[0:29] - Bonsoir, tout le monde. Good

[0:32] evening everyone. Welcome to the

[0:33] meeting. We shall start with our

[0:38] council members reports, and I

[0:40] will probably start with

[0:41] district eight. Councillor

[0:43] Cowan?

[0:46] >> I just would like to say that

[0:48] we all survived the flood of

[0:50] hopefully of the century,

[0:51] hopefully it won't come back.

[0:53] I'm on the emergency Planning

[0:56] Committee, and I am calling for

[0:58] a meeting -- where all the

[1:02] lessons can be learned and

[1:05] perhaps I -- perhaps implement

[1:09] implementing what the costs are,

[1:10] like the city, the citizens,

[1:12] give them information package

[1:14] out to citizens or how they can

[1:16] better prepare themselves well

[1:18] for the next flood of the

[1:20] century, who knows when that

[1:21] might come. Hopefully that will

[1:22] be 100 years from now -- but we

[1:26] have to take into consideration

[1:28] that might be a lot sooner.

[1:29] Thank you.

[1:31] >> Councillor Cousineau?

[1:34] >> Yes, in my opinion, we will

[1:38] be voting -- move on the agenda

[1:46] 5.6 item. Now it will be moved,

[1:51] 17.8, and I will make a short

[1:53] comment, ten, and I also want to

[1:56] apologize to Mr. Nasr El Dabee,

[1:59] I hope I got it right this time

[2:02] for earlier events, and I'd like

[2:05] to talk to you after the meeting

[2:07] if it's possible. Thank you.

[2:13] >> Councillor Stainforth?

[2:16] Councillor Homan?

[2:18] >> Good evening. I just want to

[2:20] thank all of -- I'm from

[2:22] district five, and I'd like to

[2:24] thank all of the neighbours and

[2:25] the people who helped their

[2:26] friends and their neighbours

[2:30] from the flooding. And at a time

[2:37] when it's very difficult for

[2:40] many people and you see

[2:41] different things happening and I

[2:42] saw a lot of people working and

[2:44] helping each other and literally

[2:46] restored my faith in mid

[2:48] mankind, for sure, because it

[2:50] hasn't always been easy. I would

[2:52] just like to thank the people in

[2:53] district five that helped each

[2:55] other out during a very

[2:56] difficult time. Also, you're for

[3:03] staff are getting in there are

[3:08] streets as quickly as I could

[3:12] unsettle what, Glanlynn,

[3:14] Sunnyside, I could go on and on

[3:28] , thank you all for your help.

[3:30] Councillor Tremblay?

[3:31] >> Nothing specific tonight.

[3:35] Your sentiments Homan, well

[3:37] said, and I think what you said

[3:38] applies also to district six as

[3:40] well, thank you.

[3:44] >> Councillor Thorstad-Cullen?

[3:47] >> I do echo the comments of my

[3:51] colleagues and I thank you for

[3:52] sharing them. It is a trying

[3:54] time for those going through it.

[3:57] It's not over, it's just

[3:58] beginning, as I've had many

[4:00] exchanges with my residents. I

[4:03] know that we cannot be there for

[4:06] everyone, but if there are

[4:07] needs, I encourage you to reach

[4:09] out to neighbours friends who

[4:10] can support you, and of course,

[4:11] your councillor if it's within

[4:13] something that we can try to

[4:14] help give you support or find

[4:16] someone to help support you in

[4:17] these times of need, thank you.

[4:23] >> Councillor Stork?

[4:24] >> Thank you. Just a couple of

[4:26] things, so starting off next

[4:27] Saturday's, district seven, --

[4:28] Northview Park, great cause if

[4:29] you're in district seven, where

[4:30] Stevie Cohen puts it on with his

[4:31] kids, live music for the

[4:32] children's hospital, it's a

[4:33] really nice cause -- lot going

[4:34] on in district six, or seven,

[4:35] Winthrop is very painful.

[4:36] - Juste des affaires.

[4:56] A -- developers, cities doing

[4:57] everything they can, they're on

[4:58] site every day, checking

[4:59] compaction, everything to make

[5:00] sure that nothing slips through

[5:01] the cracks because they have

[5:02] been late. Ça va prendre jusque,

[5:03] d'après moi, le 1er octobre

[5:04] avant que ça se règle. Et après

[5:05] ça, il y a encore le

[5:06] (---)

[5:07] en refaire.

[5:16] À part ça... c'était incroyable,

[5:20] ce qu'ils ont fait, comment ils

[5:21] nous ont aidés. We also have not

[5:22] heard much in reference to the

[5:23] 575 project, the Lucia's. With

[5:25] that in mind, and I've posted on

[5:28] my page that we formed a

[5:30] citizens committee to start

[5:31] drumming up some information and

[5:32] to get ahead of the curb when it

[5:34] does come. So that is a positive

[5:38] step. Last but not least but in

[5:40] reference to the flooding, you

[5:41] know, we have a great city. The

[5:44] citizens, what they did, I was

[5:46] pretty much affected, and the

[5:48] citizens from Craigmore, their

[5:50] unity and their bond And just be

[5:57] patient with the garbage

[5:58] collection, or going to get,

[5:59] their kudos to the City for

[6:00] working hard, and that's about

[6:01] it, thank you.

[6:04] >> Homan, you wanted to --

[6:05] >> I did forget about one thing,

[6:08] every year around this time,

[6:10] there's an event at the plaza,

[6:13] shopping centre, it's a

[6:14] community awareness day. It's

[6:16] between ten and three, and all

[6:18] community -- many community

[6:20] organizations set up their table

[6:21] so you can learn a lot about

[6:22] their different -- what they do,

[6:23] the services they do, they are

[6:25] pamphlets they hand out, Council

[6:27] will have a table, and also in

[6:29] the recreation department will

[6:31] have a table so you can learn a

[6:33] little bit more about the

[6:34] programs and services they do.

[6:36] So I encourage you to come. It's

[6:37] also a good way to support our

[6:40] merchants. So it's 10 to 3 on

[6:42] Saturday, September the 7th, at

[6:44] the plaza, thank you very much.

[6:46] >> Thank you Councillor Homan.

[6:49] Mesdames et Messieurs, bonsoir

[6:50] et bienvenue à cette séance du

[6:51] conseil du 3 septembre 2024.

[6:57] Ladies and gentlemen, good

[6:58] evening, welcome to our

[6:59] September 3rd council meeting. I

[7:02] as well have something to say

[7:03] about the flooding. I published

[7:04] a bit on it and spoke in it on

[7:06] an interview today on a, but I

[7:08] wrote a letter back to a

[7:09] citizen, and I thought I'd read

[7:11] it to you here tonight. It's not

[7:12] too long, I hope. There are a

[7:14] few areas of the city that were

[7:16] hit very badly. The ones that

[7:17] sprang to mind, I mean,

[7:19] everybody got hit. The

[7:22] interesting thing about this

[7:23] whole process was it wasn't the

[7:25] usual suspects, it randomly

[7:26] caught parts of the city that

[7:27] had not had previous flooding.

[7:29] They defied logic in a lot of

[7:31] ways. The ones that sprang to

[7:33] mind where the ones that I heard

[7:35] about where Saddlewood,

[7:36] Glenwood, Glenn Wynne, Glenn

[7:38] Wynne, Craigmore, and Austin

[7:40] were among the four. There were

[7:42] others that I mentioned, are not

[7:44] mentioned, that I were aware of

[7:45] many other areas. We are trying

[7:49] to analyze and understand what

[7:51] we can do, and it's a real

[7:54] challenge because it defied

[7:57] logic. The existing network, our

[7:59] existing system was simply

[8:00] overwhelmed. So when your system

[8:02] is overwhelmed, you have to

[8:03] understand why and where you can

[8:04] improve it. Like Mark -- said

[8:09] very eloquently, no city is

[8:10] going to be able to redo their

[8:12] system in time for the next

[8:14] rainfall. But we can study and

[8:16] try to do everything we can to

[8:17] mitigate against similar

[8:19] problems. We're trying to

[8:21] analyze and understand what we

[8:22] can do. We've already invested

[8:24] in storm retention basins, and

[8:25] will continue to re-invest in

[8:27] our infrastructure. But as Mark

[8:29] said, no city is in a position

[8:31] to rebuild its waterworks

[8:33] infrastructure before the next

[8:34] big storm hits. Financially,

[8:36] it's impossible. Going forward

[8:38] though, we can ensure that parks

[8:40] and streets are built in ways

[8:42] that are designed to absorb

[8:43] runoff that would otherwise and

[8:44] up in residential basements. We

[8:46] can ensure that all future

[8:48] development projects fully

[8:49] respect the need to prevent

[8:51] runoff in the existing

[8:52] neighbourhoods where they are

[8:53] planned to build. We must

[8:55] obviously ensure that wetlands

[8:56] are never cut and developed for

[8:59] exactly these reasons, and we

[9:00] can explore the use of

[9:03] absorption methods like

[9:05] permeable pavements, et cetera,

[9:07] to prevent runoff. But we must

[9:11] also highlight the need to

[9:13] address the cause of intense

[9:15] rainfall events, and that is

[9:16] global warming and climate

[9:17] change itself. And we can

[9:19] certainly as a city do stuff to

[9:21] influence that. We've already

[9:22] begun -- Pointe-Claire has

[9:23] already begun managing its

[9:25] shoreline to reduce the warming

[9:26] of its waters. It is

[9:29] dramatically increased its

[9:30] habitat gardening in places like

[9:32] copper Drake, behind the plaza,

[9:34] and all along the front of our

[9:36] public's work building just

[9:38] along Donegani. But we can do

[9:40] more. We can encourage or insist

[9:43] on having green rooms, more

[9:44] green rooms, more solar

[9:46] panneling in our industrial park

[9:48] and on as many municipal

[9:50] buildings as puzzle. Alan

[9:52] Desousa has accomplished

[9:53] miracles in this regard in St.

[9:55] Laurent, and I seem as a beacon

[9:57] and an example and an

[9:59] inspiration possibly for things

[10:00] like Pointe-Claire and others

[10:02] where we can simply do what we

[10:03] can to mitigate against climate

[10:08] disaster. We should continue to

[10:09] do our best given the resources

[10:11] available to us. I encourage the

[10:13] use of whatever means available

[10:15] to us to try and mitigate

[10:17] against heavy rainfalls in the

[10:18] future and their impact. Le 22

[10:24] août dernier, nous avons suivi

[10:27] un événement pour honorer nos

[10:29] athlètes olympiques. Kelly

[10:32] Mackay, Nathan homme bas Murray

[10:35] et

[10:36] (---)

[10:37] . Malheureusement, Patrick aussi

[10:38] ne pouvait pas prendre part à

[10:40] l'événement mais ses parents

[10:41] étaient là. Plus de 200

[10:43] personnes se sont présentés au

[10:45] Centre aquatique pour les

[10:47] rencontrer et obtenir des

[10:49] autographes de nos athlètes

[10:51] olympiques. C'était un événement

[10:55] mémorable pour tout le monde. On

[10:58] August 22nd, Pointe-Claire held

[11:00] an event to honour our Olympic

[11:02] athletes, Kiley MacKay, Nathan's

[11:04] Albert Murray, and Serena Brown.

[11:06] And as I said, unfortunately

[11:08] Patrick was unable to attend but

[11:11] his parents were day. Over 200

[11:13] people turned out of the aquatic

[11:14] centre to meet them and get

[11:17] autographs. It was fun, a great

[11:18] evening, wonderful human beings,

[11:19] I was impressed with their

[11:21] composure and resilience and it

[11:23] was very special. I just want to

[11:26] say thank you again to all the

[11:28] athletes and citizens that came

[11:29] out to the event. Les collectes

[11:31] depuis le passage de la tempête

[11:35] Debbie, Pointe-Claire a dû

[11:36] ajuster les collectes. D'abord,

[11:38] pour ramasser les débris reliés

[11:40] aux inondations et par la suite,

[11:42] pour assurer les collectes

[11:44] habituels. Nous avons prolongé

[11:46] la collecte hebdomadaire des

[11:49] déchets pour donner la chance à

[11:51] nos citoyens et citoyennes de

[11:53] poursuivre leur nettoyage.

[11:56] Compte tenu de la qualité

[11:58] importante des débris, nous

[12:01] prolongeons l'horaire

[12:02] hebdomadaire des collectes de

[12:03] déchets domestiques jusqu'à

[12:05] nouvel ordre. Nous reprenons

[12:09] l'horaire de l'automne la

[12:10] semaine prochaine. Les collecte

[12:12] des déchets se feront aux deux

[12:15] semaines. Ce sera important de

[12:17] visiter le site Web de

[12:19] Pointe-Claire pour suivre notre

[12:21] page Facebook pour vous tenir

[12:23] informés des changements de ces

[12:26] horaires. Veuillez noter que

[12:28] plusieurs collègues auront lieu

[12:30] en septembre afin de vous aider

[12:34] à vous débarrasser correctement

[12:35] de vos objets et matériaux. Le

[12:38] 11 septembre, il y aura une

[12:42] collecte de objets en comprend.

[12:44] Le 14 septembre, il y aura un

[12:46] écocentre dans la cour des

[12:47] Travaux publics. Les 14 et 15

[12:50] septembre, vous pourrez apporter

[12:53] vos résidus domestiques

[12:55] dangereux dans le stationnement

[12:58] municipal longeant l'avenue

[12:59] Civic Center derrière l'hôtel de

[13:02] ville. Les branches seront

[13:05] ramassés sur une base régulière

[13:07] jusqu'au 31 octobre. Il ne

[13:10] serait pas nécessaire de fournir

[13:12] les employés de l'hôtel de ville

[13:14] pour la collecte. Since the

[13:18] passage of tropical storm Debby,

[13:20] Pointe-Claire has had to adjust

[13:21] its collection, first pick up

[13:23] flood related to breathe and to

[13:24] ensure the usual collections.

[13:26] Due to the large quantity of

[13:28] debris that we are in contact

[13:30] with water, the weekly schedule

[13:32] for a household waste collection

[13:33] has been extended until further

[13:35] notice. Next, week we are

[13:37] getting back to our fall

[13:40] schedule, garbage pickup will be

[13:41] every two weeks. Please visit

[13:43] Pointe-Claire's website and

[13:44] social media pages to keep up on

[13:48] upcoming protections. Please

[13:49] note that several collections

[13:50] will take place in September to

[13:52] help you properly dispose of

[13:53] items and materials, like I said

[13:55] in French, Wednesday, September

[13:57] 11th of bulky items collection,

[13:59] Saturdays at number 14, and

[14:01] equal Centre and the public

[14:02] works yard, Saturday September

[14:05] 14th, and Sunday September 15th,

[14:07] a hazardous household ways to be

[14:10] dropped off, hazardous household

[14:12] ways to be dropped off in the

[14:13] municipal parking lot along

[14:14] civic centre avenue behind City

[14:17] Hall. Branches will be collected

[14:18] on a regular basis in till

[14:20] October 31st. It won't be

[14:23] necessary to contact City Hall

[14:25] to request collection. Les

[14:29] inscriptions, encore cette

[14:31] année, nous avons une importante

[14:33] programmation culturelle pour la

[14:35] rentrée. Les inscriptions aux

[14:39] activités d'été du centre

[14:41] (---)

[14:42] Stewart Hull et de la

[14:43] bibliothèque débuteront ce soir

[14:45] pour les résidents et les

[14:48] non-résident, ce sera ce jeudi à

[14:49] 19 heures. La vente des billets

[14:52] pour la saison d'automne 2024

[14:54] des grands concerts Stewart à

[14:57] l'est déjà en ligne. Chaque

[15:01] automne, l'auto Teck renouvelle

[15:03] sa collection et invite les

[15:06] artistes à soumettre leurs

[15:07] oeuvres à la galerie d'art

[15:10] Stuart Hall pour la collection

[15:12] de 1025 de l'événement....

[15:18] Celles-ci seront évalués par un

[15:19] jury formé des professionnels du

[15:22] milieu artistique. Les oeuvres

[15:25] sélectionnées seront exposées à

[15:27] la galerie d'art ils seront par

[15:29] la suite disponible à l'aréna

[15:32] TECQ pour l'avant ou la

[15:36] location. L'appel aux

[15:38] arbitres... et aux artistes est

[15:39] maintenant lancé.

[15:43] (---)

[15:44] Et la prochaine exposition qui

[15:45] se tiendra à la galerie d'art

[15:48] Stuart Hall à partir du 7

[15:50] septembre prochain. C'est

[15:52] dispositions rassemble les

[15:55] pratiques des trois artistes

[15:59] (---)

[16:00] Catherine Boivin, Frédéric

[16:02] Bigras Bogan. Registration for

[16:07] life activists at Stewart Hall

[16:09] cultural -- begin this evening

[16:11] for residents. For non

[16:12] residents, it will be this

[16:13] Thursday at seven PM. Tickets

[16:15] are now available online for the

[16:17] fall 2024 season of Stewart

[16:20] holes grand concerts. Each fall,

[16:23] Stewart Hall rental and sales

[16:26] service renews its collection

[16:28] and invites artist from the West

[16:29] Island to submit their

[16:33] earthwork. The artwork will be

[16:35] evaluated by a jury made up of

[16:36] professionals from the art

[16:38] world. The selected works will

[16:40] be exhibited at the art gallery

[16:42] and will be available at the art

[16:43] rental and sales service for

[16:45] sale or monthly rental. This

[16:47] call to artists is now open.

[16:50] Stuart Hall's next exhibition

[16:53] is, and I quote, this shower is

[16:56] a body, is a world, is a house.

[17:00] It brings you had three artists,

[17:01] Lane Côté, -- and Frederick be

[17:06] Dora. The exhibition will be on

[17:08] display starting September 7th.

[17:13] And just on a final note, we

[17:16] will be discussing a resolution

[17:19] tonight to remove once again a

[17:24] project from our interim control

[17:26] bylaw, or the RCI. I have always

[17:31] objected to buildings that are

[17:33] too high because you lose the

[17:35] sense of community. I've also

[17:37] always objected to building

[17:39] residentially in the commercial

[17:41] industrial zone which I think is

[17:42] the city's bread basket and is

[17:44] foolhardy to do so. So these are

[17:47] my objections at the outset.

[17:49] Tonight, once, again the project

[17:51] is being pulled out of the RRCEA

[17:53] and I'm almost at the point of

[17:54] asking why we have one. That

[17:58] being, said I think we can move

[17:59] to question period. Now, the

[18:00] rules for question period --

[18:02] >> No, the adoption of the

[18:04] agenda, Mister Mayor. Je

[18:05] m'excuse.

[18:09] - 1.1 Adoption de l'ordre du

[18:10] jour. 1.1 Adoption of the

[18:13] Agenda. With the following,

[18:14] change the item 5.6 is moved

[18:18] right after 17.7, there for 5.6

[18:25] will not become 17.8.

[18:31] Donc le

[18:37] . On 05 et point six sont

[18:42] déplacées à 17,8.

[18:48] >> For adoption of the agenda,

[18:49] do I have a mover?

[18:51] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,

[18:53] district. Three

[18:54] >> And seconder?

[18:55] >> Bruno Tremblay, Sonia re-.

[18:58] >> All in favour?

[19:02] - 3.1 Approuver le procès-verbal

[19:03] de la séance ordinaire du 13

[19:04] août 2024.

[19:08] >> To approve the minutes of the

[19:10] meeting of August 13th, 2024, do

[19:12] I have a mover?

[19:14] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen, --

[19:17] >> And seconder?

[19:18] - Brûlots Tremblay, district

[19:19] six.

[19:20] >> Bruno Tremblay, district six.

[19:21] >> All in favour?

[19:22] - Pour la période des questions

[19:23] ce soir. >> Question Vous avez

[19:25] été accueilli à l'entrée pour

[19:27] vous inscrire à la période de

[19:30] questions. L'intention de cette

[19:33] démarche est d'abord deux

[19:34] permettre aux personnes de

[19:35] demeurer assise jusqu'à l'appel

[19:37] de leur nom et d'accorder la

[19:40] priorité aux résidents et

[19:42] résidentes de Pointe-Claire. Et

[19:44] nous garderons 90 minutes pour

[19:46] la période de questions. Une

[19:49] personne à la fois au micro.

[19:51] Nous vous remercions d'attendre

[19:55] que le citoyen ait terminé de

[19:57] poser sa question et que vous

[19:58] soyez appelés avant de vous

[20:00] lever pour venir poser votre

[20:03] question. Trois, les

[20:04] non-résidents présents pourront

[20:05] poser leurs questions par la

[20:08] suite, si le temps n'est pas

[20:10] écoulé.

[20:34] Would be called to get up and

[20:36] ask us. And finally,

[20:37] nonresidents present will be

[20:38] able to ask questions afterwards

[20:40] or if there is time permitting.

[20:43] So first off the bat Au début,

[20:47] Alexandre Rousseau.

[20:54] >> Good evening, everyone. I

[20:56] will try and be brief into the

[20:59] point. So a couple of things,

[21:01] almost a year ago now, I've come

[21:03] in and ask this council multiple

[21:04] times to look at how we are

[21:06] charging taxes for our citizens,

[21:08] and respectively, I sent an

[21:10] email on the 1st of June of

[21:12] which every council member was

[21:14] copied on, and yourself, Mister

[21:16] Mayor. No one has answered me

[21:17] since then. Out of respect to

[21:19] all of you, I sent a follow-up

[21:21] email on July 26th, again, total

[21:23] radio silence. Now, I'm all

[21:25] about respect, it's

[21:26] bidirectional Street, so

[21:28] respectfully, let's take a look

[21:29] at that one. The next one I sent

[21:31] you an email on the 7th of June,

[21:34] asking you to look at traffic

[21:36] issues, which I copied Mr. Stork

[21:39] on, specifically around Shaw's

[21:41] or, bear wood, where the new old

[21:45] folks home is going to be built

[21:47] there. It's come to my attention

[21:49] since then you actually already

[21:51] have a traffic report, it dates

[21:52] from January 2020, I'm holding

[21:54] it in my hands, 103-page

[21:56] document that clearly lays out

[21:57] what you should be doing. And

[21:59] again, on July 20, six no

[22:03] follow-up not-so---none

[22:04] whatsoever, not even an answer

[22:05] or reply, which is a little

[22:06] ridiculous, to be honest. So,

[22:07] now I'm just gonna keep it

[22:09] simple, do you commit to working

[22:11] on these two issues and updating

[22:13] us once a month has to their

[22:16] status, yes or no?

[22:17] >> Well, we could try, but were

[22:19] completely incapable of doing

[22:20] so. But thank you for your

[22:22] question. It is a Québec

[22:23] government project and we have

[22:26] -- we are as much in the dark as

[22:27] you are, and we will report you

[22:30] as soon as we know anything

[22:31] about it. What I can tell you,

[22:33] and Councillor Stork and I are

[22:35] on the same page on this one, is

[22:37] that we are very much perplexed

[22:39] how they plan to allow vehicles

[22:41] to get in and out of that

[22:43] building. And that is of crucial

[22:44] importance to Pointe-Claire. And

[22:46] we don't know. We have our

[22:49] preferences. I for one would

[22:50] like to see an opening up of

[22:52] Hymus so there can be an exit

[22:53] and entrance on Hymus. I think

[22:55] it's the only solution. But we

[22:58] are told that it may be too

[22:59] close to the intersection. We

[23:02] have come up with our own

[23:04] solutions, and the report of

[23:06] 2020, I have not read, that was

[23:07] in the previous administration.

[23:09] However, thank you for bringing

[23:10] that up. And I will have a look

[23:12] at it. The problem with this

[23:15] project is that really it's a

[23:17] mystery. Other than we can look

[23:18] at the prototypes that have

[23:20] already been built, we can't

[23:22] really guess much. And we don't

[23:25] have the documentation or

[23:26] information we are requesting,

[23:27] so we can get back to you on it,

[23:29] because we simply don't have it,

[23:31] and it's never good to guess.

[23:33] And it's not good to surmise.

[23:36] However, you know, you are quite

[23:38] right, I don't see how they're

[23:39] going to do it down on Shaw's

[23:41] are, they would it is too

[23:42] narrow, I don't know what they

[23:43] are going to do, and we are very

[23:46] perplexing concerned as a

[23:47] Council.

[23:48] >> Okay, so just a final

[23:51] statement, respectfully, you

[23:52] have some of this information

[23:54] because continue the email us

[23:55] at, because I reached out to the

[23:57] organization that's governing

[23:58] the project ahead of time, and I

[23:59] asked them a couple different

[24:01] questions, the first one being

[24:03] the entrance off of St. John's

[24:05] to the end of the lot will be

[24:06] maintained and will be

[24:07] maintained when the project was

[24:09] live. You could be true is the

[24:10] entrance on May would, it'll be

[24:13] -- furthermore they actually

[24:15] responded because I asked a

[24:17] traffic question saying, hey,

[24:18] what are we going to do about

[24:19] this and they responded very

[24:21] clearly this is 100% the

[24:23] responsibility the City of

[24:24] Pointe-Claire. So it's actually

[24:25] your job, no offence, and there

[24:29] is no waiting on any other level

[24:31] of government here. Your

[24:33] responsibility is to study this,

[24:34] this issue respectfully, you

[24:35] have information in front of,

[24:36] the reporting, you can read it,

[24:39] and start working on the

[24:40] project. That's it. There is no

[24:41] other level of government.

[24:43] >> They have never given that to

[24:45] myself. Madame Verdun, have they

[24:48] given us a report on the traffic

[24:51] report, from the provincial

[24:52] government have we received any

[24:55] report on how they plan to wrote

[24:58] fake in and out once that's

[24:59] built, do we have that written

[25:00] in a plan?

[25:01] >> We don't have the final plan,

[25:03] but yes, it's true that we have

[25:04] some discussion with them but we

[25:07] don't have the final plan

[25:09] because it's the -- and for now,

[25:11] they didn't add the offer done,

[25:14] so we don't have the plan. But

[25:16] you know, we already discussed,

[25:18] that it will eventually be --

[25:21] responsibility of the City to

[25:22] look at the traffic around, so

[25:24] this is true.

[25:26] >> So once we know the project,

[25:27] we will absolutely do, so thank

[25:29] you sir. Sir, that's --

[25:33] >> We will see each other next

[25:34] week.

[25:35] >> Joan --

[25:42] >> Hello, good evening, thank

[25:43] you for your time. My name is

[25:45] John Terrell us, I live on 93

[25:48] Cedar Avenue. My reason for

[25:51] being here today is for the

[25:53] ongoing issue residential

[25:55] project 99 Cedar, probably half

[25:59] of you around on this table in

[26:04] this Council is aware of this

[26:05] project. My wife and I are the

[26:08] only ones in my humble opinion

[26:10] who have a reason to speak up.

[26:12] Where the only ones that number

[26:14] 99 seater. We have incurred from

[26:17] last year including this year

[26:19] over $10,000 of landscape repair

[26:23] and the cleaning, refilling of

[26:25] our pool every time because the

[26:29] landscape at 99 seater, again,

[26:31] in my humble opinion, and I've

[26:34] had people who have given me

[26:36] advice in Council, and I know

[26:38] the city is working on this,

[26:40] it's been 3.5 years, that we've

[26:42] moved into the area, we've tried

[26:44] working it out with our

[26:45] neighbour, it is not happening,

[26:48] so that page has turned and I'm

[26:51] here to ask the Council's

[26:53] support in fixing this problem

[26:54] once and for all. It's got

[26:57] nothing to do with Debby and the

[27:00] rainfall we had, created a lot

[27:02] of unfortunate issues for a lot

[27:04] of neighbours. This is been

[27:06] going on for two summers now.

[27:09] Every time there is an above

[27:11] average rain, we always get

[27:16] landscape mud and water flowing

[27:18] onto the property, onto our

[27:20] property from 99 Cedar. He's

[27:22] elevated, they've elevated their

[27:24] landscape in certain areas, it's

[27:26] four feet above our property.

[27:29] The previous owners that sold us

[27:31] the house that built next to us

[27:34] never

[29:45] For 99th seeded to implement a

[29:47] retaining wall. The rest is not

[29:49] working. And again, I have proof

[29:51] in photos, in videos, and

[29:54] outside counsel advice where

[29:56] I've been told. So I'm asking

[29:59] the City, again, I waited

[30:01] probably too long, I try to work

[30:03] it out with the neighbour, that

[30:04] option is off the table. I'm

[30:06] taking civil action to reclaim

[30:09] expenses, but I'm asking the

[30:11] City to help us out and get this

[30:13] problem resolved. Thank you

[30:15] >> Wow, but so is there a

[30:19] question -- I will speak to

[30:21] that, is there a question --

[30:22] >> The question is I know people

[30:24] are working on it, I know what

[30:26] I've been told and I don't want

[30:27] to misspeak, the owner of 99

[30:31] Cedar has been asked to stop any

[30:33] work on the landscaping because

[30:34] the City is currently

[30:36] reassessing. So my question is,

[30:40] before any work is given in

[30:42] terms of greenlight, can we see

[30:45] the final plans that will

[30:47] eliminate the shoot once or for

[30:49] all. We've never had this issue

[30:51] before, and when I say we, the

[30:52] previous owners were there for

[30:54] almost 20 years, they never had

[30:55] that issue, they never had that

[30:58] issue.

[30:59] >> So you would like to see the

[31:01] future landscaping plans

[31:02] yourself personally, or you and

[31:04] your wife would like to see or

[31:05] have a look at the landscaping

[31:07] plans once approved, is that

[31:08] what you are --

[31:09] >> Yes, that will prove that it

[31:11] will eliminate the issue.

[31:16] >> It's quite a -- you've

[31:18] explained that very well, I

[31:20] might add. I don't want to over

[31:27] speak on this, because potential

[31:30] legal stuff, but I am very

[31:33] sympathetic to places or parts

[31:37] of the city that are having

[31:39] water problems, potentially as a

[31:42] result of changes in the

[31:44] landscape, cutting up wetlands,

[31:46] transformation of land or

[31:48] territory, where we can prove it

[31:49] and find that these

[31:51] transformations have actually

[31:52] caused harm. That actually is

[31:56] something we as a city can look

[31:57] into or mitigate or prevent in

[31:59] the future, so I take that very

[32:01] seriously what you're proposing.

[32:03] Now, obviously I have not spoken

[32:05] to the professionals or public

[32:06] works or engineering on the

[32:09] issue, but I suspect that they

[32:11] will be looking at it. You said

[32:13] there has been a halt or a --

[32:15] >> What I was advised was that

[32:17] there had been a halt, so we're

[32:19] asking 99 to hold any

[32:21] landscaping. I know that Madame

[32:23] was Al and her team are looking

[32:25] into it. I would love the

[32:27] opportunity to sit down with her

[32:29] or anyone else just to prove,

[32:31] show my case and to show the

[32:34] videos I take in realtime. It's

[32:37] not fun, 10,000, probably closer

[32:39] to 15,000, let alone every time

[32:43] you empty at the pool, you have

[32:44] to wait for them to come, they

[32:45] empty it, out they clean, it

[32:47] they refill it, that's a good

[32:48] week, week and a half every time

[32:51] that you have no access to the

[32:53] pool. But just the

[32:54] inconvenience. If you come and

[32:55] see the front lawn now near the

[32:57] sidewalk, my grass is gone, it's

[32:59] covered with mud. So it's not

[33:01] going to go away.

[33:02] >> I run by there, I know

[33:04] exactly -- I actually have seen

[33:05] that. So you tell me there is a

[33:07] team looking into it. Have you

[33:09] try to approach the team to

[33:10] express your --

[33:11] >> I have, and right now based

[33:14] on all the other issues going on

[33:17] with the Debi storm, people are

[33:22] inundated, some just waiting for

[33:23] an opportunity to meet with

[33:25] them. I've been reassured that

[33:27] they are looking into it, and

[33:28] the other evidence that I can

[33:31] share with the council is that

[33:32] the owner at 99 has been asked

[33:35] not to do any landscaping until

[33:37] the assessment and

[33:39] recommendation is complete. I

[33:41] don't care if it takes another

[33:42] year, I really don't, as long as

[33:44] it's done right. It's been 3.5

[33:47] already, so another summer, as

[33:50] long as it's done right, that's

[33:52] not my concern, my concern is to

[33:55] fix it once and for all and just

[33:56] move forward, and that's it.

[33:59] >> Okay, well thank you for

[34:01] articulating that so clearly,

[34:02] and I do sympathize. Hopefully

[34:04] the team looking into it will

[34:06] come up with the solution that

[34:09] works for you as well as the

[34:11] owner of 99 and something can be

[34:13] worked out, and if you have any

[34:17] issues, don't hesitate to reach

[34:19] out, Madame Verdun, do you have

[34:23] anything that you know regarding

[34:26] 99 Cedar and how we are

[34:28] approaching it?

[34:29] >> No, we are in contact with --

[34:31] especially with Debby, we kind

[34:35] of -- but I can ensure that they

[34:37] will look at the case next week.

[34:40] >> Thank you, thank you for your

[34:42] time.

[34:43] >> Hopefully that's good. Thank

[34:44] you for bringing that up. I

[34:45] appreciate it. Line Conway?

[34:55] >> Good evening. Bonsoir.

[35:03] Je voudrais juste savoir de

[35:06] l'administration, j'ai envoyé

[35:07] une lettre aujourd'hui pour les

[35:08] numéros 15 et 17,1 et 17,6, je

[35:12] me pose. Je fais mon argument

[35:15] maintenant où tantôt quand vous

[35:17] allez discuter avant le vote?

[35:20] - Madame Conway, c'est des

[35:22] dérogations mineures dont vous

[35:23] parlez?

[35:24] - Oui.

[35:25] - Le numéro 15?

[35:26] - Oui.

[35:27] - Vous devez vous adresser au

[35:29] conseil quand on va arriver à

[35:30] ces éléments-là de l'ordre du

[35:32] jour.

[35:33] - Je vais pouvoir parler tantôt?

[35:34] - Oui. Quand on va arriver à ces

[35:36] points-là, je vais inviter des

[35:37] gens qui ont des commentaires à

[35:39] le faire.

[35:40] - Avant le vote?

[35:41] - Pour les dérogations mineures

[35:43] uniquement. 17, 01. À 17, cinq.

[35:54] - 15, si vous voulez faire des

[35:56] commentaires, c'est maintenant.

[35:59] Pour 17,1 à 17,5, vous aurez

[36:02] l'occasion de vous adresser à au

[36:03] conseil quand on va arriver là.

[36:09] Before we start, can I ask a

[36:11] favor, can we change the concept

[36:16] of -- questions to having two

[36:18] topics, because sometimes it's

[36:19] not myself necessarily, but

[36:21] often I see people, they didn't

[36:22] really get to the end of their

[36:26] answer, didn't get the answer to

[36:27] the topic, is it possible to do

[36:28] that?

[36:29] >> I don't fully understand,

[36:31] could you explain?

[36:32] >> The concept of the 90 minutes

[36:34] of question period is we're

[36:35] supposed to come with two

[36:37] questions, but my question --

[36:38] this is not my question, this is

[36:40] like --

[36:41] >> A question any follow-up

[36:44] question --

[36:45] >> Is it possible to change two

[36:46] questions to two topics, because

[36:47] sometimes we don't have the full

[36:50] answer, just the one question.

[36:51] >> I have to confirm with

[36:53] Council on that. I can't argue

[36:55] that.

[36:56] >> Just for the future.

[36:57] >> Well, would that involve

[36:59] topics, or is there two

[37:01] questions per topic, so are we

[37:02] doubling the questions? I don't

[37:04] fully understand.

[37:05] >> It's an issue, say someone

[37:06] has a problem or an issue, they

[37:09] have to explain their issue, a

[37:12] few little questions. Sometimes,

[37:13] I see people, they are leaving,

[37:15] but they don't have the full

[37:16] answer to the problem.

[37:18] >> That's a challenge. Maybe --

[37:21] >> It's topics. Now I say

[37:26] topics, but if I don't have my

[37:27] full answer, I would need a

[37:28] second question or third

[37:29] question.

[37:30] >> I think that somewhat

[37:31] depended on the quality and the

[37:32] clarity of the question as well,

[37:33] I think. I'm not sure, I don't

[37:35] need to be dodging the topic

[37:37] here, but if you ask a pointed

[37:39] question, it cannot really be

[37:43] avoided. I'm thinking. Just I'm

[37:48] free-flowing. I'm not certain

[37:49] myself. Je ne suis pas certain

[37:50] moi-même.

[37:51] I would have to consult with

[37:54] Council as far as changes to the

[37:56] question period.

[37:57] >> So now I'm told for 15 I

[38:01] should ask now. So I wrote a

[38:05] letter saying I'm opposed, so

[38:07] this is actually the first time

[38:09] I went online and check the

[38:12] public notices before the

[38:15] meeting, so a few things that

[38:17] came up, yes, of the agenda for

[38:24] tonight.

[38:31] So what I'm thinking is I paid a

[38:32] lot of taxes, by taxes, went up

[38:34] a lot, and I was told it was

[38:38] because of the real estate

[38:42] sector -- something real estate,

[38:43] how can we save money, the City

[38:44] saves money, maybe I'm taxed

[38:47] less, just like my logic, you

[38:50] know, so for 15, it's about the

[38:54] Valois library that, the

[38:57] basement will be renovated for

[38:59] 1.7 million. So, like, that's

[39:06] really a lot of money to

[39:07] renovate a basement. It's a

[39:08] small library, two times the

[39:11] size of my house, and from being

[39:14] in that neighbourhood in the

[39:16] past, it's going to the daycare

[39:17] right beside, in then the

[39:20] library is closed on Tuesdays,

[39:22] Thursdays, and Sundays, so it's

[39:24] barely an operation, so I'm not

[39:26] sure why we're spending that

[39:27] kind of money for a building

[39:29] like this, renovating a

[39:31] basement. Is it better to just

[39:32] tear down the building and build

[39:33] something new, because I see the

[39:35] company that has been, I don't

[39:37] know if they're hired yet, but

[39:38] the name of the company that's

[39:40] shown there, when I went online,

[39:42] I saw they're the ones that

[39:43] built the bit of the west

[39:45] chalet, which is very nice, so

[39:46] I'm sure they would do a very

[39:47] nice building, like, why spend

[39:49] that money to renovate and will

[39:51] building? The basement, it --

[39:54] >> I'm not sure, is it of a

[39:55] heritage interest or does it

[39:56] have any -- does the vow wall

[40:00] library --

[40:01] >> It's a red brick building.

[40:02] >> It's a building that is 100

[40:05] years old.

[40:06] >> Yes, so there are some

[40:08] reasons for it. I mean, there is

[40:11] some attempt in Pointe-Claire to

[40:13] preserve overbuilding.

[40:15] >> But that's where the water

[40:16] goes, in the basement.

[40:17] >> When it rains and floods,

[40:18] that's where the water goes, in

[40:19] the basement. The library is

[40:22] just open from 1:00, the day

[40:24] that it is open, it's open from

[40:26] 1:00, so it's barely being used.

[40:28] Maybe they should just close the

[40:29] basement.

[40:30] >> So you would like us to close

[40:32] the libraries we can charge you

[40:33] less tax?

[40:38] >> Yes --

[40:39] >> There are nonprofits in the

[40:41] basement.

[40:42] >> -- We can pay off our debt

[40:44] also.

[40:45] >> I think it has been kept open

[40:47] and renovated because the bulk

[40:48] of Pointe-Claire citizens like

[40:51] using the library. I don't think

[40:52] it's not used. From what I

[40:54] understand, it is used, the

[40:55] building is used, as the

[40:57] councillors are just explaining,

[40:58] there are nonprofits in the

[40:59] basement using it, and it is a

[41:02] library, and we are fairly well

[41:04] respected for our libraries in

[41:07] Pointe-Claire, and it's been

[41:08] there an awful long time, it is

[41:09] a heritage building. Myself, I'm

[41:12] just free-flowing again, don't

[41:14] see the justified need to

[41:15] knocking it down.

[41:16] >> I've been there quite a few

[41:18] times, there is barely anybody

[41:20] there, and as I said before,

[41:21] it's open for days a week, but

[41:23] they open at 1:00. Maybe the

[41:27] organizations that use it can do

[41:29] something else. Anyways, it's a

[41:31] basement, you know, it's where

[41:32] the water goes when it floods.

[41:35] If it's flooded, you will have

[41:36] to renovate the basement.

[41:38] >> Certainly if enough people

[41:39] would like us to not renew or

[41:42] renovate the Valois library, and

[41:45] enough people, there's a grand

[41:46] swell of citizens that wanted,

[41:48] we certainly will listen --

[41:49] >> Maybe we can do something

[41:50] else with the, money --

[41:52] >> I don't see that groundswell,

[41:54] I don't see the number of people

[41:55] telling us to do so, and it

[41:57] seems kind of a shame.

[41:58] >> It just came up today, this

[41:59] is the first time we see --

[42:00] >> We will see if we get a whole

[42:02] bunch of people that agree with

[42:03] you and come from there.

[42:04] >> A lot of people don't keep up

[42:06] with things. So I will talk with

[42:11] the other ones after.

[42:13] >> Do you have a second

[42:14] question?

[42:15] >> Yes. I went online and I

[42:23] checked 163 deep. I came to the

[42:27] February demolition committee

[42:29] because when the -- when my

[42:32] taxes went up, the director of

[42:34] finance told me that it's in

[42:36] relationship to the real estate

[42:38] market. So 163 Dieppe is listed

[42:44] on -- for 1.8 million, this

[42:46] seven bedroom house, when we're

[42:49] supposed to be caring for the

[42:51] future generations, but we're

[42:53] being told that there's urban

[42:56] sprawl, this could be -- all

[42:58] these lots on Dieppe and -- they

[43:01] could've been a fourplex, you

[43:03] discussed this in the past.

[43:04] Anyways, I don't want to rehash

[43:06] that. The thing was the February

[43:10] meeting, the demolition

[43:11] committee meeting, Linda the wit

[43:15] also came with questions and

[43:17] complaints, apparently this

[43:20] sector is supposed to be one

[43:23] garage per dwelling, so the

[43:24] dwelling is supposed to have one

[43:26] garage. Most of them were built

[43:27] with two car garage. There are a

[43:30] few also that I've seen a three

[43:31] car garage, recently, on Dieppe

[43:35] at the other end, close to

[43:37] Hastings, there is a three car

[43:39] garage being built.

[43:41] >> So your question --

[43:42] >> No, it's just like, why are

[43:45] we not following the bylaws? My

[43:48] question is in part, Mr.

[43:51] Tremblay, you are part of the

[43:52] demolition committee, and Mr.

[43:54] Cowan, when I was here in

[43:56] February, when it came up, Linda

[44:02] Dewitt came out and said what

[44:03] she said, you came out 15

[44:04] minutes later and voted against

[44:05] the demolition. But now I see

[44:07] online there is a document that

[44:08] says it was voted for.

[44:13] >> Would Councillor Tremblay or

[44:15] Councillor Cowan like to respond

[44:18] to madame Conway?

[44:20] >> If we go on the site and

[44:22] check 163 Dieppe, there is a

[44:25] public notice, and in the

[44:26] minutes, the minutes show that

[44:28] it was voted for, one in person,

[44:31] when we can just witnesses,

[44:35] Linda Dewitt was there,.

[44:41] >> Can I address that? I don't

[44:43] recall what the sequence of

[44:44] events was, but I will track and

[44:46] find out.

[44:47] >> Go to the demolition, because

[44:48] they're asking for a two car

[44:50] garage and Linda Dewitt came to

[44:52] the mic and said the zoning for

[44:53] these two streets, it's supposed

[44:54] to be a one car garage, you

[44:56] left, came back, came back

[44:58] tenants later, and you voted

[44:59] against. But the minutes show

[45:01] that you voted for.

[45:04] >> I will do the research and

[45:05] find out exactly what happened.

[45:06] As I recall, you may remember I

[45:09] think we deferred the decision

[45:10] and we came back and met after.

[45:11] >> Right, what were the minutes

[45:12] you are talking about, the

[45:13] minutes of the demolition

[45:14] committee or the council meeting

[45:15] that voted for it?

[45:18] >> On February, February 8th,

[45:23] the demolition committee that

[45:25] was here, that was held here.

[45:30] >> Yeah, I know, but when you're

[45:32] referring to minutes, which

[45:33] minutes are you referring to?

[45:38] >> When you go on the website,

[45:41] when you go on the website and

[45:42] you check the address, there is

[45:44] a link for the minutes. - Non,

[45:51] je le sais. Je sais. Je

[45:52] comprends la question mais je

[45:54] pense

[45:55] (---)

[45:56] quelque chose qui avait affaire

[45:57] avec la conseil, la décision du

[45:58] conseil et ensuite, la décision

[45:59] du comité de démolition. I think

[46:04] the best thing for us to do is

[46:05] go back, we'll have a, look

[46:07] we'll go through the minutes

[46:08] that you are talking about, and

[46:09] since Councillor Cowan as the

[46:10] chair person for that committee,

[46:12] he will be doing the work,

[46:14] correct, Brandt? But

[46:15] >> Yes.

[46:18] >> And we will invariably get

[46:19] back to you on how that

[46:21] transpires, house? That

[46:22] >> So in the document, in the

[46:24] middle, it just said that nobody

[46:27] wrote, nobody sent a letter

[46:29] opposing this, but Linda DeWitt

[46:33] in my name, it's right there in

[46:34] the middle, but there is no --

[46:37] usually in the minutes, you're

[46:39] supposed to write what the

[46:41] person talked about.

[46:43] - Excusez-moi, j'ai la décision

[46:45] si les yeux, si ça peut appeler

[46:46] le conseil.

[46:47] (---)

[46:48] La décision a été favorable à

[46:49] autoriser la démolition et la

[46:50] réutilisation du sol dégagé.

[46:51] Alors oui, la décision était

[46:53] positive. Mais contrairement à

[46:54] ce que vous dites, Madame

[46:56] Conway, dans le procès-verbal,

[46:58] dans le rendu d'une décision, on

[47:01] ne mentionne pas le nom des

[47:02] personnes qui sont présentes. Et

[47:04] les oppositions qui sont

[47:06] mentionnés dans l'indécision,

[47:07] c'est celles qui seront

[47:09] conformément reçues par la loi

[47:10] ou le règlement de la Ville.

[47:13] Donc dix jours avant la séance

[47:15] du comité de démolition, il y a

[47:17] un avis public qui est fait et

[47:18] les gens ont dix jours pour

[47:21] manifester leur opposition à la

[47:24] démolition. À l'heure celles qui

[47:25] sont faites séance tenante, la

[47:29] personne... le nom de la

[47:30] personne va apparaître dans le

[47:33] procès-verbal. Mais sa position,

[47:34] son opposition, ses arguments,

[47:36] ça ne figure pas dans la

[47:38] décision.

[47:39] - C'est vrai qu'un individu

[47:43] (---)

[47:44] au moins 10 jours d'avance?

[47:45] - Oui. Ce que la loi prévoit,

[47:46] c'est que les citoyens ont dix

[47:48] jours pour s'adresser par écrit,

[47:52] communiquez leur opposition à la

[47:53] ville.

[47:54] - Merci.

[47:57] On the website, I don't even

[47:58] know where to go to see, that

[47:59] the demolition committee

[48:01] meetings and what's going to be

[48:02] talked about. The only way I

[48:04] knew about this was from social

[48:05] media, so I don't -- even

[48:07] finding documents on the

[48:08] website, it's not easy. But

[48:11] where do we see that? The

[48:14] demolition committee meetings

[48:16] for all the addresses that are

[48:18] applying for demolition, where

[48:19] do we see that? But

[48:23] >> Are you talking about future

[48:25] [Inaudible]

[48:26] >> Yes.

[48:27] >> First of, all any demolition

[48:28] meeting, any property that's up

[48:30] for demolition, they have to put

[48:32] up a sign in front of the

[48:34] property ten days in advance of

[48:35] the meeting. There is also a

[48:40] public notice, another public

[48:41] notice in the newspaper, just on

[48:44] the website, for the demolition

[48:46] Committee meeting.

[48:47] >> I don't see that.

[48:48] >> And the, minutes you can get

[48:49] the minutes of the meeting at

[48:51] Council, follow down the council

[48:53] meetings, then you have

[48:54] Demolition Committee, you can

[48:55] pull up the old minutes there.

[48:59] >> I don't know how to reach

[49:00] that link. Whenever something

[49:05] called minutes, it's not really

[49:07] this person said this, this

[49:08] person said, that but you say

[49:10] they put the notes up ten days

[49:11] before, but they say you have to

[49:13] do your complaint ten days

[49:15] before?

[49:16] >> No, within the ten days, you

[49:18] have to -- you have to send your

[49:21] opinion if you want to within

[49:22] the ten days before the meeting.

[49:24] But

[49:25] >> I mean, we don't go on every

[49:27] street to see if there's a

[49:28] notice being put up, how do we

[49:30] know about the --

[49:31] >> It's on the website.

[49:33] >> I don't see it.

[49:34] >> Well, right now it will be,

[49:36] because there's no property up

[49:37] for demolition right now.

[49:39] >> It's going to be on the

[49:41] council page?

[49:43] >> Yeah, under that menu

[49:44] heading, that many button.

[49:46] >> Yes.

[49:52] - Madame Conway, je peux vous le

[49:54] montrer après.

[49:55] - Merci, Madame Conway. >> Nasr

[49:56] El Dabee?

[49:59] >> Good evening. I know everyone

[50:03] is doing well. I'm talking about

[50:06] a statistic about flooding,

[50:11] because I have here -- 96 is

[50:18] about 134 centimetres of rain,

[50:22] that is November 1996. So before

[50:29] they did any renovation or

[50:34] anything, made -- for the sewer

[50:36] system, we didn't have any

[50:38] flood. And we didn't have any

[50:41] sewer backup. And it's almost

[50:44] the same thing what has happened

[50:47] in the August 9th, we had flood,

[50:53] sewer backup, and everywhere in

[50:57] Pointe-Claire. The difference,

[50:59] because I live here in

[51:00] Pointe-Claire since 93, the

[51:02] reason for the -- in 96, we have

[51:07] a lot of all Greenland that

[51:11] absorb the rain. We don't have

[51:13] all these high rise building and

[51:14] all these condo, and this is

[51:17] about more than 3000 apartments.

[51:20] Do you think where is all this

[51:22] waste of water goes? It goes to

[51:24] the sewer. That's why we have

[51:26] all the flood everywhere in

[51:29] Pointe-Claire. And when we're

[51:30] talking always all the time

[51:32] about, you know, infrastructure

[51:34] and a care about it, and we stop

[51:38] building all these high-rise

[51:39] buildings in case they fix all

[51:40] the infrastructure, are also our

[51:45] insurance for all of us is going

[51:46] to be increased badly. Also,

[51:50] some houses are not able to get

[51:53] any insurance because if they

[51:55] flooded three times. So the only

[52:00] people that benefit from that is

[52:02] the developer and the politician

[52:08] supporting them. All -- in

[52:13] Pointe-Claire is what you're

[52:14] gonna pay for that, for cleanup

[52:16] and renovation, replacement of

[52:19] -- so please, can we use older

[52:24] parking lot, old asphalt, and

[52:27] instead of building a high-rise

[52:28] building, to have it as a

[52:30] Greenland to absorb all the

[52:33] water, and in the spring, to

[52:34] also observe all the snow and

[52:38] ice melt. So what is exactly --

[52:42] I heard already your letter,

[52:44] what exactly the city is

[52:48] honestly, City of Pointe-Claire,

[52:50] going to do? Because that's the

[52:51] kind of weather we are going to

[52:52] have. That's the future. Because

[52:55] all of us who forget about the

[52:59] environment and only about the

[53:02] economy. So what is the solution

[53:08] and when is Pointe-Claire going

[53:10] to be serious to avoid or limit

[53:12] what is going on in the future?

[53:16] >> Well, I will reach back a

[53:18] section of what I just read

[53:19] earlier. Going forward, we can

[53:22] ensure that parks and streets

[53:23] are built in ways to absorb a

[53:25] runoff that would otherwise and

[53:27] up in residential basements. We

[53:29] can ensure that all future

[53:30] development projects fully

[53:31] respect the need to present --

[53:33] prevent runoff in the existing

[53:35] neighbourhood where they are

[53:36] planned to build. We must

[53:37] obviously ensure that wetlands

[53:39] are never cut and developed for

[53:41] exactly these reasons, and we

[53:43] can explore the use of

[53:45] absorption methods by permeable

[53:48] payments also designed to

[53:49] prevent runoff, not to mention

[53:51] all the things we can do as a

[53:52] city to prevent climate change

[53:54] or do our best, you know,

[53:56] natural gardens, looking after

[53:58] our water, our shoreline, solar

[54:00] panneling on our industrial --

[54:03] we can do lots of stuff to get

[54:04] the cause of the problem. The

[54:08] events themselves and how to

[54:09] mitigate against it, I share

[54:11] with you, some of as I've

[54:14] written, I share with you and I

[54:16] believe, ironically, the

[54:18] gentlemen, Mr. -- is

[54:19] experiencing potentially, we're

[54:20] not sure, but from a

[54:23] construction project, may be

[54:25] suffering a water effects on the

[54:27] project. There is a house on the

[54:29] presently I know of where there

[54:30] is a similar claim. The citizens

[54:33] of Alston have made that claim

[54:35] for many many years. So as a

[54:37] city we can absolutely can going

[54:40] forward and make sure that we

[54:41] are more aware of potential

[54:45] water events and how we can

[54:46] mitigate against them. But this

[54:49] last one overwhelmed our system,

[54:52] and that was -- and you're

[54:53] right, if you have all natural

[54:57] spaces with no asphalt and no

[54:59] cement, water gets absorbed. If

[55:02] water is not allowed to absorb

[55:03] into the land, it eventually has

[55:05] to go somewhere. And so, we are

[55:07] dealing with that as a city. So

[55:09] your point is well taken, and

[55:10] going forward, those of us who

[55:12] are planning cities have to bear

[55:14] that in mind 100%. And I agree

[55:16] with you, I concur with you.

[55:19] >> I hope really --

[55:22] >> Councillor Stork would like

[55:23] to add on to that response.

[55:25] >> Yes, please. I think we have

[55:28] to get some information more

[55:30] accurate here. When we talk

[55:32] about a lot of the industrial

[55:33] buildings, say -- on Hymus

[55:36] between Stillview to St. John's,

[55:39] these are large industrial

[55:41] buildings with pretty much 0%

[55:42] green space. And this is not for

[55:45] or against high-rise buildings,

[55:46] these are just facts. So

[55:48] primarily, they had zero green

[55:50] space, maybe 83, four foot

[55:53] setback in the front. Those

[55:55] parking lots, a, there was no

[55:57] green space. B, there is no

[55:59] runoff bylaws when those are

[56:02] built. So the buildings that are

[56:04] built there now, depending on

[56:05] the project, if I think of 275,

[56:07] ice think of 62% green space.

[56:10] The one next door was 38% green

[56:12] space. So we actually got a

[56:13] green space to our industrial

[56:15] area. Secondly, when these new

[56:17] buildings are built with their

[56:18] parking lots, they are mandated

[56:21] to provincial legislation to

[56:23] limit the amount of runoff into

[56:24] our sewer systems, so they have

[56:26] to create actual catch basins

[56:28] below their parking lots to

[56:30] limit the amount of runoff into

[56:31] our sewer systems. It is explain

[56:33] to us recently at a meeting

[56:34] where we were all present

[56:36] describing this, and the

[56:38] variable they used, it was a

[56:39] number of 30, of the runoff that

[56:41] was previously allowed on a new

[56:43] product, the new parking, went

[56:44] into the sewer system. They

[56:46] reduced that to ten, millimeters

[56:48] per, hour I have no idea. So

[56:49] they've taken concrete exams to

[56:52] avoid a runoff, because as mayor

[56:53] Thomas mentioned, it was just a

[56:55] delusion. It was not the total

[56:56] rainfall, it was the sheer

[56:57] amount. At 6:30 when we got that

[56:59] second wave, all Hell broke

[57:02] loose. So to your point, those

[57:03] buildings along Hymus that were

[57:05] built, the rentals, some condos,

[57:08] have actually increased the

[57:10] green space presents, not taken

[57:12] it away.

[57:13] >> Yeah, but I'm talking about

[57:14] all the apartment, where is that

[57:16] wastewater going? It's going to

[57:17] the sewer, because as I tell

[57:19] you, in May would, in 1960, we

[57:22] didn't have -- we still had the

[57:23] old sewer. It was a small pipe.

[57:26] And I saw them. The pipes when

[57:30] they built it, it was almost

[57:32] more than eight feet high. But

[57:34] even that would get all that --

[57:37] >> My answer would be simple. If

[57:40] it was an old existing parking

[57:42] lot with no percentage of green

[57:45] spaces for us as a building that

[57:47] eight, ten, 12 storeys high,

[57:49] with the green space, the rain

[57:51] falls at the same ratio, at the

[57:53] same amount, at the same time at

[57:54] the common area. So I can't

[57:58] equate. That.

[58:00] >> I understand what you're

[58:01] saying, but all the wastewater

[58:03] from these apartments, where it

[58:04] goes, it goes to the sewer.

[58:06] >> It's the same amount of water

[58:07] whether there be a building

[58:08] there or a parking lot, it's the

[58:10] same amount of water.

[58:13] >> I hope we create more green

[58:18] land and we stop these high

[58:20] rates building until we fix the

[58:22] infrastructure because all what

[58:23] you want to build our all dry

[58:28] any asphalt, you want to put

[58:29] high rise building and --

[58:32] Greenland to absorb all the

[58:33] water and filter the water from

[58:34] the source. You know, we have to

[58:38] focus on the reality. I'm

[58:40] telling you since 93, I know the

[58:43] difference between 96 and August

[58:47] 9th. Please.

[58:48] >> Okay, I hear you, Mister Nasr

[58:50] El Dabee, do you have a second

[58:52] question?

[58:53] >> Yes, my second question, what

[58:55] is it going to be for replacing

[58:58] the medical care that's on Hymus

[59:01] and sunshine? This is going to

[59:05] be for Pointe-Claire citizens or

[59:06] for everybody? Making it clear

[59:11] what's --

[59:12] >> That's a very good question.

[59:16] I am not sure on that one, I

[59:18] think everybody, I would think.

[59:20] It's west island wide or

[59:22] citywide, Québec wide.

[59:24] >> -- Priority for Pointe-Claire

[59:26] citizens?

[59:27] >> No but their proximity might

[59:28] help them. I mean, you would

[59:29] think they could get in there

[59:32] sooner.

[59:33] >> And also please, I think

[59:35] you're talking about opening may

[59:37] would to Hymus. It's impossible.

[59:38] It's going to be a highway. May

[59:40] what is going to be a highway.

[59:41] You know, it's already a very

[59:42] tiny street.

[59:43] >> Not necessarily May would. I

[59:45] mean, --

[59:47] >> I live on May would, I know

[59:48] what's going on. So please, you

[59:50] know?

[59:51] >> Well, -- it's a challenge to,

[59:53] so the entire flow in and out of

[59:55] that project is going to be very

[59:57] interesting and we are very much

[59:59] aware of the need to pay

[1:00:01] attention to that because I

[1:00:02] don't see an easy solution to

[1:00:04] that and neither does Councillor

[1:00:06] Stork. So, you're absolutely

[1:00:07] right, we have to pay attention

[1:00:08] to that big time.

[1:00:10] >> So thank you, I hope everyone

[1:00:11] is working together for the

[1:00:13] environment and to help each

[1:00:16] other to not have these crises

[1:00:19] because -- please, that's

[1:00:20] exactly what we have. Thank you

[1:00:22] and God bless you to work

[1:00:24] altogether.

[1:00:25] >> One thing I would like to

[1:00:26] sort of reiterate and concur

[1:00:28] with the overall point you're

[1:00:29] making is that when you have a

[1:00:32] city, when you're developing or

[1:00:33] putting down asphalt or cement,

[1:00:35] you rely on your sewage system

[1:00:37] to absorb water overflow. When

[1:00:40] you have undeveloped land, it

[1:00:42] absorbs water naturally. It does

[1:00:44] not overwhelm your sewage

[1:00:46] system. So, it's not a bad thing

[1:00:49] to have undeveloped land on

[1:00:50] occasion because it absorbs, we

[1:00:52] protect wetlands. Because they

[1:00:54] absorb and they are the best

[1:00:56] protection against flooding. So,

[1:00:58] I hear what you're saying in an

[1:01:00] overall picture, I hear loud and

[1:01:01] clear what you're saying.

[1:01:03] >> Thank you.

[1:01:04] >> Thank you.

[1:01:07] >> Nikki Fournier?

[1:01:15] >> Good evening. -- Subject 575.

[1:01:20] The old folks home is something

[1:01:22] that's needed in the West

[1:01:25] Island. It's a bit upsetting

[1:01:26] with the question that was just

[1:01:28] asked that Pointe-Claire will

[1:01:30] not have -- to be able to send

[1:01:33] people there, being a Québec

[1:01:36] project so people can come from

[1:01:38] all over the place from the West

[1:01:41] Island, I find that's

[1:01:42] incredible. To, if we are

[1:01:44] responsible as a city for the

[1:01:46] traffic flow that will be around

[1:01:48] that place, will we also be

[1:01:51] responsible for the cost of the

[1:01:54] lights that might be put at

[1:01:58] Chester for any other signage

[1:02:00] that will be put on other

[1:02:04] streets? Is the province not

[1:02:07] paying for these things or are

[1:02:08] they just paying for the

[1:02:10] building itself?

[1:02:11] >> That's a good question.

[1:02:14] Madame Verdun?

[1:02:17] - Verdon?

[1:02:18] >> The man that the -- has for

[1:02:21] now is building the project

[1:02:23] itself. This is the information

[1:02:25] that we have, so for now, all

[1:02:27] the order costs would be -- the

[1:02:30] City. But we are still in

[1:02:32] discussion with them.

[1:02:34] >> Okay, when we say we are in

[1:02:37] discussion, that's certainly not

[1:02:38] the citizens. Who in the city is

[1:02:41] talking to them?

[1:02:42] >> It's the administration

[1:02:43] that's talking to them but we

[1:02:44] don't have a lot of leverage

[1:02:45] because they are all decreed, so

[1:02:48] right now, you know, we still

[1:02:49] have -- for now, the mandate

[1:02:51] they have is the building

[1:02:53] itself, that's it.

[1:02:54] >> I hope you're putting

[1:02:57] pressure. That building is

[1:02:59] needed. We all agree to that. I

[1:03:01] would love for it to be

[1:03:03] somewhere else, not just because

[1:03:04] they will impede on my daily

[1:03:07] life, but I don't think it's the

[1:03:09] right place for that building to

[1:03:11] be. There are other places in

[1:03:13] Pointe-Claire where they're more

[1:03:15] easily accessible, where not a

[1:03:17] lot of money will be spent to

[1:03:19] make new lights, to make new

[1:03:21] streets, to make whatever. And I

[1:03:24] would hope that we can have some

[1:03:26] pressure from someone, not just

[1:03:29] one person, but to help the city

[1:03:33] or to talk and sit with the

[1:03:36] government. Many of us have

[1:03:38] reached out directly to the

[1:03:39] government but they all send us

[1:03:41] back a form letter and it's

[1:03:42] like, we don't count. Can we

[1:03:44] not, as a city, put pressure

[1:03:46] that this building should be put

[1:03:48] in a different place? It's not

[1:03:51] the place for that building. How

[1:03:54] do we go about making sure that

[1:03:56] happens?

[1:03:58] >> Madam Fournier, with all due

[1:04:00] respect, it was not the place

[1:04:01] for the large condo development

[1:04:02] either.

[1:04:03] >> And we won that!

[1:04:05] >> Well, no, but that wasn't

[1:04:07] one, that was postponed by the

[1:04:08] new project. There was, go

[1:04:12] ahead, Councillor Stork.

[1:04:15] >> I mean, the project was -- it

[1:04:20] was stopped, as she just

[1:04:22] inferred.

[1:04:23] >> Without a court decision.

[1:04:24] There was no court decision, so

[1:04:26] that project was not solved or

[1:04:29] one. The victory would be the

[1:04:31] court decision but we know, we

[1:04:33] have no idea which way that

[1:04:34] court was going to decide on

[1:04:35] that one. So, it was not one.

[1:04:38] >> That project is gone.

[1:04:40] >> It wasn't gone, so, you know,

[1:04:43] in many ways, it is a lesser of

[1:04:45] two evils. In many ways. And we

[1:04:48] can't speak for the provincial

[1:04:49] government right now. They made

[1:04:50] their decision.

[1:04:51] >> But now we are stuck --

[1:04:53] >> Excuse me, excuse me. We

[1:04:55] can't speak for them, they made

[1:04:57] the decision based on their own

[1:04:59] research. They researched and

[1:05:01] decided on that site. They, and

[1:05:04] their professional capacity,

[1:05:06] decided that was the site they

[1:05:07] chose and they went ahead and

[1:05:10] expropriated and built. They are

[1:05:11] building it and we are aware of

[1:05:13] the traffic issues. And are

[1:05:15] trying to deal with them. We

[1:05:19] have little or no say as to how

[1:05:21] the project will go up and the

[1:05:23] timeframe. We can do our best to

[1:05:25] monitor it and speak for the

[1:05:27] citizens of Pointe-Claire in the

[1:05:28] traffic flow, absolutely. And we

[1:05:31] will.

[1:05:33] >> Who's going to pay for them?

[1:05:36] >> We are paying for the lights,

[1:05:37] apparently. Paying for the

[1:05:38] project.

[1:05:39] >> That's a lot of money.

[1:05:44] >> It's a higher level of

[1:05:45] government. Madam Fournier.

[1:05:48] That's how it works.

[1:05:50] >> They can take it and, you

[1:05:51] know what? Have a good evening.

[1:05:54] >> Okay, Monique --

[1:06:05] >> Good evening, everybody, this

[1:06:07] is my first time as well so I'm

[1:06:08] very happy to be a participating

[1:06:10] in this bureaucratic event.

[1:06:12] >> Welcome.

[1:06:13] >> I was reassured by Mr. Cohen

[1:06:16] the first mention about the fact

[1:06:18] that there was a study going on,

[1:06:20] you're assessing what the costs,

[1:06:22] potential causes of the flood

[1:06:23] that we had and why the sewer

[1:06:26] system seems to have locked

[1:06:27] because of all these issues. My

[1:06:29] first question will be to say

[1:06:30] once we reach her conclusion, is

[1:06:32] that report somehow going to be

[1:06:35] circulated with the citizens?

[1:06:37] Because I think it would be very

[1:06:38] reassuring for us to know that

[1:06:39] this study is going on and also

[1:06:42] what the conclusions of that

[1:06:43] study would be, how we can

[1:06:44] prepare and what the City will

[1:06:45] be doing in terms of mitigation

[1:06:47] as well as, you know, corrective

[1:06:50] actions.

[1:06:52] >> Just to correct, use the word

[1:06:54] study -- it's not an actual

[1:06:56] study. What's going on is the

[1:06:58] data is being collected,

[1:07:00] reviewed, and with the aim of

[1:07:03] lessons learned being derived

[1:07:05] from that. Some recommendations

[1:07:08] going forward, so it's not like

[1:07:09] when you say the word study, it

[1:07:11] makes it sound like we've set

[1:07:13] aside money, we've convinced

[1:07:14] commissioned a group and that's

[1:07:15] not it. It's a question of

[1:07:17] gathering information around the

[1:07:18] city and reviewing what is

[1:07:22] gathered. Now, I'm on the

[1:07:25] emergency Planning Committee but

[1:07:26] I'm not the chairman of it. I

[1:07:27] just bought it, so I will

[1:07:29] agitate that we meet to discuss

[1:07:30] this. That's what I can do.

[1:07:32] >> Okay what whatever the

[1:07:34] function, whatever the means

[1:07:35] become, I think it would be

[1:07:36] important, in my opinion as a

[1:07:38] citizen here and I'm calling on

[1:07:39] the council to let us know what

[1:07:40] it is. I think we have the right

[1:07:42] to know with our taxes, we're

[1:07:44] happy to live in Pointe-Claire.

[1:07:45] We're also happy to be part of

[1:07:46] the solution if we can be,

[1:07:48] absolutely.

[1:07:49] >> We have very much in mind

[1:07:51] putting something together a

[1:07:52] plan or a publication in the

[1:07:55] future for citizens, related to

[1:07:57] these events. We have talked

[1:07:58] about that. That idea has been

[1:08:01] bandied around and I think it's

[1:08:02] a very good idea. I think we can

[1:08:05] we, are capable of it.

[1:08:06] >> That would be great.

[1:08:07] >> Your point is well taken.

[1:08:09] >> I cannot overstate the

[1:08:10] importance of communication and

[1:08:11] on that subject, I must say that

[1:08:13] I was very disappointed. I know

[1:08:15] the employees of the city have

[1:08:17] done all their best, you know?

[1:08:18] To help us on the 9th of August

[1:08:19] but I find that the phone lines

[1:08:21] were down, I called and I know

[1:08:23] how many times and they were

[1:08:24] saying, you know, stay on the

[1:08:26] line, your call is important to

[1:08:27] us and, you know, it clicks. How

[1:08:30] come we didn't see any

[1:08:31] policeman? We didn't see any

[1:08:32] firemen, didn't see any rescue.

[1:08:34] I live on -- we had the lake

[1:08:35] Queen in front of my house. We

[1:08:38] can baptize it that way, it was

[1:08:40] really, really bad. I haven't

[1:08:41] seen a soul on my street. Not

[1:08:43] the day of, not the day after.

[1:08:45] No communication whatsoever. It

[1:08:47] was okay, coincidence that the

[1:08:49] Olympics happened at the same

[1:08:50] time and we're all writing about

[1:08:52] that, that's great. But what

[1:08:53] about the scent of, you know,

[1:08:55] what's going on guys, in the

[1:08:57] city? I know people are

[1:08:58] distressed, we can't

[1:08:59] underestimate also the

[1:09:00] psychological stress of

[1:09:02] flooding. Now we see rain and we

[1:09:03] are like shucks, are we going to

[1:09:05] have rain again in the basement,

[1:09:06] you know? I think we have to

[1:09:08] think about that so

[1:09:10] communication is super important

[1:09:11] on that. That's what I meant.

[1:09:13] Can I make a second point?

[1:09:14] >> That's actually the second.

[1:09:16] >> Sorry.

[1:09:17] >> It was the manual and the

[1:09:19] study was the first one.

[1:09:20] >> Sorry, next time.

[1:09:22] >> If I could just speak to it,

[1:09:23] I mean, I will allow a third if

[1:09:25] you would like but in fairness

[1:09:31] to the police and the emergency

[1:09:33] services, they were, I'm sure,

[1:09:35] pretty busy. And probably

[1:09:37] looking after road works and

[1:09:39] people trapped on the highways.

[1:09:42] You know, it was so bad that

[1:09:45] everybody was affected and I

[1:09:46] think they were just picking the

[1:09:47] worst-case scenario and dealing

[1:09:49] with it. I don't know

[1:09:51] specifically but I'm pretty sure

[1:09:52] that was what was occurring, in

[1:09:54] fairness to them. And it was

[1:09:57] pretty horrendous because it got

[1:09:59] everywhere.

[1:10:00] >> I know, it was, yeah. But we

[1:10:02] have an alert system, you know?

[1:10:03] Through our phones.

[1:10:04] >> Yeah, the phone system was a

[1:10:06] problem. I mean, people were put

[1:10:08] on hold and then it was

[1:10:10] disconnected. And that happened,

[1:10:11] I heard that a lot. The system

[1:10:12] was simply overwhelmed, much

[1:10:14] like the sewage system, the

[1:10:16] communications system was

[1:10:17] overwhelmed. Which has to be

[1:10:18] dealt with going forward as

[1:10:20] well, you know? Absolutely,

[1:10:21] we've got to find technological

[1:10:23] systems that will handle that.,

[1:10:24] The oncoming crisis.

[1:10:26] >> Mister Mayor -- we've all

[1:10:27] been asked what phone number

[1:10:29] would you like to be called it

[1:10:30] if there is an emergency or

[1:10:31] something like that. Maybe just

[1:10:32] a small message on there to say

[1:10:34] okay, we know what's going on,

[1:10:36] all of our, you know, everybody

[1:10:37] is deployed. We know there's a

[1:10:39] problem on Donegani, it's

[1:10:41] backing up or something, --

[1:10:43] really much in the dark. Will

[1:10:45] you allow me a third question?

[1:10:46] >> Okay, fire away.

[1:10:47] >> Can I just add one thing? I

[1:10:49] would like to let you know that

[1:10:51] Public, Pointe-Claire volunteer

[1:10:52] rescue and -- security responded

[1:10:54] to well over 100 calls that

[1:10:56] evening and into the next day,

[1:10:58] and those who we knew needed to

[1:11:00] go to different areas, we were

[1:11:02] dispatching as much as possible.

[1:11:03] I just want to reassure that --

[1:11:05] >> I trust that -- could be done

[1:11:07] but whenever you're in the

[1:11:08] situation --

[1:11:09] >> No, absolutely. It's just

[1:11:11] because it all happened at once

[1:11:12] and the phone lines crash

[1:11:13] because it was everyone, as you

[1:11:15] said, there is a lot of

[1:11:17] distress. The psychological

[1:11:18] distress is continuing on, no

[1:11:20] doubt. It's their.

[1:11:22] >> It is, for sure.

[1:11:24] >> The stats on Pointe-Claire

[1:11:25] volunteer rescue on I think was

[1:11:28] 77 calls that the handle that

[1:11:30] night which is pretty darn good.

[1:11:32] >> That's a lot, for sure.

[1:11:33] >> So, your third?

[1:11:34] >> I guess it's related. I don't

[1:11:36] know what to do about the

[1:11:38] ditches that we have in our

[1:11:39] backyards and some of them, for

[1:11:41] some reason, recently, I would

[1:11:42] say about two, three years, it

[1:11:44] seems like I don't know if

[1:11:45] people are just -- round or

[1:11:48] whatever, but now we are

[1:11:50] flooding in our backyards and

[1:11:52] our neighbours also flooding.

[1:11:54] And we are told, this is not the

[1:11:56] city, this is Montréal. So, I

[1:11:58] don't know about that.

[1:11:59] >> What's Montréal?

[1:12:01] >> The City of Montréal would be

[1:12:03] responsible for the backyard

[1:12:04] dishes. Is that correct?

[1:12:05] >> That's a good question, I'm

[1:12:07] not sure. Madame Verdon.

[1:12:09] >> It depends. I would really

[1:12:10] need to have your address after

[1:12:12] and talk about it because it's a

[1:12:14] personal case. Some of the ditch

[1:12:18] is the responsibility of

[1:12:19] citizens. Some of them is -- we

[1:12:22] have to look, you know?

[1:12:24] >> Okay so I can consult you and

[1:12:25] you can let us know and maybe

[1:12:27] what we can do about it,

[1:12:28] basically?

[1:12:29] >> Yeah but, you know, you can

[1:12:30] send an email directly to

[1:12:31] administration with your address

[1:12:32] so we can look at your personal

[1:12:34] case.

[1:12:35] >> Okay, sounds good, well thank

[1:12:36] you very much.

[1:12:37] >> Thank you. I hope you enjoyed

[1:12:39] your first visit. Kim lions?

[1:12:46] >> Good evening. Simple

[1:12:48] question. When I go over the

[1:12:53] overpass St. John and the

[1:12:55] Trans-Canada coming south, the

[1:12:57] middle lane has some crumbling

[1:12:59] in it. There's a small pothole

[1:13:02] but every time you go there,

[1:13:04] bang. And you look at it, it

[1:13:07] seems that the concrete

[1:13:08] underneath is cracked. What I

[1:13:10] don't understand is that we know

[1:13:12] how much it costs to replace one

[1:13:15] of those overpasses. Why in the

[1:13:18] heck are the city who's

[1:13:22] responsible for the asphalt on

[1:13:24] top doesn't make sure that it's

[1:13:27] always tight? Doesn't let any

[1:13:30] liquid leakage go below? Because

[1:13:32] with that, we know what happens.

[1:13:33] Water gets in and in the

[1:13:34] wintertime, corrosion and then

[1:13:35] you have to replace a whole

[1:13:37] bloody thing. Imagine the

[1:13:39] disaster of closing the whole

[1:13:40] thing down to replace it. So, my

[1:13:43] question is, why can't public

[1:13:45] works be always on the lookout

[1:13:49] and the state of the overpasses?

[1:13:51] >> They are.

[1:13:53] >> Well, how come that's been

[1:13:54] there for three weeks?

[1:13:55] >> They're working to the best

[1:13:56] of their abilities.

[1:13:57] >> Three weeks, it's been there.

[1:13:59] >> It's their professional call

[1:14:00] and they're working on

[1:14:01] priorities that they're aware

[1:14:03] of, and doing the best they can

[1:14:05] with all kinds of problems. I

[1:14:06] mean, I've seen, we had a map of

[1:14:09] how many potholes and how many

[1:14:11] dangerous situations they have

[1:14:13] plugged in the last half year

[1:14:15] and it is amazing how much work

[1:14:17] they've done. So, they're way

[1:14:19] behind and they're doing their

[1:14:20] best to correct all of these

[1:14:22] problems, and they are out

[1:14:23] there. They're well aware of

[1:14:25] them and they're working to

[1:14:26] their capacity.

[1:14:27] >> I'm not disputing what you're

[1:14:29] saying. It's a question of

[1:14:30] priorities. You know, because

[1:14:32] the impact of not doing it is

[1:14:34] going to be severe. That's the

[1:14:36] one thing.

[1:14:38] >> Yeah.

[1:14:39] >> The other thing is actually a

[1:14:42] compliment towards the City.

[1:14:44] When you go down holiday, going

[1:14:49] east, it's beautiful. You know,

[1:14:51] all the plants, the median in

[1:14:54] between, the flowers in there,

[1:14:56] they're really, very nice. You

[1:14:58] know, I like with the city has

[1:15:01] done, like their past and all

[1:15:03] that. It makes it far more

[1:15:05] pleasant than just having, you

[1:15:06] know, like green grass or

[1:15:08] something like that. That's

[1:15:10] essentially it, thank you.

[1:15:11] >> Well, thank you for that

[1:15:13] comment and you're not alone in

[1:15:14] saying that. I was at a couple

[1:15:15] of events last week and had

[1:15:17] someone pulled me aside and say

[1:15:18] pretty much the same thing, but

[1:15:19] it's a citywide thing and the

[1:15:20] last few years, horticulturally,

[1:15:23] we really upped our game and

[1:15:25] that's got to be passed on

[1:15:26] through the administration.

[1:15:28] Whoever is responsible that

[1:15:29] there has been a marked

[1:15:32] improvement in the last three

[1:15:33] years or so, or I don't know the

[1:15:35] exact timeframe but citizens

[1:15:38] have been noticing and I always

[1:15:39] post them on my Facebook page

[1:15:41] to. I think they're amazing, a

[1:15:42] lot of work they did.

[1:15:43] >> Thank you.

[1:15:44] >> Thank you. Danielle

[1:15:49] competency. --

[1:16:01] Danielle Montpetit.

[1:16:07] >>

[1:16:08] - Bonsoir, tout le monde, Daniel

[1:16:09] Montpetit. J'aimerais juste

[1:16:10] faire un commentaire, quand on a

[1:16:13] commencé la session, vous avez

[1:16:14] demandé à parler tout le monde.

[1:16:15] Vous avez juste parlé en

[1:16:17] anglais. Ce serait bon de parler

[1:16:18] dans les deux langues s'il vous

[1:16:20] plaît.

[1:16:23] (inaudible)

[1:16:24] Une coupe de commentaires en

[1:16:25] français, je me souviens, c'est

[1:16:26] monsieur Stork. Pas tout en

[1:16:29] français, c'est correct, ma

[1:16:31] femme est anglaise, elle va me

[1:16:32] chicaner tout à l'heure mais

[1:16:33] c'est pas grave.

[1:16:34] (rires)

[1:16:35] (rires)

[1:16:36] . Bonjour. Moi, je viens parce

[1:16:38] qu'encore, sur la rue brodée, où

[1:16:40] on a des maisons neuves qui vont

[1:16:41] se bâtir. Mais là, au 46

[1:16:52] Broadview, on a engagé un

[1:16:53] contracteur pour faire l'entrée

[1:16:54] d'eau, le drainage... pourquoi

[1:16:57] on engage un contracteur pour

[1:16:58] faire la job d'un col bleu?

[1:17:00] Parce que moi, j'ai été cols

[1:17:01] bleus pendant 33 ans. C'est ça

[1:17:02] que je faisais. Et en plus, ça

[1:17:04] lui a pris cinq jours. On a été

[1:17:07] dans la poussière pendant cinq

[1:17:09] jours, une fin de semaine inclus

[1:17:11] là-dedans. Et puis c'est encore

[1:17:12] dans la poussière, ça n'a jamais

[1:17:14] été nettoyé une fois. C'est bien

[1:17:16] beau d'engager un contracteur

[1:17:17] mais il me semble que la Ville

[1:17:19] n'est pas Mike... pas mal

[1:17:20] meilleur que ça pour faire la

[1:17:21] job, en tout cas. Justement,

[1:17:23] aujourd'hui, j'ai appelé, on a

[1:17:24] fait un égout sur la rue

[1:17:26] (---)

[1:17:27] , une journée! Contracteurs:

[1:17:28] cinq jours, pas fini encore. On

[1:17:31] a un maudit de méchants

[1:17:32] problèmes si vous pensez qu'un

[1:17:35] contracteur qui est meilleur que

[1:17:36] nos cols bleus et eux autres,

[1:17:37] ils en font pas pendant que les

[1:17:38] autres en font. On achète un

[1:17:42] machinerie, les grosses pelles,

[1:17:43] les gros truck, on fait quoi

[1:17:44] avec ça? On se promène dans la

[1:17:47] rue pour que ça paraisse bien?

[1:17:49] Il me semble qu'on devrait

[1:17:50] prendre nos travailleurs avant

[1:17:51] de prendre des contracteurs.

[1:17:55] - On est d'accord. Je trouve ça

[1:17:57] très intéressant. Non, mais je

[1:18:00] trouve ça très intéressant.

[1:18:02] - Et en plus!

[1:18:03] - Oui. Monsieur Montpetit, le

[1:18:06] mot du maire était à moitié

[1:18:07] moitié français et anglais.

[1:18:08] - Oui, je sais. Et en plus, ils

[1:18:10] font une autre maison un peu

[1:18:11] plus au, c'est un autre

[1:18:13] contracteur. Il le charge dans

[1:18:14] son camion et le vient de monter

[1:18:16] à la ville en plus. Donc on

[1:18:18] engage un contracteur et

[1:18:21] (inaudible)

[1:18:22] pour pas que ça coûte trop cher.

[1:18:23] Donc c'est toutes nous autres

[1:18:24] qui payent pour ça. Ça paraît

[1:18:26] pas bien du tout, du tout. C'est

[1:18:29] juste ça mes questions mais

[1:18:30] j'aimerais que ça aille à

[1:18:32] l'interne avant de donner ça à

[1:18:34] l'extérieur. On a l'expertise et

[1:18:35] on a des meilleurs travailleurs

[1:18:36] pour le faire.

[1:18:37] - Oui. La plupart des fois, on

[1:18:40] utilise nos cols bleus. Madame

[1:18:43] Verdon, est-ce que c'est vrai?

[1:18:44] (rires)

[1:18:46] - Tout ce qui est constructions

[1:18:48] neuves, c'est plus la ville

[1:18:49] qu'il ait fait, je me suis

[1:18:50] renseigné. C'est tout donner à

[1:18:52] des contracteurs. Depuis... la

[1:18:58] pandémie, depuis COVID. Mais

[1:19:00] pourquoi? Et on achète la

[1:19:03] machinerie pour le faire. On a

[1:19:06] tous en conséquence. Merci,

[1:19:08] bonne soirée.

[1:19:11] - Merci, Monsieur.

[1:19:13] >> Mister Mayor?

[1:19:15] >> Yes, ma'am.

[1:19:16] >> Three names were added. First

[1:19:17] -- time

[1:19:18] >> Do we have time?

[1:19:19] >> Do we have time?

[1:19:20] >> Yes.

[1:19:21] >> Mark --

[1:19:22] >> 30 minutes left.

[1:19:28] - Marquer quoi? >> Mark --

[1:19:29] Toute marque n'est pas là. Sandy

[1:19:31] foule?

[1:19:32] >> Sandy Fuller.

[1:19:39] >> Good evening, everyone.

[1:19:42] Councillors, Mister Mayor. I

[1:19:44] have some concerns about August

[1:19:47] 9th. And as the previous citizen

[1:19:50] mentioned, it was devastating.

[1:19:52] The flooding, people not able to

[1:19:54] get a hold of the public

[1:19:58] security. But I do have a

[1:20:00] question. I would like to know

[1:20:01] and I would like to hear you

[1:20:02] explain to the citizens of

[1:20:05] Pointe-Claire, where were you on

[1:20:06] August 9th?

[1:20:09] >> I was at a fund-raiser that I

[1:20:11] had organized to raise money for

[1:20:14] the organization Y of which is

[1:20:16] the West Island Association for

[1:20:18] the intellectually handicapped

[1:20:19] and autism.

[1:20:23] >> And was that a city

[1:20:28] organized?

[1:20:29] >> Half. It was a combination of

[1:20:31] things. Jim was there, there was

[1:20:34] there, I was, there it was a

[1:20:36] plan to raise money for -- it

[1:20:37] was a precursor to the blues

[1:20:39] fest the following evening. It

[1:20:41] was organized months in advance.

[1:20:45] It's a fund-raiser that's been

[1:20:46] going on for 15 years. It

[1:20:48] required musicians travelling

[1:20:50] from as far as Florida, North

[1:20:54] Carolina, who had travelled to

[1:20:55] the event. We were at the event,

[1:20:58] the event was going on. I was

[1:21:00] working the door, so I was

[1:21:02] actually collecting the money

[1:21:03] for the season's coming through

[1:21:04] the door. I would say a good two

[1:21:07] thirds of the way through the

[1:21:08] event, people started leaving

[1:21:12] and getting up and leaving, and

[1:21:14] they were explaining that some

[1:21:15] of their basements have been

[1:21:16] flooded. There are three or four

[1:21:18] citizens that had left and we

[1:21:20] were, you know, the show is

[1:21:21] going on. And then towards the

[1:21:24] end, while a second act was

[1:21:26] about halfway through, Jen and

[1:21:29] our both pointed out that there

[1:21:30] is some flooding in parts of the

[1:21:32] city. So, we waited, I waited

[1:21:33] for the event was over about 45

[1:21:35] minutes later, I drove, I had to

[1:21:38] pay the sound man, the

[1:21:40] officials, I had to pay a lot of

[1:21:41] the staff that were there and

[1:21:43] then ran home and got informed

[1:21:45] about the event, which was

[1:21:46] probably 45 minutes later. So, I

[1:21:49] was trying to raise money. 11

[1:21:53] probably was by 10:30, 11 was

[1:21:55] probably the time I got back.

[1:21:58] And it's funny because nobody

[1:22:00] knew what was going on. And it

[1:22:02] just got worse and worse as the

[1:22:04] evening went on. Nobody really

[1:22:05] knew. The entire crowd, there

[1:22:07] were maybe three or four people

[1:22:08] that had left. So, people knew

[1:22:10] there was an issue but the

[1:22:12] severity of it was not really

[1:22:13] known. So, and once I got home,

[1:22:18] I got informed and went out the

[1:22:19] next morning, the minute I

[1:22:21] could. So, we raised a little

[1:22:23] over 30 $500 for the

[1:22:26] organization. Lynn was there,

[1:22:27] the director of -- was there,

[1:22:30] she stayed till the end. She was

[1:22:31] very grateful, all the staff

[1:22:32] where there and they were paid,

[1:22:35] they were given the money and

[1:22:36] everyone had to get paid, then I

[1:22:38] got home and got to things ASAP

[1:22:42] like Jim and aerial, I got back

[1:22:44] to it as quickly as we could.

[1:22:46] >> Did you see the conditions of

[1:22:48] the streets?

[1:22:49] >> It's funny, I drove to

[1:22:53] musicians back to their hotels

[1:22:55] and the route I took, I went

[1:22:57] along cardinal and it wasn't

[1:22:58] that bad. It was only when I

[1:22:59] went to other parts and it was,

[1:23:02] I didn't really see some of the

[1:23:04] really bad streets. Then I saw a

[1:23:07] video of Alston. I want the next

[1:23:09] morning first thing to Alston

[1:23:11] and one of the gentleman showed

[1:23:12] me a video of his truck and the

[1:23:15] water on Alston actually knocked

[1:23:17] his truck out of commission

[1:23:18] because it was higher than a

[1:23:19] foot on the street itself. So, I

[1:23:21] never saw that. No, I never saw

[1:23:23] any of that in the drive but,

[1:23:26] you know, --

[1:23:27] >> So, you were very close to

[1:23:31] Parkdale, mainland, windward,

[1:23:34] when cast?

[1:23:35] >> No, I wasn't Valois. -- I

[1:23:38] wasn't close enough to them. I

[1:23:39] didn't drive on them so I went

[1:23:42] home on the 20, I just went out

[1:23:44] on the 20 and it was fine. But

[1:23:46] this was --

[1:23:47] >> We are all near Valois Bay

[1:23:49] and all of those streets were

[1:23:52] horrendous. Two feet of water.

[1:23:54] >> Not when I drove home,

[1:23:56] absolutely not.

[1:23:57] >> No because by that time it

[1:23:58] was all over.

[1:23:59] >> It was an hour later, so

[1:24:01] you're right, if it had been

[1:24:03] that quick, I would've been

[1:24:04] surprised but that's the --

[1:24:05] >> I would like to ask you

[1:24:06] another question.

[1:24:07] >> You have had to, Madam, I

[1:24:10] will allow you one more.

[1:24:13] >> I would like to know why you

[1:24:14] remove the photos from your

[1:24:15] Facebook page.

[1:24:16] >> I didn't, that's completely

[1:24:18] false. I never did. They stayed

[1:24:19] up the whole time. That's

[1:24:21] completely dishonest. It can be

[1:24:26] verified and checked. Thank you,

[1:24:28] Miss fuller.

[1:24:29] >> You're welcome.

[1:24:31] >> There was one more?

[1:24:33] >> --

[1:24:44] >> Hi, again, well good evening

[1:24:47] first of all. So that citizens

[1:24:52] at home can hear.

[1:24:54] >> Good evening, all the

[1:24:55] councillors. - Bonsoir, Monsieur

[1:24:56] le Maire. Question is basically

[1:24:59] the same vein a little bit but a

[1:25:02] little more specific.

[1:25:04] >> The name, sir,? Sorry.

[1:25:07] >> Patrick but Goshen. --

[1:25:14] >> I have a property in Vella,

[1:25:17] on Prince Edward, and after the

[1:25:21] flooding basically all of my

[1:25:22] neighbours were flooded on

[1:25:25] Valois Bay, Prince Edward,

[1:25:27] queen, king, all that area. It's

[1:25:30] a disaster, it was pretty bad.

[1:25:32] Some of the houses they had more

[1:25:35] than a couple of feet of water

[1:25:36] in the basement, according to

[1:25:39] one, up to five feet, I'm not

[1:25:41] sure about that. My question is

[1:25:46] basically, years ago, I remember

[1:25:48] the city would clear, there was

[1:25:51] a dish pit behind my house,

[1:25:54] between the two houses. The city

[1:25:55] would clear that ditch. At some

[1:25:58] point, the city stopped doing

[1:26:00] that. We started having issues

[1:26:03] at every spring during the thaw,

[1:26:06] we would have a small lake in

[1:26:08] the backyard for almost a month

[1:26:12] until the ground was able to

[1:26:14] absorb the excess water. Then

[1:26:17] one of my neighbours went out of

[1:26:20] his own pocket, built a drainage

[1:26:23] system connecting to the city's

[1:26:25] system, and that helped a little

[1:26:27] bit. But still, every time that

[1:26:29] there is a big rainfall, we

[1:26:31] would still have issues. At some

[1:26:36] point, there was, at the end of

[1:26:38] that ditch, there was a lot,

[1:26:41] there is a vacant lot,

[1:26:44] undeveloped. Kind of a

[1:26:45] triangular shape. It was sold to

[1:26:49] be built so a house was built on

[1:26:52] it. The block was so small that

[1:26:54] most of the lot had to be used

[1:26:56] for the purpose of the

[1:26:57] foundation of the house, which I

[1:27:01] believe because even more issues

[1:27:03] for the ditch because that ditch

[1:27:07] and exactly where the houses, so

[1:27:09] the water would not, they sickly

[1:27:13] excess water had lost its access

[1:27:16] to the manhole which was on the

[1:27:18] street right beside it. Since

[1:27:20] then, we've been having issues

[1:27:24] with the basements, excess water

[1:27:26] in the backyards, and so, I

[1:27:30] don't know what else we can do

[1:27:31] from our and because as I said,

[1:27:35] you know, my neighbour out of

[1:27:37] his own pocket spent thousands

[1:27:39] of dollars putting a drainage

[1:27:41] system, it didn't help. Yeah, so

[1:27:47] why did the city stop clearing

[1:27:50] those dishes? When the ditch was

[1:27:52] there for many years and was

[1:27:54] doing its job. And what can the

[1:27:57] city do now that the ditch is

[1:28:03] basically the end of the ditch,

[1:28:05] the access to the sewer is

[1:28:08] blocked now and can there be any

[1:28:13] kind of a correction done in

[1:28:16] that area?

[1:28:18] >> One would hope. I mean, it's

[1:28:19] a very good question. From what

[1:28:21] I've heard in our discussions

[1:28:23] about a lot of the dishes, a lot

[1:28:25] of them, individual citizens

[1:28:27] have covered them and some homes

[1:28:29] still have them, others have

[1:28:31] covered them and they've been

[1:28:32] used for other purposes. And

[1:28:34] it's very, very good question.

[1:28:37] They were almost always there

[1:28:38] for a reason, I'm sure. I don't

[1:28:40] see any reason why. I mean,

[1:28:42] what's the address?

[1:28:43] >> 115 Prince Edward Island.

[1:28:47] >> Okay, I can certainly look

[1:28:48] into that. Into that particular

[1:28:51] one, I mean, --

[1:28:52] >> And I believe years ago when

[1:28:54] I bought the property, the

[1:28:57] property line in the back, there

[1:28:59] was a five foot I believe kind

[1:29:01] of a no-man's-land where the

[1:29:03] ditch would be, so the ditch

[1:29:05] didn't belong either to me or to

[1:29:07] my neighbour. At some point,

[1:29:09] that was changed. It was added

[1:29:12] to my neighbour's lot. And the

[1:29:15] City just stopped taking care of

[1:29:20] cleaning and opening up the

[1:29:21] ditch. Also, the fact that there

[1:29:26] is no more no-man's-land between

[1:29:28] the two houses. As soon as you

[1:29:32] build any kind of offence,

[1:29:34] you're putting some kind of a

[1:29:36] blockage on that path where the

[1:29:38] ditch used to be. As soon as you

[1:29:42] have any kind of a structure,

[1:29:43] whether it's a shed or for the

[1:29:45] foundation of the house, you're

[1:29:48] blocking the way of the natural

[1:29:50] passage of the water. So, this,

[1:29:54] I think it's going to be a mess

[1:29:55] because it's very hard now to

[1:29:57] tell any of my neighbours that

[1:29:58] they have to clear some kind of

[1:30:00] a ditch when there is already

[1:30:02] offence.

[1:30:03] >> It's very interesting. I

[1:30:05] mean, I have to look into it. I

[1:30:06] don't know the history but we

[1:30:07] can certainly look into it

[1:30:10] because if there's a solution,

[1:30:13] we should find it, for sure. Or

[1:30:15] it should be found. I can't

[1:30:18] speak to this specifically

[1:30:20] because, you know, you're

[1:30:21] telling me about it now but we

[1:30:22] can certainly look into it.

[1:30:23] There is no reason why that

[1:30:25] can't happen. We are in the

[1:30:26] process of looking into a lot of

[1:30:27] things right now. And if there

[1:30:29] was a solution in the past that

[1:30:31] was there deliberately, it would

[1:30:32] make sense if it was their

[1:30:34] deliberately or if there is a

[1:30:35] reason for so we can certainly

[1:30:37] examine whether something that

[1:30:38] was necessary was filled in or

[1:30:40] removed, absolutely, we can look

[1:30:42] into that. Madam Verdon, do you

[1:30:46] have any additional?

[1:30:47] >> Like the other citizens, each

[1:30:49] case is different so I will have

[1:30:50] to look at your case, you know,

[1:30:53] specifically. Some of them, it's

[1:30:54] part of the Montréal -- the

[1:30:57] order is private from each

[1:30:59] citizen and maybe we have some

[1:31:00] left from the City, so we have

[1:31:02] to look at everything, so we can

[1:31:03] get back to you with the

[1:31:05] complete answer.

[1:31:06] >> Okay so who can I contact for

[1:31:08] more information about this

[1:31:11] particular issue of dishes?

[1:31:13] >> Probably me would be better.

[1:31:15] >> Thank you very much.

[1:31:16] >> Thank you, sir. Merci

[1:31:23] beaucoup.

[1:31:26] - Aucun. Bon, 5,1.

[1:31:34] - Avis de motion et dépôt d'un

[1:31:35] projet de Règlement décrétant

[1:31:36] les tarifs exigibles pour le

[1:31:37] financement de biens, services

[1:31:38] et activités offerts par la

[1:31:39] Ville de Pointe-Claire pour

[1:31:40] l'exercice financier 2025. De

[1:31:41] façon générale, la tarification

[1:31:42] des biens et services et

[1:31:44] activités a été augmenté de

[1:31:46] 3,5%. La tarification pour le

[1:31:48] non résidentiel est établi en

[1:31:49] fonction d'un écart de 140% du

[1:31:51] tarif résidentiel. 5.2 Notice of

[1:31:54] motion and filing of a draft

[1:31:55] By-law amending Zoning By-law

[1:31:58] PC-2775 of the City of

[1:31:59] Pointe-Claire in order to modify

[1:32:00] the provisions concerning

[1:32:01] electrical and mechanical

[1:32:02] equipment, landscaping in

[1:32:04] industrial zones, class a and b

[1:32:08] cladding materials, fences, pool

[1:32:09] enclosures and certain

[1:32:10] residential recreational

[1:32:11] equipment. Definitions have been

[1:32:14] modified, as have the criteria

[1:32:16] pickable to mechanical equipment

[1:32:17] and installations, particularly

[1:32:19] with regard to size and

[1:32:22] visibility. Pour 5,1 et 5,2. Do

[1:32:26] I have a mover?

[1:32:27] >> Cynthia Homan, district five.

[1:32:28] >> And seconder?

[1:32:29] >> There is no seconder, it's a

[1:32:30] motion.

[1:32:31] >> Sorry, moves this notice of

[1:32:33] motion? Thank you, Cynthia or

[1:32:34] Councillor Homan.

[1:32:38] >>

[1:32:40] - 5.3 Avis de motion et dépôt

[1:32:41] d'un projet de Règlement

[1:32:42] modifiant le Code Villageois,

[1:32:43] règlement numéro PC-2880 de la

[1:32:44] ville de Pointe-Claire, relatif

[1:32:45] aux classes d'usage résidentiel

[1:32:46] autorisées de même qu'à

[1:32:47] l'agencement des cases de

[1:32:49] stationnement exigées pour les

[1:32:50] habitations de classe B dans

[1:32:51] UP8. Ce règlement vise à

[1:32:53] permettre les habitations de

[1:32:54] type duplex dans cette zone. Ce

[1:32:56] règlement devrait être soumis au

[1:32:59] (---)

[1:33:00] de la Ville a voté des zones qui

[1:33:01] seront déclarées dans la

[1:33:02] (---)

[1:33:03] semi-à cet effet. >> Who moves

[1:33:04] this notice of motion for 5.3?

[1:33:05] >> Brent Cowan, district number

[1:33:07] eight. 5.4 Adoption of a first

[1:33:11] draft By-law amending Zoning

[1:33:12] By-law PC-2775 of the City of

[1:33:14] Pointe-Claire in order to modify

[1:33:16] the provisions concerning

[1:33:17] electrical and mechanical

[1:33:18] equipment, landscaping in

[1:33:20] industrial zones, class a and b

[1:33:21] cladding materials, fences, pool

[1:33:22] enclosures and certain

[1:33:24] residential recreational

[1:33:25] equipment.

[1:33:33] - 5.5 Adoption d'un premier

[1:33:34] projet de Règlement modifiant le

[1:33:35] Code Villageois, règlement

[1:33:36] numéro PC-2880 de la ville de

[1:33:37] Pointe-Claire, relatif aux

[1:33:38] classes d'usage résidentiel

[1:33:39] autorisées de même qu'à

[1:33:40] l'agencement des cases de

[1:33:41] stationnement exigées pour les

[1:33:42] habitations de classe B dans

[1:33:43] UP8.

[1:33:44] - Pour 5,1 et 5,5...

[1:33:45] Do I have a mover? - 5,4 et 5,5?

[1:33:49] - 5,4 et 5,5, merci. Do I have a

[1:33:50] mover?

[1:33:51] >> Brent Cowan, district eight.

[1:33:52] >> Seconder?

[1:33:53] >> Tara Stainforth, district

[1:33:54] four.

[1:33:55] >> All in favour? 6.1 Grant a

[1:34:01] financial support for a total

[1:34:02] amount of $ 150 to the Résidence

[1:34:04] Maywood

[1:34:05] (33 Maywood Avenue)

[1:34:06] . It is for the Christmas

[1:34:07] dinner.

[1:34:11] - 6.2 Accorder un soutien

[1:34:12] financier pour un montant total

[1:34:13] de 150 $ à la Résidence

[1:34:14] Edwin-Crawford

[1:34:15] (35, avenue Maywood)

[1:34:16] . Pour le soutien financier de

[1:34:17] repas de Noël. 6.3 Grant a

[1:34:18] financial support for a total

[1:34:19] amount of $ 150 to l'Esterél

[1:34:21] which is that

[1:34:22] (10 Vermont Avenue)

[1:34:23] . Also for a Christmas dinner.

[1:34:27] - 6.4 Accorder un soutien

[1:34:28] financier pour un montant total

[1:34:29] de 150 $ à l'Estérel

[1:34:30] (20, avenue Vermont)

[1:34:31] . Soutien financier pour le

[1:34:32] repas de Noël. >> Lastly, 6.5

[1:34:34] Grant a financial support for a

[1:34:35] total amount of $ 150 to

[1:34:36] L'Estérel which is that

[1:34:37] (30 Vermont Avenue)

[1:34:38] . Also for a Christmas dinner.

[1:34:39] >> For 6.1 to 6.5, do I have a

[1:34:42] mover?

[1:34:43] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:34:44] >> And seconder?

[1:34:46] >> Kerosene fourth, district

[1:34:48] five.

[1:34:49] >> All in favour?

[1:34:55] - 7.1 Renouveler les mandats des

[1:34:56] membres au sein du Comité de

[1:34:57] retraite des employés de la

[1:34:58] ville de Pointe-Claire. Il

[1:34:59] s'agit de la reconduction du

[1:35:00] mandat de siéger au sein du

[1:35:01] comité de retraite des employés

[1:35:02] de la Ville de Pointe-Claire. Le

[1:35:04] mandat 2024 - 2027. Les quatre

[1:35:06] représentants de l'employeur,

[1:35:07] trois quatre et un membre du

[1:35:08] conseil ainsi que la secrétaire

[1:35:09] du comité de retraite. Il s'agit

[1:35:10] de monsieur vers Vincent Proulx,

[1:35:12] représentant de l'employeur avec

[1:35:13] droit de vote, Daniel Seguin, au

[1:35:15] présentant de l'employeur avec

[1:35:16] droit de vote, et les Eric Roy

[1:35:17] à, représentant de l'employeur à

[1:35:19] victoires de voter Paul

[1:35:20] Bissonnette, représentant de

[1:35:21] l'employeur avec droit de vote

[1:35:22] désigné par le Conseil. Et

[1:35:23] enfin, madame Nathalie Laroche,

[1:35:24] secrétaire du comité de

[1:35:25] retraite.

[1:35:27] - Pour 7.1.

[1:35:28] Do I have a mover? And seconder?

[1:35:31] - Claude Cousineau, district en.

[1:35:32] >> Tara Stainforth, district

[1:35:34] four.

[1:35:35] >> All in favour?

[1:35:39] >> 10.1, sorry. To file a list

[1:35:41] of budget amendments and the

[1:35:43] register of checks for the

[1:35:44] period of August 5, 2024, to

[1:35:46] August 23, 2024.

[1:35:52] - 11.1 Désigner officiellement

[1:35:53] deux

[1:35:54] (2)

[1:35:55] parcs et une

[1:35:56] (1)

[1:35:57] avenue. Le but d'officialiser la

[1:35:58] nomination des endroits suivants

[1:35:59] auprès de la Commission

[1:36:00] d'autonomie du Québec. Le parc

[1:36:01] John Fischer, cet espace vert

[1:36:02] situé dans le quadrilatère des

[1:36:03] avenue Saint-Louis, Brock View,

[1:36:04] John Fisher et Bill Valois. Le

[1:36:06] parc d'Athènes. Cet espace vert

[1:36:07] situé dans un développement

[1:36:08] domiciliaire de 12 maisons

[1:36:10] unifamiliales, soit l'ancien

[1:36:11] centre d'achats Walton où se

[1:36:13] trouvait le restaurant Athènes

[1:36:15] pizza. Nous avons une demande

[1:36:17] citoyenne afin de nommer le parc

[1:36:19] Athènes. Enfin, l'avenue Gerald

[1:36:21] Hervé. Pour cette avenue qui est

[1:36:22] située à l'est du boulevard des

[1:36:24] Sources, soit dans la

[1:36:25] prolongation de l'avenue afro-,

[1:36:26] le conseil avait proposé de la

[1:36:28] nommer en l'honneur du premier

[1:36:29] commissaire industriel de la

[1:36:30] Ville de Pointe-Claire en 1955.

[1:36:36] - Pour 11.1 à 11.2.

[1:36:37] Do I have a mover?

[1:36:38] >> Yes, I do. You finally got

[1:36:41] it, Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:36:43] >> And seconder?

[1:36:45] >> Kelly third said Cohen,

[1:36:47] district 12.

[1:36:48] >> All in favour? - Merci.

[1:36:52] [Applause]

[1:36:54] (applaudissements)

[1:36:57] >> So, 11.2. Two Approve an

[1:37:02] application for tax exemption

[1:37:03] for the building of Habitation

[1:37:04] jeunesse de l'Ouest de l'Île.

[1:37:05] Which is under the am Cal

[1:37:06] umbrella. This is the

[1:37:07] application for recognition of a

[1:37:09] tax exemption spent by -- four

[1:37:12] the building located at seven

[1:37:14] avenue St. and in Pointe-Claire.

[1:37:15] The exemption has been in place

[1:37:16] for several years and there's

[1:37:18] there are no objections to such

[1:37:19] a request.

[1:37:21] >> For 11.2, do I have a mover?

[1:37:23] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:37:26] >> Circular?

[1:37:27] >>

[1:37:28] Kelly towards that Cohen,

[1:37:29] district three.

[1:37:30] >> All in favour? -- 14.1

[1:37:35] Exercise the renewal option

[1:37:36] provided for in the contract

[1:37:37] entered into with Conceptions

[1:37:38] Snotech Inc.

[1:37:39] - 12.1 Déposer la liste des

[1:37:40] changements au personnel par

[1:37:41] décisions déléguées pour le mois

[1:37:42] de septembre 2024.

[1:37:48] , For the 2024-2025 winter

[1:37:50] season, in the amount of $

[1:37:51] 72,282.48, taxes included, for

[1:37:52] grooming and maintenance of

[1:37:55] winter trails and cross-country

[1:37:56] ski trails in the City of

[1:37:58] Pointe-Claire.

[1:38:02] >> For 14.1, do I have a mover?

[1:38:03] - Pardon. >> And seconder?

[1:38:10] - Claude Cousineau, district un.

[1:38:11] All in favour? - Bruno Tremblay,

[1:38:13] district six.

[1:38:18] - 14.2 Octroyer un contrat pour

[1:38:19] la location des camions, avec

[1:38:20] opérateurs, pour le transport de

[1:38:21] la neige pour les saisons

[1:38:22] hivernales 2024-2025, 2025-2026

[1:38:24] et 2026-2027, à Roxboro

[1:38:25] Excavation Inc., Pour un montant

[1:38:30] total de 1 514 220,75 $, taxes

[1:38:31] incluses, avec 2 saisons en

[1:38:32] option. 14.3 Award a contract

[1:38:35] for arboriculture works on the

[1:38:37] shores of Lake Saint-Louis as

[1:38:38] well as tree pruning works along

[1:38:40] the streets in anticipation of

[1:38:42] snow removal for the 2024, to

[1:38:45] Service d'arbres Primeau Inc.,

[1:38:46] For a total amount of $

[1:38:47] 42,894.87, taxes included, with

[1:38:51] 2 optional seasons. The

[1:38:55] shoreline Barbara cultural work

[1:38:56] will be done or will be carried

[1:38:58] out on sections of municipal

[1:38:59] land located between or do lack

[1:39:01] lakeshore and the shoreline

[1:39:03] strip in the stretch between day

[1:39:04] sources boulevard protection and

[1:39:06] Antoine Pilon Park.

[1:39:15] - 14.4 Award a contract for the

[1:39:16] supply and delivery of filters,

[1:39:17] couplings, brakes and hardware

[1:39:18] for the vehicle fleet for the

[1:39:20] period of September 4, 2024,

[1:39:25] Octroyer un contrat pour la

[1:39:26] fourniture et livraison de

[1:39:27] filtres, d'accouplements, de

[1:39:28] freins et de quincaillerie pour

[1:39:29] flotte de véhicules pour la

[1:39:30] période du 4 septembre 2024 au

[1:39:31] 30 avril 2025, à Pièces d'Auto

[1:39:32] Hymus

[1:39:33] (entrepôt de Montréal 1470 Inc

[1:39:34] .)

[1:39:35] , pour un montant total de 147

[1:39:36] 017,08 $, taxes incluses.

[1:39:37] - Pour 14,2 à 14,4.

[1:39:38] Do I have a mover?

[1:39:39] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,

[1:39:40] district three.

[1:39:41] >> And seconder?

[1:39:42] >> Tara Stainforth, district

[1:39:43] four.

[1:39:44] >> All in favour?

[1:39:47] - Monsieur le Maire, je vais...

[1:39:48] - Oui, oui, Monsieur. Conseiller

[1:39:53] Cousineau.

[1:39:54] - Pour ce qui est du 14.3, la

[1:39:58] partie, je vais voter contre,

[1:39:59] mais c'est seulement à cause de

[1:40:01] la partie du de la gestion de

[1:40:04] livres qui ne fait pas mon

[1:40:08] affaire. Pas du tout. Alors je

[1:40:11] vote contre.

[1:40:12] - Alors juste pour être clair,

[1:40:13] vous votez contre seulement à

[1:40:15] 14,3?

[1:40:16] - Oui.

[1:40:17] - Parfait.

[1:40:18] - Merci.

[1:40:20] - Est-ce qu'on a besoin d'un

[1:40:21] autre vote?

[1:40:22] >> Unless anybody else, no.

[1:40:23] - Non.

[1:40:24] - Non, c'est correct? >> So,

[1:40:25] 15.1, award of contract for

[1:40:27] repair works and parcel

[1:40:29] redevelopment of the Valois

[1:40:30] Library basement, to Groupe

[1:40:31] Piché Construction Inc., For a

[1:40:33] total amount of $ 1,748,965.02,

[1:40:34] taxes included. The purpose of

[1:40:39] this contract is to correct

[1:40:41] water infiltration problems that

[1:40:42] compromise the longevity of the

[1:40:43] building and the safety of its

[1:40:45] occupants, notably the community

[1:40:46] organization -- which occupies

[1:40:48] offices in the buildings

[1:40:50] basement.

[1:40:52] - 15.2 Octroyer un contrat pour

[1:40:53] la fourniture et la livraison de

[1:40:54] pièces, outils, matériaux et

[1:40:55] équipement en menuiserie pour la

[1:40:56] période de la mi-septembre 2024

[1:40:57] au 31 août 2025, à Quincaillerie

[1:41:01] Notre-Dame Inc., Pour un montant

[1:41:04] total de 77 339,49 $, taxes

[1:41:05] incluses, avec une période en

[1:41:06] option. 15.3 Approve a change

[1:41:11] order to the contract entered

[1:41:12] into with Construction CPB Inc.,

[1:41:14] For the extension and renovation

[1:41:16] of Public Works, for an amount

[1:41:18] of $ 67,887.78, taxes included.

[1:41:23] The modifications involved

[1:41:24] architectural, mechanical,

[1:41:25] electrical, and structural

[1:41:28] frameworks. --

[1:41:29] >> For 15.1 to 15.3, do I have a

[1:41:32] mover?

[1:41:33] >> Bruno Tremblay, district

[1:41:35] says.

[1:41:36] >> Seconder?

[1:41:37] - Bruno Tremblay, district six.

[1:41:38] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:41:39] >> All in favour?

[1:41:41] - Encore une fois, Monsieur le

[1:41:42] Maire?

[1:41:43] - Oui, si vous plaît, Conseiller

[1:41:44] Cousineau.

[1:41:45] - Pour être constant avec ce

[1:41:48] projet-là, je vais voter contre.

[1:41:51] - Encore une fois, juste pour

[1:41:52] être clair, on vote contre 15,3?

[1:41:54] - Oui. Merci.

[1:42:02] - 16.1 Octroyer un contrat pour

[1:42:03] des travaux de gazonnement en

[1:42:04] plaques sur diverses emprises de

[1:42:05] rue, à B&B Déneigement et

[1:42:06] Pelouse Inc., Pour un montant

[1:42:08] total de 59 442,08 $, taxes

[1:42:09] incluses. La Ville souhaite

[1:42:11] réaliser des travaux de

[1:42:12] remplacement de gazon en plaques

[1:42:15] sur l'emprise municipal de

[1:42:16] divers terrains résidentiels,

[1:42:17] répartis sur tout son

[1:42:18] territoire. Ces travaux font

[1:42:20] suite à diverses réflexions de

[1:42:21] rue des dernières années. 16.2

[1:42:25] Approve a change order to the

[1:42:26] contract entered into with

[1:42:27] Néolect Inc., For the

[1:42:28] replacement of streetlights on

[1:42:30] Stillview Avenue, for an amount

[1:42:32] of $ 4,059.84, taxes included.

[1:42:35] The modification consists of the

[1:42:37] supply and installation of a

[1:42:38] pull box and an overrun of

[1:42:41] contaminated soil quantities.

[1:42:46] - 16.3 Approuver une

[1:42:47] modification au contrat

[1:42:48] intervenu avec Les Entreprises

[1:42:49] Ventec Inc., Pour le

[1:42:50] remplacement de la bordure,

[1:42:51] réfection des sentiers et de

[1:42:52] l'escalier menant au sous-sol du

[1:42:53] chalet du terrain de Boulingrin,

[1:42:55] pour un montant de 8 571,04 $,

[1:42:58] taxes incluses. La modification

[1:43:01] touche la gestion des sols

[1:43:02] contaminés. 16.4 Approve of a

[1:43:05] change order to the contract

[1:43:06] entered into with Groupe LML

[1:43:08] Ltée, for the replacement of

[1:43:09] lighting boxes on Saint-Jean

[1:43:11] Boulevard, for an amount of $

[1:43:14] 10,356.79, taxes included. The

[1:43:17] modification is required to

[1:43:18] adjust the quantities of

[1:43:21] conduits and cables, and to

[1:43:23] allow the installation of a P

[1:43:25] and P panel to properly secure

[1:43:26] the Crossing work south of

[1:43:28] Saint-Jean Boulevard.

[1:43:34] >> Do I have a mover?

[1:43:35] - Pour 16 recule un à de quatre

[1:43:36] >> Brent Cowan, district eight.

[1:43:38] >> And seconder?

[1:43:41] >> All in favour?

[1:43:42] - Claude Cousineau, district un.

[1:43:45] - Merci.

[1:43:49] - Les personnes présentes

[1:43:50] peuvent s'adresser au Conseil

[1:43:51] concernant les items 17.1 à

[1:43:53] 17.5. The persons present may

[1:43:56] address Council on the items

[1:43:57] 17.1 to 17.5.

[1:44:11] >> There was another document, I

[1:44:13] thought it was here, I saw it

[1:44:14] online. It's a document called

[1:44:19] public notice, and it's for the

[1:44:23] lot on Libra's Street. Here it

[1:44:26] says item one, A B C D. It's a

[1:44:29] little bit different than what's

[1:44:30] on the document that your

[1:44:34] reading now. The point I would

[1:44:37] like to make is the people that

[1:44:40] make the bylaws, they're

[1:44:44] professional people, competent.

[1:44:47] I don't understand why we don't

[1:44:49] follow the bylaws. There's

[1:44:51] always, you know, amendments

[1:44:53] that are asked for. The bylaws

[1:44:55] are there for the safety and the

[1:44:59] security, and for the community.

[1:45:01] There are reasons why the bylaws

[1:45:03] exists. Why are they asking for

[1:45:07] the -- I can explain a little

[1:45:10] bit better. Okay, if I remember

[1:45:19] correctly, this is the building

[1:45:20] where it's going to be, the

[1:45:23] government is going to subsidize

[1:45:25] 15% for 15 years on Libra's

[1:45:28] Street. That's the one we

[1:45:29] discussed in the previous

[1:45:31] meeting, this building?

[1:45:32] >> Yes.

[1:45:33] >> Okay, thank you. Now they're

[1:45:35] coming, the first thing they're

[1:45:36] saying a, they want to have only

[1:45:38] 334 parking spaces instead of

[1:45:40] 267 dwelling units. So, --

[1:45:44] dwellings in the unit. Usually,

[1:45:47] most condos, they will have one

[1:45:50] parking for each apartment. So,

[1:45:52] what happens is I often go to

[1:45:53] the business across the street

[1:45:55] where there is a plaza with the

[1:45:58] CIA and the tower -- plaza. As

[1:46:02] it is now, it's always a

[1:46:04] struggle to find a parking spot.

[1:46:06] Often, I have to weigh that

[1:46:07] somebody moved out across the

[1:46:09] street where this building will

[1:46:10] be built. There is a sign for

[1:46:13] its being used by the project

[1:46:16] Medical Center for their staff

[1:46:18] parking. So, all these cars, for

[1:46:21] the project medical building,

[1:46:23] they will end up being parking

[1:46:26] somewhere else and all of those

[1:46:28] that don't have enough parking

[1:46:29] in that building, they're going

[1:46:30] to be parking on the streets.

[1:46:32] The visitors are going to be

[1:46:33] parking on the streets. The area

[1:46:35] is going to be, like, where can

[1:46:37] we park? There's not enough

[1:46:41] parking. So, that's one item.

[1:46:44] >> Councillor Stainforth, you

[1:46:46] would like to respond to that?

[1:46:52] >> The parking lot you are

[1:46:53] referring to is on the property

[1:46:56] adjoining this property. It's a

[1:46:58] different property. That parking

[1:46:59] lot will remain.

[1:47:01] >> The parking lot remains? So,

[1:47:03] where exactly? This is on

[1:47:07] Labrosse, where exactly is it?

[1:47:08] In front of the CAO?

[1:47:12] - C'est vraiment, Madame Conway,

[1:47:14] au coin de la brosse et

[1:47:16] Saint-Jean. Vraiment, c'est un

[1:47:17] terrain qui vient en L, vous

[1:47:19] savez qu'il y avait l'ancien

[1:47:20] café, à l'arrière et sur le côté

[1:47:22] de ce terrain-là. Mais le

[1:47:24] terrain, le parking dont vous

[1:47:26] parlez à l'arrière, lui, il

[1:47:27] reste. Ce n'est pas l'ensemble

[1:47:28] de ce terrain-là.

[1:47:30] - Ça, c'est...

[1:47:31] - Ces trois terrains différents.

[1:47:32] - Lequel dont on a parlée

[1:47:34] antérieurement? On disait de

[1:47:36] faire des édifices de 15 ou 16

[1:47:38] étages?

[1:47:39] - C'est un peu moins que ça,

[1:47:40] mais oui, c'est exactement ce

[1:47:41] terrain-là, c'est 13 étages et

[1:47:42] oui, c'est ce projet-là qu'on

[1:47:43] discute.

[1:47:44] - O.K.. Mais là, il n'y aura

[1:47:46] même pas comme un stationnement

[1:47:48] par appartement... je ne sais

[1:47:53] pas si, mon point c'est de voir

[1:47:55] le problème que ça peut causer.

[1:47:56] There are condos on Hymus where

[1:47:57] there is not enough even parking

[1:47:58] for the units, there's not

[1:47:59] enough visitor parking. Parce

[1:48:00] que déjà

[1:48:04] There is going to be too much

[1:48:06] parking in the streets in the

[1:48:07] area. That's one of the problems

[1:48:10] that I see with this project and

[1:48:15] then that was a. Be, the length

[1:48:19] of the parking spaces. Okay, I'm

[1:48:21] not going to dispute that too

[1:48:23] much. B and C is the same thing.

[1:48:27] Five metres instead of 5.5 and

[1:48:29] six metres instead of 6.6, I

[1:48:31] won't really touch that. And

[1:48:33] then item the was that the

[1:48:37] ground elevation of the land

[1:48:39] site be raised by 1.5 metres,

[1:48:42] whereas it cannot be raised as

[1:48:44] it's already 30 centimetres

[1:48:46] higher than the average height

[1:48:47] of the ground of the street to

[1:48:50] which the land is adjacent. But

[1:48:53] if the bylaw says they want the

[1:48:57] -- they're saying they have 30

[1:49:01] centimetres. Like, considering

[1:49:02] the rain we got, has some of the

[1:49:06] people that I've heard of during

[1:49:10] the reign, the deluge of August

[1:49:12] 9th, the water just didn't come

[1:49:14] from the basement. Some water

[1:49:16] came from the garage doors. Some

[1:49:20] said the water came from the

[1:49:21] windows, so if the building is

[1:49:22] not high enough at 1.5 metres,

[1:49:26] this causes this kind of problem

[1:49:27] that we had in August. So, those

[1:49:33] are the point I wanted to make.

[1:49:35] >> Okay, is there a question?

[1:49:37] >> That's my objection, those

[1:49:38] are points I wanted to make.

[1:49:40] Because if you're going to be

[1:49:41] voting on it, you should be

[1:49:43] aware, like we just had all this

[1:49:44] rain, this flood, like is this

[1:49:48] building not going to flood the

[1:49:49] next time there is a deluge if

[1:49:50] it's not high enough?

[1:49:54] >> We will have to see. I am

[1:49:57] assuming it won't.

[1:49:58] >> You're voting on this

[1:49:59] tonight.

[1:50:00] >> We haven't seen it flood, it

[1:50:01] hasn't been built yet, so we

[1:50:02] don't know.

[1:50:03] >> That's what I'm saying. My

[1:50:04] first point that I made is we

[1:50:05] have competent people that

[1:50:07] decided what the bylaw should

[1:50:08] be, so they decided that the

[1:50:10] bylaw should be 1.5 metres.

[1:50:12] There is a suggestion that they

[1:50:14] want 30 centimetres to be

[1:50:16] enough?

[1:50:17] >> Well, here is hoping it does

[1:50:19] not float and here's hoping that

[1:50:21] --

[1:50:22] >> Just hoping?

[1:50:23] >> It's been voted to change for

[1:50:25] valid reasons and here's hoping

[1:50:26] it does not float in the future.

[1:50:28] >> But if the people that make

[1:50:30] the bylaws, they suggested a

[1:50:33] certain height, why would the

[1:50:35] Council go against that?

[1:50:36] >> It's not entirely Council. I

[1:50:39] suspect it's also the R C C you

[1:50:41] and it could be other people who

[1:50:42] have advised that it's okay.

[1:50:44] >> What other professional looks

[1:50:45] at this before you vote on it?

[1:50:47] Any professional explains what

[1:50:48] it is?

[1:50:49] >> Yes, the CCU, our pack

[1:50:51] committee who are specialists

[1:50:52] look at it and decide.

[1:50:54] >> And they're more

[1:50:55] knowledgeable than the people

[1:50:56] who did the bylaws?

[1:50:58] >> They might know more

[1:51:00] specifically about that project,

[1:51:03] more specialized knowledge on

[1:51:04] the project.

[1:51:05] >> So, why everybody across the

[1:51:08] street annex of them would be

[1:51:09] 1.5 metres and not them?

[1:51:11] >> Well, --

[1:51:12] >> That's the questions that

[1:51:14] were raised before this meeting.

[1:51:15] >> It's a good question. Miss

[1:51:18] Conway.

[1:51:19] >> You are going to be voting on

[1:51:20] this tonight.

[1:51:21] >> Absolutely.

[1:51:22] >> So you can consider what my

[1:51:24] arguments were.

[1:51:25] >> Well, I won't be voting for

[1:51:26] the project anyhow, just to

[1:51:28] assure you. We don't know. We

[1:51:32] will have to wait and see the

[1:51:33] vote. You can't assume.

[1:51:36] >> --

[1:51:37] >> Councillor Stork?

[1:51:39] >> I was trying to refrain from

[1:51:40] answering but, you know, I don't

[1:51:44] remember exactly, but when they

[1:51:45] write a bylaw, it's a general,

[1:51:47] broad sweep of a brush, okay?

[1:51:50] Every house, every corner lot,

[1:51:53] ill shaped lots have different

[1:51:54] issues that need to be

[1:51:56] addressed. In this one, if I'm

[1:51:58] not mistaken, it's because there

[1:52:01] was something to do with the

[1:52:03] front setback of distances and

[1:52:05] they wanted to make the entrance

[1:52:06] on the same level as something

[1:52:07] in the back, so by and large,

[1:52:11] just like, are you an expert on

[1:52:14] these type of issues, these

[1:52:15] bylaws? Nor am I.

[1:52:17] >> I have my logic and I read

[1:52:19] what I read.

[1:52:20] >> With that being said, it does

[1:52:21] go to the pack. It sat down by

[1:52:23] engineers, urban planners, they

[1:52:25] say sit with the developer, they

[1:52:26] go over the issues. It was

[1:52:28] reviewed why and I don't see the

[1:52:30] equation. If it's 30

[1:52:32] centimetres, which is about two

[1:52:33] point 54 centimetres, that's

[1:52:35] about half a foot lower. I think

[1:52:37] it's to lower the building to

[1:52:38] make it towards the streetscape

[1:52:39] to be easier, why that would

[1:52:41] cause more or less flooding than

[1:52:43] anything else. But all these

[1:52:45] things are looked at. It was

[1:52:47] discussed, it is a -- we do many

[1:52:49] of those for different reasons.

[1:52:51] But because once I said, that

[1:52:53] bylaw was probably created a

[1:52:55] long time ago, before houses

[1:52:56] changed, buildings change.

[1:52:59] Industrial buildings change, so

[1:53:00] it's a broad brush. And when

[1:53:02] they look at these things, they

[1:53:03] try to make sure the package

[1:53:05] works, and it fits, and at no

[1:53:06] point do I believe, as Mayor

[1:53:08] Thomas said, at no point they

[1:53:10] would've discussed and look at,

[1:53:12] you know, the potential for

[1:53:13] flooding. So, I don't think at

[1:53:14] this point, I can't personally,

[1:53:17] with my common sense, equate if

[1:53:19] it's 30 centimetres lower that

[1:53:21] it would flood anymore or any

[1:53:23] less interfaces than the same

[1:53:24] height.

[1:53:25] >> It's not 30 centimetres

[1:53:26] lower. They seem to be

[1:53:27] suggesting that they are at 30

[1:53:30] centimetres, but the -- it's as

[1:53:34] the ground elevation of the

[1:53:36] landslide be raised by 1.5

[1:53:38] metres, whereas it cannot be

[1:53:40] raised because it's already at

[1:53:41] 30 centimetres. The language is

[1:53:43] not very clear. To me, it sort

[1:53:46] of sounds like it should be 1.5

[1:53:47] but they are saying they're okay

[1:53:48] because there are 30

[1:53:50] centimetres.

[1:53:51] >> This is maybe not the

[1:53:52] appropriate time to discuss this

[1:53:53] but the Planning Committee, the

[1:53:55] administration, urban planners,

[1:53:57] engineers, they look at these

[1:53:58] projects. -- Is everybody

[1:54:00] perfect? Definitely not with

[1:54:01] these projects are looked at,

[1:54:03] explained, evaluated. We have

[1:54:04] competent people on our packed

[1:54:05] Committee, we have competent

[1:54:07] engineers and that's basically,

[1:54:09] there was no -- your point is

[1:54:11] well taken and it will be

[1:54:14] considered.

[1:54:15] >> Thank you.

[1:54:28] - 17.1 Considérer une demande de

[1:54:29] dérogation mineure concernant le

[1:54:30] lot 2 527 350 du Cadastre du

[1:54:34] Québec

[1:54:35] (situé approximativement à

[1:54:36] l'intersection de l'avenue

[1:54:37] Labrosse et du boulevard

[1:54:38] Saint-Jean)

[1:54:39] . Pour permettre 334 cases de

[1:54:41] stationnement pour 367 logements

[1:54:43] au lieu du minimum requis d'une

[1:54:45] case de stationnement requis par

[1:54:46] logements. Les 24 heures de

[1:54:51] stationnement d'une longueur de

[1:54:52] 5 mètres au lieu du minimum

[1:54:53] requis de 5,5 mètres. Des allées

[1:54:55] du circulation à double sens

[1:54:56] d'une largeur de 6 mètres au

[1:54:57] lieu du minimum requis de 6,6

[1:55:00] mètres, enfin, que le niveau du

[1:55:01] sol du terrain soit augmenté de

[1:55:02] 1,5 mètre alors qu'il ne peut

[1:55:05] l'être puisqu'il est déjà

[1:55:06] supérieur de 30 centimètres

[1:55:08] au-dessus du niveau moyen du

[1:55:09] centre de toutes rues à laquelle

[1:55:10] le terrain est adjacent. Do I

[1:55:14] have a mover?

[1:55:17] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,

[1:55:19] district 12.

[1:55:21] >> And seconder?

[1:55:22] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:55:24] >> All in favour?

[1:55:27] >> Mr. Stork, --

[1:55:29] >> Oh, sorry.

[1:55:30] >> Thank you.

[1:55:34] >> So, 17.2 Consider a minor

[1:55:38] exemption request concerning the

[1:55:39] property situated at 19 Belton

[1:55:40] Avenue. It is to permit an

[1:55:42] extension with a rear setback of

[1:55:44] six metres, rather than the

[1:55:45] minimum required of 7.5 metres.

[1:55:53] - 17.3 Considérer une demande de

[1:55:54] dérogation mineure concernant la

[1:55:55] propriété située au 175, avenue

[1:55:56] Devito. Pour permettre une

[1:55:58] clôture située dans la marge de

[1:55:59] recul avant d'une hauteur de

[1:56:00] 1,82 mètre plutôt que le maximum

[1:56:03] permis de omettre et une clôture

[1:56:04] située dans l'espace défini

[1:56:05] comme le triangle de visibilité

[1:56:07] avec une hauteur de 1,82 mètre

[1:56:09] par rapport au centre de la rue

[1:56:10] plutôt que le maximum permis de

[1:56:11] 91 centimètres. 17.4 Consider a

[1:56:15] minor exemption request

[1:56:16] concerning the property situated

[1:56:17] at 2345 Trans-CanadaHighway. It

[1:56:20] is to permit the installation of

[1:56:21] two additional signs on the

[1:56:23] south side wall of the building,

[1:56:25] with a civic addresses of 2345,

[1:56:29] 2395 Trans-Canada Highway,

[1:56:31] that's bringing the total to six

[1:56:33] signs rather than the maximum

[1:56:34] permitted of four.

[1:56:42] - 17.5 Considérer une demande de

[1:56:43] dérogation mineure concernant la

[1:56:44] propriété située au 193, avenue

[1:56:45] Donegani. Pour permettre une

[1:56:46] marge de recul arrière de 5,65

[1:56:47] mètre plutôt que le minimum

[1:56:48] requis de 6 mètres. >> For 17.1

[1:56:51] to 17.5, do I have a mover?

[1:56:54] >> Sorry, 17.2.

[1:56:55] >> Oh, 17.2 to 17.5. Do I have a

[1:56:59] mover?

[1:57:00] >> I move to approve 17.2 to

[1:57:03] 17.5. Tara Stainforth, district

[1:57:05] four.

[1:57:06] >> And a seconder?

[1:57:07] >> Cynthia Homan, district five.

[1:57:08] >> All in favour?

[1:57:13] >> 17.6 Consider the site

[1:57:15] planning and architectural

[1:57:16] integration programme plans with

[1:57:17] respect to lot 2 527 350 of the

[1:57:19] Cadastre of Québec

[1:57:24] (approximately located at the

[1:57:25] intersection of Labrosse

[1:57:26] Avenue and Saint-Jean Boulevard)

[1:57:27] . It is to allow the

[1:57:28] construction of the mixed use

[1:57:29] multi residential complex on a

[1:57:30] vacant lot, consisting of 2:13

[1:57:33] storey buildings, totaling 367

[1:57:36] dwellings of which a

[1:57:37] predominance our partnership

[1:57:39] with the CMHC and considered as

[1:57:42] affordable with a guarantee for

[1:57:43] a minimum period of 16 years.

[1:57:46] 1000 square feet of floor space

[1:57:47] on the ground floor reserved for

[1:57:49] a community organization with

[1:57:50] the reduced rent for a period of

[1:57:52] 16 years and also, 500 square

[1:57:55] feet of floor space reserved for

[1:57:57] a mini pool for food

[1:57:58] distribution free of rent for a

[1:58:00] period of 16 years.

[1:58:10] >> Brent Cowan, district, eight

[1:58:12] I move that we -- second

[1:58:14] planning architectural

[1:58:16] integration plans for --

[1:58:17] >> And seconder?

[1:58:20] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[1:58:21] >> All in favour?

[1:58:24] >> Thank you.

[1:58:30] - 17.7 Autoriser la signature

[1:58:31] d'une entente à intervenir entre

[1:58:32] la Ville et 9429-2562 Québec

[1:58:33] Inc. Afin de préciser la nature

[1:58:36] et d'assurer la mise en oeuvre

[1:58:37] des conditions applicables à un

[1:58:38] usage conditionnel accordé par

[1:58:39] la Ville, par sa résolution

[1:58:42] 2023-582 du 5 décembre 2023,

[1:58:44] telle que modifiée par la

[1:58:45] résolution 2024-421 du 13 août

[1:58:48] 2024. Cette entente vise à

[1:58:52] assurer la mise en oeuvre et le

[1:58:53] respect des conditions

[1:58:54] applicables aux projets décrits

[1:58:55] au point précédent, donc au

[1:58:56] point 17,6, coin Labrosse et

[1:58:59] Saint-Jean. À l'égard de l'usage

[1:59:01] permis et plus précisément, à

[1:59:03] l'égard du respect de la

[1:59:04] condition liée à l'abordabilité

[1:59:05] des loyers. L'entente identifie

[1:59:07] notamment les obligations de

[1:59:09] reddition de comptes du

[1:59:10] promoteur envers la ville. >>

[1:59:16] For 17 point, 72 I have a mover?

[1:59:20] >> Brent Cowan, I'm very happy

[1:59:21] to support this, the signing of

[1:59:22] this agreement. This is perhaps

[1:59:23] -- I don't know how many

[1:59:25] agreements of this kind across

[1:59:26] the country there are, we may

[1:59:27] have been the first city across

[1:59:29] the country to enter into an

[1:59:30] agreement with a developer to

[1:59:32] provide guarantees, verifiable

[1:59:34] guarantees, of the continued

[1:59:36] status of affordability of the

[1:59:38] housing of this development, as

[1:59:42] defined by the -- housing

[1:59:45] corporation. We all know that

[1:59:47] there is a housing crisis in the

[1:59:54] country, and a way to address

[1:59:55] the housing crisis,

[1:59:56] unfortunately for those of us

[1:59:57] who prefer that there be no

[2:00:00] change in the way to address it

[2:00:01] is to build, and you build

[2:00:04] houses to meet the demand, and

[2:00:06] might also have an impact of

[2:00:09] dropping the cost of that

[2:00:13] housing. For affordable housing,

[2:00:15] it doesn't necessarily mean it's

[2:00:17] cheap housing, but it means it's

[2:00:19] less expensive than it would if

[2:00:21] there was no intervention in the

[2:00:25] market. There are three ways

[2:00:26] that I can think of that we can

[2:00:28] actually create more affordable

[2:00:31] homes, one is to buy as a

[2:00:33] community land, build, and then

[2:00:36] we can charge whatever rents we

[2:00:38] wish, if we want to reduce those

[2:00:40] rates, we can do it. That is a

[2:00:41] little bit beyond the means of

[2:00:43] Pointe-Claire at this stage,

[2:00:44] though there are a few buildings

[2:00:46] around the perhaps we could put

[2:00:47] that use, but it would not be a

[2:00:49] lot of housing, but it would be

[2:00:51] symbolic. The other way is to

[2:00:55] address the affordability

[2:00:58] situation is we could purposely

[2:01:01] become such a miserable city to

[2:01:03] live in that nobody would want

[2:01:04] to come here. That would drop

[2:01:06] our property values down and

[2:01:08] Iran's would go down and we

[2:01:09] could address affordable housing

[2:01:10] that, but I don't think that

[2:01:11] would be a very popular move.

[2:01:13] And then the third way is the

[2:01:14] way we are doing, by taking

[2:01:17] advantage of non market forces,

[2:01:18] in this case, money that's being

[2:01:21] provided by the central mortgage

[2:01:22] and housing corporation, with

[2:01:26] rules. And we have entered into

[2:01:27] an agreement with a developer so

[2:01:29] the City has visibility that

[2:01:31] those rules are being respected.

[2:01:33] So I think that's the best we

[2:01:34] can do at this time, so I'm

[2:01:35] happy to support this motion.

[2:01:39] >> And a seconder?

[2:01:45] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,

[2:01:46] district to be.

[2:01:47] - Monsieur le Maire, j'ai

[2:01:49] quelques commentaires à faire

[2:01:50] par rapport à ce projet-là

[2:01:51] également. Donc si vous me

[2:01:53] permettez... le projet qui nous

[2:01:54] est présentée aujourd'hui par

[2:01:55] une entreprise de construction

[2:01:56] et de développement immobilier

[2:01:57] appelé Devmont et le dernier

[2:01:58] d'une petite série de

[2:01:59] propositions développement issus

[2:02:00] de l'administration belvédères

[2:02:01] que ce conseil a dû envisager

[2:02:02] d'exclure du gel pour une raison

[2:02:03] particulière ou une autre. If

[2:02:04] you allow me just a few words on

[2:02:05] this put together project, the

[2:02:06] project we have presented --

[2:02:14] Il n'y en a eu trois ou quatre

[2:02:15] par le passé. De son propre

[2:02:18] aveu, Devmont affirme proposer

[2:02:20] un projet audacieux, conçu pour

[2:02:22] établir la norme en matière de

[2:02:25] réaménagement urbain à

[2:02:26] l'intérieur ou à proximité d'une

[2:02:27] zone de développement axé sur

[2:02:30] les transports en commun à

[2:02:32] Pointe-Claire. Selon Devmont,

[2:02:40] l'objectif est de créer un

[2:02:41] repère visuel distinctifs qui

[2:02:42] sera enrichir le cadre

[2:02:43] environnant établira une

[2:02:46] référence esthétique pour le

[2:02:47] futur développement du secteur.

[2:02:49] Pour atteindre cet objectif, ils

[2:02:51] nous ont fait appel à un cabinet

[2:02:54] d'architectes primé qui a

[2:02:55] notamment conçu l'immeuble Link

[2:02:58] et l'hôtel Mont Ville à Montréal

[2:02:59] ainsi que

[2:03:02] (---)

[2:03:03] à Vancouver. Vous pouvez

[2:03:04] facilement trouver ces exemples

[2:03:05] en ligne. Outre sa proposition

[2:03:07] de conception architecturale

[2:03:10] emblématique, Devmont affirmons

[2:03:12] vouloir apporter à Pointe-Claire

[2:03:13] des immeubles à échelle humaine,

[2:03:14] des logements à prix réduits

[2:03:16] grâce à un programme de la SCHL,

[2:03:18] comme on l'a décrit, de la

[2:03:19] Société canadienne d'hypothèques

[2:03:20] et de logement. Des sources

[2:03:24] d'énergie géothermiques, des

[2:03:25] méthodes de construction

[2:03:26] écologique, des systèmes de

[2:03:27] gestion des eaux de pluie, un

[2:03:31] environnement de mobilité

[2:03:32] active, diverses mesures de

[2:03:34] réduction des îlots de chaleur,

[2:03:35] 1000 pieds carrés à loyer

[2:03:36] réduits pour un organisme

[2:03:38] communautaire, 500 pieds carrés

[2:03:40] gratuits pour des programmes de

[2:03:43] dispositions alimentaires, un

[2:03:44] jardin communautaire et un parc

[2:03:45] public. Un atelier de réparation

[2:03:47] de bicyclettes et de moyens

[2:03:49] d'entreposage de bicyclettes

[2:03:51] adapté aux besoins des

[2:03:52] cyclistes, finalement, 368

[2:03:54] logements de taille diverse dans

[2:03:56] un secteur qui longent un

[2:04:00] secteur commercial. Compte tenu

[2:04:02] de sa proposition audacieuse qui

[2:04:03] tente au moins de relever les

[2:04:04] défis sociaux, économiques,

[2:04:07] écologique et de design urbain,

[2:04:09] je suis prêt à accorder le

[2:04:14] bénéfice du doute. The project

[2:04:17] before us today from a

[2:04:19] construction and revetment

[2:04:20] company called -- is the last of

[2:04:22] a small -- bill borne of the

[2:04:25] Belvedere it menstruation, which

[2:04:26] this council --

[2:04:28] >> You are. Honour

[2:04:29] >> Has had to ponder excluding

[2:04:30] from the freeze from one

[2:04:32] exceptional reason or another,

[2:04:34] there have been three or four

[2:04:35] these in the past. By its own

[2:04:37] admission, Dev Mont says it is

[2:04:40] proposing a bold project, one

[2:04:42] designed to set the standard for

[2:04:45] -- in our proximity to a transit

[2:04:47] oriented development, aka A TOD.

[2:04:51] Devin wants aim at the northern

[2:04:52] gate is to create a distinctive

[2:04:54] visual landmark that in reaches

[2:04:56] its landmarks and sets an

[2:04:58] aesthetic benchmark for future

[2:05:00] developments in the area. To

[2:05:01] achieve its objective, it --

[2:05:04] award-winning architectural

[2:05:05] buildings that have designed the

[2:05:06] link building and the Melville

[2:05:07] oh tell in Montréal, as well as

[2:05:08] the Grosvenor Pacific in

[2:05:10] Vancouver as other. You can

[2:05:11] easily find these examples

[2:05:13] online. In addition to the

[2:05:14] state's signature architecture

[2:05:16] design proposal, Devmont says

[2:05:18] they also seek to bring to

[2:05:20] Pointe-Claire human scale

[2:05:21] buildings, discounted housing by

[2:05:22] way of the CMHC, Canada mortgage

[2:05:26] and housing corporation, through

[2:05:27] their own programs, geothermal

[2:05:29] energy sources, ecological

[2:05:30] building methods, rainwater

[2:05:32] management systems, an active

[2:05:34] mobility environment, various

[2:05:35] heat island reduction measures,

[2:05:37] 1000 square feet at reduced rent

[2:05:39] for a community organization,

[2:05:41] 500 square feet of free rent for

[2:05:42] food distribution programs, a

[2:05:45] community garden facility in

[2:05:46] public park, a bike repair

[2:05:48] workshop and cyclists friendly

[2:05:50] bike storage stations, and in

[2:05:52] the end, 367 dwellings of

[2:05:55] various sizes in a commercial

[2:05:58] location. Given its adventurous

[2:05:59] proposal, one that at least

[2:06:01] attempts to address social,

[2:06:02] economic, environmental, and

[2:06:03] urban design challenges, I'm

[2:06:05] prepared to give west more

[2:06:08] Pointe-Claire, as it is, called

[2:06:09] the benefit of the doubt and

[2:06:10] have those in favour of all

[2:06:12] aspects related to that project

[2:06:14] tonight. Thank you.

[2:06:16] >> Councillor Cousineau, you --

[2:06:18] >> I don't want to debate on

[2:06:20] this, but I don't recall at the

[2:06:25] end of John Belvedere's, mayor

[2:06:30] Belvedere's term, I don't recall

[2:06:32] what you are or saying Mister

[2:06:37] Tremblay, but I was, there and

[2:06:38] you are not, so I don't know

[2:06:41] what your team is, but I don't

[2:06:45] know why you put in Mayor

[2:06:48] Belvedere's name in there. If he

[2:06:50] has nothing to do with what is

[2:06:52] happening today. Thank you.

[2:06:56] >> Mister Mayor, who, response

[2:06:58] since I've been mentioned in

[2:06:59] that comment Premièrement, une

[2:07:05] référence à l'administration

[2:07:06] belvédère signifie tout

[2:07:08] simplement une époque, un

[2:07:10] moment, etc.. Ce n'est aucune

[2:07:12] attaque personnelle ou quoi que

[2:07:13] ce soit sur le maire belvédère.

[2:07:16] The reason that I mentioned is

[2:07:18] because there have been a number

[2:07:19] of projects that have, but

[2:07:22] through the -- interim control

[2:07:24] bylaw project, that have been

[2:07:29] questioned, worked on,

[2:07:30] redefined, et cetera, during the

[2:07:32] entire process and this happens

[2:07:34] to be one such project.

[2:07:37] >> Thank you, it's a much better

[2:07:40] choice of word.

[2:07:45] >> Are there any other

[2:07:46] commentaries? I have a few

[2:07:51] myself. Selon les données de la

[2:07:54] Société canadienne du pot et de

[2:07:56] logement, Pointe-Claire a

[2:07:58] construit plus d'unités

[2:07:59] résidentielles au cours des sept

[2:08:01] dernières années que toutes les

[2:08:03] autres villes et arrondissements

[2:08:05] de l'ouest de l'île réunies.

[2:08:10] 56%, ou 2422 unités, même si

[2:08:14] nous comptons que 15% de la

[2:08:17] population totale de l'ouest de

[2:08:18] l'île. Nous avons terminé le

[2:08:22] mois de décembre 2023 avec 955

[2:08:26] unités résidentiels en

[2:08:28] construction. C'est plus que les

[2:08:31] 14 autres banlieues défusionné

[2:08:33] de l'île de Montréal réunit. En

[2:08:37] additionnant les unités

[2:08:39] construit et en construction,

[2:08:41] nous aurons augmenté notre offre

[2:08:44] de logement de plus de 25%

[2:08:49] depuis le recensement de 2016.

[2:08:53] Pour vous donner un exemple plus

[2:08:54] précis, alors que Kirkland

[2:08:57] planifie un projet de 13 étages

[2:09:00] à côté de sa future station REM,

[2:09:02] et que Pierrefonds-Roxboro a du

[2:09:05] mal à faire adopter un projet

[2:09:08] REM de ce Taj, le conseil

[2:09:09] municipal de Pointe-Claire à

[2:09:14] supprimer pratiquement toutes

[2:09:15] les restrictions de hauteur dans

[2:09:16] le secteur autour de Fairview

[2:09:17] pour permettre au projet de 27

[2:09:19] étages et fait pression ce soir

[2:09:22] pour un projet de 13 étages. Sur

[2:09:28] la brosse, 13 étages. Councillor

[2:09:31] Stork, I like to warn you

[2:09:32] there's a code of conduct in

[2:09:33] this meeting, and that is

[2:09:34] behaviour on the holding a

[2:09:35] representative of this council,

[2:09:37] and I would like to finish my

[2:09:38] statement without snide

[2:09:40] interruption. Thank you, sir.

[2:09:45] - Nous faisons bien que plus de

[2:09:46] notre part. So before I was

[2:09:47] really interrupted, I was

[2:09:49] pointing out that we have built

[2:09:51] more than all of the West Island

[2:09:54] combined, all of the West Island

[2:09:56] combined, and our levels, her

[2:09:58] height levels are grossly larger

[2:10:00] and then those of all the other

[2:10:01] West Island municipalities. I

[2:10:03] was talking with two other

[2:10:04] mayors today. They would not

[2:10:06] dare go half of these heights.

[2:10:09] Fairview, Fairview wants 27.

[2:10:12] Tonight we're voting for 13. I

[2:10:14] wouldn't mind five or six. Nous

[2:10:19] faisons bien plus que notre

[2:10:20] juste part. J'aimerais également

[2:10:25] souligner que ce développement

[2:10:26] est le type d'unités qui sont

[2:10:27] construits n'ont pas rendu le

[2:10:32] logement plus abordable à

[2:10:34] Pointe-Claire. Nous avons

[2:10:35] terminé l'année 2023 avec la

[2:10:36] plus forte augmentation des

[2:10:38] loyers énoncés de tout le pays.

[2:10:42] Soit 25,6%. Selon vous quatre

[2:10:53] rentals.inc. According to data

[2:10:54] from the Canadian mortgage and

[2:10:55] housing corporation,

[2:10:56] Pointe-Claire built more

[2:10:57] residential units over the past

[2:10:59] seven years then all of our

[2:11:01] neighbouring West Island cities

[2:11:02] and boroughs put together, 56%

[2:11:06] or 2422 units, even though we

[2:11:10] have only 15% of the West

[2:11:13] Island's total population. I

[2:11:14] mean, we have just been on

[2:11:17] steroids. We ended December 2023

[2:11:19] it was 955 residential units

[2:11:22] under construction. This is more

[2:11:25] than all 14 other demerged

[2:11:28] suburbs on the island of

[2:11:29] Montréal put together. Had the

[2:11:32] units built an under

[2:11:34] construction together, and we

[2:11:35] will have increased our housing

[2:11:36] supply by over 27% since the

[2:11:39] 2016 census. To give you a more

[2:11:42] specific example, while Kirkland

[2:11:44] is planning a 13 storey

[2:11:46] development next to its future

[2:11:47] REM station and

[2:11:50] Pierrefonds-Roxboro is

[2:11:51] struggling to push through a six

[2:11:52] storey REM development,

[2:11:54] Pointe-Claire Council virtually

[2:11:56] removed all height restrictions

[2:11:57] on the area around Fairview to

[2:11:59] allow for a 27 storey project

[2:12:02] and is pushing tonight for 13

[2:12:04] storeys on the bra's. We are and

[2:12:07] have done much more than our

[2:12:10] share. I would also point out

[2:12:12] that this development and the

[2:12:14] kinds of units being built have

[2:12:16] not made housing anymore

[2:12:17] affordable in Pointe-Claire. We

[2:12:19] ended 2023 with the biggest

[2:12:22] increase in advertised rents in

[2:12:23] the entire country, 25.6%,

[2:12:28] according to rentals.ca. So our

[2:12:31] poor city has been under

[2:12:34] delusion and has built like

[2:12:37] crazy. Rents are going down. We

[2:12:38] haven't made more affordable

[2:12:40] housing. We do, however, have a

[2:12:43] lot more potholes, a lot more

[2:12:45] cars, a lot more housing, a lot

[2:12:47] more citizens, we have a lot

[2:12:50] more stress on our

[2:12:51] infrastructure, tons more stress

[2:12:53] on our infrastructure. The in

[2:12:55] suing infrastructure for this

[2:12:56] kind of development, we need

[2:12:58] hospitals, schools, we need so

[2:12:59] much more, and we're just

[2:13:00] scrambling to keep up. Why is

[2:13:02] this all on the shoulders of

[2:13:04] Pointe-Claire? Why is nobody

[2:13:06] else on the West Island building

[2:13:08] like this? We are everybody else

[2:13:11] combined, for years now. Why is

[2:13:13] it only us? Why does

[2:13:14] Pointe-Claire have to solve all

[2:13:15] the housing issues of the West

[2:13:17] Island? And why can it not be

[2:13:20] borne by other municipalities,

[2:13:22] and why are we obliged to

[2:13:24] continue going at the rate we

[2:13:25] are going at? I would like to

[2:13:27] protect the city and I'd like to

[2:13:29] catch up and not go at the rate

[2:13:33] we are going, and there's no

[2:13:34] need to put 13 storeys on St.

[2:13:36] John's. That's my -- thank you

[2:13:38] for paying attention.

[2:13:46] So are we voting on 17.7? Is

[2:13:48] that what we are doing? Do we

[2:13:49] need a seconder?

[2:13:50] >> No, just need to vote.

[2:13:51] >> All in favour? All against?

[2:14:00] Okay.

[2:14:03] >> 17.8, which has previously

[2:14:06] 5.6, which I hope everyone

[2:14:07] remembers, we change at the

[2:14:09] beginning of the meeting, 17.8

[2:14:11] now reads Adoption of a By-law

[2:14:13] amending interim control by-law

[2:14:15] PC-2946 in relation to the

[2:14:16] revision of the planning program

[2:14:17] and urban planning by-laws.

[2:14:20] >> The purpose of the bylaws to

[2:14:21] amend section four point 2.4

[2:14:24] title exclusions of the bylaw

[2:14:27] PC-2946 in order to exempt lot

[2:14:30] number to 527350 from the

[2:14:34] application of that interim

[2:14:35] bylaw. The project involves the

[2:14:37] construction of a mixed use

[2:14:38] residential billet comprised of

[2:14:40] 2:13 storey buildings totaling

[2:14:42] 367 units, the majority of which

[2:14:44] are part of a partnership with

[2:14:47] the CMHC and considered

[2:14:48] affordable with a minimum

[2:14:50] 16-year guarantee. The thousand

[2:14:53] square feet of ground floor

[2:14:54] space reserved for the community

[2:14:56] organization with reduced rent

[2:14:59] for a 16-year period, 500 square

[2:15:01] feet of floor space reserved for

[2:15:02] eight rent free food

[2:15:05] distribution, -- period of 16

[2:15:07] years. The bylaws also adopted

[2:15:09] with modifications, as the

[2:15:10] preamble has been modified since

[2:15:11] the draft was filed in July.

[2:15:17] >> For 17.8, do I have a mover?

[2:15:22] >> Brent Cowan. First, I'd like

[2:15:23] to talk a bit about what is an

[2:15:26] interim control bylaw. It is a

[2:15:29] temporary measure to allow us to

[2:15:32] create a pause so that we can

[2:15:35] have enough time to think things

[2:15:36] through before we change, make

[2:15:40] changes to zoning to stop

[2:15:43] development from getting ahead

[2:15:45] of what we can think and what we

[2:15:46] can plan. It's not designed to

[2:15:48] be permanent. We impose the

[2:15:53] development freeze in May of

[2:15:56] 2021. It was supposed to have

[2:15:58] been -- this whole process was

[2:16:00] supposed to be completed now. So

[2:16:02] the planning program was

[2:16:03] supposed to be done. The zoning

[2:16:05] was supposed to be changed. The

[2:16:07] whole package would've been sent

[2:16:08] up to Montréal for their

[2:16:11] approval. Shortly after we

[2:16:12] passed our interim control

[2:16:13] bylaw, the City of Montréal, or

[2:16:15] the Montréal metropolitan

[2:16:17] community, rather, came up with

[2:16:19] the -- process where they are

[2:16:22] revising the top level plan. The

[2:16:23] top level plan will not be

[2:16:25] completed until June of 2025.

[2:16:28] After that, the agglomeration

[2:16:30] will come up with its plan.

[2:16:32] After that, all of these cities

[2:16:34] are required by law that are

[2:16:35] part of the -- and part of the

[2:16:38] Montréal metropolitan community

[2:16:39] to modify their planning

[2:16:40] programs and zoning to harmonize

[2:16:43] with the Montréal plan. So our

[2:16:46] development freeze that was

[2:16:47] supposed to have been two years,

[2:16:49] if we froze everything, did

[2:16:50] nothing, that would go to five,

[2:16:52] six, maybe even seven years.

[2:16:54] It's not feasible to do nothing

[2:16:55] for seven years. And another

[2:16:59] thing to be considered is what

[2:17:01] is the PMAD, what is the

[2:17:03] objective of the PMAD we are

[2:17:04] gonna have to deal with? The

[2:17:06] objective is to address

[2:17:08] densification on the island of

[2:17:09] Montréal and to address global

[2:17:11] warming issues. Those are the

[2:17:14] two primary motive factors. And

[2:17:16] the way they are going to do it

[2:17:17] is by promoting building

[2:17:20] development in transit oriented

[2:17:22] development around transit

[2:17:23] zones, around the REM station.

[2:17:25] That REM station, this

[2:17:27] particular project is half in

[2:17:29] the REM zone, in the TOD zone,

[2:17:32] and a bit out, but it's close to

[2:17:36] the new REM station. So it is

[2:17:39] inconceivable that Montréal is

[2:17:41] going to approve anything that

[2:17:43] is going to lower the density at

[2:17:45] that site in many years to come.

[2:17:49] And this one, this particular

[2:17:50] project is now balancing the

[2:17:52] issue of affordable housing.

[2:17:54] Yes, it's not going to be cheap,

[2:17:55] but it's gonna be cheaper than

[2:17:57] if we did nothing. So this is

[2:17:58] the instrument, this is the tool

[2:18:00] that that our disposal. The fact

[2:18:02] that everybody that -- a lot of

[2:18:04] building is going on in

[2:18:06] Pointe-Claire over these last

[2:18:09] few years, well, that's because

[2:18:12] Pointe-Claire, the core of

[2:18:13] Montréal has moved west, and

[2:18:14] it's reached us, so after us, it

[2:18:17] will carry on, but it's not

[2:18:19] surprising that the development

[2:18:20] is happening here, especially

[2:18:22] since we had industrial space

[2:18:30] that is converting out

[2:18:31] residential. And it was

[2:18:32] converted in 2010, the last time

[2:18:33] that Pointe-Claire was obliged

[2:18:35] to revise its Planning Program

[2:18:36] and all its zoning in order to

[2:18:39] harmonize with PMAD one. So the

[2:18:42] height restrictions that will

[2:18:44] permit 27, 25 storeys at

[2:18:47] Fairview were actually

[2:18:49] established in 2009, 2010. So

[2:18:52] with all of that said, I am --

[2:18:57] support the motion to remove

[2:19:00] that site from the interim

[2:19:02] control bylaw, -- of this

[2:19:06] agenda. But

[2:19:12] - Pas comme conseiller Cowan,

[2:19:14] monsieur Montpetit, je vais

[2:19:15] répondre en français au début.

[2:19:16] - Ça prendrait pour quelqu'un

[2:19:18] pour seconder.

[2:19:19] - Un deuxième?

[2:19:20] >> Because the, move now we need

[2:19:21] a seconder.

[2:19:22] >> Do I have a seconder?

[2:19:26] Absolutely, and I have a

[2:19:27] seconder?

[2:19:31] >> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen, three.

[2:19:33] - Un grand mythe et que le type

[2:19:35] de développement préconisée par

[2:19:36] le Conseil a été imposé par les

[2:19:40] nouveaux supérieurs du

[2:19:41] gouvernement et que nous n'avons

[2:19:42] pas d'autre choix que de

[2:19:46] l'accepter. La communauté

[2:19:47] métropolitaine de Montréal, un

[2:19:50] organisme largement contrôlé par

[2:19:52] Montréal, fixe les objectifs de

[2:19:55] densité de logements dans un

[2:19:57] document de planification connu

[2:19:59] sous le nom de

[2:20:02] (---)

[2:20:03] . Ces objectifs n'ont pas le

[2:20:04] même poids juridique que les

[2:20:06] règlements de zonage et il

[2:20:09] arrive souvent que Montréal ne

[2:20:12] les réalise pas. Le PMAD en

[2:20:16] vigueur depuis 2011 fonctionne

[2:20:19] objectif de densité de 60

[2:20:22] logements par hectare pour la

[2:20:23] zone située à moins d'1

[2:20:25] kilomètre à pied de la future

[2:20:27] station vraiment. Pour vous

[2:20:30] donner un exemple concret de ce

[2:20:32] que cela signifie, un lecteur

[2:20:35] correspond à à peu près à la

[2:20:38] taille de deux terrains de

[2:20:41] football. Des appartements de

[2:20:42] trois étages situé juste en face

[2:20:44] de l'hôtel de ville sur

[2:20:48] Saint-Jean et

[2:20:49] (---)

[2:20:50] comprennent 258 unités sur un

[2:20:51] terrain de 2,3 hectares. Ainsi

[2:20:56] que le nombre d'espaces de

[2:20:58] stationnement et d'espaces

[2:20:59] verts. La densité est de 112

[2:21:02] unités par hectare. Soit près du

[2:21:06] double de l'objectif du PMAD. Un

[2:21:09] nouveau projet de PMAD a été

[2:21:11] soumis en consultation et a

[2:21:14] rencontré une forte opposition,

[2:21:17] même au sein des conseils

[2:21:19] d'arrondissements de Montréal.

[2:21:22] Ici, dans l'ouest de l'île, le

[2:21:25] maire de Dollard-des-Ormeaux

[2:21:27] conteste le fait que le nouveau

[2:21:30] PMAD nous demande densifier,

[2:21:32] mais refuse de désigner

[2:21:35] Saint-Jean est source pour des

[2:21:36] investissements supplémentaires

[2:21:39] dans le transport en commun. Je

[2:21:44] pense que le nouveau PMAD sera

[2:21:46] très certainement dilué. Même

[2:21:52] s'il ne l'est pas, il fixe un

[2:21:54] objectif de densité révisé de

[2:21:57] seulement 200 unités par acteurs

[2:21:58] dans la zone autour des futures

[2:22:02] stations du REM. Cette densité

[2:22:03] pourrait être satisfait par des

[2:22:06] développements dessus cet âge.

[2:22:10] De six étages. Il se profile

[2:22:13] sérieusement que Pointe-Claire

[2:22:14] serait pénalisé maintenant pour

[2:22:15] avoir refusé les projets de 13

[2:22:19] et 27 étages comme ceux que le

[2:22:21] conseil veut à faire View et à

[2:22:23] la brosse ce soir. Qui sont de

[2:22:27] deux à quatre fois plus élevé

[2:22:30] que la cible du PMAD qui n'est

[2:22:33] même pas en via. En vigueur. La

[2:22:38] réalité est que c'est le conseil

[2:22:39] de ville et non les autres

[2:22:40] paliers de gouvernement qui a

[2:22:42] choisi de développer

[2:22:44] Pointe-Claire plus que tous nos

[2:22:45] voisins combiner et ce, sans

[2:22:48] plan global. Il n'y aura

[2:22:52] toujours du développement à

[2:22:55] Pointe-Claire, mais après des

[2:22:57] années où nous avons fait plus

[2:22:59] que notre juste part, nous avons

[2:23:02] tous les droits de revenir à un

[2:23:04] niveau plus responsable,

[2:23:06] conforme à ce que nos voisins

[2:23:08] ont fait et à ce que nos

[2:23:12] infrastructures et nos services

[2:23:13] peut supporter. A big myth about

[2:23:20] development is the core

[2:23:21] development council is pushing

[2:23:22] as all been imposed by higher

[2:23:24] levels of government and that we

[2:23:26] have no choice but to accept it.

[2:23:29] The Montréal metropolitan

[2:23:30] community, or CMM, a body

[2:23:33] largely controlled by Montréal,

[2:23:34] sets targets for housing density

[2:23:37] in a planning document known as

[2:23:38] the PMAD. The targets don't have

[2:23:41] the same legal weight as zoning

[2:23:44] bylaws in Montréal itself often

[2:23:46] fails to meet them. The PMAD, in

[2:23:49] four since 20, 12 sets a density

[2:23:52] target of 60 units per hectare

[2:23:54] for the area within one

[2:23:56] kilometre, one Columbus walking

[2:23:57] distance of the future REM

[2:23:59] station. To give you a concrete

[2:24:01] example of what that means, a

[2:24:03] hectare is about the size of two

[2:24:05] football fields. The three

[2:24:08] storey apartment buildings just

[2:24:09] across the street from city hall

[2:24:11] on Saint John and Douglas-Shand

[2:24:14] include 258 units on 2.3

[2:24:17] hectares of land, along with

[2:24:19] plenty of parking and green

[2:24:21] space. They have a density of

[2:24:23] 112 units per hectare, or nearly

[2:24:25] twice the PMAD target. A new

[2:24:28] draft PMAD has been submitted

[2:24:30] for consultation and met with

[2:24:31] widespread opposition, even

[2:24:33] within the borough councils of

[2:24:35] Montréal. Here in the West

[2:24:36] Island, mayor Alex Bottausci in

[2:24:40] Dollard-des-Ormeaux is

[2:24:41] challenging the fact that the

[2:24:42] new team that is asking us to

[2:24:44] densify but refuses to designate

[2:24:46] St. John's and sources boulevard

[2:24:48] for additional investments in

[2:24:50] public transit. I believe the

[2:24:51] new PMAD will almost certainly

[2:24:53] be watered down, but even if it

[2:24:55] isn't, it sets a revised density

[2:24:58] target of only 200 units per

[2:25:00] hectare in the area around

[2:25:02] future REM stations. This could

[2:25:04] be satisfied by six storey

[2:25:07] developments. Does anyone

[2:25:09] seriously believe that

[2:25:10] Pointe-Claire would be penalized

[2:25:12] now for turning down projects of

[2:25:15] 13 and 27 stories, like those

[2:25:18] that Council want at Fairview

[2:25:19] and Labrosse tonight, which are

[2:25:22] 2 to 4 times a PMAD target that

[2:25:25] isn't even in effect. We're kind

[2:25:28] of eager, a little too eager, I

[2:25:30] think. The reality is is that

[2:25:32] City Council and not other level

[2:25:35] of governments, the reality is

[2:25:37] that it is City Council and not

[2:25:39] other levels of government that

[2:25:41] has chosen to develop

[2:25:43] Pointe-Claire more than all of

[2:25:44] our neighbours combined and with

[2:25:45] the overall plan. There will

[2:25:48] always be development in

[2:25:49] Pointe-Claire, but after years

[2:25:50] of doing more than our share, we

[2:25:52] have every right to return to a

[2:25:53] more responsible level in line

[2:25:56] with what our neighbours have

[2:25:57] done and what our infrastructure

[2:25:58] and services can bear. Thank you

[2:26:02] for listening. Merci beaucoup.

[2:26:03] Do I have a seconder?

[2:26:05] >> We have another person

[2:26:07] willing to --

[2:26:08] >> So I would like to just

[2:26:09] address the comments you've

[2:26:10] made, Mister Mayor, as well the

[2:26:12] comments made by Brent Cowan, I

[2:26:14] think in my mind the important

[2:26:15] thing to remember is that the

[2:26:18] program that we are looking at

[2:26:19] today based on the bras, on the

[2:26:22] project for the Labrosse, is

[2:26:25] some way restrictive due to the

[2:26:28] conditions a priori. In other

[2:26:30] words, we are dealing with a

[2:26:32] project that had certain

[2:26:33] conditions related to it that

[2:26:34] differ in some ways with the

[2:26:37] tools that are available to us

[2:26:39] in the -- for the other projects

[2:26:42] that are available, that are

[2:26:43] currently in the freeze. So the

[2:26:46] former, the one tonight, is in

[2:26:49] my view a little more

[2:26:50] restrictive, the second is a

[2:26:51] little more permissive, and

[2:26:53] therefore open to a little more

[2:26:56] crafting, I think. Of equal

[2:26:58] importance I think here is what

[2:27:02] Brent Cowan was alluding to

[2:27:03] earlier, Councillor Cowan in the

[2:27:06] PMAD is the emphasis on your

[2:27:08] comments was specifically to do

[2:27:11] with development densification

[2:27:13] et cetera, the notion of

[2:27:15] building, adding new homes, et

[2:27:17] cetera. As important as that

[2:27:19] might be in the long term, but

[2:27:20] the two other he considerations

[2:27:23] to give with regards to that

[2:27:24] that the peanut speaks to quite

[2:27:26] loudly our natural spaces, green

[2:27:28] areas, the ability to have

[2:27:30] nature surrounding us and our

[2:27:32] communities. The City of

[2:27:35] Pointe-Claire is in extreme

[2:27:38] deficit on -- I think we have

[2:27:40] about 9% of our areas covering

[2:27:41] that green spaces. Also, the

[2:27:44] notion of public transport,

[2:27:45] which is extremely important.

[2:27:48] None of these densification

[2:27:49] programs or projects that are

[2:27:52] afoot today can survive properly

[2:27:54] going forward in an era of

[2:27:56] climate change without proper

[2:27:58] collective transportation. And I

[2:28:01] think that has equal waiting in

[2:28:03] any comment you are going to

[2:28:05] make about the PMAD going

[2:28:06] forward. Added to that may also

[2:28:09] be for the additions that PMAD

[2:28:10] two might bring to the table,

[2:28:12] which include things like

[2:28:13] infrastructure based on the

[2:28:15] expenses we've learned today. So

[2:28:17] I think it's worth highlighting

[2:28:19] some of those elements and

[2:28:21] really, as I did initially,

[2:28:24] contrasting the projects that we

[2:28:25] are talking about today and the

[2:28:27] projects that are potentially to

[2:28:28] come and are located in the --

[2:28:31] tonight. Difficult for most

[2:28:32] people listening today, because

[2:28:33] we are caught up on all these

[2:28:35] technical things on a regular

[2:28:37] basis, but I just wanted to make

[2:28:39] sure that those points that I

[2:28:40] have minor recorded. Thank you.

[2:28:48] >> No, I'd like to speak. First

[2:28:52] of all, I just want to reassure

[2:28:54] everyone in this room and those

[2:28:55] watching online that I will

[2:28:58] certainly not weaponize

[2:29:00] misinformation to create fear

[2:29:01] and confusion for the citizens

[2:29:02] of Pointe-Claire. You can fact

[2:29:04] check what I say this evening

[2:29:05] and ask me for the references

[2:29:07] after the meeting. I have them.

[2:29:12] Je vais commencer en français,

[2:29:14] je m'excuse

[2:29:15] (---)

[2:29:16] pour avant et aussi, je vais

[2:29:17] finir en anglais. Le Canada est

[2:29:20] en train de Christ les

[2:29:21] logements, les investissements

[2:29:24] dans le logement est dans

[2:29:26] l'infrastructure doivent faire

[2:29:27] partie d'un plan de croissance.

[2:29:29] Pour construire les 5,8 millions

[2:29:31] de logements dont nous avons

[2:29:34] besoin d'ici 2030, selon le

[2:29:38] (---)

[2:29:39] , il faut renouveler les

[2:29:41] infrastructures existantes et en

[2:29:43] construire de nouvelles. Le

[2:29:46] gouvernement du Québec a mandaté

[2:29:47] toutes les municipalités par

[2:29:53] l'orientation gouvernementale

[2:29:56] aux maladies même du territoire

[2:29:58] pour réviser leurs

[2:30:00] (---)

[2:30:01] afin de contribuer à la

[2:30:02] (---)

[2:30:03] des objectifs actuels de

[2:30:04] logement et de développement

[2:30:05] (---)

[2:30:06] . À l'image de la population de

[2:30:08] l'ensemble du Canada, Québec

[2:30:10] devait connaître un

[2:30:12] vieillissement important de sa

[2:30:13] population au cours des

[2:30:14] prochaines années. D'ici 20 30,

[2:30:18] la proportion relative de la

[2:30:21] population âgés de plus de 65

[2:30:24] ans sera de 27%. Contre 6% en

[2:30:30] 2010. En vieillissant, nos

[2:30:33] citoyens ont besoin de lieux

[2:30:36] accessibles pour déménager s'ils

[2:30:38] ne sont pas en mesure de rester

[2:30:42] chez eux. La communauté

[2:30:47] métropolitaine de Montréal est

[2:30:48] une autorité compétente en

[2:30:49] matière d'aménagement du

[2:30:51] territoire. You've heard a lot

[2:30:53] of discussion about the PMAD.

[2:30:58] (---)

[2:30:59] Et pour exercer cette

[2:31:00] compétence, elle doit adapter

[2:31:01] maintenir en vigueur un plan

[2:31:03] métropolitain d'aménagement et

[2:31:04] de développement pour l'ensemble

[2:31:06] de son territoire. These minimum

[2:31:12] density threshold, accord to the

[2:31:14] characteristics of our locality,

[2:31:15] seem to be what's most of

[2:31:16] concern to Pointe-Claire

[2:31:17] citizens. Absolutely, it is, but

[2:31:18] we have been on top of this and

[2:31:19] what the PMAD Shenzhen since my

[2:31:22] first term under Mayor Trudeau.

[2:31:24] At that time, the PM at changes

[2:31:26] went from what I referred to as

[2:31:28] 12 little pieces to 60. We now

[2:31:30] are about to go from 62

[2:31:32] hopefully only 200, but as it is

[2:31:34] on paper, it's over 300. We need

[2:31:38] to look at different projects.

[2:31:39] We need to see what we can do.

[2:31:40] We need to choose a project as

[2:31:44] we are voting on tonight that

[2:31:46] will ensure that people can rent

[2:31:49] housing for less than the market

[2:31:51] value, and I am making this

[2:31:53] decision based on the

[2:31:55] unexpectedly new divorcée that

[2:31:57] needs to move out and find a new

[2:31:59] place to live on their own, a

[2:32:01] couple who decided to move into

[2:32:03] a conduct to allow their child

[2:32:05] to move into their single

[2:32:06] finally dwelling, seniors who

[2:32:08] are looking to downsize, which

[2:32:10] in turn allows maybe a young

[2:32:12] family to move into their home.

[2:32:14] These are real situations and

[2:32:15] real people that I know of in

[2:32:17] Pointe-Claire. They are not evil

[2:32:19] people, they are friends,

[2:32:20] family, and Pointe-Claire

[2:32:22] residents who need a home, and

[2:32:23] in this case, will benefit from

[2:32:25] rent a 10% below the market

[2:32:28] value. It may not be perfect for

[2:32:30] everyone. It may be scary that

[2:32:31] we have changed, but we must

[2:32:33] move forward because it's much

[2:32:34] better to move forward and then

[2:32:36] to sit and do nothing because it

[2:32:37] may not be perfect.

[2:32:39] >> Councillor Stork?

[2:32:43] - Premièrement, j'aimerais

[2:32:45] m'excuser pour tantôt, mais

[2:32:47] quand j'entends les affaires que

[2:32:48] j'ai entendu, ça me faire piquer

[2:32:51] du nez un petit peu. I don't

[2:32:54] want to say, but what Councillor

[2:32:55] Cowan said, Councillor Tremblay,

[2:32:57] and Councillor Thorstad-Cullen

[2:32:59] basically for different reasons.

[2:33:01] So what I will be doing is using

[2:33:04] my full 15 minutes and

[2:33:06] councillors comments at the next

[2:33:08] public meeting to disseminate

[2:33:10] and prove to you factually the

[2:33:14] misinformation that was

[2:33:15] currently being spread from 60

[2:33:18] dwellings per hectare, that was

[2:33:19] the minimum. Oh, I want -- you

[2:33:21] know, the height, you cannot

[2:33:22] have it all. You want six

[2:33:23] storeys? Do you want 5000 dollar

[2:33:25] requirements? Financial reality,

[2:33:28] it was a 12 million dollar piece

[2:33:29] of land. You cannot build single

[2:33:31] family homes or duplexes or

[2:33:33] triplexes there. It is not

[2:33:35] feasible. So to pick and choose

[2:33:38] information, as convenient as it

[2:33:40] might be, but I'm glad it -- I'm

[2:33:41] not gonna be critical. But I

[2:33:43] will be at the next Public

[2:33:44] council meeting explaining in

[2:33:46] detail a document, it will be on

[2:33:48] my Facebook page as well, to

[2:33:50] clearly give light of the

[2:33:52] information I challenge anybody

[2:33:54] in this room, anybody in

[2:33:55] Council, especially the mayor,

[2:33:56] on this issue. In that case, one

[2:33:59] last thing, it's not perfect,

[2:34:02] but there's three types of

[2:34:04] affordable housing. You have

[2:34:06] private. This one is the best

[2:34:07] deal, I think the only deal, as

[2:34:09] Councillor Cowan mentioned,

[2:34:10] where we have a side agreement

[2:34:12] to make sure what they're

[2:34:15] required to do in terms of

[2:34:20] Logements par pourcentage, avec

[2:34:21] le financement qu'ils reçoivent

[2:34:22] du gouvernement It's about 20 to

[2:34:24] 30%. On est rendu à 100% de

[2:34:26] logements! Another small mistake

[2:34:28] I made. Madam Conway mentioned

[2:34:31] 50%, last council meeting. En

[2:34:35] réalité, la moyenne c'est 10%,

[2:34:37] mais il y a certains logements

[2:34:38] qui vont être environ 7% et

[2:34:39] certains logements qui vont être

[2:34:40] jusqu'à 17% concernant la

[2:34:42] grosseur du logement. Les cinq

[2:34:44] ennemis ne vont plus diminuer.

[2:34:45] It's going to say four to $500 a

[2:34:47] month for a 5.5. We demanded 5.5

[2:34:50] for families. We look through

[2:34:52] this. We went through this.

[2:34:53] Wheat fine tooth comb this. In

[2:34:56] reference to the RCI, is taken

[2:34:57] too long. What a project of this

[2:34:59] nature presents itself after the

[2:35:02] time we spent -- I will even get

[2:35:04] into that, not getting through

[2:35:06] this RCI, when the project, the

[2:35:09] opportunity is, there you do

[2:35:10] what is right for the citizens

[2:35:11] of Pointe-Claire, you do what is

[2:35:14] right. And I will leave it at

[2:35:15] that, so in that respect, I

[2:35:17] think this is a moment in

[2:35:19] Pointe-Claire's history where I

[2:35:21] have never had enough for --

[2:35:22] private equity affordable

[2:35:24] housing agreement with a private

[2:35:26] developer. Yes, you have 33, 35,

[2:35:29] which was social housing. Yes --

[2:35:30] we don't have co-op, you have

[2:35:33] private, which is this deal, you

[2:35:35] have non market, which is like

[2:35:37] co-ops, and you have affordable,

[2:35:39] which is completely government

[2:35:41] run. So from a private equity

[2:35:43] position in a personal agreement

[2:35:44] with a developer, this deal is

[2:35:47] the best we are going to get.

[2:35:49] That being said, I proudly

[2:35:50] support this project and will

[2:35:52] vote in favour.

[2:36:02] Ce n'est pas permis, non. >>

[2:36:05] Where the vote for 17.8.

[2:36:15] - Non, non, monsieur Montpetit.

[2:36:17] His name is referred to --

[2:36:20] Non, non, il faut prendre, si tu

[2:36:22] peux parler, il faut prendre le

[2:36:23] micro. Monsieur Montpetit, ce

[2:36:24] n'est pas permis. L'audience,

[2:36:30] seulement parce que votre nom a

[2:36:31] été mentionné, vous avez raison

[2:36:32] à cause de ça, mais il faut

[2:36:34] parler au micro pour...

[2:36:36] - Moi, ce que je ne comprends

[2:36:38] pas, vous parlez des maisons, de

[2:36:40] ci, de ça, on va en faire. Je

[2:36:42] n'ai pas besoin de ça. Mais vous

[2:36:46] parlez des maisons et tout ça,

[2:36:48] moi je suis un vieux, j'ai 66

[2:36:50] ans. Bientôt, je vais pouvoir

[2:36:52] déménager. Mais quand je vais

[2:36:53] vendre ma maison, il n'y a pas

[2:36:54] un jeune dans Pointe-Claire, des

[2:36:56] jeunes familles, qui vont être

[2:36:57] capables d'acheter notre

[2:36:58] propriété. Parce qu'on développe

[2:37:01] assez que tout le monde. Ils

[2:37:03] démolissent le vieux taco à côté

[2:37:04] de chez nous qui était pas pire,

[2:37:05] ils mettent Maisonneuve. Les

[2:37:08] maisons, tout le monde dans le

[2:37:09] quartier, c'est vrai, mais qui

[2:37:10] est-ce qui va être capable

[2:37:11] d'acheter ces maisons-là quand

[2:37:12] nous on va être prêt à vendre?

[2:37:14] C'est ça le problème. On en

[2:37:16] développe des maisons, faisant

[2:37:17] des blocs appartements, 25,

[2:37:19] étage 12 étages. On va aller ou

[2:37:22] pareil? On va aller là-dedans à

[2:37:24] 2000, 3000 piastres de loyer.

[2:37:26] MacInnis qui va acheter nos

[2:37:27] maisons? C'est là le problème,

[2:37:30] on développe, mais nos maisons

[2:37:32] montent.

[2:37:40] >> Go back to 17 point, he was

[2:37:42] moved and seconded, we'll need a

[2:37:43] vote.

[2:37:44] >> All those in favour, 17.8?

[2:37:46] All against?.

[2:37:49] >> Thank you.

[2:37:55] - 18.1 Approuver une convention

[2:37:56] d'aide financière avec le

[2:37:57] Service national des sauveteurs

[2:37:58] inc. Dans le cadre du programme

[2:37:59] pour la gratuité de la formation

[2:38:00] des surveillants-sauveteurs et

[2:38:01] des moniteurs aquatiques du

[2:38:02] ministère de l'Éducation. Au

[2:38:05] début mai 2023, le gouvernement

[2:38:07] provincial a annoncé que le

[2:38:08] programme de subventions pour

[2:38:09] les cours de sauvetage serait

[2:38:10] prolongée jusqu'en 2026. Le

[2:38:12] programme vise à offrir la

[2:38:13] gratuité des coûts menant aux

[2:38:14] brevets de moniteurs et

[2:38:15] sauveteurs aquatiques.

[2:38:17] L'attribution de cette

[2:38:18] subvention inconditionnelle

[2:38:19] renouvellement annuel du

[2:38:20] programme de subventions par la

[2:38:21] signature de la convention

[2:38:22] d'aide financière. >> 18.2, two

[2:38:26] Resiliate a lease entered into

[2:38:27] between the City of

[2:38:29] Pointe-Claire and Angelos

[2:38:30] Kyvetos

[2:38:31] (Casse-croûte Angelos)

[2:38:32] . The tenant notified the city

[2:38:33] that he no longer wishes to

[2:38:34] operate his business on the

[2:38:36] leases premises, and therefore

[2:38:37] wanted to terminate the lease.

[2:38:42] - Pour 18.1 à 18.2. Do I have a

[2:38:46] mover?

[2:38:47] >> Cynthia Homan, district five.

[2:38:49] >> And seconder?

[2:38:54] >> Eric Stork, district seven.

[2:38:55] >> All in favour?

[2:38:58] >> Closure.

[2:39:00] >> Foreclosure, do I have a

[2:39:01] mover?

[2:39:05] >> And seconder?

[2:39:07] >> Cynthia Homan, district five.

[2:39:08] >> And on a final note, I would

[2:39:10] just like to mention

[2:39:12] Pointe-Claire has not done

[2:39:14] nothing, Pointe-Claire has done

[2:39:16] more than its share. It has done

[2:39:19] four times everyone, the same as

[2:39:22] the entire West Island put

[2:39:24] together. Why, if we've done all

[2:39:26] that, more than everyone else,

[2:39:28] did we have --

[2:39:29] >> It's over.

[2:39:32] >> It's over, closure.

[2:39:33] >> Single highest rate increase

[2:39:34] in the country? Why if we --

[2:39:36] >> I can speak whenever I want,

[2:39:37] sir, I am the chair, I am the --

[2:39:39] we haven't voted on closure, and

[2:39:41] I am the chair, and I can speak

[2:39:44] whenever I want, despite

[2:39:46] everything we've done, we've

[2:39:47] built more than everyone else in

[2:39:48] the West Island, we still had

[2:39:51] the single highest rent increase

[2:39:53] in the country. Supply does not

[2:39:57] influence price. We have seen

[2:39:59] that, and this is the mid. We do

[2:40:01] not have to build this city at

[2:40:03] the rate we are building the

[2:40:04] city. Thank you very much.

[2:40:06] >> Would you please vote --

[2:40:07] >> Enclosure, all those in

[2:40:08] favour?

[2:40:09] >> Mr. Cousineau, can you just

[2:40:10] get back to your place, please?

[2:40:13] We need to vote.

[2:40:14] >> We have a closed, we have to

[2:40:15] vote. We didn't vote closure. I

[2:40:18] am right. I did this on purpose.

[2:40:22] Okay, excuse me, all -- all

[2:40:26] those in favour of closure? I am

[2:40:32] in favour of closure,

[2:40:34] absolutely. Merci beaucoup tout

[2:40:37] le monde.

2024-09-03 Conseil de la Ville de Pointe-Claire

Transcript