[0:37] >> Hi
[0:38] - Bonjour tout le monde.
[0:39] Everybody. It's not having glass
[0:40] we don't have the partitions
[0:41] which are normally
[0:42] Here.
[0:45] - Je vais commencer avec le
[0:47] changement du nom de la rue
[0:52] Columbus. En novembre dernier,
[0:53] nous avons eu une demande de
[0:55] modifier le nom de la rue
[0:57] Columbus à Pointe-Claire, nous
[0:58] nous sommes engagés à vérifier
[1:00] dans les archives pour savoir si
[1:01] le nom de la rue était à la
[1:04] mémoire de Christophe-Colomb, et
[1:05] maintenant, nous savons que
[1:06] c'est bien le cas. Néanmoins,
[1:09] les rues nommées en la mémoire
[1:10] de Christophe Colomb sont
[1:11] présentes à Montréal, à Québec,
[1:13] à Ottawa, à Toronto et ailleurs
[1:15] au Canada et aux États-Unis. À
[1:19] Montréal c'est une rue de 8. 5
[1:22] kilomètres qui traverse quatre
[1:27] arrondissements. Cette rue à
[1:28] Pointe-Claire est petite et
[1:29] compte deux adresses, nous
[1:33] pouvons penser que les
[1:34] conséquences d'un changement de
[1:36] noms seraient beaucoup moins
[1:37] importantes pour Pointe-Claire
[1:39] que pour la Ville de Montréal.
[1:41] Souvent ce sont les citoyens qui
[1:43] habitent la rue visée par les
[1:46] changements et surtout les
[1:47] entreprises qui s'objectent à
[1:50] des changements de noms de rue,
[1:52] compte tenu des désagréments et
[1:55] des coûts que cela représentent
[1:57] pour eux. Je crois qu'avant de
[1:59] décider de ce changement pour
[2:02] Pointe-Claire et de prendre une
[2:03] décision en séance du conseil,
[2:06] nous devons considérer l'impact
[2:07] que cela pourrait produire aux
[2:08] autres villes du Québec, car
[2:12] vous comprendrez que compte tenu
[2:14] de la sensibilité du sujet,
[2:17] notre décision présente un très
[2:19] grand potentiel de répercussion
[2:20] chez nos voisins et ailleurs et
[2:23] nous devons décider si nous
[2:24] voulons être un chef de file à
[2:26] cet effet. À mon avis, c'est un
[2:33] sujet qui demande une plus
[2:34] grande analyse et qui sort du
[2:36] simple cadre de notre
[2:38] municipalité, je vais donc
[2:40] apporter ce point pour
[2:41] discussion aux membres du
[2:43] conseil et la directrice
[2:45] générale et je vous tiendrai au
[2:47] courant des prochaines étapes.
[2:56] Three name in Columbus Street --
[2:57] last November we have a request
[2:59] to change the name of Columbus
[3:00] Avenue in Pointe-Claire. We
[3:02] committed to checking the
[3:03] archives to find out whether the
[3:05] name of this Avenue is a name of
[3:08] Christopher Columbus and we now
[3:09] know that it was indeed the case
[3:11] nevertheless, streets named in
[3:13] name memory of Christopher
[3:16] Columbus are found Montréal
[3:17] Québec, Ottawa, Toronto and
[3:19] elsewhere in Canada and the
[3:21] United States. In Montréal, it
[3:23] is an eight have kilometer
[3:24] avenue that runs through four
[3:26] boroughs. This avenue in
[3:28] Pointe-Claire is short and has
[3:30] two addresses. We can -- the
[3:32] consequences of a name change
[3:33] would be less less important for
[3:35] Pointe-Claire than for the City
[3:37] of Montréal. I or we believe
[3:40] that before deciding on this
[3:42] change for Pointe-Claire making
[3:43] a decision at the council
[3:44] meeting we must consider the
[3:45] impact this could have on other
[3:46] cities in Québec. It is a
[3:48] subject that requires greater
[3:49] analysis and goes beyond a
[3:51] simple framework of our
[3:52] municipality. So I will bring
[3:54] this point up for discussion
[3:55] with Council and the general
[3:57] manager will keep you informed
[3:58] on our next steps.
[4:03] Le mois de l'histoire des noirs
[4:04] Chaque année, le mois de février
[4:05] nous permet de reconnaître et de
[4:06] promouvoir la contribution des
[4:07] Québécoises et des Québécois des
[4:08] communautés noires à l'histoire
[4:11] du Québec, à son développement
[4:13] économique, social et culturel.
[4:17] Les gens de partout au Canada
[4:18] participent aux activités et aux
[4:20] festivités du Mois de l'histoire
[4:22] des Noirs qui honorent
[4:23] l'héritage des personnes noires
[4:25] au Canada et de leurs
[4:32] communautés. excuse. En 2021
[4:34] c'est plus de 1, 5 millions de
[4:35] personnes au Canada qui ont
[4:36] déclaré être noire. A
[4:39] Pointe-Claire, nous soulignons
[4:40] ce mois grâce à l'engagement du
[4:41] service des loisirs et de la
[4:42] culture qui ajoute des activités
[4:44] pour nous permettre de découvrir
[4:47] cette belle communauté, tant par
[4:49] la lecture, la cuisine et les
[4:54] récits. Je vous invite à
[4:55] consulter notre programmation à
[4:56] cet effet sur nos réseaux
[5:02] sociaux.
[5:06] Black History Month. Each year,
[5:08] the month of your allies is to
[5:09] recognize and promote the
[5:10] contribution of Quebecers from
[5:11] black in the 80s to the history
[5:13] of Québec, through its economic,
[5:15] social and cultural development.
[5:18] People across Canada
[5:19] participated black history month
[5:21] activities and festivities that
[5:22] honour the heritage of black
[5:23] people in Canada and their
[5:26] communities. In 2021 more than
[5:29] 1.5 million people in Canada
[5:32] declare themselves to be black.
[5:33] And Pointe-Claire, we are
[5:34] celebrating this month thanks to
[5:35] the commitment of the leisure
[5:36] and culture department which is
[5:38] adding activities to allow us to
[5:40] discover this beautiful
[5:41] community through reading
[5:43] community gawking and
[5:44] storytelling. I invite you to
[5:46] consult our storytelling on our
[5:48] website and social networks.
[5:51] Plan urbanisme Nous amorçons
[5:52] auprès des citoyennes et des
[5:53] citoyens les démarches de
[5:54] développement du plan
[5:56] d'urbanisme. Vu l'ampleur du
[5:57] projet, celui-ci se fera par
[6:02] étapes. La première étape
[6:03] consiste en un exercice de
[6:05] consultation, en ligne, sur les
[6:08] éléments de la vision de
[6:09] développement, nous vous
[6:12] invitons à vous inscrire dès
[6:14] maintenant sur la plateforme de
[6:19] consultations Pointe-Claire
[6:20] c'est Nous, pour participer et
[6:22] donner votre opinion sur les
[6:23] éléments qui vous apparaissent
[6:25] comme étant les trois priorités
[6:26] de la vision.
[6:36] la deuxième étape qui consiste
[6:38] en une activité de consultation
[6:40] citoyenne, le 15 marche
[6:41] prochain, les détails seront
[6:43] communiquées plus tard cette
[6:44] semaine. Le premier thème abordé
[6:47] sera le développement du cadre
[6:50] bâti afin de clarifier ce thème,
[6:52] le cadre bâti comprend des lieux
[6:54] et des espaces permettant de
[6:57] répondre aux besoins
[7:00] d'hébergement, de déplacement et
[7:03] de récréation. Le site
[7:06] Pointe-Claire c'est Nous, est la
[7:08] plate-forme de consultation
[7:09] idéale pour nos échanges et
[7:11] contiendra plusieurs
[7:12] informations au sujet des
[7:15] stratégies de développement de
[7:16] l'urbanisme. Je vous invite à
[7:19] vous y inscrire et à le
[7:22] consulter.
[7:23] We are initiating the process of
[7:25] developing the urban plan with
[7:26] citizens. Given the scale of the
[7:28] project, it will be done in
[7:30] different stages. The first step
[7:32] consists of an online
[7:34] consultation on the elements of
[7:35] the vision of development. We
[7:38] invite you to register on the
[7:41] Pointe-Claire it's who we are
[7:42] platform to participate and give
[7:44] your opinion on the elements
[7:45] that you feel are the top two
[7:48] priorities of this vision. Top
[7:52] three priorities of this vision
[7:53] Je m'excuse.
[7:54] -- the second step consists of a
[7:56] citizen participation activity
[7:57] that will take place March 15th.
[7:59] We are now finalizing the
[8:01] details which will be
[8:03] communicated later this week.
[8:05] The first thing we will address
[8:06] in this public participation
[8:07] will be the development of the
[8:10] built environment. In order to
[8:11] clarify the steam, the built
[8:13] environment includes places and
[8:15] spaces that meets the needs of
[8:17] housing, travelling and
[8:19] recreational activities. One of
[8:21] my favourite chapters of a book
[8:23] I once edited was called a space
[8:25] for community in the built
[8:27] environment. The buildings that
[8:29] you put in determining how you
[8:31] interact as a community. So it's
[8:33] more than just affordability and
[8:35] other things. It is how it
[8:36] creates interaction amongst
[8:37] people. My favourite example is
[8:41] Falcone Ville, which some of you
[8:43] may be familiar with, it's a
[8:45] famous play about the plateau,
[8:47] and how people lived in a very
[8:49] convivial range mint and it led
[8:51] to a legendary form of living,
[8:53] which made it a play which is
[8:59] quite famous in Québec --
[9:00] because we have to think of how
[9:02] it will influence how people
[9:04] live afterwards.
[9:13] Décès de Gregory Bielby C'est
[9:14] avec une profonde tristesse que
[9:15] nous avons appris le décès
[9:16] soudain de Greg Bielby, décédé
[9:17] le 16 janvier 2023. Résident de
[9:20] Dorval, M Bielby était un membre
[9:23] éminent de la communauté de
[9:24] Pointe-Claire, faisant du
[9:26] bénévolat au Centre aquatique de
[9:28] Pointe-Claire et aux ALPs
[9:30] pendant plus de 25 ans. Au
[9:36] Centre aquatique de
[9:37] Pointe-Claire, il a débuté en
[9:38] 1996 comme chronométreur et au
[9:40] cours des années suivantes, il a
[9:44] appris d'autres fonctions. Sa
[9:47] spécialité pendant de nombreuses
[9:48] années, a été de travailler
[9:50] comme opérateur électronique
[9:51] pour les rencontres à domicile
[9:52] et à l'extérieur. Lorsque
[9:57] Pointe-Claire a accueilli les
[10:00] Championnats canadiens d'été en
[10:01] 2011, 2013 et 2015, M. Bielby
[10:04] était le « Meet Manager » pour
[10:07] ces 3 championnats de haut
[10:08] niveau,. Le « Meet Manager » est
[10:13] le directeur de la compétition.
[10:15] Il a des tâches avant, pendant
[10:16] et après la rencontre.
[10:22] Suite à la période COVID, le
[10:23] Championnat de l'Est canadien a
[10:26] eu lieu à Pointe-Claire en avril
[10:29] 2022 et encore une fois, M.
[10:31] Bielby était le directeur de la
[10:37] compétition. Il aimait
[10:38] travailler avec les officiels de
[10:39] natation, et passait beaucoup de
[10:40] temps à faire du bénévolat lors
[10:41] des compétitions à l'extérieur,
[10:43] comme à la piscine olympique, au
[10:45] parc Jean Drapeau et dans les
[10:47] piscines locales autour de
[10:50] Montréal. Il aimait aussi
[10:51] enseigner, et était
[10:52] l'instructeur de plusieurs cours
[10:53] pour officiels, donnés au Centre
[10:54] aquatique de Pointe-Claire. Il a
[10:58] également siégé au conseil
[11:00] d'administration du Club
[11:02] aquatique depuis sa création, et
[11:04] a occupé le poste de trésorier.
[11:08] Beaucoup de gens se souviendront
[11:09] de lui pour sa gentillesse et sa
[11:15] générosité. Nous saluons son
[11:16] fils Chris, qui est entraîneur
[11:17] sénior du Club aquatique dans le
[11:20] cadre des programmes
[11:21] sport-études, ainsi que le
[11:25] programme national de
[11:28] développement. Nous offrons nos
[11:29] plus sincères condoléances à son
[11:30] épouse Karen Walker; ses fils,
[11:33] Christopher et Steven, sa
[11:34] famille et ses amis. It is with
[11:42] profound sadness that we learn
[11:43] about the sudden loss of Gregory
[11:45] Bielby. He passed away on
[11:48] January 16th, 2023. A resident
[11:52] of Dorval, Mr. Bielby she's a
[11:53] prominent member of the
[11:55] Pointe-Claire community,
[11:56] entering at the Pointe-Claire
[11:58] aquatic center and Al Peace for
[11:59] 25 years. At the Pointe-Claire
[12:01] aquatic center he started in
[12:03] 1996 as a timer and over the
[12:05] next three years he learned
[12:07] other positions. A specialty for
[12:08] many years was working at the
[12:10] electronics operator for home
[12:11] and away meets. When
[12:13] Pointe-Claire host of the
[12:14] Canadian summer nationals in
[12:18] 2011 2013 and 2015, Mr. Bielby
[12:22] was the meet manager for these
[12:27] important -- after the COVID
[12:32] shut down, the Canadian eastern
[12:34] championship was held at
[12:35] Pointe-Claire in April of 2022,
[12:37] and once again he was the meet
[12:39] manager. He enjoyed working with
[12:42] swim officials and spent a lot
[12:43] of time volunteering -- away
[12:47] competitions at the Olympic pool
[12:51] Jean-Drapeau, and local poles
[12:52] around Montréal. He also enjoys
[12:54] teaching and was the instructor
[12:55] from any of the courses for
[12:56] officials held at the
[12:59] Pointe-Claire aquatic center. He
[13:00] also served on the board of
[13:01] directors for the aquatic club
[13:02] ever since it was established
[13:04] and held a position of
[13:05] treasurer. Many will remember
[13:07] him fondly for his kindness and
[13:10] selflessness. We salute his son
[13:11] Chris, who is a senior coach for
[13:13] the aquatic club, for the sport
[13:16] study program, as well as the
[13:17] national development program. We
[13:18] offer our deepest sympathies to
[13:20] his wife, Karen Walker, and his
[13:23] sons Christopher and Stephen,
[13:25] and to his family and friends.
[13:27] 4. Début de la période de je m'
[13:33] >> Mr. Thomas --
[13:34] Excuse, oui, je m'excuse.
[13:36] >> --
[13:37] Go back to the agenda. But
[13:39] first, I will have a
[13:41] modification to bring item 16.4
[13:47] in the English version. We
[13:49] should read in the agreement to
[13:51] be entered into with his majesty
[13:53] and not her majesty. I am sorry.
[13:57] The French version is okay. And
[14:03] before going further, Mr. Mayor,
[14:06] I would like to mention that if
[14:08] some views would like to express
[14:11] views on the bylaw adopted --
[14:12] they can do so during the
[14:15] consultation provided for in 5.3
[14:17] instead of the question period.
[14:20] - Avant d'aller plus loin, je
[14:22] souhaite mentionner que si
[14:23] certains citoyens veulent se
[14:24] faire entendre par le conseil
[14:26] concernant le règlement adopté
[14:28] au point 5.4 ils peuvent le
[14:31] faire à la consultation prévue
[14:34] au point 5.3 au lieu de se
[14:36] présenter à la période de
[14:37] questions, merci.
[14:38] >> And at
[14:40] 18.2, it is also -- not --
[14:43] >> Force I forgot about this
[14:46] one.
[14:47] >> Ahead of it is a very good
[14:49] friend of mine. So we better get
[14:50] it right. Thank you. The agenda?
[14:55] - Je pense?
[14:56] >> --
[14:57] Approval of the agenda.
[15:01] >> Do I have a mover?
[15:04] >> -- district too.
[15:07] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,
[15:08] district three.
[15:09] >> All in favour? Okay.
[15:17] 3. 1 Approuver les
[15:18] procès-verbaux de la séance
[15:19] ordinaire du 17 janvier 2023 et
[15:20] des séances extraordinaires du
[15:21] 19 janvier 2023 et du 30 janvier
[15:23] 2023.
[15:25] >> Do I have a mover?
[15:27] >> -- district, two.
[15:31] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,
[15:32] district three.
[15:35] - Maintenant... oui... je
[15:36] m'excuse!
[15:38] >> All in favour?
[15:39] >> All in favour.
[15:41] 4.
[15:42] >> -- Période de questions all.
[15:43] Against? Nobody is against. I'm
[15:45] eager -- to eager, perhaps.
[15:46] Ce soir, à la période des
[15:47] questions, vous avez été
[15:48] accueilli à l'entrée pour vous
[15:50] inscrire à la période de
[15:51] questions. L'intention de cette
[15:52] démarche est d'abord de
[15:53] permettre aux personnes de
[15:54] demeurer assises jusqu'à l'appel
[15:56] de leur nom, et d'accorder la
[15:58] priorité aux résidentes et
[15:59] résidents de Pointe-Claire. Les
[16:02] non-résidents présents pourront
[16:04] poser leurs questions par la
[16:06] suite; si le temps n'est pas
[16:14] écoulé. Tonight, during question
[16:15] period, you are greeted -- the
[16:17] question period. The goal of
[16:18] this approach is to allow people
[16:19] to remain seated until their
[16:21] name is called and give clear
[16:24] priority to Pointe-Claire
[16:25] residents. -- if they are still
[16:26] is time. Also an additional note
[16:31] -- if you have a question, you
[16:33] can -- is it Lucy? I think it's
[16:37] Lucy. Or who do we signal during
[16:39] the exchange to get themselves
[16:41] back on the list -- will take it
[16:43] down? Okay.
[16:46] - Ça va durer 90 minutes. We are
[16:47] going to go
[16:49] 19 minutes. And I guess that's
[16:51] about it. You can proceed with
[16:53] question period. All right? Oh,
[16:57] yes. Sorry. First name? Season
[16:58] Weaver. Susan Weaver.
[17:13] >> Okay. Preamble and one
[17:15] question -- preamble is three
[17:17] minutes. I was unable to attend
[17:21] January 30th special meeting.
[17:22] So, I would like to have my
[17:23] support for the decision
[17:25] councillors took regarding the
[17:26] resolution. It is the best
[17:29] possible approach in hopes to
[17:31] begin a dialogue with the
[17:32] property owner. If the Council
[17:34] was to keep pushing the date
[17:35] forward, perhaps for years, we
[17:37] will not have any say at all.
[17:40] All could be decided by Québec
[17:43] and the CMM. We would be left
[17:45] out. If I remember correctly,
[17:48] the description of Pointe-Claire
[17:50] as a satellite city with a
[17:52] downtown was first announced
[17:54] during a council meeting under
[17:56] mayor McMurchie in 2011. Later
[17:58] to the next year, followed the
[18:00] urban year plan, Todd's and
[18:02] updates. Some say it has been in
[18:05] the work at least -- in 2010.
[18:08] So, I cannot say. I would like
[18:11] to know the timeline and the
[18:13] stages of the project. Will it
[18:15] be ten, 15 or 20 years? The
[18:18] forest should be preserved, as
[18:20] should all green spaces on the
[18:21] island. In October 2020, see if
[18:23] put out and over the top photo,
[18:26] giving birth to Fairview forest
[18:28] group. Both raised awareness to
[18:30] this green space. The group
[18:32] still drives to the weekly
[18:34] protest. The heart of the force
[18:36] is spectacular. But with the
[18:38] fragmented teas spreading in the
[18:40] northwest corner, and most
[18:41] likely other invasive plants, it
[18:43] should be maintained. It was a
[18:45] missed opportunity on the part
[18:47] of the Fairview forest group not
[18:50] to speak about the forest with
[18:52] Mr. Salpeter when he reached out
[18:54] to a group member at a -- in
[18:58] March 2022. I do not take sides.
[19:00] But I asked for honesty. So, to
[19:02] set the record straight, twice
[19:04] it has been stated that C F did
[19:07] not want to speak to the group.
[19:09] Once, in a Gazette report, July
[19:11] 2022, a group member was quoted
[19:13] as saying, not a peep from C F.
[19:16] And again at the January 30th
[19:18] meeting when a concerned woman
[19:19] from district six said that CF
[19:22] did not contact anyone, March
[19:25] 2022, Mr. Salpeter gave out his
[19:28] business card to contact him.
[19:30] There was no response until we
[19:33] CF wanted to install a fence a
[19:35] month later. Too late. I
[19:36] imagine, with good reason, after
[19:39] listening to months of
[19:40] bad-mouthing from some people --
[19:42] also, in regard to the last
[19:43] meeting, the same woman
[19:45] questioned the councillors if
[19:46] they had contact with CF -- why?
[19:51] In a Gazette article, January
[19:52] 29th, Mr. Fletcher is quoted as
[19:54] saying, one is left to wonder,
[19:56] what possible interest could
[19:57] prompt the councillors? And that
[19:59] was uncalled for. These two
[20:01] statements, in my opinion
[20:03] implied that the councillors
[20:04] were not honourable. No. The six
[20:08] dissident councillors are not on
[20:09] the take. Many are our
[20:11] neighbours. As for being a
[20:13] dissident councillor I, was
[20:15] surprised by a description made
[20:17] on January 19th, that dissidents
[20:19] are opposing their authoritarian
[20:21] figures everywhere. Now my
[20:22] question is, for public
[20:24] participation, or consultation,
[20:26] will you try to get other
[20:28] citizens from the community
[20:30] rather than we who attend
[20:32] council meetings always? You
[20:33] know our opinions. We need new
[20:34] ideas.
[20:37] >> Yeah. It's a good point. Yes,
[20:39] the answer is, to that.
[20:41] Absolutely. There should be
[20:42] every effort to get across
[20:43] section of the community as best
[20:45] we can and not just those who
[20:49] are in the zone, as we say. As
[20:52] for the -- I don't think there
[20:53] was an implication that someone
[20:55] was on the take. I cannot speak
[20:56] for the people. But there is
[21:00] also associations or
[21:01] relationships or friendships
[21:02] that have been established that
[21:04] could possibly assist influence
[21:07] people's decision-making. I
[21:08] suspect that is what Mr.
[21:09] Fletcher was alluding to and not
[21:11] to being on the take. But I will
[21:12] let him speak for himself. I
[21:14] just wanted to put that
[21:15] possibility out there. So,
[21:18] secondly, yeah, Mr.
[21:26] --
[21:28] >> Good day, Council, and
[21:30] attendees. I prepared a
[21:31] preamble. But it was really to
[21:33] prove that Columbus Street was
[21:35] named after Columbus and the
[21:39] street voyager in Columbus was a
[21:41] named at the exact same time and
[21:42] the exact same date. That proves
[21:44] it. Didn't really have to go
[21:46] into archives to see that --
[21:48] upon your explanation to be sad.
[21:52] Because the city is putting the
[21:54] responsibility -- it's more
[21:55] responsibility to be a leader of
[21:57] change on other cities that are
[21:59] not related to this subject. I'm
[22:02] a resident of Pointe-Claire. Not
[22:04] Ottawa or Québec city -- and you
[22:10] offered no cogent argument
[22:11] disproving any of the crimes
[22:13] associated with Christopher
[22:15] Columbus. These crimes are part
[22:18] of Yale University's genocide
[22:20] studies. I don't think the city
[22:21] would respond to this if we had
[22:23] a street called at all for
[22:25] something like mail or stolen.
[22:28] Historically, Columbus is put in
[22:29] the same category as these
[22:32] people. You mentioned Black
[22:34] History Month in the same breath
[22:37] you honour Black History Month,
[22:39] I do too, but at the same time,
[22:41] you protect the legacy of a
[22:43] slave owner, which is
[22:44] Christopher Columbus.
[22:47] I mean, that's basically it. I
[22:51] don't know if protest is needed.
[22:54] This whole obfuscation -- this
[22:56] puts shame on the City. That's
[23:01] basically it.
[23:02] >> Okay.
[23:03] >> It's pretty sad.
[23:05] >> I hear you are coming from.
[23:07] We don't disagree. The issue for
[23:08] a lot of us is, are we capable
[23:11] of resolving this issue? And are
[23:12] we the ones that should best
[23:14] raise all of it? We will venture
[23:17] into the issue as a Council with
[23:21] a lot of research and thoughts
[23:23] before we make such a decision,
[23:24] because it is a four bearer for
[23:27] all other cities and other
[23:28] streets named Columbus. And we
[23:31] feel that we are ordinary
[23:33] citizens who are somewhat
[23:34] knowledgeable and municipal
[23:35] affairs. But this is a pretty
[23:37] serious issue. And it's one
[23:38] that, morally and
[23:40] intellectually, we would not
[23:41] mind getting a little more
[23:42] opinion from others about as to
[23:45] how to proceed and --
[23:47] >> A leading human rights group
[23:48] has said that this street needs
[23:50] to be changed.
[23:51] >> Okay. The name of the group?
[23:54] >> Red coalition.
[23:55] >> Red coalition. Okay, we can
[23:58] reach out.
[23:59] >> -- global News segment cover
[24:01] this and they asked the city two
[24:03] days ago about this and three
[24:05] days ago about this issue. The
[24:07] city's official response was
[24:08] that the City Street was not
[24:10] named after Columbus, and that
[24:12] --
[24:13] >> I'm sorry to hear that.
[24:14] >> Mr. Brent Cowan, he gave his
[24:20] response from this building. So,
[24:22] I would think it represents the
[24:24] city. And global news says that
[24:27] they mentioned the city is
[24:28] giving that response.
[24:29] >> Mr. Mayor?
[24:32] >> I never said. That
[24:33] >> I said I --
[24:36] >> That's what I said --
[24:37] >> I didn't know for a fact -- I
[24:39] said, the first thing to do was
[24:40] to check it out.
[24:45] >> Okay.
[24:46] >> Will, the Québec registry of
[24:48] street signs to upon me
[24:54] -- is someone who explores by
[25:01] boat and encyclopedic
[25:04] puritanical, Columbus is the
[25:06] first example. I mean, how do
[25:09] you argue that. The City of
[25:12] Montréal, I mean, has nothing to
[25:13] do with the city of
[25:15] Pointe-Claire changing its
[25:16] street sign. I don't live in
[25:17] Montréal. And if they change the
[25:23] street sign, will the city of
[25:25] Pointe-Claire change theirs? I
[25:26] made that request as well.
[25:29] >> Who knows? We can possibly
[25:31] have a referendum on. It we
[25:32] could do all kinds of things to
[25:34] resolve the issue. We don't feel
[25:35] that we are morally endowed with
[25:37] that power. It's a pretty
[25:39] serious power. And we would like
[25:40] to be fully informed on that
[25:42] decision. Because it has
[25:44] implications for other
[25:45] municipalities as well as all
[25:48] kinds of -- residents. There's a
[25:54] gazillion residents that live in
[25:55] Christophe Colomb on Montréal.
[25:57] -- that should not supersede
[25:59] anything. But we would like to
[26:01] hear more about the issue and
[26:02] reflect on it more. That is all.
[26:04] We just simply more need more
[26:05] time to understand. Okay?
[26:07] >> Thank you.
[26:08] >> May I comment?
[26:11] >> Absolutely.
[26:12] >> Just going back -- especially
[26:14] from Black History Month, it's a
[26:15] slippery slope that we are on.
[26:17] Just in Northview a number
[26:18] seven, we have Walton Street and
[26:20] Livingston Street, which are
[26:22] named after, presumably, from
[26:24] research, to slaveowners. We
[26:27] have winter of avenue, came to
[26:31] after John wind threw up --
[26:32] there's a lot out there that
[26:34] needs to be digested and gone
[26:36] through to come to a proper
[26:39] conclusion. So, to this point,
[26:40] it's a big ball to unravel. I
[26:42] think it needs a bit of time and
[26:43] a bit of thought process. That
[26:45] is just north of you number
[26:46] seven with the quick research
[26:48] that --
[26:50] >> Can I just add?
[26:52] >> Mr. Quella -- I invite you to
[27:00] have a conversation -- best way
[27:01] to address this issue. We have
[27:05] noticed at the last yuan Q --
[27:09] that's the union conference
[27:10] where different elected
[27:11] officials of Québec get
[27:12] together, they have taken
[27:14] important issues that are not
[27:16] appropriate in culture. Violence
[27:18] against women, violence against
[27:20] children, for example, and
[27:21] discuss those issues, brought it
[27:23] out into the open and had a
[27:27] bringing it to light, so that is
[27:29] not buried, it is not erased,
[27:31] and try to move forward and also
[27:33] have our culture more aware of
[27:35] these wearable practices. In
[27:37] that case, it was still going
[27:39] on, it was violence against
[27:40] women. So, I just invite you to
[27:42] speak to Brent. Because there's
[27:44] also discussions going on in
[27:45] what the best way to move
[27:47] forward is, because, as
[27:49] Councillor Stork has shared,
[27:51] what is the right way when there
[27:52] could be multiple other issues
[27:54] other than the one streaked? So,
[27:56] it is not a lack of empathy for
[27:58] the situation at all. It's
[27:59] about, what is doing right? What
[28:01] would be most honouring? Do we
[28:03] want to honour storytelling? Do
[28:05] we want to have a different type
[28:07] of reconciliation? Things of
[28:08] that sort? So, just add -- but I
[28:10] invite you to have a
[28:11] conversation with Council to
[28:14] have more of the ideas and
[28:15] exchange. Because that is what
[28:16] we are looking for.
[28:18] >> I mean, there is some -- Joe
[28:23] or distorting in this country
[28:24] now -- and this is what this is.
[28:27] The only Joe -- genocides --
[28:32] commemorate -- genocide --
[28:34] streets and important history
[28:35] behind that -- and that's
[28:39] >> Thank you, Mr. Quella.
[28:43] Bridget Watson?
[28:53] >> Good evening. I guess I don't
[28:54] have to say my name. So, the
[28:59] mandate that the letter that was
[29:02] given to Madam the down, that
[29:04] city manager -- strain on civic
[29:08] engagement. You granted private
[29:11] talks between multibillion
[29:14] dollar Corporation and City
[29:15] representatives, while leaving
[29:16] the citizens out in the cold. I
[29:17] know we disagree on that. But
[29:19] this is how I see after having
[29:22] read the mandate letter. We the
[29:24] people of Pointe-Claire don't
[29:25] generally have access to the
[29:26] resources, financial or
[29:28] otherwise, and influence like
[29:30] how like Fairview does. So this
[29:32] is not a level playing field
[29:33] with how zones and we won an Mu2
[29:35] art to be approached. For that
[29:37] reason alone, I feel you have
[29:39] failed us and I have grave
[29:40] concerns and doubts over what
[29:41] kind of city we will end up with
[29:43] when all this is over. So my
[29:47] first question is, the mandate
[29:49] letter states that members of
[29:50] the committee are firmly
[29:51] committed to achieving the
[29:53] objectives set and respecting
[29:55] the framework established for
[29:57] the redevelopment of or
[29:59] treatment of Mu1 and Mu2 zones.
[30:01] A large number of citizens are
[30:03] in favour of -- does that mean
[30:10] that anyone that -- allowed to
[30:11] join the committee?
[30:15] >> I don't think so.
[30:19] >> It states in the mandate
[30:20] letter.
[30:21] >> Read it to me again, we
[30:22] swats?
[30:23] >> -- firmly committed to
[30:24] achieving the objective set and
[30:27] respecting the a framework
[30:28] established for the
[30:29] redevelopment or treatment at
[30:30] venue won it and you two zones.
[30:33] >> Okay. So they are linked
[30:34] together.
[30:36] >> So, there is no answer? Okay.
[30:41] >> You feel that they should be
[30:43] included?
[30:44] >> I think it's a
[30:45] misinterpretation of how you are
[30:46] reading. Like you said, your
[30:47] perception -- the point is, we
[30:50] want to, as was mentioned at the
[30:52] very beginning, different
[30:53] perspectives, different
[30:55] representation. We want from
[30:56] across the city. That, yes, we
[30:58] understand that there is a very
[30:59] strong group of certain
[31:00] individuals. But we want to hear
[31:02] from everyone and all aspects
[31:04] across the city. It does not
[31:07] preclude anyone from this group
[31:08] being on it. But something has
[31:10] to be built on Mu1 for sure --
[31:15] >> For sure --
[31:16] >> And that's the whole point --
[31:20] >> --
[31:21] >> -- regularly keep members of
[31:23] the Council of the city of
[31:24] Pointe-Claire informed of the
[31:25] process of the work process
[31:27] previously agreed upon between
[31:28] the parties, which I am assuming
[31:30] our Cadillac Fairview and city.
[31:32] There is no mention of citizens
[31:35] being involved in this process.
[31:37] And this is the mandate letter
[31:38] that was given to madame Verdun
[31:40] or she gave this to the
[31:42] representative from Cadillac
[31:43] Fairview. These are the
[31:44] instruction she is to go on,
[31:45] where it states that if people
[31:47] are not committed to and firmly
[31:52] -- achieving the objective said
[31:53] by the parties, then they are
[31:55] not to be on the committee. So,
[31:56] it's not my interpretation. It
[31:58] is what is written. The second
[32:01] question -- at the
[32:03] >> That's --
[32:06] >> January 30th extraordinary
[32:07] meeting, I remember Councillor
[32:08] Stork and perhaps others saying
[32:09] that if you weren't happy with
[32:10] the talks between the city and
[32:12] Cadillac Fairview, you would
[32:14] walk away. Now nowhere does that
[32:15] state that in the mandate
[32:17] letter, so, are we to assume
[32:20] that Cadillac Fairview knows and
[32:21] understands us? Or will they see
[32:22] you for this to what they decide
[32:23] to walk away?
[32:29] >> The mandate is to start
[32:31] discussions to establish the
[32:32] process. The mandate does not
[32:35] state that we are going to agree
[32:37] on whatever Cadillac Fairview
[32:38] wants. I think that's a
[32:40] misinterpretation. We want
[32:43] madame Verdun to start the
[32:44] discussion so that things can
[32:46] move forward so that we can
[32:47] establish a best process to work
[32:49] together.
[32:50] >> Then I wish you would say
[32:51] that more clearly in here.
[32:53] Because
[32:54] >> -- well, that's her
[32:55] administrative right, to be able
[32:56] to negotiate with the person.
[32:58] She is a DG of the city. And so
[33:00] we are giving the mandate for
[33:01] her to go and start the process.
[33:04] >> From what I understand these
[33:05] mandates are your instructions,
[33:06] though.
[33:07] >> Yes, to start discussion.
[33:09] Yes, to start discussions --
[33:10] >> Well, it's more than starting
[33:12] discussions.
[33:13] >> Okay. Well -- any other
[33:16] comments --
[33:17] >> If I could weigh in -- my
[33:21] belief and desire is for the
[33:24] discussions to not involve
[33:26] Council at the early part of the
[33:28] process or politicians. The
[33:31] elected official should not be
[33:33] involved. And it should be urban
[33:35] planning and the parties
[33:36] involved and the citizen. And
[33:38] the sooner we get the citizen
[33:40] involved, the better, and that
[33:43] is why we are moving along. And
[33:45] I like the way we are headed.
[33:48] And I take exception to the way
[33:49] it's written and the resolution.
[33:51] Because I feel that we have
[33:52] moved away from them, the
[33:55] priority of the importance of
[33:58] citizen participation and I
[34:01] would have -- greater structure
[34:03] on this process and -- as long
[34:05] as it is after the facts.
[34:07] >> I'd like to comment, please.
[34:09] >> Go ahead, Councillor Stork.
[34:12] >> Contrary to what you just
[34:13] said, the elected officials are
[34:14] not involved in this process.
[34:16] This is a process involving our
[34:18] DG, members of our
[34:19] administration, and Cadillac
[34:22] Fairview, to set up a public
[34:24] participation policy to bring
[34:26] the citizens of Pointe-Claire at
[34:28] a table and discuss. Whatever
[34:30] comes out of that is brought
[34:32] back to Council -- and this has
[34:33] been noted before -- it's
[34:34] brought back to Council. It has
[34:35] to be agreed upon. And it will
[34:38] be discussed with the citizens.
[34:40] So, at no point are elected
[34:44] officials. I don't know what --
[34:45] the are of that but at no point
[34:47] are elected officials in this
[34:49] process.
[34:50] >> How is the letter structured?
[34:51] >> Thank you for clarifying
[34:52] that, Councillor Stork. At what
[34:55] frequency will the updates be
[34:57] coming from the de G?
[34:58] >> We have to see what comes out
[35:00] of it. We have to find out.
[35:02] That's what will be part of this
[35:03] discussion.
[35:04] >> I'm just really puzzled on
[35:06] how the public is not allowed to
[35:07] leave the process on the public
[35:10] participation process -- why
[35:12] couldn't you start with us? And
[35:13] then, I hear -- I was there for
[35:15] all the meetings. I know all the
[35:16] stuff that you said. And I'm
[35:18] glad you did say that. However,
[35:20] it is still confusing. So, I
[35:23] thank you for your time. And
[35:25] I've got to go.
[35:30] >> Ms., if I could just add, the
[35:32] letter itself had influence --
[35:35] it was influenced. And so, there
[35:38] has been a role. We've cleared
[35:42] the process of how -- I would
[35:45] prefer to have a citizen
[35:47] involvement and greater citizen
[35:49] involvement and I feel that
[35:50] letter was a step forward, with
[35:52] too much involvement of
[35:53] Councillor not enough of the
[35:54] citizen. That is my take on it.
[35:56] >> Just one last little comment.
[36:00] >> --
[36:01] >> Yeah, thank you, Tim.
[36:03] >> -- Mayor Thomas --
[36:05] >> Thank you, Mayor Thomas --
[36:08] for clarifying that elected
[36:10] officials will not be involved
[36:11] in the process.
[36:13] >> That would be my hope.
[36:21] Gregory Forchette?
[36:28] >> Mister Mayor, my name is
[36:30] Gregory -- please make an
[36:34] attempt to correct my name.
[36:36] >> I apologize.
[36:38] >> When you speak ill of me when
[36:40] I'm not in the room --
[36:42] >> I never speak I love you sir.
[36:44] >> That's -- excuse me it's
[36:47] unfair -- I don't speak ill of
[36:49] you, sir.
[36:50] >> You made a comment about my
[36:52] preamble's., So --
[36:54] >> In the meetings here?
[36:58] >> -- I was speaking about --
[37:01] >> The preamble's are the
[37:02] preamble's.
[37:03] >> That's me.
[37:06] >> --
[37:07] >> So, given that the letter has
[37:08] come up and the letter that you
[37:10] are post on Facebook has come up
[37:12] multiple times already this
[37:14] evening, I am -- I'm mildly
[37:18] confused. And I think a lot of
[37:20] the residents are mildly
[37:21] confused about some of the
[37:22] statements that are being made.
[37:23] You have made some very very
[37:25] strong statements in your posts
[37:28] on Facebook regarding
[37:31] commitments. And what a
[37:32] contract, one of mandates. I
[37:36] really want to truly understand
[37:39] how -- and that will get to my
[37:40] questions -- how you make these
[37:42] statements and why you make the
[37:46] statements. It's in reference to
[37:48] the agreements or discussions
[37:50] with Cadillac Fairview. I'm
[37:51] going to keep it simple. My
[37:53] first question is, please
[37:56] elaborate and explain to us
[37:58] where you see in this letter.
[38:01] And I will add, there was some
[38:03] loose translation to this letter
[38:06] being shared around that where
[38:09] we are committing the City
[38:13] clearly commits. And I use this
[38:16] several times going to force the
[38:21] City to allow as Cadillac
[38:23] Fairview to write their own
[38:24] bylaws. We are in this statement
[38:26] -- in these two pages that I
[38:28] have read now, multiple times
[38:31] does that say that?
[38:32] >> The CDP allows --
[38:36] >> Is there are contract --
[38:38] >> Mr. Frechette, -- I'm trying
[38:39] to answer your question.
[38:42] -- far greater role than
[38:44] otherwise. And my initial
[38:47] objection to this whole process
[38:49] the letter and the resolution is
[38:50] that there isn't mutual joint
[38:53] role in the process -- city and
[38:56] developer together. And that I
[38:57] don't accept. So, that's where I
[38:58] see the problem. That's where I
[39:00] see the issue with the process
[39:02] that we are engaged in, right
[39:03] now. And I would not allow the
[39:07] developer that kind of rollover
[39:09] -- control over the service in
[39:12] citizen participation. I don't
[39:13] think that's fair. So, that is
[39:16] my feeling on it.
[39:17] >> My second question is, please
[39:20] provide us, the citizens, with
[39:22] the documentation and the proof
[39:23] that we have entered, signed
[39:26] into a CDP, into a contract,
[39:29] with Cadillac Fairview that is
[39:33] going to -- allows Cadillac
[39:34] Fairview to design the bylaws at
[39:35] the city of Pointe-Claire can
[39:37] say no. If the in CC can say no
[39:40] to the federal government on
[39:42] development in downtown Ottawa,
[39:44] I am certain Pointe-Claire can
[39:46] say no to Cadillac Fairview on
[39:49] development and what happens.
[39:51] Prove to me -- prove to the rest
[39:52] of the city of Pointe-Claire
[39:55] where this CDP is, and where
[39:58] this contract that you clearly
[40:00] stated on Facebook today,
[40:01] exists.
[40:03] >> Mr. Frechette, what CDP does
[40:07] is allow Cadillac Fairview to
[40:09] propose. And what I don't want
[40:10] is for Cadillac Fairview is to
[40:12] propose. What I would like is
[40:14] for the citizen to create a
[40:16] framework and a CDP allows the
[40:18] developer to propose. And that
[40:22] is where we are already a step
[40:26] along in the -- it's. Once it's
[40:29] been proposed and the process
[40:31] starts it's very hard to relate
[40:32] back where is I would like to
[40:36] have a clue to citizen
[40:38] decision-making process prior to
[40:39] the proposal, prior to anything,
[40:41] so that we don't have to reel
[40:42] anything back after the fact. So
[40:44] that is where I'm going with
[40:46] that one. And we aren't in a CDP
[40:49] yet. We are working towards one.
[40:51] >> Thank you. We are not in a
[40:53] seedy tee it.
[40:54] >> Not yet --
[40:55] >> And this letter today -- that
[40:57] you shared, this email --
[40:58] >> It does not say we are in a
[41:01] CDP already.
[41:03] >> Okay.
[41:04] >> We are not in the CDP --
[41:06] >> This is now the signed
[41:08] contract --
[41:09] >> There is a mandate letter.
[41:11] There is a mandate letter.
[41:13] >> There's a mandate letter to
[41:14] start some discussions.
[41:16] >> The process is -- without sin
[41:19] participation. So, that is the
[41:22] issue here. Mr. Fréchet, that is
[41:24] the issue here.
[41:27] >> A pretty short says
[41:29] participation of citizens in
[41:30] here. Thank you.
[41:32] >> May I comment, Mister Mayor?
[41:34] >> Absolutely.
[41:35] >> Just for clarification,
[41:37] basically, this resolution once
[41:38] again, if you start the process
[41:40] to set up a public participation
[41:42] process with the citizens. Once
[41:44] that is established, it's how to
[41:46] set up a framework for the
[41:48] citizens to be involved in the
[41:49] process. It's their thoughts,
[41:51] their beliefs, whether it be
[41:52] three meetings, 20 people, or
[41:54] 100 people. That's to set up the
[41:56] process. In my view, in my
[41:58] opinion, then that happens.
[42:00] Those public participation
[42:02] happens. From there, we get the
[42:05] information from the feedback,
[42:06] from the citizens. And at that
[42:07] point we have confirmed an idea
[42:09] once that ideas formulated on
[42:11] what the soft thoughts of the
[42:13] citizens are, to my opinion I
[42:15] think that's the actual process.
[42:18] And from that point, we would
[42:19] open discussions, potentially,
[42:21] with Cadillac Fairview to CDP.
[42:24] So, we would not speak to the
[42:27] citizens after we negotiate a
[42:29] CDP. It happened, we will speak
[42:31] to the citizens, and bake based
[42:33] upon the information we would
[42:34] take back, we would potentially
[42:37] discuss a CDP -- it would have
[42:38] to be mutual and it would have
[42:39] to be -- council resolution, it
[42:43] would have to be passed by us.
[42:44] And the citizens would have
[42:46] public participation, even after
[42:47] we get to the citizen of what
[42:49] the --
[42:52] >> So, just to clarify -- there
[42:54] is no CDP discussions until the
[42:59] Public receives all the
[43:00] information from the public
[43:01] participation policy to be
[43:04] digested.
[43:10] >> To make it clear for all of
[43:11] you -- I gave you all a schedule
[43:14] last time, last meeting. Have a
[43:16] look at that schedule and --
[43:21] process that is about to unfold
[43:22] in this process. And analyze
[43:24] this process and see when in
[43:26] fact there actually is citizen
[43:28] participation. And you will see
[43:30] that it is quite a ways along
[43:32] the process. Have a look at it.
[43:33] You all have a schedule last
[43:35] meeting. So, you will know the
[43:37] citizens are far down the
[43:39] process. A lot can happen and
[43:42] it's very difficult to roll
[43:43] things back, wants to get
[43:44] rolling. I would wait prefer it,
[43:46] have a look where the citizen
[43:47] involvement is in that process
[43:49] -- it is produced and out there
[43:50] and you have it. As for the
[43:53] other thing that is very
[43:54] concerning, disconcerting, for
[43:55] me, it's that in the Kirkland
[43:57] process and another processes,
[43:59] the citizens got to choose their
[44:01] own representative. I'm worried
[44:03] that that is not in fact going
[44:05] to be the case, if this process
[44:06] proceeds in the way it is
[44:07] structured. So, these are my
[44:09] concerns. I'm putting out red
[44:11] lights. That's what I'm trying
[44:12] to do. And it's open to change
[44:17] -- to influence when the
[44:19] citizens get involved and and I
[44:27] think and to get citizens
[44:32] involved -- and -- no Claude
[44:38] Claude casino?
[44:56] The
[44:57] >> Way understand it, Mister
[44:58] Mayor, is that -- and one
[45:04] question left -- do you remember
[45:07] the deal?
[45:10] >> Yes, I respect deals. And I
[45:13] should know better -- and I'm
[45:18] going to throw it out there.
[45:20] Since there are by-elections
[45:22] coming up are you going to
[45:24] support me?
[45:30] >> There is all around -- you
[45:31] put it in plural. Can you allow
[45:33] me time to reflect? That's a big
[45:35] decision.
[45:40] >> And that will be determined
[45:45] -- if you are the best of all
[45:47] the candidates entered --
[45:49] >> I'm convinced of that.
[45:53] - Merci beaucoup, and --
[45:54] Monsieur, c'était une très bonne
[45:55] question, merci beaucoup!
[45:59] >> -- Tracey --
[46:01] >> Thank you --
[46:02] >> You will pass?
[46:03] >> Okay.
[46:13] Normand Lapointe?
[46:21] >> -- not here. We need the
[46:24] resolution the 30th. And -- come
[46:27] see you -- in 2017 -- novella
[46:39] and good day -- and the three of
[46:44] them councillors, that they were
[46:45] here --
[46:52] - Monsieur Lapointe, pouvez-vous
[46:54] vous approcher du micro, s'il
[46:55] vous plaît?
[46:56] - Hockey.
[46:59] (---)
[47:00] ça, c'est des P, c'est un
[47:07] exemple exactement de ce que
[47:08] vous êtes en train de faire en
[47:09] ce moment. Il y a un contrat qui
[47:11] a été soumis le 16 janvier, 27,
[47:15] dans ce contrat-là, il y avait
[47:21] trois
[47:22] (inaudible)
[47:23] qui ont été faites: possibilité
[47:24] de...
[47:53] >> -- and the 27 87 -- and they
[47:59] -- answers compact between the
[48:01] city of Pointe-Claire and the
[48:03] company, 3:35, dash or seven, 91
[48:08] and that includes some people
[48:14] from -- the contract was done
[48:18] between the DG we missed and --
[48:22] Pointe-Claire. The same night
[48:25] the adoption. Everything was
[48:31] done and already public
[48:37] consultation -- and the contract
[48:39] was signed by the City. And
[48:42] everything went on -- it with
[48:46] some public consultation. And it
[48:49] was a chance for everyone --
[48:52] they were changing the type of
[48:56] height and the number of -- that
[48:59] was supposed to be. It went from
[49:04] 40 apartment acre to have. Tara
[49:10] Stainforth today we get RCI. If
[49:11] we have to change anyone to a
[49:14] park and we this and
[49:24] -- and going to 25 storey
[49:27] We're gonna go only 15 storeys.
[49:30] And you agree, there is no
[49:33] change of the zoning, and they
[49:40] want to go to 15 if you want. An
[49:42] argument is gonna be done
[49:46] between the C C F, and the
[49:48] general manager. So, there will
[49:52] be no, if the citizen wants to
[49:57] have any two zones of the park,
[50:00] we have to go through RCI, and
[50:03] be able to do a referendum, and
[50:07] the people that are in Mu2. The
[50:13] contiguous zoning, that are
[50:18] right beside it they will have
[50:19] to vote to first of all get the
[50:23] visitor to start and then have
[50:27] the necessary number to vote yes
[50:29] or no.
[50:45] All the time right now, see of
[50:46] what they want is to build right
[50:49] away. You can see on their
[50:51] website, the timeline that they
[50:56] have. So for us, if we really
[51:00] want to change the zoning of
[51:04] Mu2, to park, the only way to do
[51:07] it is by the RCI. And that's the
[51:12] question is very important,
[51:13] because the other way if
[51:15] Cadillac Fairview decides to go
[51:20] to 15 storeys. This anyone, any
[51:25] two, zoning of a public
[51:27] consultation, but they can't go
[51:29] to a referendum.
[51:31] >> Okay.
[51:32] >> Is that right?
[51:33] >> From my understanding, I'm
[51:34] not sure, but I think that is.
[51:38] - But I ask, non, c'est pas
[51:39] correct? --
[51:40] >> I can help clarify if you
[51:42] wish. Actually, Madam Thibeault,
[51:46] you are nodding your head.
[51:49] Madame Thibault
[51:50] >>?
[51:51] Yes, want me to answer the
[51:52] question? Monsieur normal à
[51:55] point, je peux vous répondre en
[51:57] français, si vous voulez, je ne
[51:58] sais pas par où commencer, votre
[52:00] question était... bon, vous êtes
[52:01] allé un peu dans tous les sens.
[52:02] Je voulais juste ramener,
[52:03] peut-être, un fait: si vous
[52:05] permettez, Monsieur le Maire, je
[52:06] vais juste ramener un élément,
[52:07] là. Vous avez parlé que dans une
[52:12] certaine séquence, il y avait le
[52:16] RCI, ensuite, qu'il y avait un
[52:18] référendum.
[52:19] - Qu'il y avait une possibilité
[52:20] d'avoir un référendum quand ils
[52:21] y avaient un RCI.
[52:22] - Non.
[52:23] - Si on change la zone de MU2 à
[52:32] PAC, il y a possibilité de
[52:33] référendum.
[52:34] - C'est beaucoup plus compliqué
[52:35] que ça, le RCI permet à un
[52:39] conseiller municipal de faire un
[52:40] temps d'arrêt pour vers le plan
[52:42] d'urbanisme. C'est une condition
[52:44] sine qua non, légalement, un RCI
[52:46] est en place dans l'optique ou
[52:48] un conseil municipal est en
[52:50] révision de son plan
[52:51] d'urbanisme, c'est la base.
[52:53] C'est exactement ce qui se passe
[52:54] en ce moment. Au terme de
[52:57] l'opération de révision du plan
[52:59] d'urbanisme, il y aura
[53:01] concordance dans les règlements
[53:05] d'urbanisme entre les zonage,
[53:09] les PIA, la, construction tous
[53:11] les règlements d'urbanisme qui
[53:12] découlent du plan tombe anis
[53:13] mais seront ajustés en fonction
[53:15] des nouvelles orientations du
[53:16] plan d'
[53:17] Urbanisme. Je ne parle pas de
[53:19] référendum ici. Je ne parle pas
[53:20] de référendum. Ce que le conseil
[53:23] municipal de la Ville de
[53:24] Pointe-Claire est en train
[53:25] d'établir, c'est un processus de
[53:26] consultation publique des
[53:28] citoyens dans le cas de la
[53:30] révision du plan d'urbanisme, et
[53:32] ultimement, les règlements
[53:34] d'urbanisme seront changés,
[53:35] alors à aucun moment, ici, on ne
[53:38] parle d'une relation entre un
[53:39] RCI et un référendum. Alors ce
[53:41] serait faux de dire cela. Et
[53:43] votre question, encore, c'était,
[53:44] quoi précisément?
[53:46] - Il faut changer MU2 à PAC
[53:50] (---)
[53:51] , ça prend une...
[53:54] - Ça prend un changement dans la
[53:57] réglementation d'urbanisme.
[53:58] Est-ce que le plan d'urbanisme
[54:01] est ultimement, et ultimement,
[54:03] la concordance des règles moteur
[54:04] bannisse, même donc le règlement
[54:06] du zonage, viendra changer cette
[54:08] zone-là pour la rendre PAC?
[54:14] Règlement d'urbanisme? Les
[54:16] citoyens en décideront lors
[54:18] d'une révision du plan
[54:19] d'urbanisme, en date
[54:20] d'aujourd'hui, ce n'est pas le
[54:21] cas, ça pourrait être le cas,
[54:22] mais il y a des mécanismes dans
[54:23] la loi qui existe pour arriver à
[54:25] faire ça. Pour l'instant, ce
[54:26] n'est pas ça. Il n'y a pas de
[54:29] relations de changer MU2 en PAC
[54:32] en référendum au plan... au
[54:34] moment où on se parle. Elle
[54:36] - Met le CD et ne permettra pas
[54:39] de changer...
[54:40] - Le plan d'aménagement
[54:41] d'ensemble, c'est complètement
[54:42] autre chose, si on est dans un
[54:43] autre outil d'urbanisme, si vous
[54:45] voulez que je vous fasse un
[54:46] résumé de ce qu'est un plan
[54:48] d'aménagement d'ensemble, ça va
[54:49] me faire plaisir. Monsieur le
[54:50] Maire, voulez-vous que
[54:52] j'embarque dans cette
[54:54] explication-là?
[54:55] - Si tout le monde veut
[54:57] comprendre les deux...
[54:58] - Oui.
[54:59] (inaudible)
[55:01] - Hein?
[55:02] - Bon, alors je vais expliquer,
[55:05] très brièvement la notion de
[55:06] plan d'aménagement d'ensemble,
[55:07] comme on l'entend, le CBP.
[55:14] Présentement, on va parler de la
[55:17] zone Cadillac Fairview, les
[55:18] zones MU2 et MU1 ne sont pas
[55:23] soumis à un plan d'aménagement
[55:24] d'ensemble. Est-ce que c'est, un
[55:25] plan d'aménagement d'ensemble
[55:26] pour une ville, c'est que la
[55:28] ville décide que certaines
[55:29] parties de son territoire, s'il
[55:30] y a développement dans ces
[55:32] zones-là, les développeurs
[55:34] devront soumettre un plan à la
[55:36] Ville, un plan d'aménagement
[55:38] d'ensemble qui est assujetti à
[55:40] des critères très précis. Alors
[55:42] une partie du territoire
[55:43] pourrait être assujetti à un
[55:46] développement qui devrait passer
[55:48] par un plan d'aménagement
[55:49] d'ensemble. La ville peut se
[55:51] doter d'un règlement sur les
[55:56] PAE, ce règlement est assujetti
[55:59] à une consultation publique, ça,
[56:00] c'est une chose. Une fois qu'un
[56:02] territoire de la ville est
[56:03] assujetti à un règlement de plan
[56:07] d'aménagement d'ensemble, un
[56:08] CDP, tous ceux qui voudront
[56:10] développer dans cette zone-là
[56:11] devront passer par le dépôt à la
[56:13] ville, donc au comité
[56:15] consultatif d'urbanisme, d'un
[56:16] plan d'aménagement d'ensemble
[56:18] pour le projet qui sera
[56:20] ultimement soumis au conseil
[56:22] municipal et devra faire l'objet
[56:24] d'une approbation par le conseil
[56:25] municipal. Si le conseil
[56:28] autorise le projet qui a été
[56:29] fait en vertu du Règlement sur
[56:31] les PAE, à ce moment-là, le
[56:36] projet étant accepté, le conseil
[56:38] municipal doit modifier sa
[56:41] réglementation d'urbanisme pour
[56:42] arriver à ce que le projet
[56:46] rentre dans les critères du
[56:47] règlement. Et ces modifications
[56:51] réglementaires-là sont une fois
[56:52] de plus assujetti à
[56:55] l'approbation des citoyens en
[56:57] consultation publique.
[56:59] - Est question référendaire?
[57:01] - Le processus référendaire,
[57:03] ultimement, c'est suite à la
[57:04] consultation publique,
[57:05] l'adoption des second projet de
[57:06] règlement, il y a des demandes
[57:08] suffisantes dans les zones
[57:10] concernées, tout à fait. Mais
[57:12] c'est les règlements, ça, ce
[57:13] sont des règlements d'urbanisme
[57:15] qui serait modifiée advenant que
[57:16] le conseil approuve un projet
[57:19] qui a été soumis au conseil en
[57:22] raison d'un règlement sur les
[57:23] PAE, ce sont quand même des
[57:25] choses distinctes mais qui
[57:26] finissent, au bout du compte,
[57:27] par se rejoindre.
[57:29] - Alors c'est Cadillac
[57:30] fluviaux... excusez.
[57:34] (signal sonore)
[57:38] Excusez. Six cadets fluviaux
[57:41] décide de respecter les règles
[57:44] de MU1 est MU2, il n'y aura pas
[57:48] de référendum?
[57:49] - Non. Ce que j'ai dit, c'est
[57:50] que si le Conseil décide
[57:54] d'assujettir les zones MU1 et
[57:58] MU2 sur un plan d'aménagement
[57:59] d'ensemble, ce qui n'est pas le
[58:00] cas en ce moment, si le Conseil
[58:03] décidait de le faire, il y a des
[58:05] critères qui devraient être
[58:08] analysés, mais avant d'arriver à
[58:10] ce stade-là, il y a des
[58:11] discussions à avoir avec
[58:13] Cadillac Fairview, mais non
[58:14] seulement, ça il faut que le
[58:15] plan d'organismes et les
[58:17] règlements d'urbanisme fasse en
[58:19] sorte que l'on puisse donner.
[58:22] Plan d'urbanisme, pardon. Que
[58:24] les données aux demandeurs la
[58:27] possibilité de faire un PAE,
[58:28] parce que pour donner
[58:29] l'autorisation, il doit déroger
[58:30] d'une façon ou d'une autre aux
[58:32] règles d'urbanisme, et en ce
[58:33] moment, cette zone-là n'a pas de
[58:36] règles d'urbanisme très claire,
[58:37] alors l'idée d'avoir un RCI, de
[58:38] revoir le plan d'urbanisme,
[58:40] c'est entre autres aussi pour
[58:42] donner à ce secteur névralgique
[58:43] de la ville des règles
[58:46] d'urbanisme très précis qui vont
[58:49] convenir dans la
[58:50] (inaudible)
[58:51] urbaine, la trame urbaine et le
[58:52] plan futur d'aménagement de
[58:53] Pointe-Claire. Alors je reviens
[58:54] à la question, alors MU1 MU2,
[58:56] s'il n'y avait jamais un PAE
[59:00] établi pour ce secteur-là,
[59:01] devrait déposer un projet à la
[59:02] ville, la ville l'analyserais à
[59:04] la lumière du règlement sur les
[59:06] PAE et viendraient, à ce moment,
[59:08] là ajuster...
[59:11] (signal sonore)
[59:12] Vous êtes un homme occupé,
[59:13] monsieur Lapointe?
[59:14] - Oui...
[59:15] (intervention en anglais)
[59:16] - O.K., merci!
[59:17] (inaudible)
[59:26] Am I allowed to reply place?
[59:29] >> The question has been
[59:31] answered by madame to Merci,
[59:32] Madame Thibault. Go.
[59:33] >> I'd like to clarify, Mueller
[59:35] to respond?
[59:36] >> Is the
[59:37] Legal department allowed to have
[59:40] the overarching authority, or my
[59:42] chair of the meeting.
[59:43] >> I don't, know I'm asking.
[59:46] >> To the Councillor ask for the
[59:47] right to speak, Chairman Shaw
[59:51] gave him the opportunity.
[59:53] >> It's just a simple
[59:56] clarification from, 2017 of
[59:59] course this went through
[1:00:03] September 12th, which I call the
[1:00:05] long nights of Pointe-Claire,
[1:00:07] which is when they all went from
[1:00:10] -- September 12 2019, from
[1:00:13] commercial to mixed-use
[1:00:14] residential. At that point the
[1:00:15] zoning has been change. Correct
[1:00:18] me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty
[1:00:19] certain right now, we don't
[1:00:22] require icy I for making a
[1:00:24] zoning change, we just have to
[1:00:25] apply for it on our behalf, we
[1:00:28] could potentially try to resolve
[1:00:31] Fairview forest into parks, and
[1:00:33] RCIs not required. Now that I
[1:00:34] think it's in the RGI, I think
[1:00:37] that would be possible. So I
[1:00:39] want to clarify that RCIs not
[1:00:41] required to rezone something.
[1:00:49] >> Okay, now certainly Abe.
[1:00:55] >> Good evening Mister Mayor,
[1:00:56] and City Council.
[1:00:58] >> I witnessed since the
[1:01:00] beginning of last year, the same
[1:01:06] City Council, the freeze of
[1:01:13] Cadillac Fairview. And we can
[1:01:16] convince the citizen, so what
[1:01:18] they did in the spring, -- to
[1:01:27] get citizen consultation. So
[1:01:30] those over 100 people there, and
[1:01:33] the majority against against
[1:01:35] Cadillac Fairview, was very
[1:01:39] clear. So they couldn't convince
[1:01:42] the citizen. And after that, in
[1:01:46] July 27th. Mr. Frank Cohen, went
[1:01:52] to the newspaper, and he starts
[1:01:55] scaring people, people do not
[1:01:56] follow what's going on in the
[1:01:57] city. And like oh, if we not
[1:02:04] accept Cadillac Fairview, and
[1:02:06] all of the projects in the
[1:02:08] developers, they will increase
[1:02:09] the scare tactics.
[1:02:11] >> Mister Mayor, I never said
[1:02:13] anything remotely like that.
[1:02:14] Could you please intervene and
[1:02:18] --
[1:02:19] >> Actually, Councillor Cowan,
[1:02:20] it's not up to you to tell me to
[1:02:23] intervene. But I have read that
[1:02:26] article, and I think there's a
[1:02:28] lot of truth to that. There was
[1:02:31] a scare of greater taxation,
[1:02:32] link to the RCI, I don't get it
[1:02:35] because of a copy of that
[1:02:36] article, on bringing next
[1:02:40] council.
[1:02:41] >> I have it with me,
[1:02:43] Councillor.
[1:02:44] >> You've got it on you?
[1:02:45] >> I have, it and I had some
[1:02:49] copies. And please, a teacher in
[1:02:50] the school, you don't cut
[1:02:51] somebody off who's talking. So
[1:02:52] let me finish, and after you can
[1:02:54] say whatever you want. I also,
[1:03:00] we are always talking with the
[1:03:02] military. The military, you
[1:03:08] always follow the leader or the
[1:03:09] superior, not falling what they,
[1:03:10] like or who they like, but to
[1:03:12] make it clear, I know about the
[1:03:13] army, and I respect the army. So
[1:03:16] I hope you follow what you
[1:03:20] learned in the army.
[1:03:21] >> Sir, we don't need again to
[1:03:23] persevere.
[1:03:24] >> Are you coming off.
[1:03:25] >> You have a question?
[1:03:27] >> The same people, they can
[1:03:29] convince the citizens what they
[1:03:30] did, to convince the other
[1:03:32] three, City Council to alter
[1:03:36] that resolution. -- Mr.
[1:03:44] Tremblay, but when you charged
[1:03:48] district six, and you are the
[1:03:51] mayor against it. But they want
[1:03:53] to think on the beginning, and
[1:03:57] Cadillac Fairview. So I don't
[1:04:01] understand, why there is still
[1:04:03] insisting about all that, if the
[1:04:06] citizen again is all that, and
[1:04:07] we elect you. -- can you explain
[1:04:13] to me? Because we don't know
[1:04:15] what's going on behind closed
[1:04:17] doors. So please let me know.
[1:04:21] >> Well, I can lay the facts up
[1:04:23] before, you that I disagree with
[1:04:26] the resolution, and the mandate
[1:04:27] letter, because I feel like it
[1:04:29] goes against what I got elected
[1:04:34] on. That's my objection, so
[1:04:39] others can explain. Others can
[1:04:42] explain why you chose to --
[1:04:46] that's counter to what I told
[1:04:48] you was gonna, do I want to
[1:04:50] promise to do. That's my
[1:04:53] feeling, so I want to live up to
[1:04:54] what I said I would do, and I
[1:04:59] thought a give the citizen a
[1:05:00] greater role. I will say with
[1:05:05] the citizens force of the city,
[1:05:08] as opposed to force development,
[1:05:09] which people objected to after
[1:05:13] the fact. Which I think are
[1:05:18] examples of, but should we now
[1:05:21] be doing a forward, we should
[1:05:22] learn what's going on in the
[1:05:23] past. So if there are showers
[1:05:25] to, allows the citizens, to get
[1:05:27] involved, so we can prevent some
[1:05:29] of what I think are urban
[1:05:32] planning areas of the past. When
[1:05:34] we can reflect, and great in a
[1:05:41] city that we can all be proud,
[1:05:42] of there is nothing wrong with
[1:05:43] the built environment, let's
[1:05:44] have one we all enjoy. So that's
[1:05:46] where I'm at here, I think for
[1:05:48] us to get it approach X, or
[1:05:52] developing city that we all
[1:05:53] enjoy, you need to be involved.
[1:05:56] Because to know where they're
[1:05:57] gonna enjoy it or not, we have
[1:06:01] to hear what you want.
[1:06:02] >> Thank you for standing firm,
[1:06:04] I guess of what is going on from
[1:06:08] the administration. The second
[1:06:10] question, we have a lot of,
[1:06:12] issue very serious issue, -- the
[1:06:20] Environment, is very, very
[1:06:22] important. The water, the air
[1:06:34] . For future generations. This
[1:06:39] is very important. Housing for
[1:06:44] young families, and next
[1:06:45] generation, especially
[1:06:48] affordable housing and green
[1:06:49] housing. That's for the next
[1:06:52] generation. The taxes what we
[1:06:55] pay increasingly. We pay 16 and
[1:06:59] a half percent taxes. -- is that
[1:07:03] not an issue to lower cost of
[1:07:05] taxes? The road, the traffic.
[1:07:12] That's not all shoes to work on?
[1:07:16] On Cadillac Fairview, and all
[1:07:17] the developments. So please,
[1:07:20] City Council, if you are not
[1:07:23] serious to work about all that.
[1:07:27] Because I saw on the north side,
[1:07:32] someone on the same, we have to
[1:07:34] trust a politician. I agree, but
[1:07:37] the politician has to be honest,
[1:07:38] trust, and respectful for the
[1:07:43] environment, and people who
[1:07:45] elect them. Not for who work
[1:07:49] with them, so please, if you're
[1:07:52] not able to work in a serious
[1:07:55] way, for us in the next
[1:07:56] generation. Just step down. Get
[1:08:02] somebody else who is smart, and
[1:08:05] have the vision to see all these
[1:08:07] problems. We have two choices,
[1:08:10] we work on a serious issue --
[1:08:11] >> Is our question?
[1:08:13] >> That's what I'm asking, sir.
[1:08:15] >> But I can intervene.
[1:08:18] >> Yes.
[1:08:19] >> There is an insinuation
[1:08:20] there, that these people aren't
[1:08:21] doing that. Which there are
[1:08:23] arguments that they are, we just
[1:08:25] have different ways of doing it,
[1:08:26] right? So, is another question?
[1:08:34] What is the question.
[1:08:35] >> We have the serious issue to
[1:08:37] work on it. But they all just
[1:08:43] focus on developers, when we
[1:08:45] have all the traffic, housing,
[1:08:49] the environment. They preserve
[1:08:52] all the green spaces. We have to
[1:08:57] solve all these problems before
[1:08:58] you start building, so what
[1:08:59] that's what I'm asking.
[1:09:01] >> But there is an argument out
[1:09:03] there, it is environmental to
[1:09:06] develop. And in fact, it's
[1:09:08] preventing urban sprawl. You are
[1:09:12] being an environmentalist. You
[1:09:14] can't just say that the motive
[1:09:15] is not that. Can't say the
[1:09:20] motive is not an environmental,
[1:09:21] because there is an equal
[1:09:22] argument to that effect. That is
[1:09:27] shared by some of the Council,
[1:09:28] and that is that the more you
[1:09:30] built, the less we roll into
[1:09:33] urban sprawl. Problem with that,
[1:09:35] in my opinion, it means
[1:09:38] annihilating every single green
[1:09:39] space in urban setting. Which to
[1:09:41] me is somewhat contradictory.
[1:09:44] And of course the problem with
[1:09:45] that as well is, most
[1:09:49] Pointe-Claire eons, do you do
[1:09:52] not want to leave unidentified
[1:09:55] Hong Kong or -- Environment, or
[1:09:58] like even downtown Mississauga.
[1:10:03] As regards to densification of
[1:10:05] densification issue, it's also
[1:10:07] the quality of life issue. So to
[1:10:10] say that these councillors are
[1:10:14] not environmentalists, I don't
[1:10:15] think it's fair.
[1:10:16] >> I'm not saying -- I don't see
[1:10:19] serious work about the
[1:10:20] environment.
[1:10:23] >> You have another question?
[1:10:24] >> We are just criticizing. With
[1:10:25] no question.
[1:10:26] >> Okay, God bless you, and
[1:10:28] thank you for working for the
[1:10:32] citizens seriously, and to solve
[1:10:33] our problems before starting
[1:10:36] building some more. Especially
[1:10:38] what we see -- don't repeat all
[1:10:45] that again. Thank you and God
[1:10:46] bless you.
[1:10:54] >> Conway?
[1:10:57] >> Good evening Mayor.
[1:11:08] Today, as a citizen of
[1:11:10] Pointe-Claire. I must say I'm
[1:11:13] concerned with some common manse
[1:11:15] councillors have expressed,
[1:11:17] especially in recent council
[1:11:18] meetings. I'll start with what's
[1:11:20] closest to me, and I'll say this
[1:11:23] without Carson. I'm especially
[1:11:28] disappointed with the comments
[1:11:29] of Mr. Stork, at the last
[1:11:31] extraordinary meeting, January
[1:11:33] 30th, at the 20th minute in the
[1:11:35] meeting, Mr. Stork said you, our
[1:11:42] mayor. -- continue your soapbox
[1:11:44] speech. Previously on January
[1:11:47] 19th, the 23rd minute in the
[1:11:51] meeting, Mr. Stokes said twice,
[1:11:54] you need help. Moreover, on a
[1:11:58] post I commented on Facebook
[1:11:59] group, Mr. Stork replied without
[1:12:02] a word, he put a link to a
[1:12:04] YouTube video, that was titled
[1:12:08] narcissistic. When I asked for
[1:12:10] clarification explanation, I did
[1:12:11] not receive one word. This is an
[1:12:14] attempt to denigrate me, because
[1:12:18] I was directly in their
[1:12:20] misleading information, I
[1:12:21] presume. And promote himself
[1:12:23] during the election campaign, on
[1:12:26] a flyer reading better together,
[1:12:29] transparency, dedication,
[1:12:31] integrity. I don't think anybody
[1:12:35] ran a campaign with trust me I
[1:12:36] know it's good for you, or I do
[1:12:38] want to hear from you've known
[1:12:39] for my opinion. Also Mr. Stork,
[1:12:41] has been in the past -- I
[1:12:48] would've expected better
[1:12:49] behaviour. I'm disappointed by
[1:12:52] these comments to make me feel
[1:12:54] exasperated I have to stop that,
[1:12:55] it is not democratic,
[1:12:57] councillors have to listen to
[1:12:58] the citizens that elected them.
[1:13:02] Now, the last extraordinary
[1:13:04] meeting of January 30th, they
[1:13:08] asked for certain councillors
[1:13:09] might have been talking in
[1:13:13] contact with Fairview. He was
[1:13:15] clearly upset of the comment,
[1:13:16] and spoke on behalf of all the
[1:13:20] other councillors by saying, --
[1:13:22] they knew the Mayor gave the
[1:13:24] opportunity for Council to -- no
[1:13:29] one here has ever met any
[1:13:34] representatives from Cadillac
[1:13:36] Fairview. She said no, and
[1:13:39] minutes after that, she and she
[1:13:41] might have responded to an
[1:13:42] email. A few minutes later when
[1:13:45] Councillor Cowan was asked
[1:13:47] directly he admitted it that in
[1:13:50] the 25th minute on January 30th.
[1:13:54] My question earlier Thomas is it
[1:13:57] not a good call isn't not
[1:14:00] ill-advised one or more of your
[1:14:03] council members represent the
[1:14:04] city that will be talking
[1:14:06] privately to a developer
[1:14:10] corporation, --
[1:14:21] I've gotta say that one of the
[1:14:25] biggest surprise to me, when I
[1:14:29] was first elected mayor was a
[1:14:36] discrepancy between what a
[1:14:37] perceived one around me. I was
[1:14:38] told it was by my motto, do not
[1:14:41] meet with developers, it's not
[1:14:46] generally a thing to do in front
[1:14:49] of one. And I think early in my
[1:14:53] first mandate, she pointed out
[1:14:59] that she had absolutely gone out
[1:15:01] to dinner with a developer, two
[1:15:03] days before the demolition
[1:15:05] meeting. And that did seem to be
[1:15:07] a problem. I've seen councillors
[1:15:12] meet with representatives, and
[1:15:14] Councillor very out to the
[1:15:15] meetings. When met with one
[1:15:17] right before but we are
[1:15:19] confronted the parking lot.
[1:15:22] Person who confronted us,
[1:15:23] actually talk about the
[1:15:28] councillors. Maybe that's the
[1:15:32] way things are normally done,
[1:15:34] but from it's somewhat
[1:15:35] surprising. It's not what I
[1:15:36] anticipated when I got elected.
[1:15:38] I didn't think this kind of
[1:15:40] thing is standard operating
[1:15:44] procedure. Maybe I'm just naive.
[1:15:51] >> Miss yes Mr. Cowan?
[1:15:52] >> I'd like to point out, there
[1:15:54] is one member of Council, who is
[1:15:58] been -- for unethical manager in
[1:16:01] very.
[1:16:02] >> The motion of censure that
[1:16:04] exist, it was a political stunt,
[1:16:07] not expected in Canadian
[1:16:09] jurisdiction. Just so you know,
[1:16:19] -- I am talking, I'm talking. If
[1:16:25] I can replay that, and the role
[1:16:30] it plays in Canadian politics
[1:16:33] and government.
[1:16:35] >> I have a commonplace.
[1:16:38] >> Yes?
[1:16:41] >> Is it that exasperating?
[1:16:42] >> I kind of like to -- excuse
[1:16:47] me Councillor stark.
[1:16:50] [Inaudible]
[1:16:53] I answer your question, and I'm
[1:16:56] concerned about here, is that
[1:16:58] there is becoming a debate
[1:16:59] between councillors and mayors
[1:17:02] during a citizen question
[1:17:03] period. I heard you hear the
[1:17:04] question from the citizens, and
[1:17:05] not have to debate Council and
[1:17:08] father citizen, as a citizen
[1:17:10] question period. Now the next
[1:17:13] person appears --
[1:17:20] >> Thank you for that. I feel
[1:17:24] like I have a different question
[1:17:25] now. I got one from before. You
[1:17:29] had talked about public
[1:17:33] participation before, in online
[1:17:34] questionnaires. It is thinking
[1:17:35] about, it concerning the public
[1:17:37] participation. I like to say,
[1:17:39] having attended meetings in the
[1:17:42] pass, participation meetings,
[1:17:43] and I'd like something more
[1:17:44] concrete, let me get poster
[1:17:48] notes. Quite frankly, there's no
[1:17:51] guarantee south picket these
[1:17:52] notes, are have the impression
[1:17:53] that I times, good ideas
[1:17:55] getaways. I'd like to public
[1:17:58] steak to have something of more
[1:17:59] notice. For instance, proper
[1:18:01] minutes taken of what we
[1:18:02] actually say. I want this is a
[1:18:06] reminder of how citizens can
[1:18:07] participate.
[1:18:13] >> Following that, on the
[1:18:14] strategic meeting at 13th, the
[1:18:17] title presented was far from
[1:18:18] normal, and that the anyone
[1:18:19] development vision --
[1:18:26] this, along with the manner in
[1:18:28] which the last resolution was
[1:18:29] passed, leads me to suspect the
[1:18:34] by passing of severe sincere
[1:18:35] citizen input. As my member of
[1:18:37] the presentation. Pointe-Claire
[1:18:39] was shown, I have a runny nose.
[1:18:48] >> Could you also speak a little
[1:18:50] closer to the mic, if you don't
[1:18:51] mind?
[1:18:52] >> I like I'm in a podium,
[1:18:54] actually.
[1:18:56] >> As to my memory other
[1:18:57] presentation. Pointe-Claire was
[1:18:58] shown as having 6% natural
[1:19:01] spaces. This includes all the
[1:19:04] grassy areas like the parks in
[1:19:06] the soccer fields. That might be
[1:19:08] updated, at some of those fields
[1:19:09] are now turf. 2%, I believe
[1:19:11] approximately was protected for
[1:19:13] forest. These percentages are
[1:19:15] well below the 30% natural
[1:19:16] spaces that we need to be aiming
[1:19:19] for. I'm doing that by memory,
[1:19:21] because they did, think I was
[1:19:23] under the impression of the
[1:19:24] slide presentation is going to
[1:19:25] be made accessible to the
[1:19:26] public, but I can't find it
[1:19:28] anywhere. As one area that could
[1:19:30] be posted for citizens to see.
[1:19:34] >> Which slide presentation
[1:19:36] referring to?
[1:19:37] >> I'll be on some of the 13th,
[1:19:43] strategic planning workshop.
[1:19:56] >> Proposition company, with the
[1:19:58] City, came together with also
[1:20:01] serve statistics and graphs. I
[1:20:04] had some questions concerning
[1:20:07] the statistics, just as to
[1:20:08] methodology, but I haven't been
[1:20:09] able to see it.
[1:20:10] >> So you want to re-examine
[1:20:13] them?
[1:20:14] >> Okay, perfect. Oh, my second
[1:20:17] question is just a follow-up, my
[1:20:19] question that I had in January,
[1:20:21] two metro Thibault, concerning
[1:20:24] which of the councillors had the
[1:20:25] greatest number absences since
[1:20:27] 2017.
[1:20:32] >> We did the calculations at
[1:20:33] the city clerk's office. We did
[1:20:35] a calculation between for
[1:20:38] Council, sitting between 70 17
[1:20:41] in today, we were able to do
[1:20:45] public meetings, Special
[1:20:46] meetings, and caucuses. It's
[1:20:51] very big table, so we don't
[1:20:52] bring them with us. If you do
[1:20:55] the Mayor, email blinds in
[1:20:56] writing to your question.
[1:20:58] >> Okay.
[1:20:59] >> Okay, that's perfect.
[1:21:01] >> Thank you. Eric McQueen. Did
[1:21:07] I pronounce the name right? It's
[1:21:08] about with to seize?
[1:21:17] >> I, a long time resident,
[1:21:19] first time addressing Council. I
[1:21:22] followed along with the webcast,
[1:21:23] and I think it's probably time
[1:21:25] to stop lurking, and maybe give
[1:21:27] a commenter to. My first
[1:21:28] comment, a couple of comments on
[1:21:30] that question. First question is
[1:21:33] two councillors. I appreciate
[1:21:35] your work, I know that all of
[1:21:36] you are here out of a sense of
[1:21:40] doing the best for the city. And
[1:21:44] that also goes for our workers
[1:21:46] in the city, we all appreciate
[1:21:49] how the snow has been cleared
[1:21:51] better every year. We appreciate
[1:21:57] the recreation, facilities we
[1:21:58] appreciate many aspects of
[1:21:59] living here. And we look for it
[1:22:02] to the spring, when the asphalt
[1:22:04] will come back, and repair our
[1:22:10] roads. I'm particularly
[1:22:14] interested in, an environment of
[1:22:17] our city. I support the
[1:22:19] protection of Fairview forest,
[1:22:23] and another green space like
[1:22:27] Ponner Woods, which I'm
[1:22:28] particularly fond of. With
[1:22:30] regard to the resolution that
[1:22:33] the council's pastime
[1:22:34] supportive. I spent several
[1:22:35] years, decades advocating for
[1:22:38] human rights and social
[1:22:39] safeguards, a places like the
[1:22:41] IMF, the world bank, Department
[1:22:45] of Finance in Ottawa. And I know
[1:22:48] that you don't progress if you
[1:22:50] don't engage, we have to engage,
[1:22:54] that's why largely and support
[1:22:58] the resolution. My question
[1:23:00] regards the environment, I'm
[1:23:03] curious about where the
[1:23:06] environment committee is going,
[1:23:08] what its mandate is, what its
[1:23:10] focus is. So my question is to
[1:23:15] Council with a guard. Councillor
[1:23:19] Cowan. Two Kelly
[1:23:26] Thorstad-Cullen. Who's engaged
[1:23:27] in that committee, and asked her
[1:23:29] for an update on the environment
[1:23:30] committee.
[1:23:35] >> Thank you very much for a
[1:23:36] question, I do want to
[1:23:37] highlight, just reassure you,
[1:23:39] then in the previous
[1:23:40] administration, all available
[1:23:42] green spaces that belong to the
[1:23:45] city were protected, and cannot
[1:23:47] be developed on, so if we owned
[1:23:50] it we protected it so to
[1:23:52] reassure those come up a few
[1:23:53] times, the eighth anything we
[1:23:55] have the power to protect it has
[1:23:57] been protected and will
[1:23:58] certainly work on protecting as
[1:23:59] much as we can. I would say that
[1:24:02] every member of Council sitting
[1:24:04] at this table is committed to
[1:24:05] doing that for the environment
[1:24:07] committee, we actually are
[1:24:09] having our next meeting tomorrow
[1:24:11] evening. And I think I've said
[1:24:13] this before, it's a very robust
[1:24:15] group, as we know if you read or
[1:24:18] sustainable development policy,
[1:24:19] there are so many different
[1:24:20] categories, as was mentioned,
[1:24:22] there's air, there's water,
[1:24:23] there's waste management. There
[1:24:27] is canopy, forests, et cetera.
[1:24:29] So what we did in late 2022, was
[1:24:34] asked the committee to
[1:24:35] prioritize what they felt was
[1:24:37] the most challenging issues
[1:24:39] facing our city, and every give
[1:24:42] the feedback that, and we did a
[1:24:44] table, and came up with what
[1:24:46] would be our focus in 2022, or
[1:24:49] 2023, apologies. The reason for
[1:24:52] that is when you get all these
[1:24:53] passionate, committed vigils
[1:24:54] around the table, it can go
[1:24:56] anywhere. We wanted to have more
[1:24:58] of an issue I'll say, and have
[1:25:01] deliverables that we can share
[1:25:02] with community. For 2020, three
[1:25:05] we're focusing on water, because
[1:25:06] it's a very, special precious
[1:25:08] resource. And there is a new
[1:25:11] guideline from Québec, and how
[1:25:13] we can work with water
[1:25:14] conservation, protecting our
[1:25:15] water sources that are there.
[1:25:21] And then to bring back and see
[1:25:23] where we can impact. There's
[1:25:26] different cramps coming from
[1:25:27] Hydro-Québec, for water
[1:25:29] conservation. We can always
[1:25:30] practical for citizens, what's
[1:25:32] more global, we need to be
[1:25:36] policy changes. -- some of the
[1:25:40] developments of our special
[1:25:46] committees. That made, said with
[1:25:50] water being the primary source,
[1:25:51] we have items that are available
[1:25:55] as they come up, and we need
[1:25:57] opinions of the Environment
[1:25:58] committee, or if they it comes
[1:25:59] they bring it to us and we put
[1:26:02] it on for discussion, that's
[1:26:06] more timely. So so we are
[1:26:08] working on everything we, can
[1:26:10] even looking at City bylaws,
[1:26:13] when you should be water in
[1:26:14] your, Lance just to make sure
[1:26:16] that Pointe-Claire is as
[1:26:17] responsible as possible with
[1:26:19] water preservation. That's for
[1:26:20] 2023, a previous project that
[1:26:22] they worked on and put an
[1:26:23] enormous amount of effort into,
[1:26:25] was to look at our recent splash
[1:26:28] park that went into place
[1:26:29] that'll gust of park, and
[1:26:31] whether that should be
[1:26:32] continuous flow or recycled
[1:26:33] flow, and a whole report
[1:26:35] evaluating all the impacts from
[1:26:37] a sustainable perspective, and
[1:26:38] give us the recommendation, so
[1:26:42] that we as a city are making the
[1:26:45] best possible decisions for
[1:26:47] citizens, with expertise feeding
[1:26:54] into that..
[1:27:00] >> I think would be great if
[1:27:01] more the activity could be
[1:27:03] shared on the website. One final
[1:27:05] note, I do admire the stamina of
[1:27:09] all your folks on Council,
[1:27:11] having watched meetings over
[1:27:13] several nights, thank you.
[1:27:16] >> Mister Mayor, if I may just
[1:27:19] respond here, comments and just
[1:27:23] a backup councillor,
[1:27:28] Thorstad-Cullen. I don't know
[1:27:29] where you, and there you are. I
[1:27:30] was just reading recently, that
[1:27:34] we have available to us all the
[1:27:37] technological means, and the
[1:27:38] policy tools and everything we
[1:27:39] need, to start making a
[1:27:41] difference on the environment.
[1:27:43] Number one problem be climate
[1:27:44] change, and the greatest
[1:27:46] difficulties that we have today,
[1:27:48] our speed as a society, to be
[1:27:50] able to get this going. In other
[1:27:52] words, the same issues we have
[1:27:54] in terms of keeping an, shape
[1:27:56] dropping bad habits, are present
[1:27:59] in society. So that those
[1:28:01] commitments, they need to make
[1:28:02] to yourself, keep yourself
[1:28:04] healthy, also commitments we
[1:28:05] need to make socially. The
[1:28:08] difficulty is, how do you nudge,
[1:28:10] how do you convince the society
[1:28:11] to move forward on these kinds
[1:28:12] of things, it's very important.
[1:28:15] I don't think we're going fast
[1:28:20] enough. Here in those studies,
[1:28:23] in my mind, made me think that
[1:28:27] my instinctive reaction that
[1:28:28] we're not moving quickly besides
[1:28:30] seeing all the data that we
[1:28:32] presented with every day. Is we
[1:28:35] simply aren't moving along as
[1:28:36] rapidly as we should be. I would
[1:28:39] encourage, you if the
[1:28:41] environment is central to some
[1:28:42] of your preoccupations, is to
[1:28:44] keep pushing
[1:28:52] -- it all for the provincial
[1:28:53] governments, and federal
[1:28:57] governments is important people
[1:28:58] stand up that people stand up,
[1:28:59] and ask for a difference.
[1:29:00] There's a lot of, talk constant
[1:29:04] talks about -- what's talking to
[1:29:06] another councillor about called
[1:29:07] 15 meeting, and only thing that
[1:29:08] would change retain this cost 15
[1:29:10] mini, or whatever they've
[1:29:11] assigned to biodiversity, and
[1:29:13] the next one, is that the
[1:29:14] percentage of
[1:29:19] other birds implant flora, will
[1:29:20] just be falling lower and lower
[1:29:22] and lower. So we're doing a lot
[1:29:23] of talking, and we're not acting
[1:29:26] rapidly on the source of, things
[1:29:27] I want to see that happen more
[1:29:29] effectively. Tons of
[1:29:31] greenwashing going, on pay
[1:29:33] tension in terms of all the
[1:29:34] developments, what we're doing
[1:29:35] here is a city, and
[1:29:37] provincially, we need to get
[1:29:38] cracking on the stuff. So I
[1:29:40] appreciate your question today.
[1:29:41] Thank you.
[1:29:44] >> David Johnson?
[1:29:54] >> David Johnston, district one.
[1:30:40] >>
[1:30:41] Alors du 15 mars.
[1:30:47] I had thought, what can we do to
[1:30:53] offset the -- lack of trust,
[1:30:58] among some people, about
[1:31:00] discussions between the city and
[1:31:01] Cadillac Fairview. And I noticed
[1:31:07] that, with the river vision of
[1:31:09] the urban plan, there is a
[1:31:11] consultation in 2019, online
[1:31:14] survey, 350 people. Citizen
[1:31:23] participation of 70 people in
[1:31:24] workshops,. C'est à peu près ça
[1:31:29] qu'on propose de refaire. I
[1:31:31] don't know how representative
[1:31:34] those 350 people were, in 2019.
[1:31:38] I worry that maybe the people
[1:31:42] who jumped into this upcoming
[1:31:46] consultation may or may not be
[1:31:51] representative the views of a
[1:31:53] wider cross section of the city.
[1:31:56] That's gonna be a difficult
[1:31:59] thing. But I'd also like to see
[1:32:04] some mechanism in the public
[1:32:06] consultation, some kind of an
[1:32:08] inbox, where citizens could ask
[1:32:11] questions, where they could get
[1:32:17] questions answered of a
[1:32:18] relatively factual nature. For
[1:32:20] example, I'm not sure who gets
[1:32:23] the last say on how high
[1:32:25] buildings can be. I've heard no,
[1:32:31] they can build as high as the
[1:32:33] airplanes -- who decides in the
[1:32:34] end? Is it the City or not?
[1:32:37] That's a factual question. There
[1:32:39] are political questions, but
[1:32:40] that's a factual question. One
[1:32:42] can imagine questions that you
[1:32:44] may have. I mean, these are
[1:32:48] difficult issues to understand,
[1:32:50] many of us may have some pretty
[1:32:52] simple questions, to clarify our
[1:32:54] understanding, I'd like to see
[1:32:56] some kind of inbox. I suppose
[1:32:58] the biggest question I'd have,
[1:33:00] is what does it really take to
[1:33:03] get some kind of an answer when
[1:33:05] we say protect the forest -- I
[1:33:10] does that mean that in the end
[1:33:14] I. A levy of --
[1:33:20] Si oui, par? Qu'il y avait cette
[1:33:23] résolution de contrôle
[1:33:25] intermédiaire de la Communauté
[1:33:27] métropolitaine de Montréal en
[1:33:28] avril dernier. It's a temporary
[1:33:33] one but the resolution says it
[1:33:35] is only gonna be in place, until
[1:33:39] the metropolitan government
[1:33:42] finishes zone land use plan.
[1:33:44] After, that it only becomes
[1:33:45] permanent at the request of the
[1:33:46] owner, where the request of the
[1:33:49] city. To buy some property from
[1:33:52] the owner. That raises the
[1:33:53] question, of how much would it
[1:33:56] cost, four point cleared by that
[1:33:59] forest. And who would pay for
[1:34:01] it? Beaconsfield, got
[1:34:09] 14 million. That's equal to 25%
[1:34:12] of the Beaconsfield budget of 54
[1:34:14] million. That's a lot of money.
[1:34:18] How much is the forest worth? We
[1:34:22] know that the vice president
[1:34:24] have Cadillac Fairview, said
[1:34:25] shortly after the protests, that
[1:34:27] a real estate conference that we
[1:34:31] pay a little more than $5 per
[1:34:33] square foot. I see online and
[1:34:35] it's 50 acres. 50 acres is about
[1:34:39] 2.2 million square feet. So
[1:34:41] maybe they paid 11 million.
[1:34:44] Maybe the value has doubled
[1:34:47] today in the past ten years. 22
[1:34:50] million would be about 15% of
[1:34:54] Pointe-Claire's budget of 175
[1:34:55] million. I think I'd be happier
[1:34:59] with the preservation of the
[1:35:00] forest, if metropolitan
[1:35:02] taxpayers play for the it in, in
[1:35:06] Beaconsfield's case, I would be
[1:35:07] good to see. But, one of the
[1:35:11] questions we need answered and
[1:35:13] call stations is, does the city
[1:35:19] know, as the city asked the
[1:35:23] metropolitan government, will be
[1:35:24] prepared to pay the cost of the
[1:35:27] acquisition of the forest. At
[1:35:31] the end of that resolution, the
[1:35:33] press release put out by the
[1:35:35] CNN, they said we don't have the
[1:35:37] money, we need more money from
[1:35:39] the government of Québec. So
[1:35:41] we'll see next most provincial
[1:35:42] budget, whether that money is
[1:35:43] there. -- the taxpayers will
[1:35:49] have to, know if the cost falls
[1:35:51] on us, what will be the per
[1:35:53] capita cost to buy the forest?
[1:35:57] >> Questions like this, I think
[1:35:59] we need to have, a clearer
[1:36:01] understanding, instead of to
[1:36:04] make the debate a little bit
[1:36:06] more three-dimensional than it
[1:36:07] has been already. So, my
[1:36:11] suggestion is for some kind of a
[1:36:14] mechanism, to capture questions
[1:36:16] from the population. Maybe to
[1:36:22] have frequently asked questions,
[1:36:24] and maybe a background or
[1:36:28] explaining what Pointe-Claire is
[1:36:29] doing, and how it's connected to
[1:36:37] -- programme métropolitain
[1:36:40] d'aménagement et de
[1:36:41] développement. And how that is
[1:36:43] connected to the ankle bone --
[1:36:45] no, the main bone, which is what
[1:36:48] the Québec government will be
[1:36:49] deciding in the next few months,
[1:36:51] in terms of its own changes, its
[1:36:54] own policies. So it's not enough
[1:36:56] to have public consultations, as
[1:36:59] much as a company with a greater
[1:37:01] understanding of what the issues
[1:37:02] are. And I, think as some people
[1:37:06] as mentioned, that there's
[1:37:07] confusion over some of the
[1:37:08] statements that have been made,
[1:37:09] to the extent that we can
[1:37:12] clarify the factual case, let's
[1:37:15] try to do that, and recognizes
[1:37:17] some questions our political not
[1:37:20] factual. Let's try to improve
[1:37:22] the general understanding, of
[1:37:24] the population on some of these
[1:37:26] strictly factual issues.
[1:37:31] >> Okay, those are expensive
[1:37:33] sessions, is there a question
[1:37:35] that Mr. Johnson? Is a
[1:37:37] suggestion, are we doing any of
[1:37:38] the above?
[1:37:39] >> Has the city asked the
[1:37:43] metropolitan government, whether
[1:37:44] we'll be willing to pay the cost
[1:37:48] of the forest. And we got no
[1:37:50] reply?
[1:37:54] >> Well, Madam Guilbault, can we
[1:37:57] on a reveal the response.
[1:37:58] >> Déjà écrit
[1:37:59] (inaudible)
[1:38:00] (---)
[1:38:01] . We wrote, but we don't have an
[1:38:02] answer yet exactly, with the
[1:38:03] program. So we have to apply to
[1:38:04] some program, but we are still
[1:38:06] at that stage. But we have
[1:38:09] talked with a salmon.
[1:38:11] >> So you've talked to them --
[1:38:12] >> Yet, but we don't have any
[1:38:13] answer, yes or no right now.
[1:38:16] >> Not a conclusive answer?
[1:38:18] >> That's good, that's
[1:38:20] encouraging for those that want
[1:38:21] to save the forest.
[1:38:23] >> There's a letter to Madam
[1:38:24] Plante, that we are following up
[1:38:27] on following the discussion of
[1:38:29] the seamen, but the two are
[1:38:30] connected. And to answer your
[1:38:32] other question, prior to the RCI
[1:38:35] E as, they can go as high as
[1:38:38] knocking out of the sky, there
[1:38:40] is no height restrictions part
[1:38:42] of the RCMP. But I think your
[1:38:44] ideas are, great actually, and
[1:38:46] would allow for a quorum in the
[1:38:48] process. How much time do we
[1:38:50] have?
[1:38:54] >> Eight minutes.
[1:38:58] >> -- sorry, it's the way he
[1:39:00] wrote it. Owen van.
[1:39:02] >> Ask Brook.
[1:39:04] >> Okay, thank you sir. Sorry
[1:39:06] about that.
[1:39:07] >> Okay, and my question will
[1:39:08] not be about Cadillac Fairview.
[1:39:13] Kansas City investigate clearing
[1:39:15] the bike lanes during the
[1:39:16] winter?
[1:39:18] >> Good question.
[1:39:23] >> I know there's reasons why,
[1:39:24] some of them can't be cleared.
[1:39:29] As improper drainage, showing
[1:39:31] you can't. And what can be done
[1:39:34] to retrofit those to be able to
[1:39:35] be used, because --
[1:39:40] It is,, it can be part of the
[1:39:46] future environmental policies of
[1:39:47] the city.
[1:39:48] >> It's a great question. We
[1:39:50] tackle did last year, sort of
[1:39:52] the budgeting priority last year
[1:39:54] was to do the walk paths in the
[1:39:57] ski trails but, mostly the walk
[1:39:59] paths in all the parks. A lot of
[1:40:01] the budget went to those. They
[1:40:03] were prioritized over the
[1:40:05] bicycle paths. The other thing
[1:40:07] was that by salting the bike
[1:40:09] paths it would be detrimental to
[1:40:12] the asphalt which is a public
[1:40:13] works. However going forward by
[1:40:16] transit is a thing of the
[1:40:17] future. For six months of the
[1:40:20] year five months of the year
[1:40:21] where under snow. So we are a
[1:40:25] lot eliminating those bike paths
[1:40:26] which are there for a good hunk
[1:40:27] of the year. It's definitely
[1:40:29] food for thought.
[1:40:30] >> I'm using the lane on Del
[1:40:33] Mar. Half of the days I have to
[1:40:36] go into the car lane because
[1:40:39] there is simply too much snow.
[1:40:42] >> Well you're making a fine
[1:40:45] point and we will have to tackle
[1:40:46] that going forward, because
[1:40:48] increase bike of bicycle uses in
[1:40:49] the winter is a reality. I agree
[1:40:51] with you. It's food for thought,
[1:40:53] and we will definitely be on
[1:40:55] that one.
[1:40:57] >> Madame Verdon do you have any
[1:40:59] comments? I know you are pro
[1:41:00] bike paths as well. Do you have
[1:41:03] any factual information
[1:41:09] >> I know that we are working on
[1:41:11] some solutions for next year,
[1:41:15] but we look at all the equipment
[1:41:17] we have the equipment and
[1:41:18] everything, and we will open
[1:41:21] some of the bike paths next
[1:41:23] year. We will try.
[1:41:26] >> It's on our minds. Thank you.
[1:41:28] It's a very good point.
[1:41:34] >> Maria Benner vetoes?
[1:42:13] [Inaudible]
[1:42:21] >> Okay.
[1:42:27] >> Good evening, Mister Mayor,
[1:42:30] City Council members. I have
[1:42:32] thought long and hard on this
[1:42:33] question, and would like to know
[1:42:36] your insights on this as
[1:42:38] follows. A request to new
[1:42:44] Pointe-Claire development
[1:42:45] planning, especially with
[1:42:48] regulars to the zones of anyone
[1:42:50] and when you do in -- I have
[1:42:54] seen and felt that most of the
[1:42:57] fine Pointe-Claire citizens
[1:43:00] included those that the post
[1:43:02] development are perhaps not
[1:43:03] properly educated. As we would
[1:43:05] like to be when we should be
[1:43:08] with reference to what our City
[1:43:11] Council, because I believe most
[1:43:13] of the councillors that we
[1:43:16] citizens have been listening
[1:43:17] seems to me it is because
[1:43:21] processes and inclinations are
[1:43:23] planned in sort of a -- rather
[1:43:27] than naming terms. So it gives
[1:43:30] way to different kinds of
[1:43:33] interpretation from people who
[1:43:34] do not know the conventions of
[1:43:37] the CP and -- it's I do not ask
[1:43:41] how you process this and
[1:43:44] protocols are or how they work
[1:43:46] in order to understand what our
[1:43:49] city does and what they do. A
[1:43:51] lot of people work at their jobs
[1:43:54] and raise their kids and pay
[1:43:56] their taxes. And I think that
[1:44:00] the City could at least try, if
[1:44:02] they want, if they want their
[1:44:05] citizens to collaborate and
[1:44:08] participate and to work together
[1:44:10] with the City is to make this
[1:44:14] processes at least easier. To
[1:44:17] understand and to make way for
[1:44:21] perspective potato of democracy.
[1:44:23] I'm sorry. Participate of
[1:44:26] democracy.
[1:44:27] >> I have a bit of problems with
[1:44:30] pronunciation. I hope you
[1:44:32] understood. And anyway, so my
[1:44:35] question is, is there anything
[1:44:39] specific, perhaps maybe that
[1:44:42] could make more clearly aware of
[1:44:44] and understand the processes of
[1:44:47] why they need to be done and
[1:44:48] where we are at with reverence
[1:44:51] two important things such as the
[1:44:54] development procedures and
[1:44:56] stages. We are going through in
[1:44:58] our city. Perhaps we need a
[1:45:05] commendation -- on planning
[1:45:07] terms for City bylaws. Maybe
[1:45:13] also doing informational work
[1:45:16] shop such as the workshop where
[1:45:18] I attended last December. With
[1:45:23] affirmed contracted by the City
[1:45:25] in which only 20 interested
[1:45:27] people attended. But it was very
[1:45:32] educational, even though there
[1:45:33] were only 20 people there. And I
[1:45:40] learned so much. -- even though
[1:45:44] they're only 20 people there it
[1:45:46] would also put up maybe some
[1:45:49] kind of -- of the workshops for
[1:45:54] everyone to see. And that was my
[1:45:57] question. I have another second
[1:46:01] question. Maybe you would like
[1:46:02] to answer my first question
[1:46:04] first.
[1:46:08] [Inaudible]
[1:46:10] >> Absolutely. Absolutely. No,
[1:46:12] no, that's okay. I think that
[1:46:19] citizen participation is
[1:46:20] crucial. You are making a good
[1:46:21] point. A lot of what you saw,
[1:46:24] the process you are part of,
[1:46:25] there were only 20 people, which
[1:46:28] is a disappointment. We talk
[1:46:31] about citizen participation but
[1:46:34] actually giving people to come
[1:46:35] out and do it is a whole other
[1:46:37] thing. People who are making
[1:46:40] reference earlier in the evening
[1:46:42] about post it's. One woman was
[1:46:44] talking about putting posts up
[1:46:46] on the wall. And do you feel
[1:46:47] like it's actually happening? I
[1:46:49] think your point about video
[1:46:52] conferencing, getting it
[1:46:55] documented and public sizing is
[1:46:57] hugely important to the process.
[1:47:00] And I think that you can never
[1:47:02] do enough of it, that part of
[1:47:04] it. And hopefully we get a good
[1:47:08] representation of citizens if we
[1:47:10] do so. Your concern is
[1:47:13] absolutely key to the process.
[1:47:15] You're absolutely right. If we
[1:47:16] don't get that participation, we
[1:47:20] don't make something that
[1:47:21] reflects the public well. And as
[1:47:24] was also referred to, a question
[1:47:27] or two ago, we worry about
[1:47:29] getting only those who are in
[1:47:32] that's, only the zealots, people
[1:47:34] who are very focused on it. How
[1:47:36] do we get people who are working
[1:47:38] every day, who don't have time
[1:47:40] or who are busy raising
[1:47:41] children? How do we get their
[1:47:43] input? And that has always been
[1:47:45] the problem with participatory
[1:47:47] democracy, is that it tends to
[1:47:49] favour those who have time.
[1:47:52] Those who have time to be people
[1:47:54] who are of affluence or who
[1:47:57] aren't necessarily as time
[1:47:58] constraint is someone who is
[1:47:59] working all the time. So it's
[1:48:01] really hard because
[1:48:03] participation is biased, in a
[1:48:04] way, to those who have luxury
[1:48:06] and the luxury of time. I have
[1:48:09] often said we are not equal in
[1:48:11] our ability to be political. We
[1:48:13] are not equal. Some people have
[1:48:15] greater ability to be political.
[1:48:17] So it's an issue. It's always an
[1:48:20] issue with citizen
[1:48:22] participation. I was involved
[1:48:25] with political conventions, and
[1:48:28] it's not the 70s, I think it was
[1:48:30] 80s, it was a long time ago.
[1:48:32] They would actually subsidized
[1:48:34] to try to counteract buy it by
[1:48:37] is they would subsidized to get
[1:48:38] people to come to political
[1:48:42] conventions. But even giving
[1:48:43] money they still couldn't go
[1:48:45] because they couldn't afford to
[1:48:46] lose the time away from work. So
[1:48:49] the solution is a real
[1:48:51] challenge. I think that our
[1:48:54] improved technology is part of
[1:48:55] the solution. I really do. I
[1:48:57] think we can use technology as
[1:49:00] part of the solution to the
[1:49:01] issue of getting people were
[1:49:03] involved.
[1:49:04] >> May add to your comment? Just
[1:49:08] because you also asked about
[1:49:11] access to the information for
[1:49:14] citizens and their comprehension
[1:49:15] of it, I just wanted to add that
[1:49:18] we are looking at creating one
[1:49:23] pagers, since the sizing
[1:49:26] information indigestible amounts
[1:49:28] so citizens can read a bit and
[1:49:31] then understand everything that
[1:49:33] we are all talking about all the
[1:49:35] time because it can be very
[1:49:37] confusing and so as we move
[1:49:40] forward that is one of the
[1:49:41] things that our urban planning
[1:49:45] department is talking about
[1:49:47] doing with the consultations is
[1:49:52] creating digestible, easily
[1:49:53] accessible, paragraphs, so to
[1:49:55] speak, or pages that talk about
[1:49:59] different challenges, different
[1:50:00] types of development, et cetera,
[1:50:03] it's a draft, that are related
[1:50:06] to the urban plan.
[1:50:09] >> Okay.
[1:50:14] >> Okay, thank you very much.
[1:50:17] You really really understood the
[1:50:21] answers. And okay. So this is
[1:50:26] what I mean like for example
[1:50:29] it's not only just the people
[1:50:31] who have jobs and don't have
[1:50:32] time to listen or whatever it's
[1:50:36] just terms, like technical terms
[1:50:39] for example most people may have
[1:50:42] trouble understanding what CDP
[1:50:46] means, what development means.
[1:50:49] They have difficulty and the way
[1:50:54] how I understand it, I know that
[1:50:57] it's a document that you guys
[1:50:58] have to do. It's a document you
[1:51:01] guys have to do. I am sorry.
[1:51:06] [Laughter]
[1:51:08] But so this is what I'm trying
[1:51:11] to say. Maybe if Council can
[1:51:15] make the process easier for
[1:51:17] people to understand, maybe
[1:51:21] better with a document, -- so
[1:51:28] that people can understand. And
[1:51:30] my second question, can you
[1:51:33] answer my second question
[1:51:34] please? My second question is,
[1:51:38] can Pointe-Claire be able to get
[1:51:39] ourselves into the list of
[1:51:42] cities that have Shakespeare in
[1:51:44] the park? Shakespeare in the
[1:51:45] park, I believe we are the only
[1:51:47] city in the West Island that
[1:51:49] does not have Shakespeare in the
[1:51:51] park. So that citizens can enjoy
[1:51:54] the plays of Shakespeare. The
[1:51:58] summer we had to travel long
[1:52:00] distance to another city to have
[1:52:04] this.
[1:52:05] >> Okay.
[1:52:11] >> I love your question. I would
[1:52:15] love to have Shakespeare in the
[1:52:16] park in Pointe-Claire. I would
[1:52:18] also like to have porch vest. Do
[1:52:20] you know what porch vest is?
[1:52:23] It's in Hudson and NDG, it's Ian
[1:52:26] Hudson, and NDG, where they
[1:52:30] publicized an address in the
[1:52:32] city and people on their front
[1:52:34] porch play music and everybody
[1:52:35] goes to it. In NDG they have
[1:52:38] Shakespeare in park and ports
[1:52:40] vest, and I missed them both. I
[1:52:42] think that the park at the
[1:52:44] corner of Cartier and Lakeshore,
[1:52:46] I would love to have a stage
[1:52:49] there during the summer. These
[1:52:52] are just brainstorming thoughts.
[1:52:54] These are just ideas, but I
[1:52:55] would love to maybe have theatre
[1:52:57] one week and music the next for
[1:53:01] the kids or for people on summer
[1:53:06] weekends. It would be great. And
[1:53:09] I love the idea and we will
[1:53:12] brainstorming, but I think it's
[1:53:13] a great idea. I've seen
[1:53:15] Shakespeare in the park. I love
[1:53:16] it. I would love to have in
[1:53:18] Pointe-Claire. Porch vest, as
[1:53:19] well. Porch first is really
[1:53:21] cool. Thank you. How are we for
[1:53:28] time? That's it?
[1:53:29] >> Thank you very much.
[1:53:30] >> My pleasure.
[1:53:31] >> We exceeded the time.
[1:53:33] >> I'm sorry for those who
[1:53:34] haven't got to ask questions. We
[1:53:36] apologize. Oh, thanks, that was
[1:53:38] great. I'm sorry for those of
[1:53:40] you who waited and hopefully the
[1:53:43] questions can be brought to the
[1:53:44] next meeting. Our apologies.
[1:53:50] Because there are four more, not
[1:53:52] just one, otherwise I would try
[1:53:54] and do it.
[1:54:02] >> 5.1?
[1:54:03] >> Mr.? Mayor I'm sorry, perhaps
[1:54:04] you could tell them they could
[1:54:05] email their question in to the
[1:54:08] Councillors or to yourself.
[1:54:10] >> Okay.
[1:54:11] >> Those they didn't ask your
[1:54:12] questions, you can always email
[1:54:13] them to the Councillors or to
[1:54:14] myself. Okay.
[1:54:20] - 5. 1 Avis de motion et dépôt
[1:54:22] d'un projet de règlement
[1:54:23] décrétant un emprunt à long
[1:54:24] terme et une dépense en
[1:54:25] immobilisations de 3650 000 $
[1:54:27] pour le remplacement et
[1:54:28] l'acquisition de véhicules et
[1:54:34] d'équipements. un règlement
[1:54:35] comprenant divers achats de même
[1:54:37] nature et de même durée
[1:54:39] d'ampleur: le remplacement et la
[1:54:40] mise en jour de parc et de
[1:54:42] véhicules, l'acquisition de
[1:54:43] nouveaux véhicules et d'outils
[1:54:44] pour le nouvel atelier
[1:54:45] mécanique. Le montant sera
[1:54:50] financé par une taxe imposée à
[1:54:52] l'ensemble de la municipalité
[1:54:53] sur la base de la valeur
[1:54:56] foncière sur une période de 10
[1:54:57] ans.
[1:55:05] >>
[1:55:06] ..
[1:55:15] ,, To meet the needs of the
[1:55:20] community in terms of diversity
[1:55:22] and social inclusion. To submit
[1:55:25] recommendations to Council to
[1:55:26] develop new policies and improve
[1:55:29] existing policies in order to
[1:55:31] promote the notions of diversity
[1:55:33] and social inclusion. To promote
[1:55:35] diversity and social inclusion
[1:55:37] through, among others, the
[1:55:39] action plan on diversity and
[1:55:41] social inclusion. To formulate
[1:55:43] any other opinion and
[1:55:46] recommendation concerning
[1:55:47] diversity and social inclusion
[1:55:48] that may be requested by the
[1:55:51] Council.
[1:55:53] >> Who gives these notice of
[1:55:54] motions?
[1:55:56] >> Terrace and, fourth district
[1:55:59] 5. 3 Consultation publique for.
[1:56:00] Concernant un projet de
[1:56:01] règlement sur les projets
[1:56:02] particuliers de construction, de
[1:56:03] modification ou d'occupation
[1:56:04] d'un immeuble
[1:56:05] (PPCMOI)
[1:56:06] .
[1:56:11] Je vais expliquer la notion de
[1:56:14] règlements en français et en
[1:56:16] anglais avant de procéder à la
[1:56:19] consultation publique. Un
[1:56:21] caractère discrétionnaire qui
[1:56:22] permet qu'un projet puisse se
[1:56:24] réaliser malgré le fait que
[1:56:25] celui des roches dans l'une des
[1:56:27] dispositions de la
[1:56:28] réglementation dont
[1:56:29] bannissement. Pour être
[1:56:30] receveur, le projet doit être
[1:56:32] conforme aux objectifs du plan
[1:56:34] d'urbanisme, d'un programme en
[1:56:37] particulier d'urbanisme une fois
[1:56:38] applicable. Une fois en, vigueur
[1:56:39] ce règlement est applicable sur
[1:56:41] l'ensemble du territoire. Le
[1:56:42] règlement sur les projets
[1:56:44] particuliers permettre de
[1:56:45] déroger au règlement de
[1:56:46] urbanisme et de convenir d'un
[1:56:47] projet de construction, de
[1:56:48] modification, d'occupation d'un
[1:56:49] immeuble. Le projet peut ainsi
[1:56:52] satisfaire le requérant et son
[1:56:54] désir de mettre un immeuble en
[1:56:55] valeur. Il peut aussi permettre
[1:56:57] (---)
[1:56:58] , ce qui en faciliterait
[1:57:00] l'acceptation par la population
[1:57:02] du secteur.
[1:57:04] (inaudible)
[1:57:05] (---)
[1:57:06] , mais une plus grande
[1:57:07] adaptation sur la spécificité
[1:57:08] des quartiers. Cette technique
[1:57:09] permet d'encadrer le
[1:57:10] développement au même cas par
[1:57:11] cas. Elles relèvent du zonage
[1:57:13] par projet. À la suite de
[1:57:15] l'approbation de la demande d'un
[1:57:17] nouveau zonage qui est rattaché
[1:57:19] au prochain lui-même et non à la
[1:57:22] zone, comme veut la pratique
[1:57:23] actuelle.
[1:57:26] Le conseil peut assujettir leur
[1:57:29] acquérant en autant que cela
[1:57:31] cela soit une compétence de
[1:57:32] l'avenir
[1:57:33] (---)
[1:57:34] .
[1:57:35] (inaudible)
[1:57:36] (---)
[1:57:37] .
[1:57:38] Un règlement d'urbanisme donc
[1:57:39] assujetti à la consultation
[1:57:40] publique est susceptible
[1:57:43] d'approbation référendaire est
[1:57:44] soumis à la propagation de la
[1:57:45] coopération.
[1:57:49] >> The bylaw is discretionary in
[1:57:51] nature and allows, under certain
[1:57:52] conditions, that the project may
[1:57:53] be carried out despite the fact
[1:57:55] that it era Gates from one or
[1:57:58] the other of the Planning
[1:58:00] bylaws. To be admissible, a
[1:58:02] project must be in conformity
[1:58:04] with the objectives of the
[1:58:06] planning program or the
[1:58:07] objective us of a specific
[1:58:09] planning program, when
[1:58:10] applicable. Once in force, this
[1:58:13] bylaw is applicable throughout
[1:58:15] the territory. The bylaw on
[1:58:18] special projects makes it
[1:58:20] possible to derogate from the
[1:58:22] rigors of the Planning bylaws
[1:58:24] and agree on the project from
[1:58:27] the construction, modification,
[1:58:30] of a property. The project can
[1:58:32] satisfy both the applicant and
[1:58:34] in his desire to enhance an
[1:58:36] immovable. It also allows for
[1:58:38] the respect of the environment,
[1:58:40] where it could be located, which
[1:58:43] would facilitate its acceptance
[1:58:45] by the population of the sector.
[1:58:48] It also offers flexibility and a
[1:58:51] greater adaptation to the
[1:58:54] specificity of the
[1:58:55] neighbourhood. This technique
[1:58:56] allows urban development to be
[1:58:58] managed on a case by case basis.
[1:59:01] It is called Project based
[1:59:04] zoning because following
[1:59:05] approval of the application, the
[1:59:07] new zoning is attached to the
[1:59:09] project itself, and not to the
[1:59:11] entire zone, as is the current
[1:59:13] practice. Council in no to
[1:59:16] rising a project by resolution
[1:59:18] may subject the applicant to
[1:59:20] conditions, provided that this
[1:59:25] is under the city's
[1:59:26] jurisdiction. Finally the
[1:59:30] resolution authorizing the
[1:59:31] particular project is treated as
[1:59:32] a bylaw amending a planning
[1:59:35] bylaw and is therefore subject
[1:59:37] to public consultation,
[1:59:40] referendum approval if enough
[1:59:42] requests are made, and approval.
[1:59:45] Thank you.
[1:59:46] >> So we may have to help me
[1:59:47] here, Madam Thibault. Edgy. I
[1:59:51] think we have a mover and
[1:59:53] seconder, don't vote, or go to
[1:59:54] questions?
[1:59:55] >> No, we can ask the citizens
[1:59:57] of they have questions or
[1:59:58] comments about the bylaw.
[2:00:01] Otherwise we could go directly
[2:00:04] to 5.4.
[2:00:07] >> Okay. Avez-vous une question,
[2:00:10] au micro?
[2:00:22] -
[2:00:23] >> Est-ce que c'est déjà un
[2:00:24] règlement? Ce qui est en gris,
[2:00:29] ce sont les changements? Entre
[2:00:35] les thèmes 12 et 13, c'est écrit
[2:00:36] en gris.
[2:00:40] - Il y a un changement entre le
[2:00:41] projet de règlement déposé, il y
[2:00:44] a une ou deux séances, et là
[2:00:46] adoption finale de ce soir.
[2:00:50] - Est-ce que c'est un règlement
[2:00:52] entièrement nouveau?
[2:00:53] - Le PPCMOI, oui, c'est nouveau,
[2:00:55] il n'y en avait pas d'autre
[2:00:56] avant. Ce n'est pas une
[2:00:57] modification de règlement. C'est
[2:00:58] un nouveau règlement.
[2:01:00] - Est-ce que ça s'applique aux
[2:01:03] résidences et l'industriel, tout
[2:01:07] ça?
[2:01:11] - Ce règlement s'applique comme
[2:01:13] je le mentionnais, à l'ensemble
[2:01:15] du territoire de la ville, mais
[2:01:16] pas l'ensemble des
[2:01:17] constructions. Il y a des
[2:01:19] nuances à apporter, c'est
[2:01:20] mentionné dans le règlement.
[2:01:25] - C'est assez détaillé à partir
[2:01:29] de 13, de l'item 13 incluant
[2:01:32] l'item 27.
[2:01:40] C'est pas mal détaillé. On n'est
[2:01:43] pas pour tout lire. Est-ce que
[2:01:46] vous pouvez donner des
[2:01:48] spécifications? Ça ne termine
[2:01:50] plus. Je trouve ça très...
[2:01:52] extrêmement restrictif.
[2:01:58] Est-ce que c'est mis en place
[2:02:01] pour encadrer les variations
[2:02:09] mineures... dérogation mineure,
[2:02:13] est-ce que ça encadre les
[2:02:15] dérogations mineures?
[2:02:21] - Non, ce type de règlement est
[2:02:22] un règlement qui permet par
[2:02:29] exemple, dans une zone donnée,
[2:02:31] si le projet spécifique pour une
[2:02:35] partie de cette zone, pour un
[2:02:38] lot, pour une partie de l'autre
[2:02:39] qui appartient aux
[2:02:40] propriétaires, sur lequel un
[2:02:42] projet voudrait être développer.
[2:02:44] Un propriétaire aurait un projet
[2:02:45] en tête qui ne correspond pas au
[2:02:49] zonage actuel. Les programmes
[2:02:53] particuliers de construction des
[2:02:56] PPCMOI permettent de travailler
[2:02:58] avec le promoteur, le
[2:03:00] propriétaire, de manière à ce
[2:03:02] qu'il réalise son projet en lui
[2:03:05] donnant des règles applicables
[2:03:06] en matière de zonage propre à ce
[2:03:09] projet Loire, sans avoir un
[2:03:14] modifications de zonage pour
[2:03:15] l'ensemble de la zone. Ça peut
[2:03:17] être bénéfique pour favoriser
[2:03:19] une meilleure
[2:03:20] (---)
[2:03:21] urbaine, pour que le projet
[2:03:22] s'intègre bien dans un secteur
[2:03:24] décousu sur le plan de
[2:03:25] l'urbanisme.
[2:03:28] Ça ne touche pas les dérogations
[2:03:30] mineures. Pour permettre la
[2:03:32] réalisation de projets dans le
[2:03:33] secteur, ou par ailleurs, ça
[2:03:35] n'aurait pas été possible en
[2:03:36] raison du zonage actuel.
[2:03:43] - Disons que ce règlement n'est
[2:03:45] pas d'imposer, ce n'est pas là
[2:03:50] mon argument. À ce moment-ci, au
[2:03:56] coin de Lake Shore et Brunet, il
[2:03:58] y a une propriété assez grande,
[2:04:00] il y a des gens qui arrivent et
[2:04:02] qui achètent la place. Il décide
[2:04:05] de subdivisé de bâtir deux
[2:04:07] maisons. Ça serait un parfait
[2:04:08] exemple?
[2:04:09] - Non.
[2:04:15] Ce sont des cas de figure très
[2:04:17] précis. Je ne suis qu'une
[2:04:22] avocate, je n'ai pas de
[2:04:23] (---)
[2:04:24] en urbanisme. J'aimerais vous
[2:04:25] répondre avec précision. Par
[2:04:28] crainte de me tromper, je vais
[2:04:30] préférer me restreindre à cela.
[2:04:32] Vous pouvez m'envoyer les
[2:04:34] questions au service
[2:04:35] d'urbanisme, par écrit. Ils vont
[2:04:38] faire... vont se faire un
[2:04:39] plaisir de répondre.
[2:04:42] - Mes questions sont dans la
[2:04:44] bonne direction. Est-ce que
[2:04:46] j'aurai des réponses?
[2:04:48] - Vous aurez des réponses. Si
[2:04:50] vos questions ne sont pas dans
[2:04:51] la bonne direction, on va vous
[2:04:52] amener dans la bonne.
[2:05:04] The idea is to add a tool to our
[2:05:06] tool
[2:05:07] Box so that if there is a
[2:05:09] project that doesn't fit well
[2:05:10] that has because it has too many
[2:05:13] minor derogations, it will go
[2:05:14] through another process that
[2:05:15] will allow you to look at it
[2:05:16] it's in its or entirety and
[2:05:20] allowing the minor derogations,
[2:05:21] but they are for bigger
[2:05:22] projects, typically. Two may
[2:05:25] come there in the industrial
[2:05:26] area, but as the mayor
[2:05:30] Councillor Cowan had pointed out
[2:05:32] the other benefit is that it
[2:05:35] allows us to ask for things in
[2:05:37] relation to more green space so
[2:05:39] that we are
[2:05:40] Able to make that
[2:05:41] Project as nice
[2:05:42] As possible, because when you
[2:05:44] are asking for minor derogation
[2:05:45] there should be a trade-off of
[2:05:48] overall greater benefit. Does
[2:05:50] that help?
[2:05:51] >> Yes, except that we end up
[2:05:53] with a new acronym.
[2:05:57] [Laughter]
[2:05:58] >> There are many cities that
[2:05:59] have this. We are one of the
[2:06:01] last cities to not use. It was a
[2:06:03] set suggestion that we add it
[2:06:04] because it can be might quite
[2:06:05] useful.
[2:06:06] >> Okay, one last comment or
[2:06:08] question. Should you apply this
[2:06:18] thing to issue a permit for a
[2:06:20] special project that needs many
[2:06:26] derogations and the building is
[2:06:28] started, I don't see a serious
[2:06:33] effort of applying, I'm going to
[2:06:37] say it in je ne French -- vois
[2:06:39] pas d'un effort sérieux pour
[2:06:40] appliquer le règlement. Si le
[2:06:44] bâtisseur, le développeur on va
[2:06:49] de côté. Tout arrête. Je le sais
[2:06:53] par expérience. Il y a quelques
[2:06:59] projets dans mon ancien
[2:07:00] district.
[2:07:03] You have time to think about
[2:07:04] what I ask you?
[2:07:06] >> I already answered you. It
[2:07:08] depends on who enters the fray.
[2:07:11] It is a comparative process,
[2:07:13] who's the souvent best
[2:07:17] candidate,. Ce n'est pas une
[2:07:20] amende. C'est une autre
[2:07:21] dérogation.
[2:07:33] J'aimerais voir la démolition
[2:07:35] qui serait appliqué après
[2:07:36] jugement, avec raison.
[2:07:38] Il est arrivé des affaires par
[2:07:41] le passé. J'ai été témoin. Il y
[2:07:46] a des gens que la ligne est là,
[2:07:48] vous savez.
[2:07:49] (inaudible)
[2:07:50] (---)
[2:07:51] .
[2:07:53] >> I'm new to this, but my
[2:07:56] understanding of SCAOPI it is
[2:07:58] that it's there to ex-parte a
[2:08:01] zoning change, or a proposal
[2:08:04] that encompasses too many rules
[2:08:05] and involves to many other
[2:08:07] properties and it's just an
[2:08:09] expeditious process. I don't
[2:08:11] think, I mean, it's just a
[2:08:14] facility.
[2:08:15] >> I know for a fact, let me
[2:08:19] worded properly, that somebody
[2:08:22] would get a bad tape measure and
[2:08:25] he would be two feet off, you
[2:08:28] understand? And now the basement
[2:08:31] has been poured and even the
[2:08:32] walls have been started, so what
[2:08:34] do we do with that?
[2:08:36] >> The same as we have always
[2:08:38] done. We'll do the regular --
[2:08:40] >> I don't think you would --
[2:08:43] >> The SCAOPI is just too, I
[2:08:45] think and I'm not an expert on
[2:08:47] this, so correct me if I go
[2:08:48] wrong on this, it's not for
[2:08:51] those kinds of matters. It's to
[2:08:53] change something. Somebody who
[2:08:55] has a proposal and I think it's
[2:08:56] more industrial and commercial
[2:08:58] and residential. And someone who
[2:09:00] wants to just change the
[2:09:01] functioning of an existing
[2:09:03] property. So it's not so much I
[2:09:05] don't think building a definite
[2:09:06] demolition, it's trying to
[2:09:08] revamp or re-utilize a piece of
[2:09:10] property in an expeditious
[2:09:12] manner. I don't think it gets
[2:09:14] into what you're talking about.
[2:09:15] I'm not sure. Though correct me
[2:09:19] if I'm wrong. Monsieur le maire
[2:09:21] a raison..
[2:09:23] - Monsieur Cousineau, ce que
[2:09:25] vous amenez comme Soucy, ce
[2:09:26] n'est pas en lien avec
[2:09:27] l'adoption du Règlement.
[2:09:28] (inaudible)
[2:09:29] (---)
[2:09:30] .
[2:09:31] - La consultation publique
[2:09:32] porteur
[2:09:33] (inaudible)
[2:09:34] (---)
[2:09:35] . Je voulais simplement le
[2:09:36] rappeler.
[2:09:37] (inaudible)
[2:09:38] (---)
[2:09:39] .
[2:09:40] - Vos inquiétudes ne sont pas en
[2:09:41] lien avec le règlement de ce,
[2:09:42] soir c'est un autre règlement
[2:09:43] qu'on
[2:09:44] (inaudible)
[2:09:45] (---)
[2:09:46] .
[2:09:47] - Je regrette d'avoir pris votre
[2:09:48] temps. Je poserais la question
[2:09:49] une autre fois.
[2:09:50] (intervention en anglais)
[2:09:51] .
[2:09:52] -
[2:09:53] >> Mayor
[2:09:54] (inaudible)
[2:09:55] (---)
[2:09:56] . Thomas?
[2:09:57] >>
[2:09:58] Go ahead.
[2:09:59] >> For a simple clarification in
[2:10:00] support of what Mayor Thomas
[2:10:01] said. It is in fact when there
[2:10:02] are minor multiple derogations,
[2:10:03] what you can relate to his
[2:10:04] conditional use. Faux
[2:10:05] conditional use was used in
[2:10:06] relation to that but if a
[2:10:08] project required a lot of
[2:10:09] different thought, what the
[2:10:11] SCAOPI is puts under a lot of
[2:10:12] scrutiny, conditional use, there
[2:10:14] is nothing of that nature. So
[2:10:15] what this does, it puts a higher
[2:10:17] level of analysis and more
[2:10:19] public into put into making a
[2:10:21] decision. So you have minor
[2:10:22] delegation, conditional use,
[2:10:25] SCAOPI and zoning bylaw change.
[2:10:27] When it's a project spot zoning
[2:10:30] taking specific area to a
[2:10:31] specific concerns and issues by
[2:10:33] putting it to a higher stringent
[2:10:37] process.
[2:10:41] [Inaudible]
[2:10:55] >> Madam Conway?
[2:10:57] >> To establish that this is
[2:10:58] more for industrial and
[2:11:00] commercial businesses, as
[2:11:01] opposed to residential?
[2:11:03] >> Yes.
[2:11:04] >> Okay, so if my neighbour
[2:11:05] wants to tear down his house and
[2:11:07] makes neighbour and a developer
[2:11:09] comes anyone's to build town
[2:11:11] houses --
[2:11:12] >> It's not more applicable in
[2:11:15] residential neighbourhoods with
[2:11:17] just one single family home.
[2:11:20] It's not the tools we will use
[2:11:23] if we have to build a new
[2:11:25] project there.
[2:11:26] >> Take for example the --
[2:11:27] project, one of the bylaws was
[2:11:30] height. They could not go higher
[2:11:32] than the neighbours.
[2:11:36] >> Ce n'est pas la fonction de
[2:11:39] vérifier la hauteur des
[2:11:40] bâtiments. Nous sommes dans des
[2:11:43] changements d'usage d'une
[2:11:45] propriété. Nous sommes dans les
[2:11:49] changements mangeurs
[2:11:50] (---)
[2:11:51] majeurs dont les zonage.
[2:11:54] Pas dans l'usage d'une
[2:11:55] propriété.
[2:12:01] - Les règlements qu'on a dans
[2:12:02] les livres, pourquoi non... ne
[2:12:06] suivons-nous pas ces règles-là?
[2:12:10] - Comme la
[2:12:11] (---)
[2:12:12] c'est un outil de plus que la
[2:12:15] Ville pourra utiliser. Ce sont
[2:12:22] des situations précises. Il
[2:12:23] serait préférable qu'un projet
[2:12:25] se réalise. La zone au complet
[2:12:26] n'est pas affectée en termes de
[2:12:28] changements de zonage,
[2:12:31] simplement que la propriété est
[2:12:33] la partie de la zone visée par
[2:12:34] le projet soit sujet à un
[2:12:37] changement de zonage, avec des
[2:12:41] grues d'usage. La hauteur des
[2:12:42] bâtiments pourrait changer, oui.
[2:12:44] Ce sont pour des projets précis
[2:12:47] qui s'inscrivent dans une
[2:12:48] volonté d'avoir une
[2:12:49] (---)
[2:12:50] urbaine plus harmonieuse.
[2:12:52] - Les voisins vont être
[2:12:53] (inaudible)
[2:12:54] (---)
[2:12:55] .
[2:12:56] - Le conseil municipal doit
[2:12:57] adopter par résolution le
[2:12:58] projet. Une fois que le conseil
[2:12:59] municipal a approuvé le projet,
[2:13:02] la population peut s'exprimer en
[2:13:04] consultation publique. Elles
[2:13:05] vont voir des esquisses, des
[2:13:07] images du projet le cas échéant,
[2:13:09] lors de consultations publiques.
[2:13:11] Ultimement, les citoyens peuvent
[2:13:13] s'opposer au projet de manière
[2:13:15] référendaire. À toutes les
[2:13:17] instances, contrairement à
[2:13:18] d'autres outils, le PPCMOI
[2:13:21] permet aux citoyens d'avoir un
[2:13:24] mot à dire dans la procédure.
[2:13:26] - Vicky, merci.
[2:13:34] - Vous dites que ce n'est pas
[2:13:36] applicable aux résidentielles où
[2:13:37] ça peut l'être?
[2:13:42] - Vous devez deviner votre nom,
[2:13:43] s'il vous. Plaise
[2:13:46] - Andre Clermont. Wood que ce
[2:13:50] n'est pas applicable au
[2:13:51] résidentiel ou que ça peut
[2:13:52] l'être? Le projet a dit que
[2:13:56] quelqu'un a un projet peut faire
[2:13:59] changer une place de zonage et
[2:14:01] non tout le coin. Ça a peut
[2:14:03] (---)
[2:14:04] si c'est applicable au
[2:14:06] résidentiel. Il y a des places
[2:14:07] que c'est proche de résidence.
[2:14:08] Ils sont à côté ou très proche
[2:14:10] du commercial. Quelqu'un qui
[2:14:12] arrivera avec un projet pourrait
[2:14:14] faire changer le zonage. D'une
[2:14:20] maison résidentielle.
[2:14:21] - Le PPCMOI peut être appliqué
[2:14:24] au résidentiel. Habituellement,
[2:14:25] ce n'est pas un outil qu'on
[2:14:27] utilise dans ce cas-là. C'est un
[2:14:29] outil dans notre boîte à outils.
[2:14:34] Je l'ai rarement utilisé,
[2:14:36] d'expérience, personnellement,
[2:14:37] dans ma carrière. Dans d'autres
[2:14:41] villes, dans ce type de
[2:14:42] projets-là. Comme on le disait,
[2:14:43] il y a un processus qui se fait
[2:14:46] au niveau de l'adoption du
[2:14:48] PPCMOI. Il y aura résolution. Il
[2:14:50] y aura consultation publique, un
[2:14:53] référendum, un processus
[2:14:55] référendaire qui peut être fait.
[2:14:58] Un outil intéressant, ça nous
[2:14:59] permet de montrer des images aux
[2:15:01] citoyens, de voir vraiment dans
[2:15:03] le cadre du projet. Les gens
[2:15:05] vont pouvoir voir le projet. Ils
[2:15:06] ne peuvent
[2:15:07] Pas le voir nécessairement dans
[2:15:08] un changement de zonage.
[2:15:10] - Est-ce que ça ouvre la porte à
[2:15:11] des gens qui aimeraient ouvrir
[2:15:14] plus de commerce? L'école est
[2:15:17] contre les résidentielles,
[2:15:20] ciblés place, on pourrait ouvrir
[2:15:22] un restaurant, un magasin, être
[2:15:24] entourée de résidence à côté.
[2:15:28] Larry Cartier, la ligne est
[2:15:32] mince entre le commerce et les
[2:15:33] résidents. Ça pourrait permettre
[2:15:35] à ça.
[2:15:49] >> Fundamentally would never be
[2:15:50] used as residential let's take
[2:15:53] zone already 49. This probably
[2:15:56] 28 houses in that area. What
[2:15:59] SCAOPI is used for, let's say
[2:16:01] this one house that can't be a
[2:16:03] house for any reason. Aliens
[2:16:04] landed on. It it is something
[2:16:07] that can be done with that
[2:16:08] house, it's cold spot zoning. We
[2:16:10] do a zoning change. We affect
[2:16:11] the whole area. So what we do is
[2:16:14] we take one specific industrial
[2:16:16] commercial or residential house
[2:16:17] within that area, and they just
[2:16:19] can't ask you, say, turn
[2:16:22] residential to a restaurant. It
[2:16:23] has to be justified supported.
[2:16:25] You have to give plausible
[2:16:26] reasons why you can't have a
[2:16:27] house there anymore. So you have
[2:16:29] to go through a whole process of
[2:16:32] discussions, but just to make
[2:16:33] sure that if you change
[2:16:34] something you can always change
[2:16:36] one particular item in his own
[2:16:38] and not affect the whole zone.
[2:16:40] So it's a really unique thing
[2:16:42] that that is done. So it has to
[2:16:47] pass stringent policies. You
[2:16:48] just can't say I'm turning the
[2:16:50] house into a restaurant. It
[2:16:51] won't work that way. Its spot
[2:16:53] zoning of one particular
[2:16:55] location or address within his
[2:16:57] own. And there are situations
[2:16:59] where that could be required.
[2:17:01] J'ai l'impression que ça peut
[2:17:03] ouvrir une porte.
[2:17:04] - Il y a une nuance que je vais
[2:17:06] apporter. Tout projet doit être
[2:17:09] conforme au plan d'urbanisme et
[2:17:11] aux documents
[2:17:12] (---)
[2:17:13] . On a des codes villageois. Il
[2:17:15] doit quand même être conforme à
[2:17:17] notre plan d'urbanisme. Si ça ne
[2:17:20] rentre pas dans le la trame
[2:17:22] urbaine du plan d'urbanisme,
[2:17:23] mais ça ne fonctionne.
[2:17:24] - O.K., merci.
[2:17:33] >> I would understand with
[2:17:34] zoning, so if you're changing
[2:17:36] for the height, 14, two fours,
[2:17:39] Three floors --
[2:17:40] >> It's not a new build. It's
[2:17:41] transforming the function of an
[2:17:43] existing building, I think. So
[2:17:45] the height really doesn't come
[2:17:47] into play in this.
[2:17:49] >> But you can do it for the
[2:17:51] future building?
[2:17:52] >> Now, it's just changing the
[2:17:53] existing the usage of the
[2:17:55] existing building. That's all.
[2:17:56] That's what it's therefore.
[2:17:58] >> But for the new one, you
[2:18:00] don't have --
[2:18:02] >> Its Latino. And it's for an
[2:18:04] existing building. What we are
[2:18:06] debating right now, is a tool
[2:18:08] used for existing properties,
[2:18:10] changing their zoning. It's not
[2:18:12] for a new build. It's not for
[2:18:14] anything like that. From what I
[2:18:19] understand.
[2:18:20] >> Are you able to do that for a
[2:18:21] new building?
[2:18:22] >> No, I don't think so. Ce
[2:18:25] n'est pas bon pour les nouveaux
[2:18:26] développements.
[2:18:27] >> New development
[2:18:29] ?
[2:18:32] >> SCAOPI, yeah we can use it
[2:18:34] for new development also but we
[2:18:37] have some specifics to apply to.
[2:18:39] Each project is different, so
[2:18:42] it's kind of universal that
[2:18:44] question. I can't answer which
[2:18:48] project, a new project, or not.
[2:18:50] Is depending on the project.
[2:18:51] >> So you have a standard you
[2:18:52] don't have to argue out about
[2:18:55] ten floors, 15 floors, 25
[2:18:57] floors. You have a standard for
[2:18:58] that. Everybody respects it. It
[2:19:03] makes sense?
[2:19:07] >> Now, I'm sorry.
[2:19:08] [Laughter]
[2:19:10] >> So we're going to have to
[2:19:11] fight and are you about the
[2:19:12] height. If you're able to do it,
[2:19:15] change the zoning.
[2:19:18] >> This bylaw --
[2:19:20] >> I'm not talking about this.
[2:19:21] I'm talking about the future.
[2:19:23] >> Sir, we are talking about
[2:19:25] this bylaw. We're talking about
[2:19:28] a specific bylaw for a specific
[2:19:30] purpose.
[2:19:31] >> Okay. So this whole
[2:19:32] discussion is about that bylaw.
[2:19:36] >> This bylaw is not for a
[2:19:38] specific project, but yes, of
[2:19:40] course, this bylaw is new, so we
[2:19:44] will use this bylaw. It will be
[2:19:46] for a new project, for sure.
[2:19:50] Maybe for an existing property,
[2:19:52] as we will transform, modify,
[2:19:55] and we will use this tool, but
[2:19:58] this bylaw allows cities to
[2:20:03] analyze the new project with a
[2:20:09] different views beside the
[2:20:13] current bylaws. They could try
[2:20:15] to analyze the project and
[2:20:19] derogate to some of our current
[2:20:21] bylaws. But for the greater good
[2:20:23] of the city, of course, and
[2:20:26] Council is there to decide on
[2:20:27] that kind of project. And the
[2:20:30] committee as well.
[2:20:31] >> Thank you. And I hope you do
[2:20:35] for the new and limit the height
[2:20:36] so we don't have to argue.
[2:20:38] Everybody respect it. Thank you.
[2:20:39] >> Thank you. Okay, do we need a
[2:20:42] mover and seconder? Not yet,
[2:20:48] okay.
[2:20:49] [Laughter]
[2:20:50] >> If there is no more question,
[2:20:51] we can go directly to 5.4 and
[2:20:54] then this is the adoption of
[2:20:58] bylaw on staff is sick specific
[2:21:02] construction or occupancy for
[2:21:04] immovable's, and now we have a
[2:21:06] mover and a seconder.
[2:21:07] >> Do I have a mover?
[2:21:09] >> I moved to adopt the bylaw.
[2:21:13] Kelly Thorstad-Cullen, district
[2:21:14] three.
[2:21:15] >> And seconder?
[2:21:16] >> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:21:17] >> All in favour?
[2:21:18] >> Mister Mayor, I like to
[2:21:19] comment.
[2:21:21] >> Absolutely.
[2:21:22] >> Proposing amendment to the
[2:21:27] motion as the result of the
[2:21:29] citizen comments I think it's
[2:21:33] important to put an explanatory
[2:21:36] or interpretive clause into our
[2:21:38] bylaws. I made the point for
[2:21:40] five years ago now to put a
[2:21:42] preamble into the village code
[2:21:44] to create an interpretive clause
[2:21:46] the people so that people can
[2:21:48] understand why the rest, why the
[2:21:50] bylaw is. Their bylaws form a
[2:21:53] regulatory framework for the
[2:21:54] city but they're also kind of a
[2:21:55] how to or user manual. And so to
[2:21:58] make it, to help make it more
[2:22:00] clear to citizens, and future
[2:22:05] Council decades from now
[2:22:06] perhaps, when we forget why
[2:22:09] people who are part of Council
[2:22:11] may have been forgotten why
[2:22:13] there is this bylaw, explain to
[2:22:15] them. Explain to the applicants.
[2:22:17] Make it clear, it's clear
[2:22:19] responsible, the purpose in the
[2:22:21] objectives of the bylaw. So I
[2:22:24] have drafted -- I'll get in the
[2:22:33] second.
[2:22:44] I'm having difficulty calling it
[2:22:46] up now. Just a minute. Another
[2:22:48] alternative. I supposed an
[2:22:55] amendment to paragraph one point
[2:22:57] 1.3, which was the scope of the
[2:22:59] bylaw, to add the purpose of the
[2:23:02] bylaw to that paragraph, so that
[2:23:05] to the sentence that begins with
[2:23:08] the provisions of this bylaw
[2:23:10] pride to natural persons as well
[2:23:11] as two legal persons under
[2:23:13] public or private law, that was
[2:23:15] the scope. To that I propose
[2:23:17] adding the following, its
[2:23:18] purpose is to enable City
[2:23:19] Council to authorize a project,
[2:23:22] and demonstrably advances the
[2:23:24] project of the city planning
[2:23:26] program even though the project
[2:23:27] may be a variance with specific
[2:23:29] sections of the beauties urban
[2:23:31] planning bylaws. It facilitates
[2:23:33] land development there better
[2:23:35] integrates into the urban form
[2:23:36] without it being necessary to
[2:23:39] either modify applicable
[2:23:40] standards for the particular
[2:23:42] zone or the city as a whole or
[2:23:44] to process a minor exemption. It
[2:23:46] allows for conventions to be
[2:23:48] incorporated into a project that
[2:23:49] are not specifically prescribed
[2:23:52] by existing regulations such as
[2:23:54] those which might arise from
[2:23:56] sustainable development
[2:23:57] principles in order to increase
[2:23:58] the projects social except
[2:24:00] ability. That last part is an
[2:24:03] important addition, in that it
[2:24:05] highlights the ability of the
[2:24:08] city to negotiate with anybody
[2:24:12] presenting a project. We can be
[2:24:15] flexible over here, but you must
[2:24:17] deliver over here, which could
[2:24:20] be to increase green space or
[2:24:23] anything that is within the
[2:24:25] jurisdiction of the city. So it
[2:24:26] allows that capability as well.
[2:24:29] So I move that amendment to the
[2:24:32] primary motion as I just read.
[2:24:35] Cowan, district eight.
[2:24:37] >> And I have a mover?
[2:24:40] (inaudible)
[2:24:41] (---)
[2:24:42] .
[2:24:43] >> It needs to be seconded
[2:24:44] first.
[2:24:45] >> Do I have a seconder?
[2:24:47] >> Seconded
[2:24:48] By Tara
[2:24:51] - J'ai Stainforth. Une question
[2:24:53] pour clarifier. Le texte vient
[2:24:55] de lire monsieur
[2:24:58] (---)
[2:24:59] , ça sert à informer les gens.
[2:25:01] Ça décrit le règlement. Est-ce
[2:25:03] qu'on peut l'afficher sur le
[2:25:06] site Web? Est-ce qu'on peut
[2:25:07] avoir le règlement qui serait un
[2:25:11] document qu'on pourrait cliquer?
[2:25:14] On pourrait lire le Règlement
[2:25:16] directement. C'est absolument
[2:25:18] nécessaire. Est-ce que ça change
[2:25:19] la loi d'une façon ou d'une
[2:25:20] autre?
[2:25:23] - Ça appartient au conseil. La
[2:25:27] disposition lui par monsieur
[2:25:29] Cowan n'a pas d'interprétation,
[2:25:31] elle est inexpliqué hâtives.
[2:25:36] Ça pourrait se retrouver dans un
[2:25:37] plan qui
[2:25:38] (---)
[2:25:39] . Légalement, il ne vient pas
[2:25:45] Lange... changer la portion
[2:25:47] normative du règlement. C'est
[2:25:52] carrément une interprétation
[2:25:54] explicative de la portée du
[2:25:55] règlement. Ça appartient au
[2:25:56] conseil de soit de le laisser
[2:25:58] dans le règlement, dans
[2:25:59] l'inclure dans le règlement.
[2:26:02] - Aucun effet légal par rapport
[2:26:03] à la description, l'explication
[2:26:05] comme ça? Est-ce que Sussex
[2:26:09] piqué? Est-ce que c'est un texte
[2:26:10] légal?
[2:26:13] - Comme je viens de le dire,
[2:26:16] c'est un texte explicatif. Ça ne
[2:26:17] change pas la portée des
[2:26:18] éléments normatif.
[2:26:21] - D'accord, le règlement que
[2:26:22] j'ai lue reste le même document.
[2:26:26] On insère une explication
[2:26:29] décrivant ce qui se passe avec
[2:26:31] ce règlement, c'est ça?
[2:26:32] - Exact.
[2:26:33] - D'accord, merci.
[2:26:35] >> All in favour? Of the
[2:26:40] amendment? The okay, so, okay.
[2:26:45] >> And back to the main
[2:26:47] proposition which is the
[2:26:49] adoption of a bylaw with the
[2:26:53] amendment of a specific
[2:26:55] construction, occupancy
[2:26:57] proposals for a movable SCAOPI,
[2:27:04] amended.
[2:27:05] [Inaudible]
[2:27:06] >> Now we need vote. So all in
[2:27:07] favour? Okay.
[2:27:15] - 6. 1 Accorder un soutien
[2:27:16] financier à divers organismes
[2:27:17] sans but lucratif pour un
[2:27:18] montant de 27500 $.
[2:27:26] la résidence de soins palliatifs
[2:27:29] terrestres Adélard: 25000
[2:27:31] dollars, la Société
[2:27:32] d'horticulture
[2:27:33] (---)
[2:27:34] .
[2:27:35] (inaudible)
[2:27:36] (---)
[2:27:37] .
[2:27:38] >> Granted financial support to
[2:27:42] nonprofit organizations for
[2:27:44] $25,000 and financial support to
[2:27:45] the 6. 3 Autoriser des membres
[2:27:46] du conseil et la directrice
[2:27:47] générale à Lakeshore Hospital
[2:27:48] représenter la Ville de
[2:27:49] Pointe-Claire au congrès annuel
[2:27:50] de l'Union des Municipalités du
[2:27:51] Québec
[2:27:52] (UMQ)
[2:27:53] Foundation. Devant se tenir du 3
[2:27:54] au 5 mai 2023 à Gatineau.
[2:27:59] d'autoriser les dépenses et le
[2:28:01] remboursement des frais d'assise
[2:28:02] de l'UMQ 2023 conformément à la
[2:28:04] politique en vigueur. Le maire
[2:28:06] Tim Thomas, Mesdames les
[2:28:08] conseillères Cynthia Homan, quel
[2:28:11] est Thorstad-Cullen, Eric Stork
[2:28:13] et Bruno Tremblay, madame la
[2:28:16] directrice générale madame
[2:28:17] Karina Verdon.
[2:28:20] 6.4, other as members of Council
[2:28:23] to represent Pointe-Claire
[2:28:25] Canadian municipalities
[2:28:26] convention to be ultra made 25
[2:28:29] to May 28th 2023 in Toronto,
[2:28:30] Ontario. To authorize the
[2:28:32] expenses and reimbursement of
[2:28:35] costs related to the Federation
[2:28:37] of Canadian Municipalities
[2:28:39] annual conference in accordance
[2:28:42] with the current policy. The
[2:28:44] authorized persons are the mayor
[2:28:46] Tim Thomas, Councillors carried
[2:28:49] Thorstad-Cullen, Bruno Tremblay
[2:28:51] and Eric Stork.
[2:28:53] >> Do I have a mover?
[2:28:54] >> Force for six point 1 to 6
[2:28:55] point? For
[2:28:57] >> Eric Stork, district second.
[2:28:58] >> And seconder?
[2:29:03] >> Bruno Tremblay district six
[2:29:04] and seven.
[2:29:05] >> All in favour? 7. 1 Nommer un
[2:29:06] membre au sein du Comité d'art
[2:29:07] public de Pointe-Claire. cette
[2:29:11] résolution recommande la
[2:29:12] nomination de monsieur Benoît
[2:29:13] Jodoin à titre de membre expert
[2:29:15] bon père de 3 ans
[2:29:17] (---)
[2:29:18] au 31 décembre 2025. Le conseil
[2:29:20] municipal procède à la
[2:29:21] nomination des membres des
[2:29:22] comités dans la sélection et la
[2:29:25] composition finale demeure à son
[2:29:26] entière discrétion.
[2:29:32] >> Seven point to prove the
[2:29:34] reappointment and nomination of
[2:29:35] members to the Stewart hall
[2:29:37] advisory board. The Stewart Hall
[2:29:38] Advisory Committee
[2:29:39] Recommends the appointment of
[2:29:42] Mr. Leary on his, Mrs. L and
[2:29:44] Chris Knott, Mrs. Linda do it,
[2:29:45] and Mrs. losing a point for
[2:29:47] three years, three-year terms
[2:29:49] for
[2:29:55] January 1st 2023 to December
[2:29:56] 31st 2025. The advisory
[2:29:57] committee also recommends the
[2:29:58] appointment of two new members,
[2:30:01] Alexandra Nova and Marilyn Smith
[2:30:03] for three years terms for
[2:30:05] January 1st, 2023 to December
[2:30:09] 31st 2025. So Council should
[2:30:10] proceed with the appointment of
[2:30:12] community members, the final
[2:30:14] selection and composition of
[2:30:15] which shall be absolved it the
[2:30:18] question of Council. 9. 1
[2:30:21] Approuver une modification au
[2:30:22] contrat intervenu avec « Pénéga
[2:30:23] Communications Inc.  », pour la
[2:30:24] fourniture des services de
[2:30:25] photographies et de vidéos pour
[2:30:26] un montant de 3840, 23 $, taxes
[2:30:27] incluses.
[2:30:32] (inaudible)
[2:30:33] (---)
[2:30:41] >> Do I have a mover.
[2:30:42] >> So the home district five or
[2:30:45] 7.1, I moved to a point a member
[2:30:46] to the Pointe-Claire Public Park
[2:30:49] committee. For 7.2 I move to
[2:30:51] withdraw this item from the
[2:30:53] agenda, due to new information
[2:30:56] that needs to be evaluated by
[2:30:58] the City administration. This is
[2:31:00] brought to our attention for the
[2:31:03] public meeting and I move to
[2:31:08] approve 9.1 a change order to
[2:31:09] the contract entered into with
[2:31:12] -- communications and the supply
[2:31:14] of photos and video services for
[2:31:16] amount of $3,483.43, tax
[2:31:20] included.
[2:31:21] >> So do I now have a mover for,
[2:31:25] for the removal?
[2:31:27] >> I am withdrawing seven point.
[2:31:29] Two
[2:31:30] >> Okay. So we have to have a
[2:31:31] motion to withdraw.
[2:31:32] >> And we need a seconder.
[2:31:34] >> A seconder please, for the
[2:31:36] withdrawal?
[2:31:37] >> Yeah, given the fact that we
[2:31:40] were in block for 7.1, 7.2 and
[2:31:43] 9.1, do you want to vote
[2:31:45] separately on 7.2?
[2:31:47] >> Yes.
[2:31:48] >> For the withdrawal.
[2:31:50] >> Sure.
[2:31:51] >> Then we will go back to 7.1
[2:31:54] in 5.1. So 7.2 it's a
[2:31:56] withdrawal.
[2:31:57] >> That's correct. Since you
[2:31:58] want me to say that I move 7.1
[2:32:02] and 9.1 for a vote.
[2:32:05] >> Yes.
[2:32:06] >> Do I have a seconder?
[2:32:07] >> I agree.
[2:32:09] >> All in favour?
[2:32:11] >> Are we doing seven to?
[2:32:14] >> 71 or nine. One
[2:32:18] >> 71 a 91 right now.
[2:32:19] >> And we are back to 71. Every
[2:32:23] once in. Favour
[2:32:24] >> For 7.1 a 9.1, all in favour?
[2:32:27] >> Correct.
[2:32:28] >> Back to 7.2. So you're moving
[2:32:32] that so we need a seconder. Go
[2:32:36] ahead.
[2:32:38] >> 7.1, second Bob is the net.
[2:32:42] >> 7.2, Paul.
[2:32:44] >> 7.2, I agree that --
[2:32:46] >> You second the withdrawal?
[2:32:52] All right.
[2:32:53] >> All in favour? All against?
[2:33:01] Okay. 10. 1 Déposer la liste des
[2:33:05] amendements budgétaires et le
[2:33:06] registre des chèques pour la
[2:33:07] période du 5 au 25 janvier 2023.
[2:33:25] >> Municipalities are required
[2:33:26] to table report of the
[2:33:28] administration of their contract
[2:33:29] agents by at least once 10. a
[2:33:33] year and a council meeting 3
[2:33:34] Autoriser un amendement
[2:33:35] budgétaire afin de. Régulariser
[2:33:36] les postes budgétaires ayant des
[2:33:37] soldes déficitaires au 31
[2:33:38] décembre 2022. les dépenses sont
[2:33:44] liés aux contrats de services,
[2:33:45] (inaudible)
[2:33:46] (---)
[2:33:47] . Aux Services professionnels
[2:33:50] pour les fouilles
[2:33:52] archéologiques, à différents
[2:33:53] travaux de menuiserie,
[2:33:54] (inaudible)
[2:33:55] (---)
[2:33:56] . De services professionnels.
[2:34:03] 10.4. Appropriate funds to
[2:34:04] create new budgetary items for
[2:34:07] reserves for the compression of
[2:34:09] information technology projects
[2:34:12] in 2023 following the adoption
[2:34:13] of the 2023 C IP the City wishes
[2:34:17] to appropriate $1,295,000 from
[2:34:21] the general fund surplus, not
[2:34:24] otherwise 10. 5 Octroyer un
[2:34:25] contrat pour la fourniture de
[2:34:26] vêtements de travail pour les
[2:34:27] appropriated. Cols bleus pour
[2:34:28] l'année 2023 à « Le Groupe
[2:34:29] d'importation et de distribution
[2:34:30] Hugo inc.
[2:34:31] (Promotion Plus)
[2:34:32] », pour un montant total de
[2:34:33] 173526, 59 $, taxes incluses,
[2:34:34] avec les années 2024 et 2025 en
[2:34:35] option.
[2:34:45] >> For 10.3 to 10.5, do I have a
[2:34:48] mover?
[2:34:50] >> Ted Cowan district eight.
[2:34:56] >> And secondary?
[2:34:57] >> Eric Stork, district second
[2:34:59] district seven.
[2:35:02] >> All in favour?
[2:35:35] >>
[2:35:36] >> In this regard, the Council
[2:35:37] of the municipality may be, made
[2:35:40] by resolution establish a rate
[2:35:43] of remuneration or allowance
[2:35:44] that is higher than that
[2:35:46] established by a minister. The
[2:35:49] recommended rates shell take
[2:35:50] into account rage paid to date
[2:35:52] by the City of Pointe-Claire.
[2:35:56] 12. 1 Déposer la liste des
[2:35:57] changements au personnel par
[2:35:58] décisions déléguées pour le mois
[2:35:59] de février 2023. 12 point to
[2:36:06] approve the chaff staff changes
[2:36:09] to 2020. Three
[2:36:10] >> For 11 point 1 to 11 point
[2:36:12] would weigh them?
[2:36:14] >> Moved by Tara Stainforth,
[2:36:19] district four.
[2:36:20] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,
[2:36:23] district four.
[2:36:24] >> Any other? 14. 1 Autoriser un
[2:36:25] amendement budgétaire afin de
[2:36:26] régulariser les soldes
[2:36:27] déficitaires au budget 2022. une
[2:36:32] valeur totale de 498000 dollars.
[2:36:36] 14 point, to approve a change
[2:36:39] order to the contract entered
[2:36:42] into with -- for the supply and
[2:36:44] delivery of 24 by four pickup
[2:36:47] trucks with crew cabins, 2021,
[2:36:50] for an amount of $49,094.30,
[2:36:56] taxes included. Due to current
[2:36:58] delays in the automotive
[2:37:00] industry polite supply chain an
[2:37:02] additional amount is payable to
[2:37:04] -- to ensure the original order
[2:37:06] placed for two vehicles remains
[2:37:09] confirmed. 14. 3 Approuver une
[2:37:12] modification au contrat
[2:37:13] intervenu avec « Jacques Olivier
[2:37:14] Ford », pour la fourniture et la
[2:37:15] livraison d'une camionnette
[2:37:16] (4x4)
[2:37:17] avec chassis cabine, année 2021,
[2:37:18] pour un montant de 24820, 12 $,
[2:37:19] taxes incluses.
[2:37:27] 14.4, the water contract supply
[2:37:30] of services for the collection,
[2:37:31] transport, and value-ization of
[2:37:35] -- four total amount of 26,000
[2:37:40] $621,000.21, taxes included. For
[2:37:42] the year 2020 for an option.
[2:37:44] This contract will allow for the
[2:37:47] continuation of the voluntary
[2:37:49] drop of service for the citizens
[2:37:51] of the city. In accordance with
[2:37:53] the city's -- development path
[2:37:56] policy developed in 2017, the
[2:37:57] public works department is
[2:37:59] making its efforts to divert as
[2:38:02] much material as possible from
[2:38:03] landfill. To this hand, the City
[2:38:05] offers a voluntary drop off site
[2:38:07] and must hire an outside company
[2:38:09] to collect, transport, and
[2:38:10] recycle their material.
[2:38:13] >> For 14.1 to 14.4, do I have a
[2:38:17] mover?
[2:38:19] >> District to.
[2:38:20] >> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:38:21] >> All in favour?
[2:38:28] - 15. 1 Approuver une
[2:38:29] modification au contrat
[2:38:30] intervenu avec « Construction
[2:38:31] Doverco Inc.  », pour la
[2:38:32] réparation de maçonnerie et des
[2:38:33] travaux de remplacement des
[2:38:34] fenêtres au Stewart Hall pour un
[2:38:35] montant de 28109, 94 $, taxes
[2:38:38] incluses. la découverte de
[2:38:39] parties de charpente de bois
[2:38:41] pour y a nécessité des travaux
[2:38:42] supplémentaires.
[2:38:46] >> Approve a change order
[2:38:48] entered into with -- for the
[2:38:49] construction of a new
[2:38:51] neighbourhood police station for
[2:38:53] a credit of $4,943.15, taxes
[2:38:58] included. Various modifications
[2:39:00] made during the course of the
[2:39:02] work at the request of the City
[2:39:04] of Montréal and 15. 3 Octroyer
[2:39:06] un contrat pour des travaux
[2:39:07] d'entretien et de réparation de
[2:39:08] nature électrique pour la
[2:39:09] période de février 2023 à
[2:39:10] décembre 2024, à by the
[2:39:11] contractors. « Mofax Électrique
[2:39:12] Ltée », pour un montant total de
[2:39:13] 949233, 60 $, taxes incluses,
[2:39:14] avec les années 2025, 2026 et
[2:39:15] 2027 en option.
[2:39:25] un contrat qui prévoit des
[2:39:26] travaux d'entretien et de
[2:39:28] réparation en effet électricité
[2:39:30] (---)
[2:39:31] de réaménagement électrique.
[2:39:38] >> 15.4 to 15.3, do I have a
[2:39:39] mover?
[2:39:40] >> Yes, I propose approval of 15
[2:39:44] 1 to 3. District six.
[2:39:45] >> And seconder?
[2:39:47] >> Cindy home district five.
[2:39:48] >> All in favour?
[2:40:01] >> 16.1, designated authorize
[2:40:03] represented to sign the court
[2:40:07] documents accompanying the final
[2:40:09] report pursuant to the agreement
[2:40:11] entered into with the Federation
[2:40:14] of Canadian Municipalities under
[2:40:17] the Municipal asset management
[2:40:19] program. Authorize a director of
[2:40:21] a engineering to sign the court
[2:40:24] documents 16.. 2 Approuver une
[2:40:25] modification au contrat
[2:40:26] intervenu avec « Réalisation
[2:40:27] Dynamique Inc.  », pour la
[2:40:28] construction d'une aire de jeu
[2:40:29] d'eau au parc Augusta pour un
[2:40:30] montant de 20613, 87 $, taxes
[2:40:31] incluses.
[2:40:40] l'ajout d'un conduit rigide en
[2:40:42] PVC, de trois fils électriques,
[2:40:44] l'installation de
[2:40:45] (inaudible)
[2:40:46] (---)
[2:40:47] .
[2:40:48] >> The 0.3, approve a change
[2:40:49] order to the contract entered
[2:40:52] into for the supply installation
[2:40:55] of L.E.D. street lights through
[2:40:57] the to an amount of $23,541.13,
[2:41:02] taxes included. Supply and
[2:41:05] installation of photo cells on
[2:41:06] the guarded lights that are
[2:41:08] connected to the same electrical
[2:41:10] network as the lead road lights.
[2:41:15] 16. 4 Approuver une entente à
[2:41:16] intervenir avec « Sa Majesté du
[2:41:17] Chef du Canada », représenté par
[2:41:18] le ministre de l'Infrastructure
[2:41:19] et des Collectivités, concernant
[2:41:20] une contribution dans le cadre
[2:41:21] du Fonds pour le transport actif
[2:41:22] dans le cadre du projet de
[2:41:23] construction d'une passerelle
[2:41:24] pour piétons et cyclistes
[2:41:25] permettant de franchir
[2:41:26] l'autoroute 40, dans l'axe du
[2:41:27] boulevard Saint-Jean à
[2:41:28] Pointe-Claire.
[2:41:32] la Ville confirme qu'il répond
[2:41:34] aux exigences de l'entente de
[2:41:36] contribution dans le cadre du
[2:41:37] fonds pour le transport actif
[2:41:38] pour le projet de construction
[2:41:44] d'une passerelle pour piétons et
[2:41:45] cyclistes permettant de franchir
[2:41:46] l'autoroute 40, dans l'axe du
[2:41:47] boulevard Saint-Jean à
[2:41:48] Pointe-Claire..
[2:41:53] >> Do I have a mover?
[2:41:55] >> District. To
[2:41:56] >> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:42:00] >> All in favour? 17. Urbanisme
[2:42:01] Les personnes présentes peuvent
[2:42:02] s'adresser au conseil concernant
[2:42:03] les sujets ci-dessous pour les
[2:42:04] items 17. 1 à 17. 4:
[2:42:08] >> The reason presented as
[2:42:09] Council on the subjects under
[2:42:11] The 17. 1 Considérer une demande
[2:42:13] de dérogation mineure concernant
[2:42:14] la propriété sise au 83, avenue
[2:42:15] Fifth. 17.1 to 17.4. Permettre
[2:42:22] l'agrandissement d'une résidence
[2:42:24] unifamiliale détachées avec une
[2:42:25] marge de recul latérale adjacent
[2:42:26] à l'autoroute 23,25 mètres
[2:42:30] puisque le minimum requis est de
[2:42:31] (inaudible)
[2:42:32] (---)
[2:42:33] .
[2:42:34] >> 17.2,
[2:42:35] A minor exemption Jen request
[2:42:37] from the 63 Avenue Pointe-Claire
[2:42:40] Avenue with a portico setback of
[2:42:43] 16.15 minutes metres weather
[2:42:46] then rather than the minimum
[2:42:48] required of 7.2 metres. Oh,
[2:42:53] there is a question.
[2:43:04] C'est pour la marge avant, cette
[2:43:05] dérogation?
[2:43:08] (inaudible)
[2:43:09] (---)
[2:43:10] .
[2:43:11] - L'adresse sur l'a vu la nuit
[2:43:12] Pointe-Claire?
[2:43:25] - Le conseil a une
[2:43:28] recommandation du comité
[2:43:29] consultatif d'urbanisme.
[2:43:32] - Revenez moi avec les détails.
[2:43:39] Il y a deux adresses.
[2:43:40] (inaudible)
[2:43:41] (---)
[2:43:42] .
[2:43:47] >> It's two includes the front
[2:43:49] porch. The front porch already
[2:43:51] exists with the minor exemption.
[2:43:54] It's to enclose it. So the porch
[2:43:56] is staying in the same place.
[2:44:01] >> Okay.
[2:44:20] >> Anybody else to ask a
[2:44:22] question? No? Okay.
[2:44:32] - C'est correct, je m'excuse.
[2:44:40] - 17. 3 Considérer une demande
[2:44:41] de dérogation mineure concernant
[2:44:42] la propriété sise au 4025,
[2:44:43] Autoroute Transcanadienne.
[2:44:44] (inaudible)
[2:44:45] (---)
[2:44:46] .
[2:44:54] L'installation d'appareils de
[2:44:56] mécanique sur le toit
[2:44:57] (inaudible)
[2:44:58] (---)
[2:44:59] , plutôt que le maximum permis
[2:45:01] de 3 mètres. L'installation de
[2:45:02] cinq frigos d'entreposage dans
[2:45:04] la marge latérale gauche, plutôt
[2:45:06] que dans la marge latérale tel
[2:45:08] que permis. L'installation de
[2:45:10] cinq silos d'entreposage situés
[2:45:11] à ça de mettre de la propriété
[2:45:14] latérale plutôt que le minimum
[2:45:16] de 10 mètres.
[2:45:18] (inaudible)
[2:45:19] (---)
[2:45:20] , c'est de 126 à 101.
[2:45:24] >> 17.4, minor exemptions
[2:45:26] considering the property at 60
[2:45:33] 301 and 60 701, the highway,
[2:45:34] installation of science in the
[2:45:36] straight line on all three
[2:45:39] facades a block wide rather than
[2:45:42] installed one above the other as
[2:45:45] permitted. Two signs attached
[2:45:48] letters in a frame whereas on
[2:45:52] that letters are permitted 17..
[2:45:55] 5 Considérer les plans
[2:45:56] d'implantation et d'intégration
[2:45:57] architecturale relatifs à la
[2:45:58] propriété sise au 17, avenue
[2:46:02] Condover.
[2:46:03] (inaudible)
[2:46:04] (---)
[2:46:12] >> 17.6 consider the integration
[2:46:14] program place with respect to
[2:46:17] the properties so minute and a
[2:46:18] jurist be avenue for a motion to
[2:46:20] end the new construction.
[2:46:34] .
[2:46:38] >> 17. 7 Considérer les plans
[2:46:39] d'implantation et d'intégration
[2:46:40] architecturale relatifs à la
[2:46:41] propriété, sise au 10, situated
[2:46:42] at avenue Jervis Bay. 63
[2:46:44] Pointe-Claire for an extension
[2:46:47] and outdoor renovation.
[2:46:49] >> Do I have a mover for 17.1 to
[2:46:53] 17.8?
[2:46:54] >> I move to consider and
[2:46:56] approve the minor exemptions
[2:47:02] from 17.1 to 17.4 and consider
[2:47:03] and approve the site planning
[2:47:05] architectural plans for 17 point
[2:47:08] 5 to 17 point. Eight Kelly
[2:47:10] Thorstad-Cullen, district three.
[2:47:12] >> I seconded. All
[2:47:14] >> In favour? 18. 1 Approuver un
[2:47:18] don de documents usagés
[2:47:19] provenant des collections de la
[2:47:20] bibliothèque publique de
[2:47:21] Pointe-Claire à Les Amis de la
[2:47:22] Bibliothèque de Pointe-Claire.
[2:47:24] (inaudible)
[2:47:25] (---)
[2:47:38] >> 18.2, approve a donation of
[2:47:48] $175 to -- a donation of hundred
[2:47:52] 75 highly pony produced by hives
[2:47:56] from the Pointe-Claire Public
[2:47:58] Library. Do
[2:47:59] >> We have a mover?
[2:48:01] >> District. One
[2:48:02] >> And seconder?
[2:48:05] >> District eight.
[2:48:09] >>..?
[2:48:17] >>, Kelly Thorstad-Cullen.
[2:48:21] >>?. Merci tout le monde..
[2:48:25] (applaudissements)