[1:31] Well, good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the June 4,

[1:34] 2025 council meeting. I, Mayor love it. And I'll be

[1:36] chairing this afternoon's meeting. Today's council meeting is. Being video

[1:40] live streamed and the video recording will be made available

[1:43] online at a later date. June is national indigenous history

[1:47] Month and Pride month. And yesterday I was pleased to

[1:50] raise both the pride flag and. Indigenous flag at our

[1:53] community flag poll and memorial park. This gesture is not

[1:56] only a symbol of solidarity and support for the two

[1:58] S LGBTQ plus community and indigenous peoples. But. It also

[2:03] serves as a reminder of our ongoing commitment to diversity,

[2:06] inclusion, and respect for all cultures. And identities in our

[2:10] town. Also, doors open. Richard Stoville is this Saturday, June

[2:14] 7. This year there are 15 sites plus two bonus

[2:16] sites across town to visit experience, all at which Stoville

[2:19] has to offer for free. For a full list of

[2:22] the locations and to download your passport, please visit townofws

[2:26] ca. Doors open. I'd like to now call the meeting

[2:30] to order. First on our agenda was actually mayor for

[2:34] the day, but our mayor for the day is Lucas

[2:36] from St. Catherine Drexel. And at a field trip today.

[2:40] So we are deferring there for the day until our

[2:43] last meeting in June, which will be on the 18th,

[2:46] and I look forward to welcoming him then. The town

[2:49] Witcher Stoville acknowledges this land is the treaty territory of

[2:52] the Williams Treaty. First nations. It's also traditional territory of

[2:55] other Anishnabi peoples, the Wendat. And the hode Nishoni. We

[2:59] also recognize the contributions of all indigenous peoples to this

[3:02] place, and we commit to a continued dialogue and a

[3:04] greater respect for the land that we have come to

[3:06] share. Recognition of the contributions and historic importance of indigenous

[3:11] peoples must also clearly and overtly be connected to our

[3:14] collective commitment to make the promise and challenge of truth

[3:17] and reconciliation real in our community. Are there any declarations

[3:21] this afternoon? Seeing none. We have one set of minutes

[3:25] to adopt. Can I have a mover? And second? Or

[3:27] to adopt the minutes from May 21. Please move by

[3:29] Councilor Smith. Second by Councilor Sherman. Thank you. All those

[3:32] in favor? As carried. We have three recognitions today and

[3:36] I'll turn the floor over to our chief administrative officer

[3:39] Sonny Baines. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council,

[3:43] it's my pleasure today to announce three awards. Received by

[3:47] staff. I will ask that we hold for pictures at

[3:50] the very end. We'll recognize each of the teams, and

[3:52] perhaps I can ask the teams to stand at the

[3:55] end of each description just for recognition, and then we'll

[3:57] take photos afterwards. So on Friday, April 11, Stacy and

[4:03] Iona attended the Life Saving Society's affiliate recognition awards along

[4:07] with senior Aquatic staff Regina and Eleana Stoville was the

[4:11] proud recipient of the 2024 Scarborough cup which awarded. Which

[4:15] we is awarded to the municipal affiliate with the largest

[4:18] life saving program in a community with a population between

[4:21] ten and 50,000. The commitment and energy required to get

[4:23] as many Stoville residences possible into the pool to learn

[4:26] a most important life skill is unmatched, and we could

[4:29] not be better served by our aquatic team. There is

[4:32] not a drop of water that Eddie and Iona don't

[4:35] maximize for our community. And the community services team is

[4:37] pleased to share this amazing success with you all. Please

[4:40] join me. In congratulating Stacey, Eddie, Iona and the entire

[4:43] Stoville aquatic team for this incredible achievement.

[4:55] I'm guessing the pool is still open, so the rest

[4:57] of the staff are occupied. The second award in 2024,

[5:05] the Witchurch Stoville Museum partnered with York Region to develop

[5:08] a special exhibit celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Orac

[5:11] Regional Forest. The historical exhibit traced the forest's evolution over

[5:15] the past century from a vital conservation effort to a

[5:18] treasured community resource in 2024. The exhibit welcomed over 5000

[5:22] vis. Visitors at the Witchchurch Stoveville Museum. We are proud

[5:27] to share that this project has been recognized with a

[5:28] 2025 Gold Hermes Creative award in the custom category. Educational

[5:33] exhibit. It was a privilege for the museum to host

[5:35] the exhibit. Showcase the collection and collaborate with such a

[5:39] dedicated team. Congratulations. Congratulations to the staff at the Witcher

[5:42] Stoville Museum and York Region for their outstanding work and

[5:46] collaboration. On this important project. Congratulations to York region staff.

[5:50] Nicole Wells, Evangeline Lee, Aaron Thomas, Samantha. Shepard, James, McClellan

[5:55] and Coryogen and town staff. Sorry, I'm going to skip

[5:58] your last names. Shannon, Krista, Melissa, ohan, lauren and jess.

[6:03] If I could ask the team to. Stand for recognition,

[6:05] please. And the final award for today. We've spaced these

[6:14] out. There's a few more. Coming on the next council

[6:16] as well. But the Distinguished Budget Presentation award is the

[6:19] highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting. This esteemed award

[6:23] is granted by the government finance officers association and signifies

[6:27] a consider. Considerable accomplishment in public finance. It is presented

[6:35] to governmental entities that create budget documents of exceptional quality.

[6:39] Adhering to best practices in budgeting and transparency. I would

[6:42] like to congratulate our budget and financial planning division. Marina,

[6:46] Carol, Adriana, Cindy, Josie, Lauren, Jane, John, Dale and Joan.

[6:52] For their. Hard work, dedication, and expertise in creating a

[6:55] clear, comprehensive and transparent budget document. This recognition reflects the

[6:59] town's commitment to effective financial planning and accountability. Also, thanks

[7:03] to Glenn and the communications team, who assisted with putting

[7:06] the town's budget book together. And that concludes the descriptions

[7:10] of the awards. If I could ask the commissioners of

[7:12] each area. To join their teams for a photo opportunity

[7:15] with members of council. Thank you.

[10:41] Okay. Excuse me. On the presentations on our agenda. We

[10:47] have two presentations this afternoon. The first is from the

[10:51] Stoville. Youth Advisory Working group, and they're doing a presentation

[10:54] on the year in review. And I'd like to welcome

[10:56] Alina, Nakita and Tasha, who are members of our youth

[10:59] advisory group. Good afternoon, Mayor Lovett and members of council,

[11:08] welcome to the youth Advisory Working group year in review.

[11:13] My name is Alina Duramshi and I am a grade

[11:15] twelve student at Stoville. District secondary school. My name is

[11:24] Tasha Rogeretnam and I am also a student at Stoil

[11:27] district. Secondary school, grade eleven. My name is Nikita Kumar,

[11:33] and I'm a grade ten student at Milliken Mills. High

[11:36] school. As the official voice of the youth of Stoville.

[11:40] Our group has worked tirelessly to provide insight into events

[11:43] and initiatives concerning our demographic. The primary aim of our

[11:47] committee is to give the future of Stoville, the chance

[11:50] to feel like an integral part of our town and

[11:52] so we worked with town staff to learn more about

[11:55] what we can bring to the table for the future

[11:57] of. Stoveill. Here are the ten members of the 2024

[12:02] to 2025 Stoville Youth Advisory Working Group. We represent one

[12:06] elementary school and five high schools. Together, with our varying

[12:10] personalities and opinions, we have created events for our youth

[12:13] to feel engaged within our community, developing a collective sense

[12:16] of stoble. Pride. The group has worked diligently. Alongside town

[12:26] staff to support and deliver youth focused initiatives, including study

[12:32] nights, the Santa Claus Parade, movies at 19 on the

[12:36] park, a board game, cafe, youth Pilates class, youth week

[12:42] and Stoville's got talent in the fall. We are looking

[12:46] forward to partnering with 19 on the park to host

[12:50] a youth trivia night. Other ideas that we've discussed include

[12:54] a night market highlighting youth makers and specialty youth clubs.

[13:00] Such as drama club. Through our monthly meetings.

[13:11] Members have also had the opportunity to engage with staff

[13:13] from planning and development services. Communication, heritage events and theater

[13:19] operations, as well as councilor Sherban and Mayor Lovett.

[13:32] I had the opportunity to work with recreation services staff

[13:36] and our communications team to write an article. For May's

[13:39] edition of on the Road magazine. This article highlights the

[13:44] group's focus on leadership, civic engagement and advocacy, showcasing how

[13:50] yog. Empowered youth to make a meaningful impact, all while

[13:55] gaining insight into municipal operations. In partnership with Suso Skate

[14:01] Co. And with support from the Witchur Stoville Legacy Fund,

[14:06] the Youth Advisory Working Group, also referred to as Yog

[14:10] and Recreation services staff, are excited to. Present twelve evenings

[14:18] of free roller skating on the multipurpose trail at Memorial

[14:22] park beginning June 5 and ending on August 21. Each

[14:28] event will include one time slot open to all ages,

[14:32] followed by two sessions exclusively for youth. Participants are welcome

[14:37] to bring their own roller blades or scooters to participate

[14:41] in the fun. On behalf of the working group, we

[14:50] would like to thank all of the young members for

[14:53] their passion, dedication and leadership. Your voices, ideas and hard

[15:00] work continue to shape us stronger, more inclusive community for

[15:04] youth in stowwill. Your commitment to civic engagement and advocacy

[15:10] is inspiring, and we're proud of the impact that you're

[15:13] making. We appreciate you and all that you do. If

[15:18] you are interested in becoming a youth advisory working group

[15:21] member for the following school year, please visit our website

[15:24] to fill out an application form. Applications will open for

[15:28] grades seven to twelve in early September, and we would

[15:30] like to thank Mayor Lovett and the members of the

[15:33] council for your time today. Thank you, ladies. We really

[15:41] appreciate your presentation and all the work that you are

[15:43] doing. Questions for YOg members, councilor Sherban. Yeah. That's wonderful.

[15:52] Wonderful presentation, ladies. Good for you. Just a quick question.

[15:58] In your skating. Roller skating. Is it by registration or

[16:02] is it? Open just to the hours and anybody can

[16:06] come and intend. I'll answer that to me or love

[16:10] it to Councilor Sherband so the registrations for the. Specifically

[16:19] what people are registering for is to reserve their roller

[16:22] skates. Participation is welcome, anyone's. Welcome to participate. And they

[16:26] can use inline skates as well as the roller skates.

[16:28] They can. We've got a little bit of signage and

[16:31] there's some information on the website. On what's approved and

[16:33] what's not approved. So non marking skates and nothing. Electric,

[16:38] but scooters are welcome if they're not marking as well.

[16:41] Great. I've. Just had a lot of questions and the

[16:43] community is very excited, but they really weren't. Sure whether

[16:46] it was just open to everybody, so thanks for the

[16:48] clarification. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Sherman, I'm too really

[16:52] excited that you're partnering. With Suso. When I was a

[16:57] kid. Living in Scarrow. Anyone go roller skating in your

[17:01] cedar Ray mall in Scarborough? The roller rink down there?

[17:04] Nobody here. Anyway, it was awesome. So I am super

[17:08] excited to get roller skates back on and hopefully we

[17:12] have a couple of members of council, actually, that were

[17:14] skating when it was ice. And didn't end out too

[17:18] well. I'm a roller skater. Who knew? I know. Play

[17:25] that 80s funk. Okay. Can I have a move, a

[17:28] second to receive the presentation, please? Move. By Councilor Sherman.

[17:30] Second by councilor Acton. All those in favor? That's carried.

[17:34] Ladies. Thank you so much. You don't have to stick

[17:37] around for the rest of the council meeting if you

[17:38] don't. Want to. All right, our next presentation is regarding

[17:43] additional residential units. And the presentation is by our senior

[17:46] development. Planner Randall Roth and Brandon Slope.

[18:07] Good afternoon, mayor. Members of the council staff and members

[18:10] of the public. My name is Brandon Slobach. And I'm

[18:12] here with Randall Roth. We're here representing development services today.

[18:16] We're here to give an overview of our report, looking

[18:20] at recommendations to enable additional residential units and other matters

[18:24] within. The green belt and Oak Ridge's moraine. On February

[18:32] 4, 2025 development services. Received the above. Mayworld directive two

[18:40] one for Pero. Report to counsel. Outlining policy challenges. With

[18:43] respect to permissions for additional residential units, also known as

[18:47] Aries, within the green belt. In Oak Ridge's marine by

[18:50] the end of the second quarter and additionally provide a

[18:54] list of recommended changes to the Green belt and Oakrajit's

[18:57] marine conservation plan. To send the province for consideration. What

[19:02] is an aru? An aru is a second or third

[19:05] dwelling unit in addition to the principal dwelling unit. As

[19:09] shown in the graphic above. Aries often take the form

[19:11] of basement apartments, attached additions to existing homes and ancillary

[19:17] Aru is often known. Called tiny. Homes and garden suites.

[19:24] Within the fully service settlement area, properties have potential for

[19:27] up to two additional two Aru's in addition to the

[19:31] principal dwelling, this can take the form of two. Integrated

[19:34] Aru. So in the home or one integrated area and

[19:38] one ancillary area. As we will highlight in the following

[19:41] slides outside of the settlement areas, ar. Permissions are greatly

[19:45] limited or nonexistent. Birthday. In May of 2024, council adopted

[19:54] the new official plan. This document provides ARA permissions and

[19:58] conformity with the provincial plan. Shortly after, in June of

[20:02] 2024, council approved the zoning bylaw amendment to produce zoning

[20:06] regulations. To actually implement the aries throughout the town and.

[20:13] This was, of course, in conformity with the planning act,

[20:14] provincial plans and official plan. The provincial policy statement is

[20:24] one of the key planning guidance documents. The most recent

[20:27] 2024 iteration provided ARU permissions and associated precautionary measures. Notably,

[20:34] the PPS will now permit up to two ARu than

[20:37] prime agricultural areas and further. To this two ARU will

[20:41] be permitted in addition to any existing farm worker housing.

[20:46] To provide checks and balances. The following provisions and criteria

[20:49] have been put in place for Aru. One, they must

[20:53] comply with minimum distance formula. To be compatible with surrounding

[20:59] agricultural agricultural operations. Three have appropriate sewage and water services.

[21:06] Four, address any public health and safety concerns. Five, be

[21:10] limited in scale and ensure development is clustered to limit

[21:14] disturbance. Six. They must minimize the land being taken out

[21:17] of agricultural production. In addition to all these. The pps

[21:24] also put forward. A provision to prevent fracturing of land.

[21:31] So it very specifically states that severances of areas will

[21:34] be prohibited. On the left side. We discuss how the

[21:38] provincial plans interact and what this means really, for Stoville.

[21:45] Despite these new Aru permissions being in place, the reality

[21:48] is that the majority of earl Stoville will not be

[21:51] eligible for these above permissions. This is because most of

[21:55] the town's prime agricultural lands are located within the green

[21:58] belt. And Oak Ridge's marine plan, which are more restrictive

[22:02] and take precedence over the provincial policy. Statement. Good afternoon,

[22:07] mayor and members of council. The next few slides will

[22:10] outline the existing additional residential unit. Permissions within the two

[22:14] provincial plan areas, including the oak ridges marine Conservation plan,

[22:18] as well as the green belt plan. A summary of

[22:25] our staff recommendations and supporting rationale, as well as some

[22:30] other matters that the province should consider in their review

[22:33] and updates to the provincial plants. So, as Brandon indicated,

[22:37] although the provincial planning statement does permit up to two

[22:41] arus within prime agricultural areas. The ORMCP. And the green

[22:46] Bell plan are more restrictive and take precedence over the

[22:49] provincial planning statement and the municipal decisions must conform to

[22:53] these provincial plants. So this figure you see here illustrates

[22:57] the existing Aru. Permissions in accordance with these provincial plans

[23:02] within the Oak Ridges Marine Conservation area. Only one Aru

[23:07] may be permitted within a single detached dwelling within the

[23:10] countryside area. Shown in the lighter green here on this

[23:14] figure. And Naru is permitted only in an existing single

[23:19] detached dwellings. You're not permitted to have an ARU within

[23:22] a detached accessory building. Furthermore. An ARU is not permitted

[23:29] in the natural linkage or the natural core area designations

[23:33] as shown in the darker green, which does comprise the

[23:36] majority of the agricultural and rural lands within the town.

[23:41] And within the Green belt plan area in the northwest

[23:45] portion of the town. Only one Aru may be permitted

[23:50] in the protected countryside area designation provided that is located.

[23:55] Outside of the natural heritage system, which is the darker

[23:58] green area. And only one Aru is permitted within a

[24:03] single detached dwelling or within an existing accessory structure. For

[24:09] the agricultural lands that are located outside of the provincial

[24:12] plan areas. The southern portion of the town. The new

[24:17] torrential planning statement, permissions would apply. And up to two

[24:22] arus may be permitted. So these lands are shown in

[24:25] the red hatched. Here on the screen. I know. These

[24:29] lands have also been identified for settlementary expansion and future

[24:33] urban development. So, although the new pps broadened the permissions

[24:38] for additional residential units within the agricultural areas. The provincial

[24:43] plans are more restrictive and only permit one ArU within

[24:47] the countryside and protected. Countryside area designations. So staff's recommendations

[24:54] to the province for consideration are that up to two

[24:58] Aru may be permitted, and all of the ORMCP and

[25:02] Greenbell plan area designations, including the natural linkage and natural

[25:07] core area designations of the Oak Ridges Marine Conservation Plan.

[25:12] And within the natural heritage system of the Green belt

[25:15] plan, and only one aru may be permitted within an

[25:20] existing or a new accessory building in addition to the

[25:24] AR use that may be permitted within the primary dwelling.

[25:29] It is recommended that the province would establish development criteria

[25:33] in the provincial plans that are consistent with the new

[25:36] pps, as Brandon outlined. And the staff report in section

[25:41] 3.5 also identifies some additional criteria for consideration to ensure

[25:47] the responsible stewardship of the natural environment. And these relate

[25:52] to any development within 120 meters of a key natural

[25:57] heritage feature or a key hydrologic feature would still require

[26:01] the approval of a natural heritage evaluation or a hydrologic

[26:05] evaluation. To demonstrate that there will be no adverse impacts

[26:08] on the features themselves or. Their functions, and they would

[26:13] be required to maintain a minimum 30 meters buffer from

[26:17] those features. The ARU could also be limited to an

[26:22] appropriate size and scale to limit their potential impacts. And

[26:26] also maintain the character of the rural area. The ARU

[26:31] should also be located within existing farm building clusters or

[26:35] existing disturbed areas and not result in the removal of

[26:39] any land from agricultural production. And lastly, the ARU should

[26:45] also utilize existing infrastructure such as wells and septic systems

[26:50] where feasible and demonstrate that there will be no impacts

[26:53] on the natural or hydrological features or functions. And lastly,

[26:58] our recommendation is that the ARU terminology and definitions in

[27:03] the provincial plans be updated. To be consistent with that

[27:06] of the new provincial planning statement. So in terms of

[27:10] our supporting planning rationale for these recommendations that are outlined

[27:14] in section 3.5, of the staff report. Essentially. In staff's

[27:24] view, the ARU permission should be consistent with the new

[27:27] provincial planning statement. For agricultural areas to be fair and

[27:31] consistent and provide equitable opportunity for the construction of Aru's

[27:36] within the agricultural areas. The ARU are inherently not different

[27:43] from the potential impacts of other low intensity type uses

[27:46] that are currently permitted within these provincial plans, such as

[27:50] farm health dwellings, bed and breakfast establishments. Home occupations or

[27:56] on farm diversified uses. The potential impacts of constructing ARu

[28:02] are also similar to permitting expansions to existing dwellings or

[28:07] the construction of a new accessory building or even renovations

[28:11] to a basement which could potentially accommodate an additional residential

[28:15] unit. Broader permissions for ARU would also contribute to the

[28:20] province's objectives. To develop much needed housing and provide opportunities

[28:25] for more affordable housing. That could accommodate multifamily housing aging

[28:31] in place for seniors or provide a secondary source of

[28:35] income. And just to reiterate, construction of AR use would

[28:40] be subject to the same development and environmental evaluations of

[28:44] other permitted uses, buildings, or structures to ensure that no

[28:48] adverse impacts to the natural features and also restrict the

[28:52] amount of land taking out of agricultural production. And as

[28:57] outlines section 3.6 of the staff report, Staff have also

[29:06] identified a number of other matters that the province should

[29:09] consider in reviewing and updating the provincial plants. In staff's

[29:14] view, the provincial plans are overly restrictive and do not

[29:16] provide sufficient flexibility to address local circumstances as well as

[29:21] town's planning objectives. So it is recommended that a process

[29:25] be established to consider minor amendments to the provincial plans

[29:30] and expand local decision making authority. A process should also

[29:35] be established to consider the redesignation of prime agricultural areas

[29:39] to rural areas. Particularly where these lands are not viable

[29:43] for agricultural production or they are already disturbed. Broader permissions

[29:50] are also recommended to permit small scale commercial, industrial, and

[29:55] institutional uses, as well as public service facilities and service

[30:00] parks within the countryside area, including both the rural area

[30:05] and the prime agricultural area in order. To provide greater

[30:10] flexibility to support rural economic development as well as the

[30:14] recreational needs of the town. And lastly, the province should

[30:18] provide greater clarity and guidance in considering settlement area expansions

[30:23] within the countryside area to provide for the logical expansion

[30:27] of settlement areas while balancing the provincial objectives related to

[30:31] developing complete communities, the efficient use of infrastructure and. Services,

[30:38] as well as protecting ecological features and functions. So in

[30:43] terms of next steps, staff is seeking council endorsement of

[30:47] the recommendations as outlined in the staff report. Staff would

[30:51] then submit the report to the province for consideration, requesting

[30:56] that the changes to the provincial plan Aru permissions. Be

[31:04] expedited to be more consistent with the new provincial planning

[31:06] statement. Staff is also recommending that the report be submitted

[31:11] to all other municipalities that are impacted by the provincial

[31:14] plans for information. And staff will continue to monitor the

[31:18] timing of the parental planned reviews for opportunities to comment,

[31:23] which is anticipated to commence prior to 2027. And that

[31:28] concludes our presentation. We'd be pleased to answer any questions.

[31:32] Thank you. Thank you. Brandon Randall, come to the dice.

[31:36] Any questions on the presentation? Councilor smith.

[31:46] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just. Wanted to just note

[31:54] that there are some other speakers, and I was wondering

[31:56] if we could hold. My questions unless you want me

[31:59] to do them now. No. If you have questions on

[32:02] the presentation, we can deal with them now. And then

[32:04] the deputies. Can have their five minutes. Okay. I just

[32:09] noted, Brandon. That. In one part of the report, it

[32:15] says, minimize land taken out of agricultural production. And then

[32:21] I believe. The next speaker talked about not taking any

[32:26] land out of agricultural production, and I'm just wondering. If.

[32:33] We are going to bend the rule a little bit

[32:35] and let this happen. Through you, mayor. Love it. To

[32:40] Councilor Smith. We would ultimately need to take direction from

[32:48] the province as to. What their guidance and criteria would

[32:53] be. We would not want to take any land out

[32:57] of agricultural production, but really, it would all depend on

[33:02] the guidance that we ultimately received from the province. I

[33:06] appreciate that, but is your position. That. It will be

[33:11] our position that we would not take land out of

[33:13] agricultural production. Is that your position either between. Your. I

[33:22] would say the first position and every situation would be

[33:25] to not take agricultural lands out of thank you very

[33:29] much. That's what I was hoping that you had. Thank

[33:31] you. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Okay. Thank you, Councilor Shervin.

[33:35] Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Did we have a consultant

[33:39] help with this report. It was done by staff. Thank

[33:42] you. And this report that came forward from staff, how

[33:46] was it requested? Through mayor Levitty. Councilor Sherbat. We received

[33:52] it through a mayoral directive. Okay, thank you very much.

[33:56] Thank you. Councilor barley. Thank you.

[34:06] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thanks for the presentation. I hope

[34:09] by the residents who are listening to that. If this

[34:13] gets endorsed by counsel. What kind of time frame are

[34:16] we looking at from the province? Through you. Mayor Lovett,

[34:21] the councilor. In a recommendation. We have just indicated that

[34:26] we would request the province to expedite the review of

[34:29] the provincial plans perhaps could be addressed through the current

[34:34] bill 17 which is before the legislature. Otherwise. It would

[34:39] likely come up again during the provincial plan review, which

[34:42] is anticipated to occur prior to 2027. The ten year

[34:46] review. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? You're good. Just

[34:53] on the presentation? Yeah. The report will come after. Just

[34:59] because it was related to a slide that you posted

[35:02] about the directive. And also work to date on updated

[35:08] planning permissions for ARU. We adopted our official plan on.

[35:15] May 2024, which established permissions in accordance with provincial requirements

[35:20] for ARU's in the urban area, correct? And then proceeded

[35:24] with a follow up bylaw. I want to commend our

[35:28] development services team and our communications team, who did an

[35:31] exceptional job actually marketing. To the public and making sure

[35:36] that they were aware of the work that was being

[35:39] done on the official plan, but also on additional residential

[35:42] units. And so it shouldn't surprise us that we would

[35:45] get correspondence from members of the community. Some of which

[35:48] are here today to speak to this item. Who are

[35:51] outside the urban boundary seeking clarity and understanding. How and

[35:57] where and when, or can they actually. Do or build

[36:01] an Aru. So I have one such correspondence which was

[36:04] sent to me on January 23 and. It says it's

[36:08] wonderful to have a mayor willing to listen. I live

[36:10] at this address. In McAllen Road in Stoville. My understanding

[36:14] is the Ochre's marine act. Does not allow second dwelling

[36:16] on a property. I then asked about an addition that

[36:20] would allow our family members to live here and have

[36:23] their own space, and I was informed that I could

[36:25] do an addition, but it could not be a second

[36:27] residence. The house would have to remain one residence, as

[36:31] we know. Very well. As we know very well, affordable

[36:35] housing is a huge issue, and we're just not sure

[36:38] how we can help our family. I've been doing some

[36:41] reading, and I thought. There would be a new bill

[36:43] coming for second residences to be added to properties. I

[36:48] understand you. Have far more pressing issues trying to run

[36:50] our town, but I appreciate you be willing to. Look.

[36:53] So that was the impetus of this whole directive, which

[36:56] was issued on February the fourth and I want to

[37:01] be clear. The directive, which was published on our website

[37:04] on the same date and sent to all members of

[37:06] council who received a copy of it states very clearly

[37:10] that. Under the authority of part 6.1, special powers and

[37:15] duties of the head of council of the municipal act,

[37:18] the mayor may direct staff to a undertake research and

[37:22] provide advice to the head. Of council and city council

[37:25] on policies and programs of the city or of the

[37:28] head of council. As they relate to powers and duties

[37:30] under this part. MB carry out duties related to the

[37:34] exercise of the power or performance of this duty, including

[37:37] implementing any decisions made by the head of counsel under

[37:39] this part. Therefore, I hereby direct staff as follows. Prepare

[37:44] a report which we have before us today to counsel,

[37:47] outlining policy changes with respect. To permissions for additional residential

[37:51] units within the green. Melt at Ogres moraine by the

[37:53] end of Q two and provide a list of recommended

[37:56] changes to the green Belt act in Oakdridge Moraine conservation

[37:59] plan to send to the province for their consideration. I

[38:02] want to be very clear. No decision has been made

[38:03] by me or anyone. Else on this council. I do

[38:06] have the ability, as the members of council, to ask

[38:09] staff to actually bring a report to council. I did

[38:13] this under the mayor directive, which is why this is

[38:16] before us. And consider that this is an abuse of

[38:19] some sort of power to bring. A report forward, I

[38:23] think. Is actually. Very ill advised and incorrect. I was

[38:28] responding to the needs of our residents. I've had conversations

[38:31] with them many times. A number of residents, not just

[38:33] this one. I read out this email as to why

[38:35] we are here today. So I want to thank you

[38:37] for your presentation. I appreciate. Certainly the context and the

[38:42] fullness of the report that you brought for us. Thanks

[38:44] so much. Can I have a move in second or

[38:46] receive the presentation? Please move by Councilor Crun. Seconded by

[38:49] councilor Smith. All those in favor? Okay. There are seven

[38:54] deputations today. Please note that as of January 1, those

[38:57] wishing to speak to a staff report were required to

[38:59] submit a deputation request form by 09:00 a.m. on a

[39:02] council day. A deputation not listed on the agenda shall

[39:06] not be heard without the consent of at least two

[39:08] thirds of the majority of members present. I'd like to

[39:10] thank those who are coming forward today to address counsel

[39:13] regarding a report on the agenda. I would like to

[39:15] remind speakers that you have up to five minutes of

[39:18] uninterrupted time and only on the matter pertaining to the

[39:21] report item. I'd also like to remind council members to

[39:24] hold their. Questions until the speaker has concluded, as per

[39:28] the town's procedural bylaw, when addressing counsel the speaker shall

[39:30] be respectful of all persons and refrain from entering in

[39:33] across debate with members of council or town staff following

[39:37] the address, council members may ask questions and obtain additional

[39:39] information or seek clarification from the speaker, but shall not

[39:42] make statements to or enter into debate with the speak.

[39:45] Speaker. Deputations will be received for information. All deputations we

[39:50] heard before council moves. On to a consent agenda. Item

[39:54] first deputation is Dennis van Zevenbergen. He's the director of

[39:59] property environmental services for Park View, and Susan Pethick, who

[40:03] is a park View resident. Good afternoon, mayor. Love it.

[40:22] Sorry, just one sec. We've just got to get your

[40:24] microphone on.

[40:39] Just give us 1 second.

[40:57] Test. Do you want me to start over? Okay, so,

[41:02] good afternoon, mayor. Love it. Council members, my name is

[41:05] Dennis van Zebenbergen. I'm the director of property and environmental

[41:10] services. For Parfu services for seniors. I'm here today regarding

[41:15] the traffic light request for Perkv village north entrance. At

[41:21] the 9th line on February 10, 2025, a request was

[41:26] sent to Mayor Lovett from our CEO, Hamlet nation. We

[41:31] did receive response stating that traffic study was conducted in

[41:34] February 26, 2025 the. Study revealed that traffic light did

[41:39] not warrant. Was not warranted at this time. We do

[41:43] appreciate that timely response. This brings us to today's meeting

[41:48] where I'd like to introduce you to Susan. Pesick, a

[41:52] member of resident council and a resident of Perturb village.

[41:58] Good afternoon, mayor Lovett. Good afternoon, counselors and fellow residents.

[42:04] My name is Dennis, said as Susan Pathek, and I

[42:06] am a resident of Parkview Village, as I'm sure you're

[42:10] aware, Parkview village is located just south of Main street

[42:14] off 9th. Line. Parkview Village is living for seniors. It

[42:23] includes 189 units and 154 registered vehicles. I'm here on

[42:29] behalf of many of the residents who share a growing

[42:32] concern for our safety and well being. One of the

[42:36] reasons I moved to Park View was the walkability and

[42:39] the proximity to downtown. I thought I might be a

[42:43] little late getting to this meeting today because sometimes trying

[42:46] to turn left onto 9th line to come up to

[42:49] Main Street. Is a test. But here I am. I

[42:56] would like to speak today about the need for a

[42:58] traffic light at park U north entrance. And sunset Boulevard.

[43:03] This is not just a matter of convenience. It's a

[43:05] matter of public safety. Especially for the most vulnerable members

[43:09] of our community. When we talk about vulnerable, we talk

[43:14] about children. And seniors. And Stoville is doing an excellent

[43:18] job around the schools of making certain that things are

[43:22] safe for children, but I think that somehow we might

[43:25] have been overlooked a little bit. We. As seniors. When

[43:28] it comes to road and pedestrian safety, Stoville is growing.

[43:34] Wow. Has it ever grown. I moved back here in

[43:37] 2001, having been away for 15 years. The population when

[43:42] I moved back was 49,800 people and currently is estimated

[43:47] to be 53,300. People. That's a lot of growth in

[43:51] a relatively short time. Some of that growth is senior

[43:56] friendly. We've seen new senior residences, care, residents and retirement

[44:00] communities. Unfortunately. Our road infrastructure has not necessarily. Kept up

[44:09] with a pace of people coming here. Crossings that lack

[44:13] proper traffic control, such as traffic lights, make it dangerous

[44:17] for seniors, particularly those who use canes, walkers or mobility

[44:23] devices, and people at Park View do go out and

[44:26] walk one of the residents I talked to last week

[44:28] walked to shoppers, which doesn't sound too bad. She's. 95.

[44:34] In addition, our community has seen an increase in local

[44:37] programming and events, many of which are possible. Due to

[44:42] partnership with staff and service providers who work tirelessly to

[44:46] improve the quality of life for seniors. There's an Alzheimer's

[44:50] program that runs at Parkview four days a. Week. Chat

[44:54] services have an office as Park View as well. There

[44:57] are over 200 staff members at Parkview and contractors coming

[45:01] in and out daily, whether it's a wellness seminar, a

[45:05] craft fair, or an outing to a nearby park. These

[45:09] events mean more residents are on the move. And often

[45:12] crossing busy streets. Sunset Boulevard, traffic has also increased. Because

[45:18] of the increased traffic on Main street, people are cutting

[45:22] down and using Sunset Boulevard as well. And so, consequently,

[45:27] That also increases the traffic north and southbound on 9th

[45:30] line. Construction traffic has also increased due to the ongoing

[45:35] building in the 9th Line Main street corridor. Each trip

[45:39] becomes a risk, not just an outing. I also want

[45:44] to mention this study that Dennis referenced. The temperature that

[45:48] day was -1 celcius. While we value the effort. I

[45:54] suggest, respectfully, that the timing of this study was not

[45:58] necessarily reflective of the activities of seniors. Seniors don't necessarily

[46:04] go out a whole lot in the coldest once of

[46:06] the winter. And snowbanks also inhibit. The ability to see

[46:13] traffic coming. As someone who lives here and sees all

[46:17] the daily routines, I can say with confidence that weekends

[46:21] and warmer days paint a much more accurate picture of

[46:25] foot traffic. And activity in the area. We're not asking

[46:31] for anything excessive. We're asking for safety that reflects the

[46:35] changing reality of our town and respects the lives and

[46:38] dignity of the people who live here. A traffic light

[46:42] at Parkview north and sunset. Would improve safety for pedestrians,

[46:47] particularly seniors and residents with mobility challenges. It would reduce

[46:52] the risk of traffic accidents in an increasingly libidity area.

[46:57] It would also facilitate the entry and exit of the

[47:00] buses, which run on a schedule. And have also faced

[47:04] challenges. It would support the safe and successful delivery of

[47:09] local events and senior. Act services and align with the

[47:13] town's vision of becoming more. Senior friendly. Can you wrap

[47:19] up, please, Susan? Pardon me? Can you wrap up? I'm

[47:23] at the bottom. Okay. Thank you. On behalf of myself

[47:26] and the other concerned residents, I respectfully request that this

[47:30] issue be added. To council's agenda for further review and

[47:34] action. Let's make sure there are infrastructure supports to people

[47:39] who live here. Thank you for your time, thank you

[47:42] for your service and thanks. For listening. Thank you so

[47:46] much for your deputation this afternoon. Any members of council

[47:50] have any questions or comments. Councilor Sherban. Thank you very

[47:55] much for taking the time and coming here today. I

[47:59] have to conclude, being Ward six, I've had a number

[48:02] of requests from Sunset Boulevard. With the same concern, getting

[48:07] in and out of that area so you're not alone

[48:10] and this is not the first time I've heard this,

[48:13] and I think we'll be more pleased to bring it

[48:15] back again and see how we can possibly best to

[48:18] address it. For our community and, of course, for the

[48:21] safety of you seniors. So thank you for coming. Thank

[48:24] you so much. Anyone else? Okay. I think it's probably

[48:29] best. To receive the deputation and refer it to staff

[48:33] for budget consideration during the budget process. And we can

[48:37] have that conversation. As we engage in the budget. Yes,

[48:42] commissioner. Yes, Mr. Mayor. I would like to just draw

[48:47] to council's attention that this portion of 9th line does

[48:50] fall in the region's jurisdiction, and so. Anything along the

[48:55] lines of a traffic study and or up to including

[48:58] signalization would be part of their budget and not ours.

[49:03] You're absolutely right. I'm sorry. I thought that we had

[49:05] been through that process. Already. Is that not the case?

[49:07] We have not talked to the region about this and

[49:10] they referred it back down to us. Well, my understanding

[49:14] from the deputy is that the region had undertaken a

[49:17] traffic study at this intersection. There is some question with

[49:20] respect to the time of year. And so there is

[49:24] some validity in a reconsideration. To have the region. Undertake

[49:31] the study once again. And so perhaps that can be

[49:35] the direction that council would like to provide. Okay, that

[49:39] sounds that. Sounds great. So we'll refer this back to

[49:41] your commission, and you can speak with Mr. Petrangaro up

[49:44] at the region and see if we can redo the

[49:46] traffic study. Okay, can I move her in second, or.

[49:49] Please? For that move by Councilor Sherman, a second. By

[49:51] councilor Bartley. All those in favor? As carried, okay? The

[49:57] next six deputies are all regarding report DS 2125. So

[50:03] we will hear all six deputies. And then move. And

[50:06] second, to receive those deputies. The first one is Mr.

[50:09] Robert Brown.

[50:27] Sorry. We have the same mic trouble as we had

[50:29] before. Sophisticated, then our. There we go.

[50:40] Good morning, folks. I'm Robert Brown. I'm here today with

[50:46] storm coalition, save the Oak Ridge's. Moraine, I participated in

[50:51] the public engagement that shaped the last consolidated review. And

[50:55] now, as the chair of storm. I'm working towards leading.

[51:00] The revision and development of a new marine report card,

[51:03] which reports on, like the ecological and hydrological conditions, current

[51:07] conditions of the marine, as well as an audit of

[51:10] land use planning changes that have happened over the past

[51:13] ten years. Well, I am here to respectfully urge counsel

[51:18] to reject the staff report. I want to begin. By

[51:20] acknowledging. The challenge you face, we understand. The differences. And

[51:28] difficulties merging the plans and. We also recognize the difficulty

[51:34] balancing housing demand, environmental responsibility, and the limited forms of

[51:40] housing that developers are on offer right now. That said,

[51:44] I believe that the report places counsel in illegally and

[51:47] proced. Procedural, precarious position. I believe to be frank. And

[51:54] while I've put in a more technical statement, I'm keeping

[51:56] this one fairly easy going. I believe that what we're

[52:01] offering here is a blank check to the province. Without

[52:07] a blank check to amend Ontario's most critical environmental land

[52:10] use plan without a formal process without scientific data and

[52:13] without public consultation. As of today, there has been no

[52:18] public launch of the ten year consolidated review. There is

[52:21] no publish consultation framework, no science advisory panel, no updated

[52:25] ecological or hydrological data. Despite this, the staff report encourages

[52:30] council to request sweeping amendments to these provincial plans through

[52:32] Bill 17, a mechanism that is not designed for plan

[52:36] review. Reviews and bypasses the evidence based transparence framework required

[52:39] by law. Counsel is being asked to endorse changes before

[52:44] public review begins. This is not just procedurally premature. I

[52:47] think it sets a dangerous precedent for adoption across other

[52:50] municipalities. I'm just going to briefly go over the points

[52:54] that I've expanded further in my larger report that we

[52:56] submitted this morning. We have obvious contradictions with the provincial

[53:00] plans, which your planners have noted, right. Permitted additional residential

[53:05] units in natural core and linkage areas, zones where residential

[53:09] development is prohibited under section 62.1. Allowing AR use the

[53:15] green belt natural heritage systems. Contrary to sections 311-1453. Reopening

[53:21] land use requests previously denied by the minister in 2002

[53:26] during York region's official plan. Approval and enabling municipalities to

[53:31] implement so called minor amendments, provincial plans in which practice

[53:36] would erode the authority of these plans through ad hoc,

[53:39] decentralized approvals. None of these proposals conform to the existing

[53:44] framework. They represent clear departures from the objectives, policies. And

[53:47] legal structure. Of the Oak Ridge Drain conservation Plan and

[53:52] the green belt plans. I believe that there's also a

[53:54] misrepresentation of land use designations in the report. The report

[53:59] further conflates prime agricultural areas with natural core and linkage

[54:03] areas, creating the false impression that the regulated uses of

[54:06] these areas are similar. In fact, these areas are governed

[54:09] by distinct ecological and legal policies. It also fails to

[54:14] distinguish rural settlement from designated settlement areas, a mistake previously

[54:18] found in provincial mapping. Errors tied to the 2002 green

[54:21] belt removal scandal. These lands use categories these land use

[54:26] categories carry different planning permissions and blurring them, I think,

[54:29] undermines the policy framework. The recommended development criteria I don't

[54:35] believe are enforceable. The development criteria presented in the staff

[54:39] report such as Aru size limits, setbacks and the disturbed

[54:43] land are inadequate. Unenforceable in the current legislative climate. Under

[54:48] bill 23, the conservation authority to comment the ability of

[54:51] the conservation authority. To comment. Under natural heritage, wetlands and

[54:54] groundwater impacts have been drastically curtailed. Bill five well presented

[55:00] as a corrective entrenches municipal decision. Without resorting to expert

[55:06] review. So municipalities like yours now carry full responsibility for

[55:10] assessing development impacts on ecological systems without the resources or

[55:15] independent oversight. Required to evaluate the cumulative risks that are

[55:19] happening across the entirety of the marine. These criteria amount

[55:24] to a narrative justification that is not an enforceable safeguard.

[55:28] And I will remind you that the green belt plan?

[55:31] The Oakris Marine plan don't have something like the escarpment

[55:34] commission that oversees these. Flawless as a body. I fear.

[55:42] The report advances strategic denaturalization, and I believe this tenancy

[55:46] came from. A consultant report that was presented to Soville

[55:49] Council maybe 1015 years ago and has been adopted across

[55:52] other municipalities since. We are increasingly seeing a pattern where

[55:57] degraded natural lands are presented for redesignation based on their

[56:00] condition, not their ecological function. The staff reports, recommends to

[56:04] allow ARU's and core and linkage areas could incentivize further

[56:08] ecological degradation in order to make development more permissible over

[56:12] time. That undermines the restoration mandate of the ORMCP and

[56:17] contradicts the plant's. Ecosystem based approach, and I would stress

[56:20] that this is a part of the conservation plan that

[56:23] everyone likes to ignore that we are actually supposed to

[56:26] improve the areas that we're on. Not to grade them.

[56:30] Can you have up, sir? Thank you. I will wrap

[56:34] up with several quick ones here. I'm concerned. The report

[56:39] was initiated through Merrill directive strong mayor powers to expedite.

[56:43] Housing within serviced areas. And the directive appears to expand

[56:48] beyond its scope. Tasking staff to recommend changes to the

[56:51] green belt and OrMCP. I don't believe the strong mayor

[56:54] powers were able to be used to change environmental regulation.

[56:58] I'm concerned how the lake. Woods mzat o could play

[57:02] into this as well. I'm concerned that the ability to

[57:06] sever a lot and then add several residential units or

[57:09] ARU's on that. Site could create a situation for stealth

[57:13] development. Okay, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions? Councilor

[57:20] Sherban. Yes. Thank you. First off, I guess I've heard.

[57:27] A lot of stories where people are saying that. Information

[57:32] coming out of your organization is saying that we are

[57:35] building subdivisions and not just looking at single units. Has

[57:41] that been communicated from your group? I have not. That

[57:46] you're applying to build subdivisions on the Oak Ridges. Marine.

[57:50] No, thank you. And your report that you just provided

[57:54] us on storm coalition. Who are the committees or who

[57:59] are the professionals who assist you? So we have registered

[58:03] land use. Planners that have been employed at, like, various

[58:06] universities in southern Ontario. As well as the conservation authorities,

[58:10] like the Toronto Region Conservation Authority. We have academics like

[58:14] myself that work in environmental policy and politics. I have

[58:18] hydrogeologists that work with us, and I have hydraulic and

[58:21] engineers that work with us. We now brought on staff

[58:25] that are ecologists and conservation focused. We are a small

[58:29] organization we're the ones that develop. The or put forward

[58:33] the creation of the Oak Ridges Marine Conservation Plan. And

[58:36] up until about 2018 we thought we had done our

[58:39] job and that we could retire. And after 2018, I've

[58:44] now been tasked to come on, rebuild the coalition. And

[58:48] to defend the moraine from what I would see as.

[58:53] A very problematic motion that's coming forward here. Okay. Thank

[58:58] you for the clarification. Because quite frankly, quite often we

[59:02] hear that these are just advocates for the environment, that

[59:06] they're not professionals with any sorts of sound degrees, so

[59:10] I appreciate the clarification. And if you could send that

[59:13] to me, I would. Appreciate it. Thank you. Your membership?

[59:17] Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. Any other

[59:19] comments? No. Okay, I've got a couple. Great presentation and

[59:28] thank you for coming. Your presentations are better. What you

[59:33] put are better than what you put on your social

[59:35] media. I think that. There's a few challenges that you

[59:41] are communicating widely to the public about this process that

[59:45] since you're here, I'm going to address. So you posted

[59:49] something on your website a day ago. The green belt

[59:51] scandal was never over. It just went local. In that

[59:54] you state that led by Mary Ian Levitt, who is

[59:57] using his strong mayor powers. To bypass regular council deliberation.

[1:00:02] The town is advancing a staff report that recommends opening

[1:00:05] protected oak, reduce marine and greenboat lands to residential intensification

[1:00:09] and fast track approvals. Can you explain to me? How

[1:00:15] we're bypassing council deliberations. Well, I would say that. There's

[1:00:21] a lot of people in various organizations, including myself, that

[1:00:24] feel that the strong mayor powers are undemocratic. We've seen

[1:00:27] how they've been used in Caladin. And elsewhere to serve

[1:00:31] developer interests. And I think the optics behind you using

[1:00:35] them in this particular case. Regardless of what the detention

[1:00:40] was before it or the motivations behind it, pose a

[1:00:44] lot of difficulty. And it makes me like, if it

[1:00:47] wasn't for the fact that I reached out, to a

[1:00:49] bunch of folks that live in this municipality that have

[1:00:53] lobbied you for other environmental issues. In the past. I

[1:00:57] don't know that I would have came in. So sympathetic

[1:01:01] if I just looked at what was on the page

[1:01:04] and what was in the report. Like it took a

[1:01:06] bit of research for me to dig into who you

[1:01:08] folks are a little. Bit. To, I guess. Come in

[1:01:12] here. And. Be as, I guess, open and even as

[1:01:18] I am. I appreciate that. Whether you choose to. Believe

[1:01:24] there was ill intent in the directive. I read the

[1:01:28] email from the resident that actually spurred on the directive

[1:01:32] to bring this report forward. That's up to you. I

[1:01:35] mean, you might believe this is all nefarious and. We're

[1:01:39] working for developers who want to crack open the moraine,

[1:01:41] and that is not the case, I can unequivocally tell

[1:01:45] you that. But it is troubling to me when you

[1:01:49] position. Me. As you have in your article that has

[1:01:54] been shared widely. The other thing is, and this is

[1:01:58] a question, actually, to our commissioner, because this is off

[1:02:00] of your Facebook post on Monday that I'm using strongmare

[1:02:04] powers, Mary and Lovett using strong. Mayor Powers has directed

[1:02:08] staff to support a planning proposal that would allow urban

[1:02:11] Spra. Sprawl, which I think urban sprawl is residential communities,

[1:02:17] subdivisions. So you said that. Actually wasn't the case, but

[1:02:20] this is a post where you're referencing residential sprawl. We're

[1:02:24] not going to argue about semantics, but I think it's

[1:02:26] important. I think. It is worth argued about. Semantics. No,

[1:02:29] we're not doing it here. I'm just saying. But I

[1:02:32] do want to ask our commissioner. Did I direct staff

[1:02:36] to support a planning proposal in this report? Through your

[1:02:39] worship. No, you have not. You've asked us to provide

[1:02:43] comments and recommendations to comments to the ministry. Okay. Thank

[1:02:50] you. And then further down in your post, asking people

[1:02:54] to come here, you demand that Mayor Lovett and counsel

[1:02:57] respect the integrity of the Orm and green belt plans.

[1:03:00] Ask them to stop using backdoor amendments and strong mere

[1:03:04] powers to undermine environmental protection. Can you explain to me

[1:03:06] how we're using backdoor amendments. I would suggest that the

[1:03:11] use or the proposed use of Bill 17 to expedite

[1:03:14] this process and to take it out of the consolidated

[1:03:17] review process that is supposed to be an open transparent

[1:03:21] process that's informed by organizations like yourself. Organizations like ourselves.

[1:03:27] Plus, that has been updated. With modern data sets that

[1:03:31] reflect. The current ecological hydrological conditions of the moraine because

[1:03:35] that hasn't happened yet. And what we're seeing across the

[1:03:38] marine is like a bunch of seriously concerning issues like

[1:03:42] the level of urban contaminants that are now going into

[1:03:46] our aquifers and that are holding there for long periods

[1:03:49] of time. Salt, for instance, 100 to 1000 years accumulating

[1:03:54] in the moraine in our watersheds. That are being used.

[1:03:59] To support our farmers that are used for this breadbasket

[1:04:02] that we have in the GTA. I would say that.

[1:04:08] 's troubling to me, frankly. Okay, well, usually the term

[1:04:12] backdoor is. Used. Not in a public process like this.

[1:04:19] We're not hiding anything. I do connect you. One of

[1:04:21] our board has mentioned this as. Well, that I do

[1:04:23] commend you. And I had gotten to my thank you.

[1:04:26] I had said that. Thank you for your time and

[1:04:30] for placing this important. Matter on public record. So thank

[1:04:33] you for doing that. Yeah, you're welcome. I mean, we're

[1:04:36] not doing anything nefarious here. We're trying to address real

[1:04:39] life issues. That our residents are bringing to us, and

[1:04:43] I think our track record has been rather consistent and

[1:04:47] it has all been done in a transparent and open

[1:04:49] way. And I think if this report, if it passes.

[1:04:52] Will be submitted to the ministry to be part of

[1:04:55] the record for Bill 17 and the review process that

[1:04:58] will take place, hopefully before 2020. And I guess that's

[1:05:02] what concerns me, is that you're doing that before those

[1:05:04] data sets like. You're making a planning recommendation or a

[1:05:08] planning ask before data sets have been updated before. You're

[1:05:12] looking at current ecological and hydrological conditions that will dramatically

[1:05:17] affect how that process happens. So I really fear that

[1:05:21] the way that the province has worked in the past

[1:05:23] is that they create stages of legitimization for things that

[1:05:27] snowball and get out of control. And your endorsement of

[1:05:31] the. Motion from agile toso the Mzato this issue. The

[1:05:38] one last year from York. The redesignation. Of infrastructure services

[1:05:44] as infrastructure. I would say that there's a track record

[1:05:50] that could be argued otherwise. Well, listen, everything. We've done

[1:05:54] has been public, and I would invite you to come

[1:05:56] and sit down with me if you wanted a coffee.

[1:05:59] I'd love to explain to you the complications and complexities

[1:06:02] that our municipality has and. That our residents are dealing

[1:06:04] with and the fact that we have to deliver things

[1:06:07] like fire halls. And community centers and parks, and the

[1:06:11] regulations around our areas, unfortunately, are not allowing us to

[1:06:15] do such without asking these questions. And so I think.

[1:06:20] That's reach out to my. Forwardness today, I would ask.

[1:06:30] And that we work through this in a collaborative fashion

[1:06:33] because. I agree with you. We do need solutions. You're

[1:06:39] hemmed in on all sides, and I think we need

[1:06:41] to find solutions that work within the conservation plan, within

[1:06:45] the greenhouse plan, but also, we're still able. To. Address

[1:06:49] real concern that the community has. I would ask you

[1:06:52] to pause this process so we can do that collaboratively

[1:06:56] now. Before this. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Sorry

[1:07:01] your mic went out there, but I think everybody heard

[1:07:04] you. In the room. Okay, the next deputy is Michelle

[1:07:08] Reeser. Michelle's running a little late. Fast. If you could

[1:07:12] postpone her a few minutes, okay? Sure. Kim emperor. Kim's

[1:07:20] online. Okay, great. Hi, kim. Hi. Can you hear me?

[1:07:29] Yes. Great. So thank you. For allowing us to present

[1:07:37] on behalf of the York Region Federation of Agriculture. We

[1:07:42] appreciate the opportunity to provide the comments on the additional

[1:07:46] residential units as requested. In your letter. Ar user are

[1:07:53] an important solution. To ease the housing crisis and are

[1:07:58] equally important in supporting multigenerational farm families. We agree to

[1:08:05] part one and part two of your motion. Although I

[1:08:09] think adding. A specific size for the small footprint. That

[1:08:17] is detailed in the criteria I think would be helpful

[1:08:22] to avoid. Continually having. To. Continually having.

[1:08:34] To defend. What a small scale. House for a new

[1:08:38] accessory building would be. On the Oak Ridge ridges. Marine.

[1:08:44] We do, however, strongly oppose. The requests that are outlined

[1:08:50] in part three. And I just wanted to note that

[1:08:54] the agenda when I filled out the form. I had

[1:08:57] a typo, so. It says e, but it should say

[1:09:01] part three, which it is clear in the letter that

[1:09:05] I submitted. So each of those items, we feel, would

[1:09:10] have significant detrimental effect on the agriculture in the municipality.

[1:09:18] York Region Federation of Agriculture is a nonprofit general farm

[1:09:22] organization representing over. 600 registered farm businesses. In York region.

[1:09:29] We are farmers working for farmers on issues, legislation and

[1:09:33] regulations affecting farms and in the region, as well as

[1:09:36] decisions that will affect agriculture into the future. We are

[1:09:41] passionate and dedicated to ensuring that. The agriculture sector and

[1:09:45] our rural communities. Are included, consulted and considered on any

[1:09:50] new and changing legislation that impacts the sustainability and the

[1:09:54] growth of the agriculture sector in the region. The Oakridges,

[1:10:00] moraine and the green belt are significant agriculture and environmental

[1:10:05] resources. They must remain intact and protect protected in their

[1:10:11] entirety for future generations. Allowing municipal amendments. Redesignation of prime

[1:10:19] agricultural areas. Small scale commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. Public

[1:10:27] service facilities and parks. Will result in the death of

[1:10:31] the Oak Ridges marine by 1000 cuts. Settlement area expansions

[1:10:37] will set up will speed up this demise. The yrfa.

[1:10:43] Would support the ARU on the Oak Ridge's marine and

[1:10:46] the Green belt, but not the list of requests that

[1:10:50] were found in part three of the motion. We thank

[1:10:53] you again for the opportunity to comment regarding the ARU

[1:10:57] request, and we look forward to working with you on

[1:11:01] this and other issues related to. Agriculture in the future.

[1:11:05] Thank you. Thank you. Kim, do you also want to.

[1:11:08] While we've got you, do you want to? Speak on

[1:11:10] the other item you want to debute on. Sure. Thank

[1:11:14] you. Thank you. So it is. Regarding. The stormwater.

[1:11:26] Fee. That is found. In the bylaw that establishes the

[1:11:32] rates and levies for the taxes for 2025. York Region

[1:11:38] Federation of Agriculture appreciates the opportunity to provide the comments

[1:11:42] on the stormwater fee. Sorry. As I said, repeating myself.

[1:11:50] In the property tax bill. This is the first time

[1:11:55] that rural residences will be charged this fee. We understand

[1:12:00] the importance of ensuring that stormwater infrastructure capital costs have

[1:12:04] long term funding structure. In place that is fair, equitable

[1:12:11] and easy to administer. The funding structure and the fee

[1:12:16] selected must also recognize. The stormwater mitigation contribution of farm

[1:12:22] properties. We are requesting deferral of the fee on the

[1:12:26] rural residences until a stormwater management. Fee study can be

[1:12:31] completed to ensure that the rate charged to farm residences

[1:12:36] is fair. Inequitable. Wirefa agrees that every member of the

[1:12:41] community should contribute to the infrastructure costs that are related

[1:12:47] to municipally owned facilities such as libraries, community centers, et

[1:12:53] cetera. To be fair and equitable. The funding approach must

[1:12:58] also be flexible enough to. Enable fee calculations that are

[1:13:04] related to stormwater infrastructure required for each property type. There

[1:13:10] are many factors that need to be considered when selecting

[1:13:14] stormwater rate. Appropriate to farmhouses. One of the simplest is

[1:13:20] that. Most urban properties have been engineered to slope towards.

[1:13:28] The stormwater drains, directing 100% of the runoff to stormwater

[1:13:33] systems, preventing flooding while the agriculture lands have not been

[1:13:38] engineered to slope to the roadside ditch. In fact, there

[1:13:43] are many agriculture properties with no slope. With a natural

[1:13:49] slope. Sorry. That does not drain off the property at

[1:13:52] all. The stormwater infrastructure. Costs related to urban and rural

[1:13:57] residences are very different, and the fee charged to the

[1:14:01] residences. Should reflect those differences as well. Thank you again

[1:14:08] for the opportunity to provide the comments regarding the stormwater

[1:14:11] fee, and we look forward to working with you on

[1:14:15] this and other agricultural matters. Thank you. Thank you so

[1:14:19] much. Kim. Any questions or comments on either of Kim's

[1:14:24] reput? Reputations, Councilor Croon. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thanks,

[1:14:28] Kim. For your two deputations on these two important items.

[1:14:31] Neighbor. It's always good to see you representing the farming

[1:14:35] community. Not only in our town, but across. The region.

[1:14:40] I appreciate. Your concerns, and I agree. That any efforts

[1:14:46] that we can make to ensure that farming families continue

[1:14:49] to be able to live on their farms, especially when

[1:14:51] it's becoming more and more intergenerational operations and I think.

[1:14:57] There's this opportunity for Aru's expanded Ar use. We'll do

[1:15:02] exactly that. As we spoke. Your concern about. The industrialization

[1:15:11] and commercial activity. Specifically. In part three of the recommendation

[1:15:19] is something that we need to take harder look at,

[1:15:21] and I will be. At the appropriate time, I will

[1:15:23] be bringing a deferral of that portion of it. When

[1:15:28] council considers that as well, the stormwater issue, it is

[1:15:32] becoming more and more of a large issue, especially here

[1:15:35] in the urban area, and it needs to be addressed.

[1:15:38] But there are challenges. And concerns, as you say, out

[1:15:41] in the rural areas. And I think staff. Is very.

[1:15:47] Impatient to move forward with solutions in the urban area.

[1:15:51] But again, we were hoping to defer the implementation in

[1:15:55] the rural areas to protect. Farmers and. To consider. All

[1:16:01] the special circumstances when it comes to soil water management

[1:16:04] out in the rural areas. So again, thank you for

[1:16:06] your presentation. Thank you for all the work you do.

[1:16:08] And I know that every farmer in the town of

[1:16:10] Richard Stovel and beyond the region. And across the province

[1:16:15] that you work with. Appreciate your efforts. So again, thank

[1:16:17] you. Thanks, Kim. Thank you. Thanks, Councilor Krun. Thanks so

[1:16:22] much, Kim. No other questions. Okay, our next deputation is

[1:16:28] from Jacqueline and Jody Allen. Good afternoon, mayor and counsel.

[1:16:36] Nice to see you again. Mayor ian. Love it. We

[1:16:41] would first like to thank you for having us today.

[1:16:45] And addressing the need of an affordable housing option. Just

[1:16:48] for a little introduction. My name is Jacqueline. This is

[1:16:51] my sister, Jody. We are in the modular housing industry

[1:16:54] and we are the Co owners. Of wholesale housing. We're

[1:16:59] a local family run business and have been providing Canadians

[1:17:01] the best deal in housing. For over 30 years. We

[1:17:05] are in support of having. Responsible buildings without impacting farmland

[1:17:10] or conservation areas. Our homes are quite unique. They're transported

[1:17:14] on their own carrier systems, allowing them to be mobile.

[1:17:19] Our homes can be relocated, resold, leaving little to no

[1:17:24] footprint and can be as small as about 30ft long.

[1:17:28] 14 wide for 350 sqft. They need as little as

[1:17:33] a packed gravel foundation, which avoids the need to dig

[1:17:37] on these protective lands. Even off grid possibilities are an

[1:17:41] option for our homeowners at their own expense. We've seen

[1:17:46] firsthand over the years the demand grow for garden suites

[1:17:50] and tiny homes. And are becoming our most in demand

[1:17:53] product all across the province. We hear stories every day

[1:17:58] from homeowners like Michelle Reeser, whom is participating in our

[1:18:01] meeting today. Unfortunately, due to the current regulations, homeowners like

[1:18:06] Michelle are now forced to save for a costly home

[1:18:09] which is not the attendance of the province. When they

[1:18:12] change regulations for a more affordable housing option. So some

[1:18:17] of the examples of the needs we are seeing for

[1:18:19] an aru are for farm. Workers, which would allow workers

[1:18:22] to live on site, avoid transportation costs, and ultimately supporting

[1:18:26] the canadian farmers housing for the elderly, which would grant

[1:18:30] them their independence while being under supervision of loved ones.

[1:18:35] Retirement homes have long wait lists, high costs and don't

[1:18:37] offer the care a family member would provide, especially since

[1:18:40] Covid, which magnified this matter. Our younger generation who are

[1:18:45] already having difficulty. With unemployment. And can't afford to get

[1:18:50] into Ontario's housing market, could afford an ARU and get

[1:18:54] into home ownership. ARU can help with rental market. Homeowners

[1:18:58] could utilize their vacant land and rent out an Aru,

[1:19:01] helping to save a retirement, paying off mortgages or even

[1:19:04] passive income. This, in turn, brings more affordable rental options

[1:19:08] to citizens in need. Our. Homes are built to the

[1:19:10] highest principal residential code, CSA 82777, an average less than

[1:19:15] half the cost of site building. Our homes are built

[1:19:18] inside a factory with dry materials and. Build time averages

[1:19:22] about eight to 17 weeks. Our homes are likely the

[1:19:25] most turned key product you'll find in Canada. Fully equipped

[1:19:29] with full size kitchens, bathrooms, train, furnace, water heater and

[1:19:32] much more. The number of families we have that walk

[1:19:36] through our doors on a regular basis that want to

[1:19:38] stay a part of stable community, but sadly had her

[1:19:41] being forced out due to the rising cost. Of living.

[1:19:44] We would love to see and be part of a

[1:19:46] movement like this to provide help. To the housing crisis

[1:19:49] Ontario faces. We believe it will increase population, support the

[1:19:53] elderly, the young. And promote affordable living, which Ontario is

[1:19:57] so in desperately need of. Thank you again for having

[1:19:59] us. Today. Thank you so much for your deputation. Any

[1:20:02] questions from members of council? Councilor, Sherband. Hi. Thank you

[1:20:10] very much for taking the time today to come and

[1:20:12] speak to us. You are representing. A business that builds

[1:20:17] tiny homes, is that correct? So. You're asking counsel to

[1:20:23] support. ARu to build homes for. Obviously your business for

[1:20:29] profit. I guess the concern I have with this and

[1:20:33] the deputation that you're providing us today. The comments that

[1:20:37] this allows them to be able to move up to

[1:20:41] get into the market. This was not the intent of

[1:20:45] Aru. From the report. And if it was, then I

[1:20:49] miss read, unfortunately. This is a situation, and we're talking

[1:20:55] about where we're looking for the Aru. You can do

[1:20:59] ar youth, as you know, in all approved areas, but

[1:21:03] in this particular area, I would suggest that you would

[1:21:06] be best to actually look for the legislation of where

[1:21:10] you can build instead of asking the community to provide

[1:21:15] new legislation so that you can have those opportunities here.

[1:21:18] In this community. I find that very difficult for us

[1:21:22] to receive. And considering we did receive. Another letter from

[1:21:27] another business that was asking and supporting the exact same

[1:21:31] reason. I feel for the people who are asking you

[1:21:34] to build those for them on their lots. I do

[1:21:38] feel for that. But unfortunately, this is not a time

[1:21:42] or place to be asking, in my opinion, for. This

[1:21:46] town to put forward a report to us to build

[1:21:50] so the businesses can obviously flourish and I wish you

[1:21:53] all the success in the future. But at this point,

[1:21:57] This deputation. I think is actually in the wrong place

[1:22:01] in the wrong time. Thank you. Any other comments for

[1:22:05] members of council? Seeing none. Thank you, Jacqueline and Jody,

[1:22:10] I appreciate your time coming today. Thank you, mayor. Okay,

[1:22:16] the next deputy is Michelle Johnson.

[1:22:35] CAN you hear me? Welcome, Michelle. Thank you. Good afternoon,

[1:22:39] mayor and members of council. I'm here to express my

[1:22:43] support. For the recommendations outlined in the staff report. Ds.

[1:22:50] 02125, which proposes allowing additional residential units. In the green

[1:22:57] belt and on Oak Ridge's moraine areas. As a resident

[1:23:02] in these areas. I believe that this initiative will have

[1:23:05] a positive impact on our community and provide valuable opportunities.

[1:23:09] For affordable housing. Our family purchased land in this area

[1:23:14] in 1997 prior to the implementation of the Oak Ridges

[1:23:19] Marine act. The restrictions imposed by the act have significantly

[1:23:24] limited our ability to utilize our property in a way

[1:23:27] that would allow us to live affordably. The possibility of

[1:23:31] building an ARU would enable us to provide a stable

[1:23:35] and affordable living arrangements. For our children, who are currently

[1:23:38] facing challenges in finding affordable housing in the GTA. An

[1:23:43] ARU would not only provide a solution for our children,

[1:23:47] but also offer a potential long term housing option for

[1:23:50] our family as we age, the unit could serve as

[1:23:54] a residence for us. Allowing us to maintain our independence

[1:23:58] and stay connected to our community. Furthermore, the ARU could

[1:24:02] generate income through rental opportunities, which would be beneficial in

[1:24:06] our retirement years. It's important to note that Aru's are

[1:24:11] not a form of major development. And do not have

[1:24:14] a significant impact on the environment or community. Rather, they

[1:24:18] offer a practical solutions for family like ours to utilize

[1:24:22] their properties in ways that are both sustainable and responsible.

[1:24:27] I urge you to consider. The benefits of allowing Aru's

[1:24:31] in the green belt and Oak Ridge's moraine areas by

[1:24:34] doing so. You'll be providing families like mine with the

[1:24:37] opportunity to live on their land affordably. And sustainably. To

[1:24:42] assume that we are out to damage the land. Please

[1:24:45] first understand what we actually do. The last recorded trumpeter

[1:24:49] swan in Ontario was in 1886. Trumpeter swans were at

[1:24:54] that time considered extinct. Conservation efforts began in Ontario in

[1:24:58] the 1980s by retired Minister of natural resource resources biologist

[1:25:04] Harry Lumpston he attained eggs from the alaskan and rocky.

[1:25:08] Mountain population and recruited landowners to host breeding pairs. My

[1:25:13] pond was one of the five ponds that were used.

[1:25:16] We fenced our pond and provided daily corn purchased through

[1:25:20] our local co op. Roughly at $2,400 a month for

[1:25:25] the sorry, $2,400 a year for the corn. To date,

[1:25:29] that's over $60,000. Once considered critically injured. Sorry. One's considered

[1:25:36] critically endangered in Ontario. They now have a flourishing population.

[1:25:41] And are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Conservation Act.

[1:25:45] Our palmed is the only available soft release pond for

[1:25:48] the Toronto wildlife. And shades of hope. They bring us

[1:25:52] injured swans that have finished emergency care but need protected

[1:25:56] release to finish rehabilitation. They're free to leave when they're

[1:26:00] able to fly away. In short, please don't assume that

[1:26:04] we're out to destroy the land. We're actually doing our

[1:26:07] part to protect it in the animals that we share

[1:26:10] it with. When you see a swan flying in Stoville,

[1:26:14] know that our town was crucial in their reintroduction in

[1:26:17] Ontario. Thank you for your time and consideration. Michelle, thank

[1:26:22] you so much for your deputation. Any comments? Or questions.

[1:26:28] Councilor Sherban. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you for your deputation.

[1:26:33] I appreciate it. And I also hear what you're saying

[1:26:36] and what you're asking. Two things that trigger for me

[1:26:42] is that. First you talk about rental for income. So

[1:26:47] it's obviously a longer term, and then once you're gone,

[1:26:51] somebody else would. Be buying it and trying to sever

[1:26:53] it into three properties. Therefore, now we've just created three

[1:26:57] lots in the rural area. This is, I guess, the

[1:27:01] concern I have. The debate I have with myself. If

[1:27:08] I was in your shoes, I'd be doing the same

[1:27:10] thing, so I respect that. But being on the decision

[1:27:15] of the future of the community and for the future,

[1:27:19] my seven grandchildren. The future of the environment and the

[1:27:23] climate change that we're fighting. It seems so minuscule, what

[1:27:28] you're asking. To ar youth. But if this keeps on.

[1:27:32] One more aru. One more aru. It's. Opening that door

[1:27:37] and where do we stop? And when we're in this

[1:27:40] situation, they point fingers. Well, you gave it to, so

[1:27:44] why don't I, right? And you're looking for two Aru.

[1:27:50] Your family members having family. So just for two single

[1:27:56] people, or are they for a family of two or

[1:27:57] family of three? Which will be the next question. Not

[1:28:01] for you to answer. But I'm saying that would come

[1:28:03] to us. So. It's not that I don't empathize with

[1:28:08] the rural community. And the endeavors of trying to help.

[1:28:14] Their children. I also don't really see how the children

[1:28:17] are going to get enough money to even leave there

[1:28:20] to buy because I know my kids won't be in

[1:28:23] that situation either. Because the affordability for homes is real.

[1:28:28] But I don't think Ar yout are our solution to

[1:28:31] the crisis. Density apartments and urban areas. Yes. But at

[1:28:38] some time, somebody has to say no. And I don't

[1:28:41] want to be in this seat. Someday when somebody says

[1:28:45] that I started this and didn't help. So I appreciate

[1:28:49] you coming. And if there was another way or some

[1:28:53] other option that I could offer you, I would. But

[1:28:57] I thank you for your comments. Thank you. You're welcome.

[1:29:02] And for Dr. Trumpeter swan. Thank you, councilor. Any other

[1:29:07] comments? Okay. Thank you so much for your deputation. Last

[1:29:13] call for Michelle Reeser. Hi, Michelle. And he has sent

[1:29:21] us a station to staff to read it into the

[1:29:23] director, but she's. Unable to attend building which I can

[1:29:27] present the execution. That would be fine, sir, if you

[1:29:30] could just state your name when you come to the

[1:29:32] microphone. Thank you.

[1:29:44] A resident at 70 Lakeview Avenue. Mayor and

[1:29:54] council thank you. First, thank you to town staff for

[1:29:58] their support navigating the complexities of government mandates for. Home

[1:30:07] affordability options for seniors coupled with aged conservation policies. Your

[1:30:13] work is truly appreciated. I'm here to support option a

[1:30:18] within the report. Ds zero to one two five. Item

[1:30:22] 10.3. I was the first to attempt an application for

[1:30:28] an additional dwelling unit. In Stoville, following the new provincial

[1:30:32] rules. Unfortunately, we were denied the possibility. But through that

[1:30:38] process, we learned a lot. On October 5, 2023. We

[1:30:42] received the outcome of our pre consultation application and there

[1:30:46] were no objections from York Region. Developmental services. Even though

[1:30:51] we back onto a regional road. No objections from TRCA,

[1:30:56] even though an area in our property is a part

[1:30:59] of the Toronto Conservation area, and no objections from fire

[1:31:03] and emergency services. Living in the Orm natural linkage area.

[1:31:10] Designation is where. The stopped to this dream occurred and

[1:31:15] the possibility of an additional dwelling unit for my husband.

[1:31:21] And husband's grandparents occurred. The land we hope to build

[1:31:25] on was just a mowed patch of grass about the

[1:31:29] size of a couple of soccer fields. On the street

[1:31:33] parallel and across the street from us, there are homes

[1:31:36] located on equivalent plots. We have ample parking and proposed

[1:31:41] and affordable prefab Adu to reduce impact to our neighbors.

[1:31:46] While supporting a stable business. Due to current regulations with

[1:31:51] Orm and green belt we are forced to save for

[1:31:55] costly home addition, in hopes that we might later convert

[1:31:58] it to a duplex. This is not the intent of

[1:32:02] the regulation the province intended. When they change regulations. For

[1:32:08] more affordable. I hope this helps with the

[1:32:18] presentation. Thank you, sir. For. Bringing Miss Reese's comments to

[1:32:26] us. I appreciate it, and we're not going to. Ask

[1:32:29] you any questions because you're not Mrs. Reese. Thank you

[1:32:33] so much. You're welcome. Okay, members of council, can I

[1:32:36] have a mover and secondary to receive all the deputations.

[1:32:39] Please move by councilor Croon. Second by councilor Sherband. All

[1:32:42] those in favor receiving the deputations that's carried. Okay, we're

[1:32:47] going to move on to our consent agenda. Members of

[1:32:50] council. Like any items pulled off of our consent agenda,

[1:32:54] items 9.1 through 9.9 we'll start with councilor update. Nothing,

[1:33:00] Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councilor Prune. Yes. Thank you, Mr.

[1:33:07] Mayor. 9.3. 9.8 and 10.3. Okay, 10.3 is an action

[1:33:15] item, so that's. No problem, council. Spence? None, Mr. Mayor,

[1:33:21] other than, as my friend said, 10.3. Okay, thank you,

[1:33:25] councilor. Bartley? None, your worship. Thank you. Councilor Acton? Nothing,

[1:33:30] Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. And. Councilor Sherband. Sorry.

[1:33:41] Ten point. Sorry, I just passed it. But what I

[1:33:44] want to ask is that I would like to defer.

[1:33:47] And I just want to ask Becky at this time,

[1:33:51] the item that I pull, should I pull up, then

[1:33:54] do the deferral. It's an action item. Okay, so this

[1:33:58] is items 9.1 through 9.9. Okay, so. None. Thank you.

[1:34:02] Okay. Sorry. No problem. Okay, so items 9.3 and 9.8

[1:34:07] were pulled for separate discussions. So can I have a

[1:34:09] mover in second or to move? All items not requiring

[1:34:12] separate discussion. Moved by councilor Smith, second by councilor up.

[1:34:16] Upton, we'll call the question.

[1:34:30] No, we're going to push the button. Where's the button?

[1:34:46] Three.

[1:35:11] Everybody vote. Okay, those are carried okay. Onto our action

[1:35:20] items. The first item is 10.1. I report. EPW nine

[1:35:24] two five waste collection option for the downtown village business

[1:35:27] area. And can I just get a mover and secondary

[1:35:31] to get on the floor? Councilor, Sherband and councilor Bartley.

[1:35:34] And councilor Sherband you want to speak to? A deferral

[1:35:35] motion. Yes, thank you. Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. In

[1:35:45] regards to this item coming on the agenda. It wasn't

[1:35:49] widespread in the downtown village. Area. That this would be

[1:35:54] on this agenda, and we would just like to provide

[1:35:57] time. For the stove village advisory committee to have an

[1:36:02] opportunity. To read over and to. Provide comments to council

[1:36:09] in regards to the four options that were laid out

[1:36:12] in this agenda. So with that. I'd like to defer

[1:36:15] it until next meeting. Okay. Councilor Barley. You second the

[1:36:21] motion to get on the floor. Are you good with

[1:36:22] deferral? Yes. Okay, thank you. Any other members of council

[1:36:26] wanting to speak to the deferral councilor? Croon. There was

[1:36:30] a couple of questions I wanted to ask related to

[1:36:32] this, but not in regards to. Commercial pickup. But somebody

[1:36:38] would probably tell me. We're just talking about downtown, so

[1:36:40] we're not. Good to. We wouldn't answer those questions. So

[1:36:44] we're just dealing with the village. Area. Okay, so I

[1:36:45] just wanted to make that point, so. I have no

[1:36:48] question with the deferral. Okay, thank you. Any other comments

[1:36:52] or questions on the deferral, madam Clerk? You're good. Okay.

[1:36:57] Can we put the wording up, please? This will come

[1:37:06] back at our next meeting, June 18. Okay, so it's

[1:37:10] moved by councilor Sherbin and second by councilor Bartley. Follow

[1:37:13] the question. Okay, that's.

[1:37:25] Carried. Thank you for calling that forward, council. Shermanning is

[1:37:27] more than reasonable. And the next item is 10.2, which

[1:37:31] is CS four, two, five. Youth advisory working group. It's

[1:37:34] just a motion to receive the presentation for information. Moved

[1:37:37] by councilor Upton, second by councilor Smith. All the question.

[1:37:48] Okay, that's. Carried. In item 10.3, DS 2125, additional residential

[1:37:56] units. Can I move a second or to. Get on

[1:37:58] the floor, please. Move by Councilor Sherband and second by

[1:38:00] Councilor Bartley. Okay. And let's get a speaker's list. Councilor

[1:38:08] Upton. Do you want to speak to the sitem? Are

[1:38:10] you wanting to speak to. 10.3. No, I'm just getting

[1:38:15] speakers list right now. You're wanting to speak to it?

[1:38:17] Okay. Thank you. Councilor Kundas. Councilor Smith. Councilor. Partly councilor

[1:38:26] Acton. Okay, we're all speaking to it. Perfect. Okay, so

[1:38:33] let's start with councilor. Upton. Alphabetically. I just have a

[1:38:42] few questions. We talked about this here and what we're

[1:38:45] looking to do. I wonder why the problems did not

[1:38:49] allow this to be in the natural linkage area or

[1:38:51] the natural heritage system. Was there any logic with them

[1:38:55] or any scientific reason? Through the chair if I can

[1:39:00] ask. Randall, who is our policy expert, to come forward

[1:39:07] because he's our provincial policy guy and he might be

[1:39:10] able to provide some justification. As to the difference between.

[1:39:15] Where the permission is and is not. With respect, that's

[1:39:17] what you're asking for. Right what the justification is. Randall,

[1:39:21] can you assist with that clarification? When they did these

[1:39:24] reports. Through your worship. I'm not entirely certain what the

[1:39:30] rationale was for not permitting. A second unit within. Other

[1:39:35] designations within the marine is just specific to the countryside

[1:39:39] area. However, since then, planning legislation has evolved substantially and

[1:39:45] obviously. There's more recently been the introduction of additional residential

[1:39:50] units, as we see in the new provincial planning statement.

[1:39:54] I think it's a matter of these provincial plans kind

[1:39:57] of catching up. To this new legislation and incorporating similar

[1:40:02] permissions throughout. The agricultural and rural areas. You scrambled as

[1:40:08] well? Sure. That doesn't exactly. That helps. You scrambled. Well,

[1:40:14] thank you. Okay. We'll work on that later. Do we

[1:40:20] have a specific size that they're allowed? The Aru that

[1:40:25] footage by footage. Three year worship. No, we did make

[1:40:30] recommendation. That they were giving us specific. That limit the

[1:40:35] scale and location. Of the ARu on the site. But

[1:40:39] not specifics? No, just general. Yes, and general law always

[1:40:44] scares me when it comes to government. But planners like

[1:40:46] to use the word, general. I'm wondering the impact of

[1:40:50] this would have enough that we should have a public

[1:40:52] meeting. On this, or is this not in the area

[1:40:55] of a public meeting? Anybody will answer me.

[1:41:06] Through your worship. We always welcome the opportunity for consultation,

[1:41:11] if that's teamed by council, to be further. Needed. For

[1:41:17] providing education. Of what were being requested and what our

[1:41:20] recommendations are. Staff has no problem with providing that if

[1:41:24] council wishes. Do you feel this is a subject? Or

[1:41:29] dynamic enough or large enough to call for a public

[1:41:33] meeting. I would hope that. Our public that are already

[1:41:43] in a position for engagement have had the opportunity. To

[1:41:47] report on this. Coming into today. So I would hope

[1:41:53] that again, I would never say no to more, but

[1:41:56] I would hope that. Those that are already feel that

[1:41:58] they are affected by. This report would have had a

[1:42:02] say in it already, so I'll leave it at that.

[1:42:04] Yeah, okay. I appreciate that because it's just that we

[1:42:08] have five or six, and there's. 55,000 people in town.

[1:42:13] So I just worry that long. Kind of like a

[1:42:14] development application. Pardon? Kind of like a development application. Yeah,

[1:42:18] I kind of worried that a lot of them didn't.

[1:42:19] Hear about it, but anyway. It's all interesting. I had

[1:42:24] hoped to get a reason, but maybe we can work

[1:42:26] on that. Why the province has not allowed these areas

[1:42:31] to have. Aru and I appreciate when we hear. About

[1:42:37] multiple generations or farm workers, but to me. This has

[1:42:42] been for hundreds of years. And the farms have survived

[1:42:45] very well. So it's not that all of a sudden.

[1:42:50] We have multiple generations, so I don't know if those

[1:42:51] are really good reasons for it. So with that. That's

[1:42:55] my comments. Okay, councilor. Thank you. Think it's important to

[1:42:59] note that. Before 2003. A second dwelling was allowed on

[1:43:07] these lands, so it's only been in the last 22.

[1:43:10] Years that there's been restrictions. Yeah. What? I'm just saying,

[1:43:14] for hundreds of years, people have been able to build

[1:43:16] more. Than one home on their property. Councilor Croon. Thank

[1:43:24] you, Mr. Mayor. As the counselor who represents the vast

[1:43:29] majority of the rural areas in municipality. This is a

[1:43:32] very important issue to me because it's a very important

[1:43:35] issue to my residence as the mayor. Has just noted

[1:43:37] now that 22 years ago. A lot of the things.

[1:43:42] That. The tractors of this particular initiative, imagine actually happened

[1:43:49] that multiple units on these properties was allowed as a

[1:43:52] matter of fact, lot divisions was allowed. If not. Encouraged.

[1:43:58] That has kind of come to an end and we

[1:44:00] are left with the situation. We're in right now. Where

[1:44:05] large parcels of property and, in many cases, large homes.

[1:44:10] Are limited to. A single family. I think that our

[1:44:15] staff and perhaps the fire chief can attest to that.

[1:44:19] There are more. Than enough. Arus, which are not currently

[1:44:24] permitted in the municipality. I have direct knowledge of. Several.

[1:44:31] Dozens. Of multiple units within single family homes which are

[1:44:35] currently operating in the town to our knowledge or to

[1:44:38] an honor, knowledge. And it's a challenge for us because

[1:44:42] folks don't want those things inspected. And I know that

[1:44:44] that makes the chief and his staff very nervous, that

[1:44:47] the proper building. Guidelines, ingress and egress. Concerns are not

[1:44:54] dealt with, and no one wants a tragedy to happen.

[1:44:58] And if we were to approve this. This may legitimize

[1:45:02] some of these things, and people will bring them forward.

[1:45:05] To ensure that they and their tenants or family members

[1:45:08] are being kept safe. From a personal perspective, I live

[1:45:12] in a 140 year old. Farmhouse. That my children have

[1:45:19] abandoned me and for my wife and I, it's probably

[1:45:21] a little too big. But our dream is that some

[1:45:23] I'm being planned. I plan on being carried. Out of

[1:45:25] there in a box. But somewhere in the future that

[1:45:28] perhaps one of my daughters would move back in and

[1:45:31] we would have an opportunity to stay there. But in

[1:45:34] a separate apartment, but currently. This is not allowed. And

[1:45:38] when we spoke about intergenerational and this is. For many

[1:45:43] people in many cultures that this is an important part

[1:45:46] of. Not only the end of life, be taken care

[1:45:50] of your elderly parents, but to give your children a

[1:45:54] place to start. I think that the delegation on behalf

[1:45:57] of Michelle research speaks exactly to that. That it gives

[1:46:01] an opportunity for families to support their children. To get.

[1:46:07] To have a place of their own and a place

[1:46:09] to start. Councilor Upton's concern about lot coverage. Well, currently,

[1:46:15] our legislation allows people to have ten. Acres of land

[1:46:18] and build a 20,000 square foot house, which. Is massive

[1:46:22] lot coverage, but it's only a single family. But we

[1:46:24] can't build. Two 5000 square foot houses or units on

[1:46:28] the same property because of this legislation. If we talk

[1:46:31] about impact. To the land that. 's kind of counterintuitive

[1:46:37] or potentially hypocritical that we allow these kind of uses,

[1:46:41] but the lack of ARa support for ar use. Does

[1:46:46] not. I want to comment on the two ladies. Who

[1:46:53] spoke. To. Their product, for lack of a better term.

[1:46:57] It was a very nice commercial, ladies. But they're providing

[1:47:01] a service. I know of residents within my ward who

[1:47:04] have purchased properties, but I can't afford to. Build a

[1:47:06] house on the property now because of their current economic

[1:47:10] situation. So sometimes they just pull up a trailer and

[1:47:12] live in a trailer for a while and they are

[1:47:15] problematic. And potentially not permitted, so they don't tell anybody.

[1:47:20] So again, the safety issues. Are not properly dealt with.

[1:47:25] Septic, servicing wells, those kind of things, they're problematic. Putting

[1:47:29] an aru, especially a portable one. As wholesale housing incorporated

[1:47:34] on Highway 48. They're the guys with a big flag

[1:47:37] just north of andorf. That's the kind of product that

[1:47:41] they provide, and they're giving people an opportunity. To get

[1:47:43] into the market. I know of a family outside of

[1:47:47] a municipality where two brothers bought a property and they

[1:47:50] put two mobile homes on it and live in that

[1:47:53] property. Somebody stopped that clock. And live in that property

[1:47:57] while they can afford to build homes and then move

[1:47:59] it. One will move on a separate way, and then

[1:48:01] they can move on. Without these opportunities, people can't. Get

[1:48:05] into the housing market. For everything I said to Kim.

[1:48:10] When she deputed on this item. I support the farm

[1:48:14] lease. Intergenerational farm families need our support, and those farmers

[1:48:21] especially, and also to Ms. Johnson. Who deputed these people,

[1:48:24] who lived on these lands for generations, potentially hundreds of

[1:48:28] years. They're. Not about to screw it up. If we

[1:48:30] can't allow the farmers to make the decisions themselves. What

[1:48:34] are we going to do to tell them? And I'm

[1:48:36] also going to address some of the comments from storm.

[1:48:41] I would prefer that our Miss Valley would make decisions

[1:48:43] at our level because we know our municipality. And we

[1:48:47] know what is needed and what works. Much better than

[1:48:51] having the province. Making. Top down, one size fits all

[1:48:57] decisions for the entire province. Richard Stoville is. A unique

[1:49:02] town. We have unique solutions. To our requirements, and I

[1:49:06] think we should be allowed to make those decisions. Finally,

[1:49:10] Mr. Mayor. I do concur. With Kim in regards to

[1:49:16] item number three. Specifically. Sub point C broader permissions for

[1:49:22] small scale commercial, industrial, and institutional uses in countryside area

[1:49:27] that makes me a little nervous because we have a

[1:49:28] whole lot of unpermitted commercial activity. And I think that

[1:49:31] if we can. Punt that back to staff for them

[1:49:37] to come up with a report for commercial activities. In

[1:49:41] appropriate areas, my desire would be. In conjunction with transportation

[1:49:47] facilities. Specifically. Four or four corridor, et cetera, that those

[1:49:52] kind of permissions. Would be allowed. Out in the more

[1:49:58] remote rural areas. I can't support that. So. I would

[1:50:04] ask Mr. Mayor, when the time comes that we would.

[1:50:07] Defer. Item three, part C. For further study, if that's

[1:50:12] possible. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, we'll go. Through

[1:50:15] the list, and then we'll come back to any referral

[1:50:19] motions. Councilor Smith. Please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well, I

[1:50:28] want to take a bit of a different tact with

[1:50:30] this whole issue. But I want to start out by

[1:50:35] mentioning that I've sat here on council. For over ten

[1:50:40] years. And one of the real benefits of having the

[1:50:45] community of Stoville that we have is. We allow? The

[1:50:51] public to come here, make delegations, talk, explain. Their position.

[1:50:55] We've heard from some good speakers. Over all those years.

[1:51:01] And they have an opportunity. To perhaps put forward ideas

[1:51:05] and things that maybe we haven't thought about and perhaps

[1:51:08] even change our mind as to how we're going to

[1:51:10] vote, but I've got to say that. Today for the

[1:51:16] very first, for the very first time. I am absolutely,

[1:51:19] absolutely rejecting the presentation made by storm. I'm sorry. Storm

[1:51:26] coalition. Your speaker. Is so free, or has been so

[1:51:32] free with words and assumptions. Even, especially on social media.

[1:51:39] That without, in my opinion. Checking the facts. Sir. The

[1:51:45] mayor has read out some items that aren't in social

[1:51:47] media, presented by storm. And. I have simply incompletely blanked

[1:51:53] out your complete presentation. I'm sorry to say that. And

[1:51:59] your comments. Will have no bearing. On me whatsoever. Rest

[1:52:04] of council can take their own facts, but. I have

[1:52:08] no opportunity at all to support any of your comments.

[1:52:10] I've got your 20. Some odd page report, and it

[1:52:14] is to me. I've already chucked it, so, sir. I

[1:52:16] am sorry, but your comments and your presentation will have

[1:52:21] no bearing on how I feel on this subject whatsoever.

[1:52:25] Thank you. Councilor Smith. Councilor Sherband, please. First clarification.

[1:52:37] There was the comment that I asked in the beginning

[1:52:38] in regards to how this came to counsel. And it

[1:52:41] was stated it was meryl, directoral, marital powers, whatever. And

[1:52:45] then it was stated. That council can do that anytime.

[1:52:48] Am I allowed to go to staff and ask them

[1:52:50] to write? A report on an item. Do I have

[1:52:54] that authority? No. Through council resolution, members of council would

[1:52:58] be able to do that. By bringing a notice of

[1:53:00] motion forward. Thank you. Okay. Just wanted to make that

[1:53:03] clear. Next. I totally, totally, totally support. And accept Storm's

[1:53:10] comments. It's people who are passionate enough and care enough

[1:53:14] to come and to be able to investigate and to

[1:53:18] provide us alternative answers, I believe are where we are

[1:53:23] here today and why we're here. The conversation in regards

[1:53:27] to ARU and the farm argument that I'm hearing over

[1:53:32] and over and over, I find. Somewhat, I guess maybe

[1:53:37] misunderstanding. And through you, Mr. Mayor, to. Director, Commissioner of

[1:53:43] development services. Our farm is already not allowed. Aru. Through

[1:53:50] your worship. No. The purpose of the report is to

[1:53:53] provide that equality depending on where the farm is located

[1:53:57] in the town. We'll determine right now whether or not

[1:54:03] an Aru is permitted. So unfortunately, no. It depends on

[1:54:06] what? If you go to the figure in the report

[1:54:10] that has the color schemes. I will hold up here.

[1:54:15] Depending on the color, that's where it's permitted or. Not

[1:54:17] permitted. And the challenge for staff is when they do

[1:54:21] come to the counter or they do. Write in and

[1:54:23] ask for permission. It's depending on what side of the

[1:54:26] road or what. Side of the line they're on. Farm

[1:54:28] is a farm to a farmer, but unfortunately. Due to

[1:54:31] provincial policy. We cannot permit in some and we can

[1:54:34] in others. That's the challenge we have as staff. Okay,

[1:54:37] that's interesting because. Just reading. It states that multiple agriculture

[1:54:44] planets organizations. A report recommends retaining existing legislation. To allow

[1:54:51] residential on farm. Additional residential units. So what are they

[1:54:57] saying that you're saying they can't? What am I missing?

[1:55:01] Sorry, what are you referring to? In the report from,

[1:55:05] they just came out with the green belt ca, it

[1:55:10] says here that and I didn't look up the legislation,

[1:55:13] and that's why I'm asking this. Question, because. It says

[1:55:17] retain existing green belt policies. Retain for on farm additional

[1:55:22] residential units. I thought farmers were allowed to have additional

[1:55:27] residential units, I guess forever. So through your worship. I

[1:55:34] don't know. The materials you're talking to right now, but

[1:55:37] I will say there is a difference depending on the

[1:55:40] designation of dual courage marine permissions. Worker units, residents for

[1:55:47] workers are permitted with criteria. So workers. Residences are permitted

[1:55:55] across the board for farms, but that is a little

[1:55:58] bit different than the Aru. Permissions, so retired farmers are

[1:56:03] not allowed to. Build an Aru to retire on and

[1:56:07] keep their principal space for their whatever family to take.

[1:56:11] Over through your worship and the majority of the rural

[1:56:14] area of stovel. That is correct. Okay. Thank you for

[1:56:18] that legislation. And I guess I'll have to go back

[1:56:20] and ask. I guess I've mentioned many a times and

[1:56:25] my concerns of this legislation, and I really do not

[1:56:29] want to sit here and be the community that leads

[1:56:33] this onslaught of request to the province prior to their

[1:56:38] opening and review that we would like them to consider

[1:56:42] and. Discuss. Us. Bringing or not us, the province bringing

[1:56:47] forward. A. I guess, prior to the review. The opportunity

[1:56:54] for. Rule. Communities in the green belt. Yokridge's marine to.

[1:57:01] Have ar youth. I don't know. Where the buck stops.

[1:57:09] Everybody's pretty much aware that I've always voted against anything

[1:57:12] that goes on the green belt. The mzos. The. Additional

[1:57:17] properties. If somebody doesn't stop the bus. It's just going

[1:57:23] to keep collecting more people until it can't carry the

[1:57:26] weight. Anymore, and that's what we're doing. This is out

[1:57:30] of our legislation. Writing a letter to them, asking them.

[1:57:36] To look at. This is one thing, but asking. For

[1:57:41] the town of Witchard stove. To endorse the request. To

[1:57:47] have Aru on the Oakridge brain and the green belt.

[1:57:52] Exceeds our responsibility. And I believe even. My position, which.

[1:58:01] I was asked to represent the residents for the municipality,

[1:58:05] but not for the provincial legislation. Asking, as I say,

[1:58:11] through a letter, but putting forth this report. Is actually

[1:58:16] going far beyond. Sending a letter saying that we would

[1:58:19] like ar use. In the Oak ridge of Marine and

[1:58:24] the Green belt. We received 13 letters of residents stating

[1:58:29] that's all I received anyways. Emails saying please don't. I

[1:58:33] receive two that said, please do. And one of them.

[1:58:38] Was. One of them was. A business. Sorry, the one

[1:58:44] which councilor Croon spoke to, but the one that probably.

[1:58:49] Impressed me the most and. That was recent. Was we

[1:58:54] received. An email. From. A student. And this was prior

[1:59:02] to this debate. So this is very honest. And this

[1:59:05] is our young people. Speaking. And I was overwhelmed with

[1:59:10] the fact and the timing that. This actually came forward

[1:59:13] to us, and I'm going to read it. Dear members

[1:59:15] of council, my name is Jalen Ramlin. I'm a student

[1:59:18] stole district as part of the class project on social

[1:59:22] change. I've created a campaign the loss of green space

[1:59:25] contributing to climate change. Focusing on the loss of green

[1:59:29] space in stovel. This campaign is about something that affects

[1:59:34] us all in Stoville. The loss of green space. As

[1:59:37] our town continues to grow, as more buildings go up,

[1:59:41] we're losing the trees, parks, natural areas that help fight

[1:59:45] climate change, reduce pollution prevent flood. Flooding support our mental

[1:59:49] and physical well being. Green spaces in Stoveville help to

[1:59:53] keep our town during heat waves. Absorb carbon dioxide, prevent

[1:59:59] flooding during major storms, improve physical and mental health, and

[2:00:03] provide safe habitat for local wildlife. As our population continues

[2:00:08] to grow, we must balance development with sustainability. Losing green

[2:00:13] space means a hotter, more polluted, and less livable community.

[2:00:17] Through. My campaign, I am proposing solutions such as preserve

[2:00:22] remaining green spaces in town, installing green roof solar panels.

[2:00:28] On public buildings and residential buildings. Linemore streets with trees.

[2:00:31] Green year add more public garbage recycling guns and four

[2:00:34] small fines for loitering and put in bike lane sidewalks

[2:00:37] to promote greener travel opportunities. To spread the awareness, I

[2:00:41] created an Instagram campaign, and the feedback from the acute

[2:00:46] community was powerful. Here are a few real comments that

[2:00:50] residents made so true. Stoval population is growing we need

[2:00:54] more homes and business thrive, but we also need to

[2:00:57] have the plan in place to protect our green spaces

[2:01:00] and. Ensure our wildlife is protected. Walking with dogs and

[2:01:03] green spaces is decompressing enriching enriching. I love going for

[2:01:07] walks and seeing all the green in the neighborhood. It

[2:01:09] is so helpful for our community to have these spaces

[2:01:12] for everyone to release their stress just walking in space

[2:01:15] lowers my stress level. After you return home, you feel

[2:01:19] your body battery is recharged. Necessity for human well being.

[2:01:22] Last year was the hottest summer to date, and we

[2:01:25] need to take action. Flooding is becoming such an issue.

[2:01:30] And this strong storm. These strong storms and downpours. Councilor,

[2:01:33] can you wrap up, please? Yeah. This shows how much

[2:01:36] residents value our green space. Not just the environment, but

[2:01:40] for the daily life and well being. And I say

[2:01:42] well fed. And we should listen to our young people

[2:01:46] because they're their future who have to take over this

[2:01:49] municip. Municipality. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Acton, please.

[2:02:00] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Before I get into. This. Recommendation.

[2:02:08] I would just like to remind everybody and say this,

[2:02:11] that I think with regards to needed housing. I believe

[2:02:14] we here in Richard stovel have been doing our fair

[2:02:17] share, and I think the province would probably complement us

[2:02:21] on our contributions to date with regards to this. To

[2:02:27] this, to this recommendation. It says in the report that

[2:02:30] staff recommends that. The province expedite the review of these

[2:02:35] provincial plans. As opposed to waiting until the mandated ten

[2:02:40] year review. Which has been said today. Is anticipated by

[2:02:47] 2027. So in the next 18 months or less. The

[2:02:54] province will do their review. At that point, all parties,

[2:03:00] the public. The municipality, whoever. Will have an opportunity to

[2:03:07] make comments. I think it would be wise at this

[2:03:12] point to let the province do their work. And review.

[2:03:17] On their timetable and. They will own their decision. Therefore,

[2:03:24] I can't support or endorse this recommendation. I don't think

[2:03:28] there's a need to expedite review, in my opinion, to

[2:03:31] facilitate it needed housing. In the Oakridge's moraine in the

[2:03:35] green belt. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Councilor Acton.

[2:03:40] Councilor Barley. Thank you, your worship. And thank you to

[2:03:44] all deputations here. Today was great. Thank you, my councilor

[2:03:52] coharts here, but I'm going to try and keep my

[2:03:53] eye on the ball. What we're here for today. And

[2:03:56] it's to help out our farming community. Basically, there's a

[2:04:00] lot of misinformation out there. I just love Facebook and

[2:04:03] social media. I've been reached out to many times over

[2:04:06] the last few days. About. Can't believe that the mayor

[2:04:10] with his strong powers is open up the green belt.

[2:04:13] For full development. And when I got back to the

[2:04:17] residence and said, This is what we're asking. The staff

[2:04:21] to ask the problems to look at. It was for

[2:04:24] our farming community to build so that we can keep,

[2:04:27] as councilor Cruz said, we can keep our farmers at

[2:04:31] home. There isn't one person up here. I don't think

[2:04:34] that would open up this. Green belt for full development.

[2:04:37] I mean, I just received another email from please don't

[2:04:39] let developers take over our green belt. Nobody up here

[2:04:43] wants that. Nobody. And I don't think if allowing the

[2:04:47] farmers to have. A second dwelling or build onto their

[2:04:53] dwelling to have a separate entrance and that sort of

[2:04:57] thing. Is going to hurt or disrupt anything. On the

[2:05:00] green belt, and I don't think it's going to open

[2:05:03] up any doors for any development. So anyways, thank you

[2:05:07] for clarifying that. You're not opening up the green belt

[2:05:11] for full development with your strong mare power. I will

[2:05:14] be supporting this. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. Hey, anyone

[2:05:20] wanted to round two? Okay, Councilor Sherbet.

[2:05:30] I keep hearing Aru for our farmers. For our farmers.

[2:05:34] For our farmers. I feel like we're leaning on this

[2:05:37] as a reason that we're doing this just for our

[2:05:40] farmers. We're not. We're saying we're allowing second dwellings. On

[2:05:47] these properties. And correct me if I'm wrong, commissioner. Of

[2:05:53] development services. Are we doing this just for farmers? This

[2:05:59] is what this report is. Through to mayor to councilor

[2:06:03] Sherband. We're asking for the permission. On the lands that

[2:06:11] are currently not allowing it. So it be it a

[2:06:14] house or a farm, it would be the same permission

[2:06:18] so for anybody. For anybody that currently has a house.

[2:06:23] They would have that permission. Yes. Correct. Thank you. I

[2:06:25] just want to make it clear, because we seem to

[2:06:27] saying we don't want to deny our farmers and. It's

[2:06:31] just a myth that we're doing it for the farm.

[2:06:33] Thank you. Thank you. Councilor barley. I would just comment

[2:06:40] then, for everybody. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Croon. Are

[2:06:46] you going to move your deferral at this point? Yes.

[2:06:50] Okay. Sorry, my screen is not working. There you go.

[2:06:54] There we go. Okay. He's always blame. The equipment. Yeah.

[2:07:02] So again, to move. The resolution as is, with the

[2:07:09] exception of three subset. C. To. Defer that portion and

[2:07:17] ask staff to come back. With a report as to

[2:07:23] what might be appropriate. Areas in the town for small

[2:07:28] scale commercial, industrial. Uses in the countryside area. I guess

[2:07:34] we're going to leave that out. Small scale industrial. Uses.

[2:07:39] In the areas we're talking about. I'll let you word,

[2:07:41] Smith that, Mr. Director. Sorry. Through the mayor. Industrial commercial

[2:07:48] are permitted in that designation. What we are leaning towards

[2:07:53] was broadening those permissions, but we can provide a report

[2:07:56] to that effect. If you're asking for us to provide

[2:07:58] more clarity on what we mean by broadening. And perhaps.

[2:08:03] A definition of small scale industrial because we do have

[2:08:05] situations where people currently will buy. A piece of land.

[2:08:11] In a traditional residential area, estate subdivisions was becoming a

[2:08:14] problem, and they turn the property into a full scale

[2:08:18] commercial activity. You have a ten acre estate and you're

[2:08:21] enjoying the wildlife. Next. Thing. You know, there's 40 dump

[2:08:23] trucks parked in the backyard next to, so perhaps a.

[2:08:26] Definition of that. And if necessary, Some kind of restriction

[2:08:31] in areas where we don't want them and more permissions

[2:08:34] to where we do want them, but I will leave

[2:08:35] that to. Your recommendations. Through the mayor. We will explore

[2:08:40] that. We will also have to use permission policy. For

[2:08:45] guidance on what the definitions are. So we will explore

[2:08:48] that. It's a complex, complex. Issue. That's why you and

[2:08:50] your staff are doing it, not me. So with that,

[2:08:54] the word smithing, Mr. Mayor. I will. Propose that deferral.

[2:09:01] I'm going to just give my comments first and then

[2:09:04] we'll get a mover. In second or for the deferral

[2:09:07] and then the motion. Well, the motion we've. Already got

[2:09:09] on the floor. What do you need? Final clerk. Okay,

[2:09:16] let's just do that. Now, is there second or for

[2:09:18] Councilor Kern's? Deferral. Is there a second, or anyone seconding?

[2:09:23] I will, Councilor Shervin. Will second it, okay?

[2:09:33] This is an important. Policy report. For our community and

[2:09:38] for the province. I wholeheartedly reject any assertion that. We're

[2:09:47] bypassing regular counsel. Deliberations or that I'm somehow. Strong. Marrying,

[2:09:54] opening the green belt. I don't have that authority to

[2:09:57] do that, and that's been perpetuated. By storm and by

[2:10:01] other social media outlets. That's the case. There is no

[2:10:06] question. And actually, the deputy from storm, I think, alluded

[2:10:10] to the fact that there needs to be some discussion

[2:10:13] around reasonable reform. Is that a fair statement, sir? I

[2:10:18] think that through the appropriate challenge, through the appropriate channel,

[2:10:21] of course. Yeah, absolutely. But there needs. To be a

[2:10:24] discussion of a reasonable form. There are too many inconsistencies

[2:10:27] within. The conservation plan, and I'm just going to read

[2:10:31] one of them to you. So an unpermitted use in

[2:10:34] the natural linkage area. We're here debating. Whether or not.

[2:10:38] Mrs. Johnson can have a second unit. On her acreage

[2:10:43] where she saved trumpeter swans. In the province. And yet,

[2:10:50] if she would like. To. She can apply for a

[2:10:53] mineral aggregate operation. She can dig a pit on her

[2:10:58] property. That's an allowable use in the Ochre's marine natural

[2:11:02] linkage area. Or she could do a wayside pit. She

[2:11:07] can do the same. In the countryside area of which

[2:11:12] her home is not in. But how can we allow,

[2:11:16] like, the allowable uses for the natural linkage? Our forest

[2:11:21] management, conservation projects, agricultural uses, infrastructure uses, home businesses, home

[2:11:25] industries, bed and breakfast on farm diversified, unservice parks and

[2:11:29] a pit, an aggregate operation. It makes zero sense to

[2:11:33] me how we're talking about saving our green space, and

[2:11:36] yet. There's an allowable use for someone to buy a

[2:11:39] property in our municipality and rightfully apply for a license

[2:11:43] if they can get it, and then. Dig 200ft into

[2:11:47] the ground. Makes no sense. Makes no sense. So we

[2:11:54] are addressing the needs that have been brought forward by

[2:11:57] residents. And. There clearly are differing opinions about how we

[2:12:03] should be addressing those needs, but the fact that we're

[2:12:05] having the discussion today is actually what democracy is about.

[2:12:10] It's actually how we're supposed to operate. We're to deal

[2:12:16] with issues that are real life issues for our residents

[2:12:19] and make recommend. Recommendations to staff where we have authority,

[2:12:23] but in this case, to the province. I'm happy to

[2:12:27] support the resolution. I'm happy to support the deferral. I

[2:12:30] think Kim Emperingham brought up. A good point. And Councilor

[2:12:40] Krune, you've taken that one and brought that. Forward. I

[2:12:43] think that actually deserves a second look. But we are

[2:12:47] not the decision making body. For this report. We can

[2:12:53] obviously approve the recommendations, but the main thing is that

[2:12:56] we endorse the recommendations. For the province to consider. We

[2:13:01] know many times from this dias, we have recommended resolutions

[2:13:08] to go to the province and they have not listened.

[2:13:12] This is. Important on the ground. Response to members in

[2:13:20] our community. Who are wanting to, as the deputies have

[2:13:26] said, age in place, find a place for their kids.

[2:13:28] To live. A place where they can afford to live.

[2:13:35] And I don't see us as opening up for Sprawl.

[2:13:39] This isn't. About Sprawl. This is not about subdivisions being

[2:13:42] built. This is about an Aru and. We went through

[2:13:46] an entire process around Aru's, and we know what they

[2:13:49] are and. The presentation that started us off this afternoon

[2:13:53] clearly articulated what they are. The fact that someone can

[2:13:57] build a 20,000 square foot house, but we won't. Allow

[2:14:00] a second unit within. It is bonkers to me. They'll

[2:14:07] do it after the fact. There's a guarantee. You drive

[2:14:11] down Bethesda. There's more than one family. Living independently in

[2:14:14] some of those monster homes, but they're doing it illegally,

[2:14:18] and. That is just a bonkers policy. We should be

[2:14:22] allowed to let families who want to live together. Live

[2:14:25] together how they want to live together. And small additional

[2:14:30] residential units are not going to destroy our environment. They're

[2:14:34] going to solve a massive problem that we have in

[2:14:37] this province, in this country. Right now, which is finding

[2:14:39] places for our kids to live or for our seniors

[2:14:41] to live. And making a recommendation to the province. Endorsing

[2:14:46] a recommendation. Is not opening. Up for urban sprawl. Despite

[2:14:53] what the clickbait on social media shows, So, councilor croon,

[2:15:00] you've got a motion on the floor to. Move the

[2:15:05] recommendation and defer item three, point c, to a future

[2:15:11] staff report. Yes, sir. Okay, so we'll speak to the

[2:15:15] deferral motion. Anyone want to speak? To the deferral motion,

[2:15:18] Councilor Smith. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess I have

[2:15:22] a question back to. My fellow counselor, when you talk

[2:15:26] about deferral bothers me, but are you deferring? It to

[2:15:29] the next council meeting? Or are you saying let's do

[2:15:32] it in the fall. With respect, I think that would

[2:15:35] be up to staff. As to how quickly. They can

[2:15:42] turn this around. Yes, through the mayor. Be appreciative. If

[2:15:44] we could do. This after the summer recess. Bring it

[2:15:48] back in the fall. My reports for the next council

[2:15:51] meeting are due today. I don't see any urgency for

[2:15:55] this. And I certainly want you to take the time,

[2:16:00] you and your staff to take the time and do

[2:16:01] it properly. Appreciate, I think that that's probably the best

[2:16:04] course of action. So are we then approving everything else

[2:16:08] except for this particular one item? Okay. Thank you. Anyone

[2:16:14] else want to speak to deferral motion? Can we put

[2:16:19] the deferral motion up? So. The main motion be amended

[2:16:25] to defer item three c until such time as stepping

[2:16:27] forward a report providing additional clarification. So we're going to

[2:16:31] vote on the deferral, and then we'll vote. On the

[2:16:32] main motion. Council. Sherben, are you still wanting to second

[2:16:37] the deferral? No. Thank you. And. Mr. Mayor, can I

[2:16:40] get a recorded vote on both? You absolutely can. So,

[2:16:44] who would like to second the deferral motion? Councilor Barley.

[2:16:47] Thank you. And councilor Shiman has called for a recorded

[2:16:50] vote. Madam Clerk, over to you. As councilor Sherman has

[2:16:55] requested her credit vote. I will go through each member

[2:16:57] of council, starting with Councilor Sherbin. If when I call

[2:17:00] your name, you can. Please advise how you vote, Councilor

[2:17:03] Sherban. Can you do that again? We'll just get you.

[2:17:07] Thank you. Get you on. No. Councilor smith. Yes.

[2:17:18] Councilor upton. No. Councilor Octon. No.

[2:17:31] Councilor Bartley. Yes. Councilor Croon. Yes. Mayor Lovett. Yes.

[2:17:44] Motion carries. That's just on the deferral. Motion. On the

[2:17:47] deferral. Now. We're going to vote on the main motion.

[2:17:50] And the main motion was moved by councilor Sherband and

[2:17:53] seconded by councilor. Barley. Just checking. Councilor Sherman, you're still

[2:17:56] wanting to move the motion? No. Okay, so. You'll move

[2:18:00] the motion, councilor barley. Is there second or for the

[2:18:02] motion, councilor? Smith. And this is a recorded vote as

[2:18:08] well. As it was Councillor Sherman who once again requested

[2:18:16] a recorded vote. We'll start with her. And go alphabetic

[2:18:19] order from there. Councilor Sherman. No. Councilor smith.

[2:18:30] Yes. Okay. Can you put your mic on? Can you

[2:18:33] put your mic on? Yes, thank you. Councilor Opton. No.

[2:18:44] That was. No, thank you, Councilor Octen. No. Councilor? Partly.

[2:18:52] That was. Yes. Councilor Croon. Yes. Mayor. Love it.

[2:19:04] Motion carries. On to our. Oh, sorry. There's

[2:19:14] one item. 10.4. Correspondence from Simcoe County. Greenbelt coalition regarding

[2:19:18] concerns regarding the expansion of strong mayor powers under Oreg

[2:19:21] 530 22. This was pulled by Councilor Upton. Is there

[2:19:25] a secondary to receive this? Councilor Sherband. Thank you. Call

[2:19:29] the question. Just to receive.

[2:19:42] Okay, it's carried. First item on our consent agenda is

[2:19:47] item 9.3, cs three. Two five, Aurora war memorial. It's

[2:19:51] moved by councilor croon and second by. Councilor Sherband. Thank

[2:19:59] you. Councilor koon over to you. Thank you very much.

[2:20:03] There we go. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I

[2:20:06] have your brain fart here. When is the 100th anniversary?

[2:20:14] Krista, if you could just. What is the date of

[2:20:17] the event? October the third. Okay, I should know that.

[2:20:22] So I want to thank Krista and Melissa and all

[2:20:26] the staff at the museum. For all their work involving

[2:20:30] us in this. As we know, this is a very

[2:20:34] important celebration of this monument. Which is in Aurora, unfortunately.

[2:20:40] But it used to be witchards Township at one time,

[2:20:42] but it does recognize veterans of the first world War.

[2:20:47] Of Witchers Township. And King Township and a town of

[2:20:51] Aurora, and it has been expanded to the Second World

[2:20:55] War. And the Korean War. But it is a very

[2:20:57] important monument and one that. We are due and required

[2:21:03] to celebrate in deference. To our veterans and those who

[2:21:09] have given the supreme sacrifice and done so much. At

[2:21:14] the same time the town has commissioned. A veteran banner

[2:21:19] expert panel, which includes some members of the public. Representatives

[2:21:25] of the legion and random counselor who. Has been examining.

[2:21:31] The names of not only the individuals who are on.

[2:21:36] The monument, but also those who will be recognized in

[2:21:39] our banner program, which will start during November. In remembrance

[2:21:45] week, and I want to thank again the staff who

[2:21:47] involved and the members of the public. Who've done this

[2:21:51] important work to recognize. To properly recognize all of those

[2:21:56] individuals who. Are named on there. Unfortunately, there were some

[2:22:01] names that we felt didn't qualify. But we've also found

[2:22:06] a few. That may have been missed or inappropriately remembered,

[2:22:11] and that is important work that. Will continue. So again,

[2:22:17] I want to thank staff for everything that you've done.

[2:22:20] And as we get closer to it. They will provide

[2:22:22] more information to the public and to members of council

[2:22:26] and I've been happy to represent the town for the

[2:22:28] last six years. At remembers day ceremonies in Aurora. And

[2:22:34] it's a privilege that I take and responsibility that. I

[2:22:38] take very powerfully. And on October the third, I invite

[2:22:42] all members of council to come on out to this

[2:22:45] important celebration. And, of course, all members of the public.

[2:22:47] So again, thank you, staff, for all the work. That

[2:22:49] you've done. And unfortunately, it's only the beginning. But thank

[2:22:53] you again. Thank you. Councilor. Yeah. This is a report

[2:22:58] to receive. For information, please put October 3 in. Your

[2:23:01] calendars. It's number of months away, hopefully. We can all

[2:23:07] be there for. This important memorial. Okay, so it's moved

[2:23:11] by councilor crew and second by councilor Sherben. The receiver

[2:23:14] information. Call a question. It's

[2:23:24] carried. Next item is 9.8. Report fi nine two five.

[2:23:28] A bylaw. To establish rates and levees taxes for 2025.

[2:23:33] This is moved by councilor Crun. And second by councilor

[2:23:35] Smith. Councilor crew. Sorry. There you go. Thank you again,

[2:23:44] Mr. Mayor. Taxation and the collection of taxes is a

[2:23:47] very important part of what we do, at least that's

[2:23:50] what Jeremy tells me, because that's what pays the bills.

[2:23:54] And we know that tax rates need to be set

[2:23:58] year to year. So that the residents have an expectation

[2:24:03] of knowing what they pay and that they are paying

[2:24:06] for. Their appropriate services. Unfortunately. There's a charge that's buried

[2:24:11] in this report, the annual stormwater charge. And the report

[2:24:17] proposes that it would be expanded. Beyond. The current pays,

[2:24:23] which are people who receive. Water bills and expanded to

[2:24:28] every landowner in town. As Kimberingham spoke to and in

[2:24:34] regards to my comments as well. That is not without

[2:24:38] its challenges in the rural areas. And I think that

[2:24:43] that part of it needs to be deferred until staff.

[2:24:47] Works department in conjunction with finance, comes back with a

[2:24:52] more robust sort of. Description of what the cost should

[2:24:57] be. So, Mr. Commissioner of works. I believe that you

[2:25:03] have agreed. The staff will do a report. But to

[2:25:08] phase it so that the urban portion of it comes

[2:25:11] back a little bit quicker. Or more expediently than perhaps

[2:25:15] the rural areas, because I think the rural areas are

[2:25:17] going to take some deep dives to have an understanding

[2:25:20] of what is an appropriate charge for stormwater management. Through

[2:25:25] the mayor to councilor croon at the present time. There

[2:25:30] is no identified capital project for the storm rate study.

[2:25:33] However, following council's direction today, staff will be putting that

[2:25:38] forward. And as part of that analysis, you are correct.

[2:25:45] In that. The impact of the stormwater management is greater

[2:25:50] in the urban area of the town than in the

[2:25:54] rural areas. And so there's no objection to a prioritization

[2:26:00] in doing a fulsome rate study. But particularly focusing on

[2:26:05] the urban area of the town. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

[2:26:09] So, Mr. Mayor. With your permission. I would like to

[2:26:17] defer that part. Of the report or the resolution. For

[2:26:22] the annual stonewater management fee. So just leave the way

[2:26:27] it is right now. Madam Clerk, you sent me. A

[2:26:31] wording for that, but I've got so many emails. In

[2:26:33] the meantime, I can't. Find it, so we'll get it

[2:26:35] up on the screen before we do that. We have

[2:26:37] another speaker. Anyway, so. That would be my proposal. Okay.

[2:26:44] Thank you, councilor. Can we pull that down? Thanks, councilor.

[2:26:47] Smith. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm not going to repeat

[2:26:52] all the things that Councilor Krune has indicated. I'm absolutely

[2:26:57] supporting. And my only comment was I was quite frankly

[2:27:00] surprised that this item got tucked in with. The. Tax

[2:27:06] levies, et cetera, et cetera. So I'm supportive of this,

[2:27:09] and you can. Do a further study. Come back sometime

[2:27:14] in the future as to how. This whole thing will

[2:27:18] work its way through. But I'm absolutely. Supporting. The deferral

[2:27:24] or the removal entirely of 3.2. Okay. Thank you, Madam

[2:27:30] Clerk. Please put the amendment up. Okay, so

[2:27:40] it's received for information or. Sorry, it's bring forward a

[2:27:43] bila. To establish the rates and levees, and then this

[2:27:45] addition. Should be the amendment. Okay, let's go with the

[2:27:50] mover, and second, we'll call a question. Okay. Carrie's and

[2:28:00] then we'll vote on the main motion moved by councilor.

[2:28:02] Crew second by Councilor Smith. That's Carrie two. Okay, on

[2:28:08] the bylaws, there are seven sets of bylaws. We're pulling

[2:28:10] bylaw 12.6, which is the bylaw, to establish these. Fees

[2:28:14] because. They'll be moved. And second, as amended, any questions

[2:28:23] on the bylaws? So. Twelve, 12345 and seven. We're dealing

[2:28:28] with Kymu and seconder, please. By councilor Acton. Second by

[2:28:33] councilor Bartley. All those in favor?

[2:28:47] That's carried in item 12.6 would be as amended, moved

[2:28:52] by councilor Bartley. Second by councilor Acton. All those in

[2:28:56] favor? As carried. Okay. Does anyone have any new other

[2:29:05] business this afternoon? Not seeing any. I don't have anything.

[2:29:16] So closed session. We have only the minutes. Does anyone

[2:29:20] have any questions on the minutes? So we don't need

[2:29:22] to go into closed. Come over in second or please,

[2:29:24] for the minutes moved by councilor Shervan, second by. Councilor

[2:29:27] Acton. The minutes be approved is circulated. All those in

[2:29:30] favor? Councilor Smith, can you vote?

[2:29:41] Thank you. No problem. That's carried. Mover and sacrifice confirmatory

[2:29:47] bylaw. Move by councilor Upton, second by councilor Smith. All

[2:29:50] those in favor? His hands is fine. That's carried. And

[2:29:53] motion to adjourn. This afternoon's meeting moved by councilor Bartley,

[2:29:55] seconded by councilor Sherband. All those in favor? As carried.

[2:30:00] Okay. We have a planning meeting tonight. 07:00 all are

[2:30:03] welcome. See you then.

Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript