] Thank you very much. Are there any questions from members
[4:26:53] of Councillor of the delegation? Would somebody like to bring
[4:26:57] this report forward? Councilor Garnell question.
[4:27:12] On the page where you have heights. What's changed? The
[4:27:16] legend. So there's some that's in gray and some that's
[4:27:18] in white. And I missed what you said. What was
[4:27:21] what? There. Yeah. And again, we can kind of. Toggle
[4:27:25] between the two. But this one here identifies. So basically,
[4:27:34] the gray area we're not touching as far as. Height
[4:27:37] goes. And as David mentioned previously, the south precinct, which
[4:27:40] is just south of the ghost station. That's an area
[4:27:44] that's going to remain largely unchanged just because it is
[4:27:46] an established neighborhood. There are a lot of cultural heritage
[4:27:50] assets within that neighborhood, and the idea is that a
[4:27:52] long strategic corridors. In sort of clusters up in the
[4:27:56] north area where the Mill street precinct is, there's an
[4:27:59] ongoing act of development there. So basically, in close consultation
[4:28:04] with staff, We have proposed an increase in heightened density,
[4:28:08] but it was not an arbitrary decision. It was first
[4:28:12] and foremost close to the ghost station because we want
[4:28:14] to encourage the highest heights. And densities there. And then
[4:28:18] again, that maple and guelph intersection and some opportunities up
[4:28:22] in most treat as well. You'll also see. Along Mountain
[4:28:27] view close what we call. The here. I wonder if
[4:28:31] I can skip, actually. To. Yeah. So the northeast precinct,
[4:28:36] which you'll see on the east side. There is a
[4:28:38] chunk that has a five story increase in height, and
[4:28:42] that's, again, just due to proximity to negotiation. We want
[4:28:47] to look at transition. From the Main street into the
[4:28:51] interior neighborhood, and there is an employment area just south
[4:28:55] of there. So the idea would be that there's a
[4:28:58] bit of transition and use there from a higher density,
[4:29:01] or we'll call it medium density to the neighborhood. In
[4:29:05] the interior area. Okay. Thank you. No problem.
[4:29:17] All of this development depends on individual developers deciding to
[4:29:21] do this work, correct? Yes. This is all conceptual. So
[4:29:25] it's all conceptual. But. When you're mapping out some of
[4:29:31] the streetscape changes. Some of the maybe amenities or some
[4:29:36] of the things that we might do. For the public.
[4:29:41] To make it for sort of like the common good
[4:29:42] element, right? At what point? Would those happen? So if
[4:29:49] one development happens, does the street scape get changed? Or
[4:29:54] when would the park? So I'm just wondering. The phasing
[4:29:58] and how you see that. Practically. Materializing some of that.
[4:30:05] Yeah. And I might pull David up a bit later
[4:30:07] for this, but, I mean, there are a. Lot of
[4:30:08] moving parts. It is a long term plan. Like we
[4:30:13] are seeing this build out until 2051. So we've identified
[4:30:18] what we think will occur within that time frame, short
[4:30:20] of in a short, medium, long term. Time frame each
[4:30:25] decade, however. Yeah, it could be through new development applications.
[4:30:28] It could be through. New investment that the town. Makes.
[4:30:32] Could be one off parks. I know that there's some
[4:30:34] new parks coming. To be in the future. And. Again,
[4:30:42] it's hard to predict, but we hope that through both
[4:30:47] the secondary plan policies and the urban design standards that
[4:30:50] we bring forward. That change will come, and it provides
[4:30:55] the basis to make those decisions, whether they be public
[4:30:58] or private investment. Sure. I'm actually. I think I'm going
[4:31:04] to turn over to the town. But. Specifically around phasing.
[4:31:08] But if you look at this map and you think
[4:31:09] of it as a heat map as well, too. I
[4:31:11] think it's clear now, but it's the dark gray is
[4:31:13] all. The area where the heights aren't changing. The areas
[4:31:17] that are the lighter color. We've identified as, like, an
[4:31:20] incremental change in height. They're not conceptual. Those are what
[4:31:26] the policy and the schedules would permit in order to
[4:31:30] go beyond that, you would require an official plan amendment,
[4:31:32] zoning bylaw amendment and everything that's. Entailed with that, too,
[4:31:36] when it comes to community services, facilities, studies, et cetera.
[4:31:39] Et cetera. But specifically in terms of phasing, I might
[4:31:42] turn it over to keep. To add to that. Thank
[4:31:46] you. They've done a pretty good job explaining that. I
[4:31:47] just want to add two. Things. One thing to this
[4:31:50] map here. I know the dark gray isn't subject to
[4:31:52] change. Just also want to point out in our mixed
[4:31:56] high density residential mixed use areas directly north of the
[4:31:59] Gova station. So that would be one Rosetta, two river
[4:32:01] drive. And 130 mountain view. Those heights are actually permitted
[4:32:07] there right now. We are not actually going up. It
[4:32:10] was before the plant. They changed the planning act. You
[4:32:12] could do it through density bonusing. We are going to
[4:32:15] have to revise those policies because that's no longer part
[4:32:17] of the Planning act. It's been replaced with community benefits
[4:32:20] charges. But I do want to make that clear that
[4:32:22] before? This. As of now, you can still go up
[4:32:24] to those heights in those areas. And in terms of
[4:32:28] your question, At the development stage. Development application stage. A
[4:32:33] lot of that does get sorted out in terms of
[4:32:35] how the streetscape might change the design of the buildings.
[4:32:38] Things like looking for opportunities for green amenity space within
[4:32:41] the developable area, all of that. The secondary plan here
[4:32:46] does act as a guide to that in which our
[4:32:48] development review staff can use those policies to enforce what
[4:32:52] needs to happen as part of those development application packages.
[4:32:56] So again, one of the reasons why this secondary plan
[4:32:58] is important is that we do set the tone for
[4:33:01] that. Thank you. And so a follow up question. Through
[4:33:09] you, Mr. Chair. Regarding the streetscapes. Right. So a lot
[4:33:15] of the arterial roads are through. Existing residential areas that
[4:33:21] are mapped out in the gray to not change in
[4:33:25] the height restrictions. And it's largely like people's front lawns
[4:33:31] and then little sidewalks or some sides don't have sidewalks.
[4:33:35] And so I'm just wondering. How that walkability and where
[4:33:40] that extra space might come from. For those sidewalks and
[4:33:45] some of the features that. Are shown as being important.
[4:33:51] To adding that density and making it walkable. And I
[4:33:55] can let them jump back into. But as part of
[4:33:59] the secondary plan, we can put in policies to encourage.
[4:34:03] Change to the streetscape to better accommodate pedestrian. There. I
[4:34:07] say cyclist, traffic. Sorry. But. We can put in policies
[4:34:13] to recommend that. And again, we do try to work
[4:34:15] with our developing partners. As they have the applications, they
[4:34:18] are responsible. Mercy alteration happens. So we do understand that
[4:34:23] I had an inquiry today about similar to what you've
[4:34:25] asked about the impacts on streets outside. Of the plan
[4:34:28] area. So certainly we do appreciate that the density will.
[4:34:32] Add the need for people to get around. We've made
[4:34:36] comments on applications already as a policy team on that
[4:34:39] very notion that. Developer should be a partner in creating
[4:34:44] space for pedestrians as well as vehicular traffic. Through you,
[4:34:49] Mr. Chair. To Councillor Garnell. It's a great question, and
[4:34:55] it hasn't all been decided yet. We haven't. Started drafting
[4:34:58] the policies, so there will be policies that speak to
[4:35:01] that when it comes to the transportation network. We haven't
[4:35:04] actually made changes to the right of ways of any
[4:35:07] of the streets, so that remains the same. And I
[4:35:10] know the town has the mobility master plan that is
[4:35:13] also under. Underway and that will feed into it. And
[4:35:16] then, just to add around the density, Earlier when I
[4:35:20] was speaking to the new provincial planning statement. I mentioned.
[4:35:25] Minimum densities. Those are minimum densities. What we've identified. I
[4:35:31] know there have been discussions with the province is a
[4:35:35] lower density, but that 126 number that's not a minimum
[4:35:38] number. That is showing that you can achieve up to
[4:35:41] that number. With. The densities that are presently in place.
[4:35:49] Sorry. Just to follow up. And with the roads that
[4:35:51] are currently in place as well. Generally. Yes. We have
[4:36:01] a whole series of recommendations. Three. Mr. Charity. Councillor Garno.
[4:36:04] We have a whole series of recommendations that have come
[4:36:06] out of the transportation impact study, and those do indicate
[4:36:10] where there are areas where it could require. Improvements to
[4:36:15] the signal timing. It does not recommend any increases to
[4:36:21] the rights of way or reclassification of streets. We also
[4:36:24] have a whole set of urban design guidelines that have
[4:36:27] not. Been developed yet, and those will speak. To. How
[4:36:33] to improve the public realm. But I should reiterate that
[4:36:36] those are guidelines, so you have your policy. And your
[4:36:40] policy is something that is required to be met through
[4:36:43] development applications unless you apply to amend it, and then
[4:36:46] you have your guidelines, which are directions. Okay. Thank you.
[4:36:50] Thank you. Mayor Lawler. Thanks very much, Mr. Chair, and
[4:36:57] thank you for the presentation. I have three or four
[4:37:02] questions. And probably to the consultant. Yes. Okay. I want
[4:37:09] to refer to this slide that's on the screen right
[4:37:11] now for my first question. And that is. You have
[4:37:18] three circles there. With arrows radiating out and the one
[4:37:23] that is at Mountain View and John street. Yes, I'm.
[4:37:27] Wondering if you can tell us what the built form
[4:37:30] might look like there and what might the population be.
[4:37:35] Based on? Your projections or your calculations at this stage.
[4:37:42] I think you talked about up to 16 stories. But.
[4:37:49] How many towers? How many people? Can you describe that,
[4:37:52] please? Yes. So that would be under the high density
[4:38:00] residential mixed use area designation. It does permit some minimum
[4:38:06] of twelve stories and a maximum of 16 stories. There
[4:38:11] is also a maximum of twelve stories for certain portions
[4:38:15] of that site. I wonder if I have. What? That.
[4:38:21] If. You're asking in particular about the Guelph and maple
[4:38:27] intersections, that is? No, just. Generally. No, I'm asking. About
[4:38:31] Mountain view and John. Oh, Mountain View. Mountain view and
[4:38:34] river. Oh, mountain view, river. Okay. Yeah, it's the biggest
[4:38:37] circle there. Yeah. Understood. We could probably provide this to
[4:38:41] you if you'd like. We did an internal exercise that
[4:38:45] looked at both two d and three d rendering of
[4:38:47] a few different sample sites. This being one of them.
[4:38:49] So this could be anything from a combination of. Some
[4:38:55] higher towers, maybe 16 stories, going down to twelve. But
[4:39:00] generally more of a mid rise feel. We're looking at
[4:39:04] podiums, and really within these areas, we hope to encourage.
[4:39:09] Community. The integration of community services in these buildings, for
[4:39:12] instance, At the vmc in bond metropolitan center. They have
[4:39:17] a ymca right at the base of the tower. Coming
[4:39:21] right off the subway. And that's something, a great example
[4:39:23] that we would think of. Having that integration of community
[4:39:26] use in a new building. So that's sort of what
[4:39:29] we envisioned for right next to the Go station, those
[4:39:32] heights. Are proposed to be a bit higher. In what
[4:39:36] we will call close to Mountain View. Just north of
[4:39:39] the ghost station. Those heights are. A tad lower. So
[4:39:43] eight to twelve. And again. That transition to the areas
[4:39:50] to the north, those existing low density residential neighborhoods. So
[4:39:56] transition would be really important here. And we would think
[4:39:58] about things like perhaps townhouses between a higher density built
[4:40:03] form just to make sure there's a bit of a
[4:40:05] buffer between. Existing and proposed neighborhoods. And thank you, Michi
[4:40:10] three. Mr. Chair, to Mayor Lawler. By full buildout in
[4:40:14] 2051. We've projected that area. To house up to just
[4:40:18] under 2000 people and 133 jobs. 2000 people. In that.
[4:40:28] Where that circle is with the arrows. Radiator. In all
[4:40:32] the areas that are. Correct. In that one lot. I
[4:40:39] will go back and confirm those numbers, but those are
[4:40:41] the numbers that I'm seeing. I used to live across
[4:40:43] the road and it would blow me away if there
[4:40:46] were 2000 people. There. It's really not that big of
[4:40:49] space. Right now, where there's kind of industrial and a
[4:40:54] lot of ratty trees. Anyway, I'm just trying to confirm.
[4:41:04] Just to confirm that? Yes. So that entire designation is
[4:41:07] one lot. It's 130 Mountain view. And yes, those are
[4:41:10] the correct numbers based on the densities that are in
[4:41:12] the table in the report. All right. Thank you. That's
[4:41:20] a lot of people. Another question that I have regards
[4:41:24] the area along Gulf Street. Between Maple Avenue. And down
[4:41:34] towards the creek. Where it's kind of a zigzag. Streetscape
[4:41:41] on the map. And I just want to confirm. What
[4:41:46] is proposed there. Through. Mr.
[4:41:56] Chair to Mayor Lawler. Sorry. The area that you're asking
[4:42:01] about. Are you asking at the intersection of Guelph? And
[4:42:04] Maple. The area with the other circle. No, I'm not
[4:42:09] asking about the intersection. I'm asking about? Well, let's call
[4:42:12] it the west side of Gulf street. That. Goes from
[4:42:17] that other circle. Towards. The creek. Right now.
[4:42:27] It's primarily a single family homes. And very large. Trees.
[4:42:34] Along that guelph. Streetscape. That I would argue. Is a
[4:42:42] defining characteristic of that neighborhood, yes. And of Guelph Street,
[4:42:48] a major corridor in Georgetown. So what's being proposed along?
[4:42:52] I can't see. No, that's okay. I. Understand. It's not
[4:42:55] entirely clear. It's four to six stories. For those sites
[4:42:59] that are fronting onto Gwell street along that zigzaggy saw.
[4:43:03] Tooth saw tooth area. So that would be quite a
[4:43:07] significant difference from, as I said, the single family. Streetscape
[4:43:13] that's there right now. It's an increase. It is an
[4:43:18] increase from what is there right now. That's correct? Sure.
[4:43:20] Okay. Another question that I have is. You mentioned that
[4:43:29] there's the capacity for us, for a municipality. To propose
[4:43:35] to the province. A different formula. For a metropolitan. Sorry.
[4:43:42] Major transit area. And I'm wondering if you can tell
[4:43:45] me a little bit more. About that process. Yes. I
[4:43:50] may refer that. I think I may refer that to
[4:43:52] staff for this specific process. But I believe what the
[4:43:56] policy says. Is. I spoke to before. I'm happy to
[4:44:02] identify numbers again, but it's 260 or. 150. Are the
[4:44:08] minimum densities identified in the provincial planning statement. However, there
[4:44:12] is another policy that says and I may need to
[4:44:15] look up the exact wording, but it says that. If
[4:44:20] a municipality finds that. There are land uses that make
[4:44:24] it prohibitive to reach those numbers. I believe it may
[4:44:28] also. Mention. Some direction around the existing built forum. That
[4:44:34] the municipality can request the minister to provide. A lower
[4:44:40] density target than that. Identifying the provincial planning statement. Right.
[4:44:46] Well, and I appreciate knowing that that provision exists. I
[4:44:50] don't know where this is all going to end up,
[4:44:52] but to know that, that. Capacity is there? If you
[4:44:58] present a good argument. Is good to know. As part
[4:45:02] of our planning toolbox, let's say yes. Okay, that's. All
[4:45:07] I have. Thanks very much. Thank you. Councilor Fogle. Thank
[4:45:14] you. I think it's a question for the consultants, too.
[4:45:18] Or a comment. I'm having a little trouble with all
[4:45:23] the different ways of expressing density. I don't know. We
[4:45:27] go from units per net hectare and then units per
[4:45:31] gross. Heck. There, and then we go to square floor
[4:45:34] indexes. And. Then. Look to me like
[4:45:42] 16,492 people in jobs per hectare. It's hard for me
[4:45:49] to understand. To what magnitude were changing things.
[4:45:59] And how it fits with the jobs and people per
[4:46:02] hectare. Because that's kind of what the province was using.
[4:46:06] Or place them to grow anyway, was based on that?
[4:46:10] No. Through you, Mr. Chair. To Councillor Fogel. It's a
[4:46:14] very good question. And it's extremely confusing. I can appreciate
[4:46:19] that. There are two different. Density designations that are in
[4:46:24] the existing secondary plan. I'm going to let he speak
[4:46:29] to sort of direction around why we're using both. Units
[4:46:34] per hectare. And fsi, which stands for floor space index.
[4:46:40] What we've done, though, in order to come up with
[4:46:42] a specific density numbers. Is. Oh, gosh. I don't even
[4:46:47] know if I can explain this. Off top of my
[4:46:48] head, but. You identify your gross floor area. For example,
[4:46:53] if you're using. Your floor space index by multiplying. That
[4:47:02] number, the 1.01.8, whereas 1.0 would be like one times
[4:47:06] the entire site you could cover by how large the
[4:47:09] site is. And then when it comes to units per
[4:47:13] hectare, just multiply it by how many hectares exist. Within
[4:47:17] that specific land use designation. But then if you're focusing
[4:47:22] on taking that number to people in jobs, By. Look
[4:47:26] at the gross floor area from the floor space index.
[4:47:31] You're then able to use. Your average unit sizes that
[4:47:34] are directed. By, for example. Often the development charges background
[4:47:41] study. You can take that information to divide it into
[4:47:44] the types of units that you're expected under each designation.
[4:47:48] And then once you identify your number of units, you
[4:47:51] then take your average unit size, and then once you
[4:47:53] have your average unit size, you then say, okay. Within
[4:47:58] a one bedroom apartment, you might expect 1.6 people, and
[4:48:01] you multiply it by that in a townhouse, you might
[4:48:04] expect 2.7 people. You multiply that and there. Are different
[4:48:06] numbers for different uses. Those gives you your number of
[4:48:10] people. Use something very similar for your employment where depending
[4:48:14] on what type of employment it is, you have specific
[4:48:16] ratio. Ratios of how many people work per square meter.
[4:48:22] It's a bit easier. In the units per hectare because
[4:48:26] you already have the number of units, but then you
[4:48:28] still use the same ratios, divide it up into the
[4:48:31] types of units. In the same area. Of land. Not
[4:48:36] of land. Of floor plates, floor space that you have
[4:48:41] for each of those units, and then you multiply. Again
[4:48:43] by the multiplier for the number of people, and that's
[4:48:45] how you come up with those numbers. I'm going to
[4:48:47] turn it over because. It was direction from the town
[4:48:51] and it's within the existing official plan. It uses both.
[4:48:56] Units per hectare as well as floor space index, but
[4:48:59] I'll turn it over to Keith. To explain the reason
[4:49:01] behind that. Thank you, David. Through the chair to the
[4:49:05] Councillor. So the first thing I'll say is, Traditionally for
[4:49:12] high density residential area, we had a 100 units per
[4:49:15] hectare maximum. Over last ten years or so. I think
[4:49:19] development review staff have found that to be challenging generally.
[4:49:22] The high density projects that come in request to exceed
[4:49:25] that. So that is one reason why we started looking
[4:49:28] at the floor space index. The other reason is that
[4:49:34] the floor space index for a builder provides a little
[4:49:37] bit more flexibility. In that you're identifying the fuller area
[4:49:41] for a building that the developer. Can then carve up
[4:49:46] into the units that they so wish, depending on what
[4:49:49] the market is. Dictating. So if, say, the market is
[4:49:52] dictating that a bachelor is smaller or a smaller one.
[4:49:55] Bedroom unit is popular and would they believe it would
[4:49:58] sell? They could create more units that way. In the
[4:50:00] same building, the same floor area, or in the other
[4:50:04] way. If more, the community is desiring three bedroom units.
[4:50:09] It's more flexibility that way. So we had heard through
[4:50:12] some of our technical review committee. And things like that,
[4:50:15] that this was a preferred way to go. In terms
[4:50:20] of based on the heights at 16 and twelve stories
[4:50:23] in our identity, residential mixed use areas that this would
[4:50:26] be a better option and a better measure of density.
[4:50:30] So that explains it in a nutshell. Why we were
[4:50:32] gone with this direction. Well, I think you've all made
[4:50:35] my point. I don't know how the public could ever
[4:50:39] figure out exactly what's going to happen here. But just
[4:50:43] on the last point. Of just doing the floor space
[4:50:49] so that the developer can divide it up according to
[4:50:52] the market. And these would largely be condos. The condo
[4:50:57] market has been based on who wants to invest. In
[4:51:00] condos. Not which families, what the family needs. But what
[4:51:05] does the market need to make? Money on it. And
[4:51:09] to me. We've sort of ceded it to these people
[4:51:14] out there that are going to make a lot of
[4:51:15] money. But then we've ended up with not enough family
[4:51:19] units. People buy up four and five condos just to
[4:51:24] make some money. And they don't care about how the
[4:51:30] building is looked after and who's on. The condo board
[4:51:32] and all of that stuff. So it's just part of
[4:51:35] a system that's not working very well if we're trying
[4:51:38] to create this. We said vibrant community. Through the chair.
[4:51:43] I do appreciate that point. I will say that we
[4:51:45] have had our high density residential mixed use areas in
[4:51:48] place. Those designations in place for almost 15 years now,
[4:51:51] and we haven't seen a unit be built. So I
[4:51:55] think in some ways we were looking at how to
[4:51:57] get development going, period. But I think I do appreciate
[4:52:00] that. The points you make that there's no guarantee on
[4:52:04] what will be built. In that lease. But can't be
[4:52:09] negotiated. That would be at the development application stage. Okay,
[4:52:18] well, finally, I think the public is going to have
[4:52:21] trouble understanding what all this means, and the idea that
[4:52:25] there might be renderings out there to show. Them, I
[4:52:29] think would be very useful, like a picture of what's
[4:52:32] it feel like from the standing at the ghost station
[4:52:36] looking up around you. What does it look like? I
[4:52:40] have trouble with that. So that's a fair point for
[4:52:44] the next public open house and future engagement. Absolutely. We
[4:52:47] can look into a focus on that. Absolutely. And through
[4:52:51] you, Mr. Chair. To Councillor Fogel. We have actually tested.
[4:52:57] It's a very fair point. We've tested each of these
[4:52:59] designations to show what would it look like? If you
[4:53:03] follow the policies and if you follow the zoning regulations
[4:53:06] and you build out to these densities. What does it
[4:53:10] mean for how many buildings you can fit on site?
[4:53:12] What are those? Floor plates. What is the separation between
[4:53:15] these buildings? And we'll bring those forward to the next
[4:53:20] public open house. We haven't specifically spoken about providing renderings,
[4:53:25] but that's a conversation. We can certainly have, but, yeah,
[4:53:28] a picture is worth 1000 words, and it's a very.
[4:53:30] Fair point. Okay. Thank you for that. And I'm also
[4:53:36] trying to get my head around transportation that everybody's going
[4:53:38] to have to have cars there because. There's no transit
[4:53:43] other than the go train and the bus. But not
[4:53:48] for around the town or not if you want to
[4:53:50] get to Orangeville. There's going to be a lot of
[4:53:55] cars and there's no schools, so everybody's going to be
[4:53:58] driving or buses coming up and around that area. I
[4:54:03] don't know. I see it very congested sites as a
[4:54:06] result of that. So somehow. We have to figure out
[4:54:12] where all those cars going. It looks tight to me.
[4:54:19] With not that much space. For amenities. With that many
[4:54:24] people, that many cars. Looks difficult to me. But anyway,
[4:54:30] one final question. Is that? This is for staff. The
[4:54:36] public input that we've been doing. When it's just those
[4:54:41] boards that go up around the room. I find it's
[4:54:44] very hard for people to understand that they sort of
[4:54:47] look at it. And go, oh, make some sense out
[4:54:50] of this, and then maybe they go to another one,
[4:54:53] but. The kind of meetings where we do a presentation.
[4:54:57] Like we just had tonight, take people through it and
[4:55:00] then listen to everybody's questions and. Hear the answers is
[4:55:03] way better. For actually understanding what we're talking about. And
[4:55:08] I'm hoping that we could, at some point, go back
[4:55:11] to that. Given how big this is in the town,
[4:55:15] like, it's infill, it's. Not like doing the fields out
[4:55:19] at southeast Georgetown. This is right in people's neighborhoods that
[4:55:22] we're talking about, so I think we need a higher
[4:55:25] degree. Of helping people understand what it is. Okay, I
[4:55:31] can just comment to the chair, to this Councillor. I
[4:55:33] will take that into consideration. I. Think the last time
[4:55:36] we had a public open house, we did try to
[4:55:37] carve out an hour after the presentation, as you said,
[4:55:41] to do that, and maybe that was challenging this time
[4:55:45] around. We certainly can do more focus on the presentation.
[4:55:50] With strict Q and A afterwards. I think we just
[4:55:53] maybe bring the boards as displays that people can read
[4:55:55] before and after. We do like the people to feel
[4:55:57] comfortable, to stick around and look. At them and ask
[4:56:00] one on one questions if they can, so we'd still
[4:56:02] like to. Provide that as a service, but absolutely. We
[4:56:06] can consider that even in the coming up forthcoming public
[4:56:09] open house to be more presentation focused. With commissioner Linhardt
[4:56:13] had a comment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just wanted to
[4:56:18] follow up on a couple of points that Mr. Hamilton
[4:56:21] made. In it. So with respect to density and moving
[4:56:24] forward, how we'll be dealing with this, so if you're
[4:56:27] dealing with either lower medium density product, Expect to still
[4:56:33] see the calculation done on a units per hectare basis
[4:56:36] and you'll see. That in the chart. For medium density
[4:56:39] residential area. Now it sort of says what the base
[4:56:42] is in the parent official plan at 21 to 50
[4:56:46] units per hectare and then. In the next. Column, if
[4:56:50] you will. It shows 35 to 75 units per net
[4:56:54] hectare, so it's just. Giving you a bit of the
[4:56:55] range or the changes that we're looking at. Insofar as
[4:57:00] higher density development goes. So essentially apartments, we are moving
[4:57:05] towards floor space index. As the way to calculate it
[4:57:09] when you're dealing. In a more infill or intensification scenario.
[4:57:14] We just find that that makes more sense. To do
[4:57:17] it that way rather than the units per hectare calculation,
[4:57:20] because. You have parcels that are very irregular shape. There's
[4:57:25] no real uniformity in a lot. Of cases. You're relying
[4:57:28] on land assembly to make projects work. So if you
[4:57:31] looked in the existing go station secondary plant right now
[4:57:34] as it exists today, as approved by Councillor Fsi is
[4:57:38] used for the Mountain View road property. For the Rosetta
[4:57:42] property. We used it on the former memorial arena site.
[4:57:46] Now, the amico lands all through there. The recent approval
[4:57:50] we did on day foot drive. We've all used floor
[4:57:52] space index. To govern those specific projects on an individual
[4:57:57] basis. The other. Challenging part, of course, in all of
[4:58:01] this is that the province then wants us to look
[4:58:03] at persons and jobs per hectare right across the entire
[4:58:06] plant area. And that's something that we have to look
[4:58:09] at, frankly, because the province asked us to do so,
[4:58:12] not because. We particularly think it's the be all and
[4:58:16] end all, but it is something that the province asks
[4:58:18] for, and that's what we have to do. So those
[4:58:20] are some of the things that we need to look
[4:58:22] at. And I think maybe the last comment I will
[4:58:25] offer is on units per hectare for apartments, and Keith
[4:58:29] made reference to 100 units per hectare as a historic
[4:58:33] standard. Yes, that's true, but. We've consistently had to surpass
[4:58:37] that because, frankly, eight stories and 100 units per hectare
[4:58:41] it just doesn't work. So we see over and over
[4:58:43] again, we get requests from the private sector to amend
[4:58:47] that, and either through an increase in the number of
[4:58:49] units per hectare or moving towards a floor space index
[4:58:53] or in the case of destination downtown, we decided to.
[4:58:57] Control development strictly on the basis of height. And we
[4:59:00] decided we wouldn't even bother with units per hectare or
[4:59:02] floor space index. So there's so many different ways you
[4:59:06] can do this. And it's a matter of finding. Okay,
[4:59:09] what makes the most sense in a given geographic? Area
[4:59:12] depending upon the context. So I just wanted to add
[4:59:15] that to assist the discussion. Thank you, commissioner. Councillor Brass.
[4:59:22] Thank you. Chair through YouTube planning. I was listening to
[4:59:26] all this discussion and going through. The various iterations and
[4:59:31] explanations. I zoomed in on the act in major transit
[4:59:36] area, I should say, and I'm wondering as we go
[4:59:39] through and whatever we settle on here. Does that have
[4:59:43] precedent? For the act and go area as well. Through
[4:59:48] the chair. My short answer will be no, it doesn't,
[4:59:51] because it's going. To be looked at through its own
[4:59:53] study, subject to the approval of the capital budget for
[4:59:56] next year, and you would really go through the detailed
[4:59:59] analysis and make a determination what makes sense there. And
[5:00:03] we also know in the case of Acton, you also
[5:00:05] have a servicing constraint that. Is much more significant than
[5:00:10] anything we have in Georgetown. So that's another consideration. But
[5:00:13] bottom line is whatever you set for here will not
[5:00:16] be the precedent for what you said enacting. Okay. Thank
[5:00:19] you. Thank you, Councillor Norris. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair.
[5:00:27] And. My question I was waiting for because I'm hearing
[5:00:30] part of it coming from Councillor fogle. Part of it
[5:00:32] coming from Councillor Garno, but I just want to say,
[5:00:35] after 7 hours, of not having anything to say. Commissioner
[5:00:38] lindhard, you, I think came up with the answer. That
[5:00:40] we wanted here because. We are talking different things within
[5:00:44] even one report. As I just look at the one
[5:00:46] report and we've got the different ones. So I'm hearing
[5:00:49] that the number of people can go from 1.6 to
[5:00:52] 2.7. So actually going by the units, can we actually
[5:00:56] now say that that's what we will? Use. In the
[5:01:00] reports that the public will see at the public meetings.
[5:01:04] Is that what we should go with? Are you still
[5:01:07] thinking that maybe we should go with people? And if
[5:01:09] we do, can we go? With just one or the
[5:01:12] other. So through the chair to the Councillor. Great question.
[5:01:17] So we have the provincial piece that we have. To
[5:01:19] deal with. And I think, as the consultant alluded to
[5:01:22] for this, for a major transistation area on a go
[5:01:25] line. They've set a minimum target of 150 residents and
[5:01:29] jobs per hectare for what I'll call the. Collective area.
[5:01:35] Then there's a bit of a caveat that you can
[5:01:38] ask the minister for an alternative target. If you believe
[5:01:42] that you cannot achieve that target. And effectively, what you've
[5:01:48] heard tonight. Is even sort of rolling up our sleeves
[5:01:51] and looking at the possibility of some increases in density.
[5:01:55] We don't believe you would get to 150 residents and
[5:01:58] jobs per hector within this larger geographic area. So I
[5:02:01] think there were a couple of numbers bantied. About one
[5:02:03] was around. 125 if my words, everything went well. And
[5:02:09] all the projects advanced as is set out in the
[5:02:12] plan, you would get to around 125. There was another
[5:02:15] number that said what it may average out around 100.
[5:02:18] So one of the decisions that we would have to
[5:02:20] make through this process is what is the minimum target
[5:02:25] that we would want to go to the province with
[5:02:27] for that I'll call aggregate density target for the geographic
[5:02:31] area as a whole. So that's something we haven't arrived
[5:02:34] at. A definitive conclus. Conclusion tonight that's really a final
[5:02:37] study deliverable that would be implemented in the secondary plan,
[5:02:41] and then that's what we would go to the province
[5:02:43] with. So that's still open for discussion. The other ranges
[5:02:46] that you see here are for specific land use designations
[5:02:50] that would sit inside the secondary plan itself. So pick
[5:02:54] your area, whether it's a low. Density area, a medium
[5:02:57] density area or one of the high density areas, and
[5:03:00] then that's. Giving you an indication of. Either units per
[5:03:04] hectare or a floor space index, and then you will
[5:03:07] also get an indication on heights, depending on the geographic
[5:03:11] area, so it's almost like drilling down at the site
[5:03:13] level. Versus that aggregate total. And the province is kind
[5:03:17] of interested in the aggregate total. Based on what's? In
[5:03:19] the provincial planning statement, but you kind of get to
[5:03:22] the aggregate total. By factoring in what you may achieve
[5:03:26] on individual sites. Just as planners, we've always looked at
[5:03:30] either units per hectare on a site or use the
[5:03:33] floor space index, and then you build from there to
[5:03:36] get to that combined residence and jobs for Hector over
[5:03:39] the broader geographic area. So I know it's a bit
[5:03:43] confusing, but hopefully that helps a little. It does. And
[5:03:46] just so I understand. So when we do get to
[5:03:48] that point where we presenting to the public like the
[5:03:51] one that's coming up on November 27. We won't have
[5:03:54] all three. Different. Your team will just agree to go
[5:03:57] with one number, whether it's units or people. Because that
[5:04:02] confusion. Will. And I think Councillor Fogle said that confusion
[5:04:06] when it gets to the public level is going to
[5:04:08] be a problem. So am I hearing correctly that we
[5:04:10] are just going to use one? When it comes to
[5:04:12] presenting to them. Great question through the chair. I want
[5:04:21] to take that away and think about it with the
[5:04:23] team, exactly what we show, right? Now, in the report,
[5:04:27] it's basically saying you could maybe do 125 if all
[5:04:31] goes well. The question in my mind, though, is that
[5:04:35] really going to be the minimum target or is that
[5:04:37] maybe more of a maximum, and I think the province
[5:04:40] is looking for a minimum target, so I think that's
[5:04:43] what we have to turn our mind to right now
[5:04:45] is more the minimum. Than the maximum. Thank you. Councilor
[5:04:51] Keen. Give me a comment. Commissioner Lynnhardt, my next question
[5:04:57] might just make your job even harder. Looking at the
[5:05:01] changes to the plans proposed by the consultant. The new
[5:05:06] land use. High density land use areas one and two.
[5:05:12] Around the ghost station. Made complete sense to me. And
[5:05:15] even the higher towers of the mayor was referring to
[5:05:17] I kind of see how that fits, being such close
[5:05:19] proximity to the ghost station. It's the high density area
[5:05:24] number three down on the corner of Maple and Gulf
[5:05:27] street. I'm kind of having a hard time getting my
[5:05:29] head around. That's where the postsees are on strike right
[5:05:33] now, right? The current post station. And Gary Allen High
[5:05:37] School in that area there. I don't see them going
[5:05:40] anywhere in the foreseeable future, for starters, but. I see
[5:05:46] that. Proposing a height designation of almost ten stories. Six
[5:05:49] to ten stories. I realize there's some three or four
[5:05:53] story walk ups across the road on the other side
[5:05:56] on the corner there already. Existing. I just think. That's
[5:06:03] really on the outskirts of the study zone, and there
[5:06:06] ain't nobody in a tower there that's going to be
[5:06:08] walking to the ghost station or even riding their bike
[5:06:12] they're all going to be driving. If they're commuting. So
[5:06:15] I'm just wondering what the rationale was. For increasing the
[5:06:18] density in that corner just because it was already designated
[5:06:22] a high density area. On the original plan or that
[5:06:25] talks about options there potentially. For? What do they call
[5:06:28] it? Sure. No, I understand what you're saying through the
[5:06:32] chair. Potential amenities use or something. Opportunities for community amenities
[5:06:38] is a possible opportunity. So through the chair, I know
[5:06:42] the consultants is coming up to the podium to speak
[5:06:44] to this. I'll just quickly. Say something. So, yes, at
[5:06:48] that intersection, it is high density in the town's existing
[5:06:51] official. Plan, even though those. Lands sit outside of the
[5:06:55] existing ghost station secondary plan. But it is high density
[5:06:58] now, so that. Would permit up to eight stories. A
[5:07:03] bit of a history there at one point. I know
[5:07:05] it's Gary Allen High school. Now. Once upon a time.
[5:07:09] Was, I believe, Wrigglesworth Public School, which was declared surplus
[5:07:13] by the Halton district. School board several years ago when
[5:07:16] we were doing the current official plan in the early
[5:07:19] two thousand s and discussions that we held with the
[5:07:22] school board at that time identified that as a suitable
[5:07:25] site for high density purposes. Since that time, obviously the.
[5:07:30] School board has repurposed the site for Gary Allen High
[5:07:32] School, and I think, obviously, we recognize that as we
[5:07:35] recognize that the post office is there, but. If I
[5:07:39] can take you back to a comment the consultants made
[5:07:42] about this being a plan out. To 2051 so things
[5:07:44] can change. Over the horizon. And this is really identifying
[5:07:49] an opportunity should things change within this area. This would
[5:07:54] be, in my view, a good site for redevelopment purposes,
[5:07:57] given the Gulf street location, so that's a bit of
[5:08:00] the backdrop, but with that. I will turn it to
[5:08:03] the consultants to provide any additional input. Thank you. Not
[5:08:07] much to add there, but yeah, just to pull up.
[5:08:13] The comparison of the existing land use schedule against the
[5:08:16] proposed. So as John mentioned, we are just retaining that
[5:08:20] high speed designation. The only changes that we've added mixed
[5:08:24] use within that title as well, and then added a
[5:08:26] three, and that was more of a way to make
[5:08:30] it a bit more user friendly. So then we have
[5:08:32] a first 2nd 3rd as far as the high density
[5:08:35] category goes. Otherwise, it kind of would have been on
[5:08:37] its own. As a high density residential area, but we
[5:08:41] still wanted to incorporate the mixed use. So just to
[5:08:44] keep things consistent. We changed the name. It was more
[5:08:47] of a naming convention. And for that area, currently it
[5:08:51] has maximum permitted height of eight stories. So this is
[5:08:55] in the range of six to ten. So, assuming that
[5:09:00] things could still land about the same as. They're currently
[5:09:04] allowed being eight stories. Thank you. Just one final comment
[5:09:09] out on that. That's all true. So it's an increase.
[5:09:11] Of two stories, from the existing permissions to the maximum
[5:09:17] heights. And if you see the scale that shows a
[5:09:22] distance there of 250 meters and typically. When you're studying
[5:09:28] a major transit station area, a distance of 800 meters,
[5:09:32] they equate that to a ten minute walk. So. This
[5:09:37] might be? I don't know. It's within still what would
[5:09:40] be considered approximately a ten minute walk of the go
[5:09:43] station. So that tends to. Be within the realm of
[5:09:48] what people consider walkable. Thank you. Before I go to
[5:09:56] the merit a second time speaker, I just wanted to
[5:09:58] follow up on her. Original questioning, I think it has
[5:10:02] kind of been alluded to, but. It's worth emphasizing. The
[5:10:07] plan here as proposed. The density as proposed in this
[5:10:10] plan is below. What the province is asked for, for
[5:10:15] major transit stations. So we are already asking the province.
[5:10:19] For an exemption. Through this plan. That's correct. Right. I
[5:10:24] got a nod from Keith. Okay, so just want to
[5:10:26] make sure that that's very. Clear for everybody. Madam mayor.
[5:10:31] Thanks very much, Mr. Chair. I just want to make
[5:10:35] a comment about the process. That I'm seeing here with
[5:10:41] this particular plan. And it's one that I think has
[5:10:46] been influenced heavily by circumstance. It was described as starting
[5:10:52] in. 2021, changes were made and so forth. But this
[5:11:02] particular process. Started in the spring of 2022. Which was
[5:11:07] just prior to the election. Which happened in October of
[5:11:13] 2022. So this process started. Under the regime of the
[5:11:20] old previous council. And then there was obviously. A significant
[5:11:26] change. But the activity continued on. As it is reasonable.
[5:11:35] But also in that time we had Covid. Okay. Public
[5:11:40] consultation. That this council. Has experienced through vision,
[5:11:50] Georgetown through. And more recently through the secondary plans with
[5:11:56] southeast Georgetown, with Stewart Town. And so forth. The amount
[5:12:04] of public consultation and the discussion that happened. The fact
[5:12:09] that a steering committee. Was not struck for. This particular.
[5:12:17] Consultation. Means that. The process, I think, of public consultation
[5:12:25] and in fact, informing this Councillor and the ward counselors.
[5:12:31] Of the way this was unfolding has been. Significantly less.
[5:12:38] Than we have traditionally undertaken in the town of Halton
[5:12:42] Hills. And frankly, I think we've lost a lot in
[5:12:47] that. I was stunned, frankly. A few weeks ago. When
[5:12:54] I went to let's talk. And saw some of these
[5:12:59] studies that had been done. The reports had not been
[5:13:03] brought to my attention, that's for sure. It was there
[5:13:10] for public consumption. But. I hadn't been advised that some
[5:13:18] of this was ready to go. And that I should
[5:13:22] pay attention. And I kind of think if I wasn't
[5:13:26] aware of it, there's got to be a lot of
[5:13:28] other people as well who are not aware. Of the
[5:13:33] way this project and this set of studies has unfolded.
[5:13:39] So. I'm feeling extremely uncomfortable right now. With the level
[5:13:46] of understanding. I think, witnessed the conversation that we had
[5:13:51] about gross floor area. About units per hectare, about heights
[5:13:57] and so forth. I kind of wish we'd had a
[5:14:00] videotape of some of that explanation. Because frankly, it is
[5:14:08] extremely complex. And as I said, I'm feeling very uncomfortable
[5:14:16] with the process that has unfolded. We as a municipality
[5:14:21] typically take public consultation and education and understanding and truth.
[5:14:29] Very, very seriously. And it is my sense that we've
[5:14:35] missed the boat. As I said, for a variety of
[5:14:39] reasons. Elections, Covid. The complexities of the planet itself, the
[5:14:47] lack of a steering committee. The lack of a unified
[5:14:54] neighborhood group that would pay attention. And. Would comment on
[5:15:00] this. Those are all factors, I think, that have led
[5:15:05] us. To a lot of really big question marks here
[5:15:09] at this, I would say, fairly late stage. In the
[5:15:13] secondary planning process. So I'm just laying that out on
[5:15:17] the table. In my position. That I wish that we
[5:15:23] had done things a bit differently on this particular plan.
[5:15:28] See no other questions. Madam Mayor, would you like to
[5:15:31] bring this forward for discussion? Sure? Yes. Bring the report
[5:15:38] forward. Thank you. Any comments on the report? I will
[5:15:45] just say something. I have attended public information meetings both
[5:15:53] in person at the library and on Zoom regarding. This
[5:15:57] secondary plan. I think it's absolutely essential when we look
[5:16:00] at our housing target. I've heard 2000 units is what
[5:16:04] we need to have in our existing urban boundary. And
[5:16:08] intensification, obviously extremely important to my residents and I think
[5:16:12] residents across Halton Hills. And there's no better place in
[5:16:15] our town to intensify them, this area, so. Very pleased
[5:16:18] to see. This. Come forward and move along. Councilor garnell.
[5:16:27] Yes. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair. I sometimes
[5:16:31] refer to being a new Councillor, and this will be
[5:16:34] a time that I do that. Again. Having. Been newly
[5:16:41] elected two years ago. So. I came in after this
[5:16:46] project had already started and. I did sit on the
[5:16:50] Stewart Town secondary plan steering committee and through that process
[5:16:54] did have a lot of updates and was very familiar
[5:16:57] with the land use plan when it came to councillor
[5:17:00] and so I understand very much what the mayor was
[5:17:03] saying. About not having been involved with that process for
[5:17:07] this and. When this is having such a big impact
[5:17:12] on the local residents who already have homes and already
[5:17:15] live in those areas and not even. Just within the
[5:17:20] secondary plan area, but all the adjacent neighborhoods and all
[5:17:25] the adjacent folks too. It goes right up to downtown
[5:17:28] Georgetown. So, wondering if the BIA was involved. And some
[5:17:32] other community. Folks. So I'm wondering. If it's possible to
[5:17:40] just slow the process down a little bit. I did
[5:17:44] have a request come in from one of the neighborhood
[5:17:47] associations representatives asking if it's. Possible to. Defer the approval
[5:17:54] tonight and maybe just slow down a little bit, go
[5:17:57] back to the public. And explain some of. This. Because
[5:18:03] I imagine when we get into the next phases, there's
[5:18:05] going to be even more information when we get into
[5:18:07] the policies and everything. So just trying to make sure
[5:18:10] that everyone understands. The land use. The proposed densities. Really
[5:18:20] well. Or at least a little bit. And then continue
[5:18:25] moving forward. So just maybe slow it down, paste it
[5:18:28] a little bit. I'm wondering maybe if staff could speak
[5:18:32] to that. Thank you. Through the chair to the Councillor.
[5:18:37] A few points. So. No, we didn't have the traditional
[5:18:44] steering committee. Yes, we do have a stakeholder. Group, Silver
[5:18:47] Creek Neighborhood association and the John Street Neighborhood group. We
[5:18:51] have had meetings with them where things like Florida Space
[5:18:55] index and units per Hector have been discussed. We have
[5:18:59] circulated them on studies. We have circulated them on the
[5:19:02] preferred land use option report for our comment. We did
[5:19:04] not receive any comments, but we did circulate them. I
[5:19:07] have been. In regular contact with the two representatives for
[5:19:11] those groups, updating them on the project. Through. Let's talk
[5:19:15] Halton Hills. We do regularly update our public notification lists,
[5:19:18] and as well as all. Let's talk. Subscribers on this.
[5:19:22] We have been putting public notice out of both these
[5:19:24] things. So I do want to clarify that. I don't
[5:19:28] believe that the process has been sped up. I think
[5:19:31] we are two and a half years into what was
[5:19:33] originally budgeted, in the terms of reference as a two
[5:19:35] year project. We have. Taken time and careful consideration. Really,
[5:19:41] this entire calendar year has been just the technical work
[5:19:44] that's. Gone into it. Project update report was provided at
[5:19:47] the start of the year, laying out the technical studies
[5:19:50] and all that information. And we're effectively moving forward to
[5:19:55] a public open house in November 27, largely because we
[5:19:57] haven't been to the public in over a year, so
[5:19:59] we would like to engage them. Again. So I just
[5:20:03] wanted to make those points of clarification. Councilor Garnos. Good.
[5:20:13] For now. Councilor Fogo. I guess I'm also feeling a
[5:20:19] little uneasy about it. And I'm not saying that. I
[5:20:23] don't want the density there. But politically, what I'm afraid
[5:20:30] of is approving this. And then the press puts it
[5:20:33] in the paper that we've approved all these towers and
[5:20:36] everything, and then the people that don't know about it.
[5:20:38] Come and say what? When did that happen and what
[5:20:43] did you do? I wonder if. This public information. That
[5:20:51] we're lining up to do. Could be before we approve
[5:20:54] this. Instead of after. It. To the chair? To the
[5:20:59] Councillor, certainly, if that's council's decision. We do still plan
[5:21:06] to go ahead on the 27th. We can refocus. That
[5:21:10] presented materials a little bit there to go back to
[5:21:14] what was presented largely last October when we did go
[5:21:17] over the preferred plan. And density and things like that,
[5:21:20] but if that's our direction, we certainly will do so.
[5:21:25] I do acknowledge that we did see the message from
[5:21:27] the representative of the silver Creek neighbor association. And. We
[5:21:33] can also have more engagement with the groups, more meetings.
[5:21:36] Absolutely. But if that's how we're directed, that's what we'll
[5:21:40] do. Well, I think it would be a good idea.
[5:21:44] Where we're in the room with those people. Like staff
[5:21:48] have gone and talked to Silver Creek, but I haven't
[5:21:51] gone and talked to them. I don't know what they
[5:21:53] said to you, so there's a little bit. Of. I
[5:21:57] wish I knew more about what they were saying. Than.
[5:22:02] I do. And. If it really wouldn't slow us down
[5:22:06] all that much. To sort of have a meeting with
[5:22:10] them and then come back. And get an approval. Commissioner
[5:22:16] Linhardt. So through the chair to the counselor. I
[5:22:25] echo Keith's comments that at the end of the day,
[5:22:28] this is a Councillor decision. How you wish to proceed
[5:22:31] from here. And if Councillor wishes to slow the process
[5:22:34] down, that of. Course, is council's purview to do that.
[5:22:38] In any report, you have an option of approving the
[5:22:41] report, not approving the report, modifying the report in some
[5:22:44] way, shape or fashion or defer in a report. Those
[5:22:48] are basically your choices. Obviously, if you didn't approve the
[5:22:51] report whatsoever, then that sort of begs the question. Well,
[5:22:54] now what? If you were just trying to modify the
[5:22:59] report on the fly. That probably wouldn't be prudent, I
[5:23:04] would suggest. So that really leaves us with either you
[5:23:08] approve it or you defer it to allow for additional
[5:23:12] consultation to take place. And I guess the only other
[5:23:16] thing that I would offer counsel, if you would think
[5:23:19] that would be helpful at some point early in the
[5:23:22] new year is some form of councillor workshop on some
[5:23:26] of the terminology where you could maybe roll up our
[5:23:28] sleeves a little bit more, if that would. Be helpful.
[5:23:32] Given. The. Obviously, there's a lot of terminology, there's a
[5:23:36] lot of moving parts here. There's been a lot of
[5:23:38] change at the provincial level. And really maybe giving you
[5:23:41] some of the. Context, almost what I'll call the starting
[5:23:45] point here, where we are with this particular. Initiative in
[5:23:50] terms of some of the existing permissions that are already
[5:23:52] in place that are sort. Of like your anchor point
[5:23:56] where we're starting from. This is really not a blank
[5:23:59] canvas that we're starting completely from scratch. There are obviously
[5:24:03] existing permissions in place, and as Councillor knows, there's existing
[5:24:06] applications that are currently going through the process, so there's
[5:24:08] a lot of things to think about. Including the potential
[5:24:12] for litigation, so I just offer that as well. As
[5:24:16] a thought. So could we more or less get to
[5:24:20] the finish line? Sort of like maybe a month late
[5:24:26] or something like that. But just do things in the
[5:24:29] other order. There's no concern on my end in doing
[5:24:33] that, frankly. We don't have a hard deadline on getting
[5:24:38] this done, other than, obviously, given the length. At the
[5:24:41] time, it has been ongoing. We don't wish this to
[5:24:43] go on forever. I don't think Councillor would either. So
[5:24:47] we would like to wrap it up sooner rather than.
[5:24:49] Later, but we do have a little bit of time.
[5:24:52] There's not a specific hard deadline. That I have to
[5:24:54] say, if this is not done by such and. Such
[5:24:56] a date. We're getting a call from the minister, which
[5:24:59] I know. Councillor, you're? Familiar with those kind of deadlines
[5:25:01] from other planning processes. Thank you, commissioner. Councillor Somerville. Thank
[5:25:09] you. So, in the recommendation. This is to be approved
[5:25:14] in principle to allow for these other conversations to go
[5:25:17] on and for the preparation of the draft. Secondary plan.
[5:25:21] Is that correct? That's what it says right in the
[5:25:25] recommendations. Through the chair to the Councillor, yes. Okay. So
[5:25:28] I really don't know how much less glacial we want
[5:25:31] to slow this down. It's been around for a long
[5:25:34] time. And, Madam mayor, you could have appointed a steering
[5:25:37] committee. As mayor, it's under your purview. You could have.
[5:25:41] That's one of the things you're able to do. You
[5:25:43] could. Have created a committee to look at this. And
[5:25:47] frankly, this has been around. For. It came back. In
[5:25:53] 2021. It was around before that because we did have
[5:25:57] other iterations of it, but. I think the other thing
[5:26:01] for us to all keep in mind is with the
[5:26:03] land assembly that would need to happen for the infrastructure
[5:26:06] that would need to happen. This is going to be
[5:26:09] a very complicated. Area to ever see developed because the
[5:26:14] infrastructure that would have to be updated through existing neighborhoods
[5:26:18] is also part of that as well. So in reality,
[5:26:23] I'm not sure. What? We have enough things there to
[5:26:27] go back out to the public to be able to
[5:26:29] talk. To them without having it anyway. And as the
[5:26:33] planning director just said, we still have those options. It's
[5:26:36] not like we have a hard deadline, but it is
[5:26:39] something I'd like. To see it before us sooner rather
[5:26:42] than later. Any other comments before I take a second
[5:26:51] time? Speakers. Councilor Keene. Just to support. The more I'm
[5:26:56] thinking about it. I made our comments. I don't. See
[5:26:59] what's to be gained by delaying this any further. I
[5:27:02] would support going forward. With it. Mayor Lawler. Yeah, I'm
[5:27:09] going to put a deferral on the floor. And so
[5:27:12] we can decide. Okay. I'd like to suggest that. We
[5:27:19] defer this report. Until the spring, until. Let's say.
[5:27:30] March the 31st. I'm looking at the planning commissioner because.
[5:27:38] In order to allow us. To have time to. Get
[5:27:45] that public consultation. And to advise counsel on what the
[5:27:50] implications. Are for this. And in the meantime, We will
[5:27:58] continue to have the public meeting. That is later on
[5:28:01] in November. And so the processes can continue on. But
[5:28:08] this report would come back. I'll just say March 31.
[5:28:17] And if the planning commissioner has another date in mind.
[5:28:22] I'd be happy. To change that date. The clerk just
[5:28:29] reminded me that March 24 is the Councillor date, so.
[5:28:35] Maybe. It would be that date. But, commissioner. Thank you.
[5:28:41] Thank you, Mr. Chair. At the end of the day,
[5:28:43] this is council's decision. Whether to adopt the report, as
[5:28:46] I said, as is, or whether to modify the recommendations
[5:28:49] in the report. So, as always, we're in your hands.
[5:28:54] The way this is set up and the way I
[5:28:56] would interpret it, if it's deferred until March 24. The
[5:29:00] preferred land use plan is not approved in principle at
[5:29:03] all. It's simply going out for another public open house.
[5:29:08] And in March, if we're using the March date, that
[5:29:11] would be the deadline to bring back a follow up
[5:29:15] report and presumably for Councillor, then to make a determination
[5:29:18] on the preferred land. Use plan and then move on
[5:29:21] into phase four and develop the secondary plan. So that's.
[5:29:24] Really what we're talking about right now in my mind.
[5:29:27] But again, this is entirely up. To. Council. We'll work
[5:29:30] with whatever Councillor directs us to do at this point.
[5:29:34] Well, just further to that. Commissioner. With those dates in
[5:29:41] mind, do you? See that. As holding up the process.
[5:29:47] In a significant way. Is that going to create other
[5:29:50] problems? Through the chair to the mayor. I think a
[5:29:59] lot of it will. Come into play is. Whether in
[5:30:05] that period of time that the matter is deferred. Whether
[5:30:10] everyone works hard and we arrive at a consensus and
[5:30:13] are able to bring back a report. Or whether. This
[5:30:19] spirals into other areas, and sometimes you can get that.
[5:30:24] On a process. So there's a bit of an unknown,
[5:30:27] I guess, is the way I would characterize. It. We
[5:30:31] would obviously proceed in good faith. Conduct the necessary meetings
[5:30:35] and come back with the necessary reports. Sometimes you do
[5:30:39] get into these processes. Though, and you find at the
[5:30:42] end of the day, you can't satisfy everybody and that.
[5:30:44] May be the challenge in all of this. The other
[5:30:48] component, just to bear in mind, is obviously we do
[5:30:50] have one existing application. On the one Rosetta property and
[5:30:55] probably another one that we're going to see in the
[5:30:56] not too distant future as well. And those proposals are
[5:31:01] entitled to due process as well. So that's just something
[5:31:03] to think. About in terms of an overly elongated deferral.
[5:31:07] So just something to bear in mind. Okay, well, and
[5:31:11] they've got existing permissions and existing. That they would be
[5:31:16] submitting under anyway. Right. Yeah. Okay. Yes, that is correct.
[5:31:22] Yeah, okay. All right, so then I'll put that deferral
[5:31:26] on the floor. To March 24 and with the provides,
[5:31:31] though. That we, in fact, do roller upper sleeves and
[5:31:35] that those processes that we already have in place. Such
[5:31:39] as? A public meeting on November the 27th and so
[5:31:43] forth. Will continue on. Okay. Thank you. Councilor brass to
[5:31:50] the deferral. Thank you, chair. Yes, thank you. So I've
[5:31:55] heard a lot of conversation about this tonight. I also
[5:31:59] think that this area. Should be intensified and should be
[5:32:05] dense. But I've heard some cautionary comments from the ward
[5:32:11] three counters. I wonder if. We can. Before I decide
[5:32:15] to vote on the deferral or not, I kind of
[5:32:17] want to know where Councillor Norris and Councillor Garno stand.
[5:32:21] On a deferral or do either of you think. That.
[5:32:26] We haven't gotten far enough along the road for us
[5:32:28] to make a decision yet. Councilor norris. Thank you, Mr.
[5:32:34] Chair. And thank you, Councillor Brass, for that. I've been
[5:32:38] sitting here going through this. I'm. Not a fan of
[5:32:41] deferring this through to next year. I'm hearing what's coming
[5:32:45] from the planning. And it has been out there for
[5:32:48] a long time. My only concern is when we present
[5:32:52] at the end of November. I think it's November 27.
[5:32:56] Will it be clear what the density will be? Will
[5:32:58] there be a lot of confusion at that? Time if
[5:33:02] no. If the public that comes out can clearly see
[5:33:06] what the density is going to be, I'm not a
[5:33:09] big fan of deferring it. I don't want to defer
[5:33:13] it, but I just want to be sure that what
[5:33:14] we're going to be presenting on November 27 and any
[5:33:17] public when it's going to be cleared as to what
[5:33:20] the density is because I'm just looking at the one.
[5:33:22] Report, and we're seeing. Different descriptions on the same line,
[5:33:27] and so I just want to be sure that we'll
[5:33:30] be able to explain that. Or your team will be
[5:33:34] able. To explain that. So that's where I'm at with
[5:33:38] the deferral. Thank you, Councillor Brass, for doing that. Commissioner
[5:33:42] Linhard. So through the chair to the Councillor, we would
[5:33:47] certainly undertake to have a clear set of density. Parameters
[5:33:53] for purposes of this meeting. And maybe. It's as simple
[5:33:56] as saying this is going to be the density on
[5:33:59] this particular site. And sort of going at it that
[5:34:01] way and then concluding with it will aggregate up to
[5:34:04] this. Across the area as a whole. And then if
[5:34:07] someone. Is really keen, if you will. Will have the
[5:34:12] existing permissions in our back pocket that we can present
[5:34:15] to them, because maybe. It's transitioning from one to another
[5:34:19] that may cause confusion. I don't know. At the end
[5:34:21] of the day, but we will make it as clear
[5:34:23] as we possibly can. Thank you, commissioner. And with that
[5:34:27] in mind. With that kind of foot direction. Specifically when
[5:34:32] it comes to the public meetings, I would not support
[5:34:34] the deferral. Thank you. Councilor Garnell. Yeah. From speaking to
[5:34:41] some residents about this project. Not very many people in
[5:34:44] war three know that this is on the horizon. And
[5:34:52] I think deferring it and not deciding. Making a firm
[5:34:57] decision tonight. But still, I do think the density is
[5:35:01] coming. I think everyone knows. It's coming, but I think
[5:35:04] giving time for the residents. And to cast the net
[5:35:09] a bit wider than the neighborhood associations that have been
[5:35:12] involved so far. Because those are very limited neighborhoods where
[5:35:15] this whole area is huge. So there's the Stuart McLaren
[5:35:19] area. There's the area up. Like. Dayfoot north of there.
[5:35:27] There's a lot of different areas within ward three that
[5:35:29] are being affected by this, and I'm not sure that
[5:35:32] everybody's aware. And I just like to, if it's not
[5:35:37] going to slow down the process, Too much or really
[5:35:40] interfere, then I think. Just in the spirit of involving
[5:35:46] as many people as possible in the process. Before the
[5:35:49] decision. Around where the density goes, I think. It would.
[5:35:55] Be. Important to allow. That participation. So I would be
[5:36:01] in favor of a deferral. But still having the meeting.
[5:36:06] And speaking about it. Like presenting it to them again
[5:36:10] and really targeting to get people that haven't been. In
[5:36:15] front of this project yet to ensure that we're including
[5:36:19] as many people as possible. From the whole area. Rather
[5:36:23] than certain neighborhood groups that might be a little bit
[5:36:27] more engaged. Any other comments on the deferral? Councilor fogle.
[5:36:37] Just to be clear, I'm supporting that deferral just in
[5:36:41] order. To what I feel. Complete the circle as far
[5:36:45] as the community is concerned and to do it. In
[5:36:48] a way where it's not a fed accomple. Why am
[5:36:50] I coming out? If you've already decided. So I prefer
[5:36:54] it this way. All right. Thank you. And I will
[5:36:58] not be supporting the deferral to Councillor Keane's. Point. There's
[5:37:04] existing density on Gary Allen and the post office that
[5:37:07] hasn't been acted. On and probably won't be acted on
[5:37:09] whether we pass this or not anytime soon, so. We're
[5:37:13] simply updating our plan. That's what we're doing here, and.
[5:37:15] This isn't the final secondary plan. It's just the preferred
[5:37:18] land use, so I. Think we need to keep the
[5:37:20] ball rolling and to delay it till the end of.
[5:37:24] March is quite significant. With that. All in favor of
[5:37:28] the deferral? That does not pass. So it is now
[5:37:37] on the floor. Any further comments on the report? Moved
[5:37:44] by Councillor Summerville. All in favor of the report moving
[5:37:47] forward. And that passes. Thank you. Sorry. Raise your hand
[5:37:54] again. Keep them up nice high. Thank you. Okay.
[5:38:04] So the next report on the agenda. Report. Number pd
[5:38:11] 240 64. Regarding. Bishop Court. And we have a delegation,
[5:38:19] Glenn Wellings from Wellings plan and consultants incorporated. And we'll
[5:38:24] have a five minute timer on the screen for our
[5:38:27] delegations. Just so. We can keep this going. Thank you.
[5:38:31] I try not to laugh. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Mayor
[5:38:40] Lawler and counselors. My name is Glenn Wellings. I am
[5:38:44] planning consultant for the owner. Charleston developments. And I've been
[5:38:52] involved in this project many, many years. Our consulting team
[5:38:56] is available this evening to answer any questions. I should
[5:39:01] note that we're all in person, with one exception. Our
[5:39:04] ecologist. Sarah Mingi is available virtually, and she's happy to
[5:39:10] answer any questions of counsel and the public. First of
[5:39:15] all, I'd like to thank Mr. Chairman and committee members.
[5:39:19] Town staff and in particular, Ruth Connor. For her effort
[5:39:24] in preparing tonight's staff report. It's comprehensive and there's a
[5:39:28] lot of history, folks. In that report. And this. Spans
[5:39:34] over a 40 year period. This file. We are in
[5:39:39] support of the staff recommendations that are before you. It
[5:39:44] has been a very lengthy planning process. And the subject
[5:39:48] lands were first included within the hamlet boundary of Glenn
[5:39:51] Williams. Back about 20 years ago. With the Glenn Williams
[5:39:57] secondary plan, the 2005 version, and that's been reaffirmed in
[5:40:02] the latest version of the secondary plan. The extension of
[5:40:06] Bishop's court for residential development will complete the rehabilitation of
[5:40:12] the former sand and gravel pit that was formerly on
[5:40:15] the property. I think we lose sight of this, that
[5:40:17] these lands were used industrially for sand and gravel pit
[5:40:22] for many, many years. So this is a rehabilitation of
[5:40:26] that former use. So the process to get to this
[5:40:30] point this evening has been. Extensive. Exhaustive. Tonight's been exhaustive?
[5:40:37] And very challenging to get to this point. So I
[5:40:41] do thank staff for their persistence and efforts. Again, I'm
[5:40:44] bringing this report forward. It was a lot of work.
[5:40:48] But happily, this rezoning and subdivision application is before you.
[5:40:52] It does fully conform to the new secondary plan. And
[5:40:57] I emphasize new secondary plan. The process. To lead to
[5:41:03] tonight's staff report has been instrumental in resolving the outstanding
[5:41:08] appeal of the secondary plan by my client. In the
[5:41:12] recommended zoning bylaw and conditions of draft approval. Implement the
[5:41:18] latest policies of the secondary plan approved by this Councillor
[5:41:22] and supported by the community and that support. Includes Zcland
[5:41:27] Williams Community Association. Although the applications predate the new secondary
[5:41:32] plan, the development satisfies these latest policies and that would
[5:41:37] include the public dedication of a ten meter hamlet buffer
[5:41:42] into public ownership. To facilitate both trails and enhance planting.
[5:41:50] In addition to the public dedication of open space blocks.
[5:41:53] And that would be blogs 29 to 31 of these
[5:41:57] subdivision plan. As I have five minutes. I will not
[5:42:01] get into the technical details this evening. The staff reports.
[5:42:04] Comprehensive the conditions. Are extensive. And I won't get into
[5:42:11] the technical side of things. But I do want to
[5:42:14] point out. One important aspect. That this is the only
[5:42:20] recent subdivision. Within the Glenn Williams hamlet that has not
[5:42:25] gone to the Ontario land trip noono so we are
[5:42:29] actually here without going to the land tribulo, which. Is
[5:42:34] significant, in my opinion, because they last four subdivisions approved.
[5:42:39] Were before the Ontario Land Tribunal and not as Councillor,
[5:42:43] so I see that as good news. In addition, just
[5:42:47] to clarify, I'll be very quick, Mr. Chairman. I just
[5:42:49] got a couple more points. In addition, just to clarify
[5:42:53] some misinformation that is out there, there's been site work
[5:42:56] that has occurred in this property, and I can advise.
[5:43:01] This Councillor at all. Site work that has been undertaken
[5:43:04] has been in accordance with permits issued by both the
[5:43:07] town as well as Credit valley Conservation. There has been
[5:43:10] no legal work on this property. There was that comment
[5:43:15] that did come out through the circulation process just to
[5:43:19] clarify that comment. So I would ask, respectfully that, Councillor,
[5:43:24] adopt the staff recommendations this evening as presented. In just
[5:43:29] one additional comment, Mr. Chairman. Before I wrap things up,
[5:43:33] the lines of communication. Do not end here this evening.
[5:43:39] I noticed there's two other delegations after me. Mr. Stalkford
[5:43:44] and Mr. Brown from the Community association. We're happy to.
[5:43:49] I'm happy to meet with them to discuss. The staff
[5:43:53] report, discuss our consultants reports, and make her consulting team
[5:43:57] fully available to them to answer. Any questions? I've not
[5:44:01] met these gentlemen, but. I'm opening that out for further
[5:44:06] dialogue and discussion. So thank you for your time and
[5:44:09] happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Williams. Any
[5:44:14] questions from Councillor to the delegation? Seeing none. Thank you.
[5:44:20] I'm happy to come back if necessary. Thank you. I
[5:44:22] appreciate that. Our next delegation is Roger Stoffford, who I
[5:44:28] believe is on Zoom.
[5:44:41] Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Roger. Go
[5:44:43] ahead. You have five minutes. Thank you very. Much. So
[5:44:47] I have some prepared notes, and I'm sure I'll get
[5:44:50] through it in. Less than five minutes. I'm speaking, of
[5:44:54] course, in consideration of the report. I've lived in Holton
[5:44:59] Hills for over 40 years, and I've been in Glenn
[5:45:02] Williams for over ten years, so I'm familiar with. The
[5:45:07] nature of the town and the requirements for growth, and
[5:45:09] I have no objection to growth and developments. What triggers
[5:45:13] me to come forward is that. I object to. Development,
[5:45:19] degrading the quality of Glenn Williams. And in particular the
[5:45:24] unique quality of the Glenn Williams historic core. And I'm
[5:45:27] going to talk about that a little bit. Our official
[5:45:31] plan. And I'll paraphrase a little bit, but I think
[5:45:34] I stay. True to the meaning in the official plan
[5:45:37] regarding Glenn Williams. The goal is to guide change so
[5:45:42] that it contributes and does not detract from the character
[5:45:45] of the glen. And the Glen Williams secondary plan is
[5:45:48] clear. The goal is protect and preserve and maintain and
[5:45:51] enhance I think those sentiments that are reflected in the
[5:45:55] documents are a very good reflection of what the residents
[5:45:59] of the Glen feel. We're all familiar with Glenn Williams,
[5:46:03] and I'm not going to try and describe the unique
[5:46:06] qualities of Glenn, but certainly Glenn Williams is worth the
[5:46:10] effort to try and preserve and protect. The report evaluates
[5:46:16] the draft plan of subdivision against the official plan on
[5:46:20] the glamorium. Secondary plan. But I don't feel the report
[5:46:25] addresses these requirements, which are the goals for the Glenn
[5:46:29] as laid out in those two documents. The report. Talks
[5:46:34] about. The technical build design guidelines. But I feel these
[5:46:39] overarching goals. Are not really addressed in the report. New
[5:46:44] homes in the Glen are good because they add residents
[5:46:47] and create the opportunity for healthy economic vitality. Reasonably, you
[5:46:54] could. Say, bishop? Court two is just a subdivision. Yes,
[5:46:58] it's within Glenn Williams, but it's. One or 2 km
[5:47:01] away from the historic core of Glenn Williams. Apart from
[5:47:06] therefore addressing the architectural design buildings, how can it contribute?
[5:47:12] To protecting, preserving, maintaining and enhancing Blair Williams. I think
[5:47:17] that's a question, really, that we should have our professionals.
[5:47:21] Evaluate. As part of the process of producing the report.
[5:47:25] New residents benefit the economic vitality of the glen. Extra
[5:47:33] cars. Potentially are a problem for the glen. The historic
[5:47:38] core of the gland is tiny. Sometimes it is exactly
[5:47:43] the nature of Glenn Williams that we are supposed to
[5:47:45] be protecting. Other times, it's a log jam of vehicles.
[5:47:50] I've read the traffic impact study. Of course, the traffic
[5:47:54] impact of Bishop court two is tiny. But the, and
[5:47:59] the subject report assesses the traffic impact as acceptable. But
[5:48:03] for Glenn Williams. It's going to be death by 1000
[5:48:06] cuts. Each increment is going to be tiny. But. They
[5:48:12] all accumulate, and eventually it kills. I think there are
[5:48:17] two things that are needed in Glenn Williams. One is
[5:48:20] a solution for the growing visitor parking, and the other
[5:48:24] is. Something we're all familiar with, which is the through
[5:48:28] traffic. And clearly, as these developments go into place, We've
[5:48:33] got the growth in traffic from the residential growth on
[5:48:37] the east side. And then, of course, the coming of
[5:48:41] 413 and the two interchanges that are going to drop
[5:48:44] traffic on Mayfield and old school. And Mayfield, an old
[5:48:48] school, directly lead to the historic core. Of glomal loops.
[5:48:54] So I feel Glenn Williams is going to have developments
[5:48:56] and growth. Georgetown has grown and changed what's different with
[5:49:01] Glen Williams is that there is already a consensus in
[5:49:04] our official plan and the secondary plan that the glen
[5:49:07] has unique qualities that should be protected, preserved, maintained and
[5:49:11] enhanced. And what I would like to see. Is the
[5:49:16] report start to address? Those requirements that we've already laid
[5:49:21] out. And that completes my presentation. Thank you very much.
[5:49:28] Thank you very much, Roger. And are there any questions
[5:49:31] of the delegation? From, Councillor. This is just questions again,
[5:49:35] to the delegation, not to staff at this point. Seeing
[5:49:39] none. Thank you, Roger. Again, thank you. Mike brown from
[5:49:44] the glenn williams community association. Madam mayor. Esteemed
[5:49:53] counselors. Thanks for allowing me some time tonight. I'm Mike
[5:49:58] Brown, and I'm here representing Glenn Williams Community association regarding
[5:50:02] the recommendation. Report for proposed zoning bylaw amendment and draft
[5:50:06] plan of subdivision to permit an extension of Bishop Court
[5:50:10] in Glenn Williams. First, I'd like to thank town staff
[5:50:14] for their time and focus. On our questions and concerns.
[5:50:18] Following reviews of all the filed key documents. We appreciate
[5:50:22] they followed up with us on all outstanding issues discussed.
[5:50:26] We are generally supportive of the conditions of draft plan
[5:50:30] approval for this subdivision as tabled by the planning department.
[5:50:34] There are several issues, however, we strongly feel need to
[5:50:37] be highlighted. While we also reserve the right to continue
[5:50:40] to monitor. Previously noted outstanding issues and questions. Subsequent reviews
[5:50:46] of the plan moving forward. The issues we feel strongly
[5:50:51] that should be highlighted include the removal of 35% of
[5:50:55] the conifer plantation. Granted, it is acknowledged that this plantation
[5:51:00] is in its latter stage of life. While we appreciate
[5:51:03] the efforts to date to reduce the amount of canopy
[5:51:06] removal. The proposed replacement plannings will take many years to
[5:51:11] replace the lost carbon footprint. We acknowledge the intent to
[5:51:16] create more diversity with the replanting plan. However, the language
[5:51:20] used in current documentation when referencing reinforcement plantings, for example,
[5:51:24] best efforts or as opportunities are available. Does not reflect
[5:51:29] an absolute commitment for equivalency. We will continue to monitor
[5:51:34] this as the loss of canopy in the Glen is
[5:51:36] a priority concern for residents as the hamlet continues to
[5:51:40] experience negative impacts of climate change. It was most disheartening
[5:51:44] to see what we feel was a superficial assessment of
[5:51:48] wildlife. Activity throughout phase two property and phase one pond
[5:51:52] area, and to see that this data supported canopy removal
[5:51:56] decisions. It should be noted that is not only cottontail
[5:52:01] rabbits, squirrels blue. Jays and American crow red breasted nut
[5:52:06] hatch a few frogs and a few turtles that inhabit
[5:52:09] these lands rather. What will more accurately be impacted are
[5:52:13] additional wildlife, such as pilliated and Downey woodpeckers. Deer, foxes,
[5:52:19] coyotes that actively inhabit and track these lands today. Beavers,
[5:52:24] muskrats, and snapping turtles have also been cited in the
[5:52:27] phase one pond area. There are currently many bird nesting
[5:52:31] boxes actively in use and maintained by a local resident
[5:52:35] throughout the phase two property and the phase one pond
[5:52:38] area. We expect that the replacement planting density and caliper
[5:52:42] sizes will provide the continued habitat required for this diversity
[5:52:46] of wildlife to continue to thrive. There's a reference that
[5:52:50] numbers of calling amphibians were generally low, with no full
[5:52:53] choruses heard on the ponds or adjacent to the site
[5:52:57] as a resident of Bishop Court. And adjacent to pond.
[5:53:01] Phase one, pond area. This is not an accurate observation
[5:53:05] as full courses are. Evident throughout the spring and summer.
[5:53:09] Protecting wildlife. Access to the wilderness areas and tributaries is
[5:53:13] critical, along with the sensitivity to birds. Amphibians and mammals.
[5:53:18] As an example, the fencing proposal along the hamlet buffer
[5:53:21] will unduly restrict access to these areas for such mammals
[5:53:25] as deer who are currently active in the area. We
[5:53:28] appreciate that this will. Be assessed and hope plans can
[5:53:31] be modified to maintain this access. The proposed slope for
[5:53:36] the rights are fitted in expanded fees. One stormwater management
[5:53:39] pond suggests a fence will be required around the pond.
[5:53:43] This is a great concern, as an enclosed fence would
[5:53:46] not allow access for wildlife, for water foraging and habitat.
[5:53:50] We ask that the grading be reconsidered. To design the
[5:53:52] slopes around the pond such that no. Offense is required.
[5:53:56] The existing trail around this pond is a favorite height
[5:53:59] and viewing spot. I'll hurry for residents to observe wildlife
[5:54:03] in this area, which residents do not want to. Lose.
[5:54:06] It's great to hear this pond will remain a wet
[5:54:09] pond. Today's snapping. Turtles and occasional beaver. Muskrats, frogs, herons,
[5:54:14] ducks form part of the wildlife that inhabits this pond
[5:54:17] is our expectation that the retrofit will be done in
[5:54:20] such a manner. To protect the existing wildlife and allow
[5:54:24] for the diversity of wildlife to flourish here. We recognize
[5:54:28] and appreciate an adjacent wetland is proposed to provide a
[5:54:31] breeding habitat for amphibian species. However, this should not be
[5:54:36] considered as compensation for losses from bond one. Finally, regarding.
[5:54:41] Trails in all. Hurry. We are pleased to see a
[5:54:44] proposal for a trail system, but have specific concerns and
[5:54:47] requests here. First, in phase one, a trail system was
[5:54:51] proposed. It was never implemented by the developer. There is
[5:54:55] access off Bishop court between number 28 and 30. But
[5:54:59] it goes nowhere. There is town land behind the properties
[5:55:02] along the right side of Bishop Court for the trail
[5:55:05] system. However, it was never implemented. It is our request
[5:55:09] that this be included in this draft plan of subdivision
[5:55:12] as part of the overall trail system failing. This being
[5:55:16] added to the draft plan. Would be expect the town
[5:55:18] to include this project in the appropriate corresponding budget year.
[5:55:22] Two more points please, if I could. Be quick, please.
[5:55:26] Second, it's great to see the trail system be incorporated
[5:55:29] into the hamlet. To buffer. However, there should be a
[5:55:31] connecting trail from behind lot 16 on the. Hamlet buffer
[5:55:36] to connect to this proposed phase one trail completion. Create
[5:55:40] trail contiguity. Third. Pleased to see the trail access through
[5:55:45] this area for passive recreational use. However, we are requesting
[5:55:48] that extend it through and include the existing stormwater management
[5:55:52] pond beside bishop court. The existing trail locally developed and
[5:55:56] managed requires improvements, including old tree, old tire removal and
[5:56:00] old tree stakes. Fine and closing there. 's a long
[5:56:04] standing issue on Bishop Court, with property flooding along the
[5:56:07] lower west side of Bishop court phase one. This problem
[5:56:10] has not gone away. In fact, it is worsened in
[5:56:12] frequency and flow with the recent work in phase two
[5:56:15] land. We would like assurance that this issue will be
[5:56:19] addressed, if not at least not further compromise by this
[5:56:22] new development. Apologize for the. Lengthiness of that. Thank you
[5:56:25] very much for your time and consideration. Thank you, Mr.
[5:56:28] Brown. I appreciate that and also appreciate the GDWCa having
[5:56:33] those conversations with staff ahead of this as well as
[5:56:35] providing those comments to us ahead of this meeting, very
[5:56:38] much appreciate it. Any questions from councillor to delegation. Councillor
[5:56:43] Summerville. Thank you. Thank you for delegating tonight. I hope
[5:56:47] you'll take up Mr. Wellings on his offer. Work with
[5:56:51] him. With GWCN? Yes. Thank you. Any other questions? Seeing
[5:56:58] none. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Would someone. Like to bring
[5:57:03] this report forward. Councilor brass. Thank you. All those in
[5:57:06] favor? All right. It is now on the floor. Any
[5:57:10] questions to staff Councillor Brass? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
[5:57:16] would just start with Rogers comments, Mr. Staufford and in
[5:57:21] particular. If the 413 does go through and those two
[5:57:25] exits on Mayfield and Old school. And maybe we can
[5:57:30] hear from traffic. If there's our transportation. Sorry. If there's
[5:57:35] been any discussion on how to mitigate traffic. From those
[5:57:39] two roads going into Glenn Williams. Has that been discussed?
[5:57:44] What are the possible solutions? Marine Ben Ravens to come
[5:57:48] up and provide some comments.
[5:58:00] Three, Mr. Chair. To Councillor Brass. As part of the
[5:58:02] 413 we're still waiting for. The MTO to do their
[5:58:05] assessment. We have asked as part of their analysis that
[5:58:08] they look at the interchanges, one interchange being Mayfield Road,
[5:58:12] and the impact from that. But we have not received
[5:58:14] any information. To date. So this would be on our
[5:58:18] radar, obviously. That. We sort of get good answers on
[5:58:22] these questions for both those exits. Through the chair to
[5:58:26] you. Councillor Brass? Yes, that's correct. Great. Thank you. And
[5:58:29] maybe at that point, we can circle back to Mr.
[5:58:31] Staufford. Mr. Brown's comments, and there are plentiful lots of
[5:58:36] good questions there. Mike. And so I'm wondering, from staff,
[5:58:41] there's different areas of staff that would needed. To be
[5:58:45] consulted on this, but the fencing around the buffer, the
[5:58:48] fencing around the stormwater pond. Et cetera. Are two things
[5:58:53] I highlighted for sure. The trail system, whether that can
[5:58:57] be part of the draft plan and actually get the
[5:59:00] trail system. Done is another one that I highlighted, which
[5:59:03] would be, I think, of keen interest to the community.
[5:59:07] In Glenn Williams. And so just wondering if anyone can
[5:59:10] talk to those. And who will we be getting back
[5:59:13] to? Mr. Brown and gwc. On these new questions.
[5:59:24] Sure. Thank you for the chair to Councillor Brass. So,
[5:59:30] yes, Mr. Brown had a number of great questions. And
[5:59:33] we have worked extensively with the GWCA to date. In
[5:59:40] terms of fencing at the hamlet, buffer staff understands and
[5:59:43] appreciates the concerns that have been raised by the GWCA.
[5:59:48] The draft conditions are flexible enough that staff can work
[5:59:52] with the applicant to explore how fencing can occur along
[5:59:55] the hamlet buffer and around the stormwater management pond. Although
[5:59:59] development engineering staff is here and can speak to that
[6:00:02] if they have any further information. In terms of trails.
[6:00:06] So while the town owns lands behind the phase one
[6:00:09] lots that can accommodate the trail. The construction of the
[6:00:13] trail was not secured at the time of approval of
[6:00:16] phase one, which we understand. Staff cannot require the applicant
[6:00:21] to construct the trails in phase one through the approval
[6:00:23] of phase two. However, it appears that construction in this
[6:00:27] area has been budgeted to 2027. 2028. So. That is
[6:00:30] something that can be considered as. Part of next steps.
[6:00:35] The active transportation master plan has identified the desire for
[6:00:38] trails throughout the subdivision. Including to the east side of
[6:00:41] the subdivision behind lot 16. So that has been considered.
[6:00:46] And the trail system. Does extend, actually, through the swim
[6:00:49] pond. To bishop court, and that's in condition number 67.
[6:00:55] So I'm not sure if that was reviewed, but I'm
[6:00:58] not sure. Community services is online and has. Any other
[6:01:02] responses or if Jeff wanted to come up to talk
[6:01:04] about the swim pond fencing? Through the chair to Councillor
[6:01:13] Brass. I don't have much else to add, but typically.
[6:01:17] Our ponds. You only add fencing around there when they
[6:01:19] sort of safety the slopes is not sort. Of conducive
[6:01:21] for allowing public in those areas there, based on the
[6:01:23] input we were hitting. We're going to try to accommodate
[6:01:25] the trail system and make sure it's accessible where we
[6:01:27] can. If an extreme situation we can't, then we might
[6:01:30] be forced to. Put the fence in, but it won't
[6:01:32] be our first go to. Okay, so you'll. Try to
[6:01:35] work around for that. We're going to try to. Yes.
[6:01:37] Sure. And Mr. Chair, if I can have one more,
[6:01:39] please. It wasn't addressing Mr. Brown's comments just now, but
[6:01:42] I did read in one of the concerns that. The
[6:01:47] water pressure for phase two, whether. That would be adequate
[6:01:50] or not, given that bishop's court phase one, and I
[6:01:54] actually remember. This. When I was campaigning, I had several
[6:01:57] people on district court complaining to me about lack of
[6:02:00] water pressure. So just maybe if there's someone here that
[6:02:02] can comment on that as well. Please. Yeah, sorry. This
[6:02:10] is from region. No, go ahead. Through the chair to
[6:02:15] Councillor Brass. Yes. We consulted with the region after discussions.
[6:02:22] With residents and the region's responses that their interest is
[6:02:26] ensuring that. The pressure is within acceptable range, there could
[6:02:31] be other engineering solutions that meet that pressure threshold. Other
[6:02:35] than onsite pressure tanks, but this is up to the
[6:02:37] consulting engineer to provide those solutions. Regional staff are not
[6:02:42] expecting that there will be any water pressure concerns for
[6:02:45] the phase one residents. The new water infrastructure will create
[6:02:49] a looped water main which will eliminate the dead end
[6:02:51] within. Phase one and approve the pressure of the system.
[6:02:55] While a booster pump could be an option, so the
[6:02:56] GWCA had brought up the possibility of a booster pump.
[6:03:00] So we consulted with the region, and they did indicate
[6:03:03] that while a booster pump could be an option. Regional
[6:03:05] staff again have to leave it up to the consulting
[6:03:07] engineer to demonstrate that the region of Halton requirements can
[6:03:10] be met. Wonderful. Thank you. Chair. Councilor Somerville. My questions
[6:03:18] are asked, were answered. Anyone further questions on their report?
[6:03:23] Seeing? None. Someone like to move this report. Councillor Brass,
[6:03:27] all those in favor? That carries Q and that brings
[6:03:32] our general committee to a close for the evening. Can
[6:03:35] I get a motion to adjourn back into. Councillor. Councillor
[6:03:38] Norris. Thank you. All in favor? Gary.
[6:04:43] Well, thank you very much. Thank you very much, Councillor
[6:04:46] Rosinski. This is heading on to be a Councillor meeting
[6:04:53] for the book, that's for sure. You and I have
[6:04:58] earned our money tonight. Okay, well, some of the items
[6:05:03] from general committee. Were identified as being time sensitive, needing
[6:05:10] immediate action by Councillor tonight. And the details of these
[6:05:14] items can be found in section nine of today's agenda.
[6:05:18] It is moved by Councillor Somerville, seconded by Councillor Engels.
[6:05:21] The recommendation contained in the following immediate action item reports
[6:05:26] from Monday, November 18, 2024 general committee are hereby adopted
[6:05:33] report pd. 20240 70 as presented. Report PD 20240 92
[6:05:41] is presented. Report PD 20240 94 as presented. All in
[6:05:47] favor? That's carried. Thank you. And it's been moved by
[6:05:52] Councillor Somerville, I think, and seconded by Councillor Brass, that.
[6:05:57] The recommendations contained in the following confidential reports from the
[6:06:01] Monday, November 18, 2024 closed session of Councillor are hereby
[6:06:05] adopted as presented. And further that staff carry out any
[6:06:13] of council's direction on these matters as set out. In
[6:06:17] the confidential minutes dated November 18, 2024. Report CS 20240
[6:06:24] to nine report. Fire 20240. Zero five, report TPW 20240.
[6:06:31] Two three. All in favor? That's carriage.
[6:06:48] We have it moved by Councillor Vzinski, seconded by Councillor
[6:06:50] Ingles, that the general. Information package dated November 18, 2024,
[6:06:55] be received. Are there any items that people want. To
[6:07:01] address. See none. All in favor? That's carried.
[6:07:13] The details of tonight's bylaws can be found in section
[6:07:17] 17 of the agenda. Is boomed by Councillor Rozinski, seconded
[6:07:21] by Councillor Fogel, that the following bills are. Hereby passed
[6:07:25] by council. And further, the mayor and clerk are hereby
[6:07:32] authorized to execute the said bylaws and affix the seal
[6:07:36] of the corporation thereto. Bylaw numbers 2024 0086 through to
[6:07:43] 20240. Zero, 95. All in favor? That's Carrie. Thank you.
[6:07:56] And finally, it has been moved by Councillor Somerville, seconded
[6:08:00] by Councillor Fogle, that this Councillor. Meeting. Do now adjourn
[6:08:03] at 09:18 p.m. All in favor?