Taken from the roll call in the town’s own minutes. The minutes record who was not there and almost never why.
What was decided (7 motions)
6 carried, 1 recorded otherwise. Every motion below is printed as the minutes print it.
That, pursuant to Subsection 89(3) of the Procedure By-law (being By-law NO 2022-410), the Planning and Housing Committee approve that the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow for the consideration of the item(s) listed as: RESPONSES TO INQUIRIES PHC 2023-04 – Development and stormwater systems
Moved by L. Johnson
Carried
WHEREAS the Riverside South Secondary Plan includes area-specific policies that allow for uses that would otherwise be non-compliant for development applications that were initiated prior to the adoption of the Plan; and WHEREAS the Riverside South Secondary Plan already includes an area-specific policy for the in-progress Plan of Subdivision application for 708, 720, and 750 River Road to reduce the minimum density requirements; and WHEREAS the proposed development application described above includes new lots that would rear onto River Road, which would otherwise not be permitted by the Riverside South Secondary Plan; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT section 2.1 (Neighbourhood designation), policy (2)(a) of the Riverside South Secondary Plan be removed and replaced with a new and expanded policy (6) in section 2.1 (Neighbourhood designation) under the Residential Uses – West of River Road subtitle, with the following language: “6) For the lands within the Plan of Subdivision application addressed 708, 720, and 750 River Road: Notwithstanding Table 2 – Neighbourhood Density Category, for the lands designated low-density, the minimum density requirements may be lowered to no less than 20 units per hectare; Notwithstanding the policies in section 3.2 of this Plan, dwelling units may rear or side onto River Road. Surface parking will be located away from River Road; and Notwithstanding the policies in section 3.2 of this Plan, where the City has determined that noise levels exceed
Moved by G. Gower
Carried
WHEREAS the Riverside South Secondary Plan has the most up-to-date boundary for the lands designated Industrial and Logistics within Riverside South; and WHEREAS Schedule B4 (Greenbelt Transect) and Schedule B6 (Suburban Southwest Transect) in Volume 1 of the Official Plan have a different boundary for the Industrial and Logistics designation, and incorrectly designate a portion of the unaddressed property identified as PIN 043310309; and WHEREAS the National Capital Commission’s Greenbelt Master Plan does not include the portion of the unaddressed property identified as PIN 043310309 to be within the Greenbelt on the Greenbelt Master Plan; and WHEREAS the City cannot change the Greenbelt Transect boundary outside of a Municipal Comprehensive Review; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Planning and Housing Committee recommend Councill approve that Schedule B4 (Greenbelt Transect) and Schedule B6 (Suburban Southwest Transect) in Volume 1 of the Official Plan be amended to reflect the boundary of the Industrial and Logistics designation found on Schedule A – Designation Plan of the Riverside South Secondary Plan, and to update the legends accordingly; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a new area-specific policy in Volume 2C (Area-Specific Policies) be created for the unaddressed property identified as PIN 043310309 with the following language: “## PIN 04331-0309 – Industrial and Logistics in the Riverside South Secondary Plan ##.1 Notwithstanding the location of the lands within the Greenb
Moved by G. Gower
Carried
WHEREAS cost-sharing agreements are legal agreements between landowners who develop in an area to ensure that they collaborate and agree on how the costs for key infrastructure, and the necessary land, will be shared; and WHEREAS cost-sharing agreements are necessary for the provision of key services and infrastructure in greenfield areas; and WHEREAS a non-participant in a landowners’ group is expected to pay its fair portion of the costs for land and services as outlined in private cost-sharing agreements. Similarly, a non-participant is expected to receive their share of land costs for a value outlined in a private cost-sharing agreement; and WHEREAS the proposed policy for cost-sharing agreement in the Riverside South Secondary Plan is missing a reference to the value of land needed for infrastructure projects and specifies a single landowners’ group; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Planning and Housing Committee recommend Council approve the cost-sharing agreement for services policy (policy (8)), in section 4.2 (Greenspace System, Stormwater Management, and Services) of the Riverside South Secondary Plan be replaced with the following language: “Landowners within the Riverside South Secondary Plan boundary shall enter into private agreements to share the costs of the major infrastructure projects and the value of land needed for such projects, together with associated studies and plans (including but not limited to Infrastructure Planning, Environmental Assessments an
Moved by G. Gower
Carried
WHEREAS Annex 2 – Mobility Concept Plan for the lands located east of Mosquito Creek identified a street network that was no longer consistent with the policies of the Plan and was removed from the Riverside South Secondary Plan as a result of feedback received during the March 2024 circulation period; and WHEREAS policy (2)(d) of the Riverside South Secondary Plan contains an outdated reference to Annex 2 – Mobility Concept Plan, and staff have no intention of replacing the Annex. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Planning and Housing Committee recommend Council approve that policy (2)(d) in section 3.2 (Street Network) be removed; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to subsection 34(17) of the Planning Act , no further notice be given.
Moved by G. Gower
Carried
WHEREAS the street network surrounding the District Park in the Town Centre has been revised in the Plan of Subdivision application, the parcel configuration and size of the District Park in the Town Centre has been adjusted slightly, specifically the western boundary along Portico Way, and the northern boundary along a future collector street; and WHEREAS the proposed zoning boundary for the District Park in the Town Centre (Areas H and I in Location Map 1) does not reflect this updated parcel boundary; and WHEREAS Area C in the updated Zoning Height Schedule 269 (Document 8) shows the correct configuration for the District Park; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Planning and Housing Committee recommend Council approve that Location Map 1 (Document 5) be replaced with the following updated version: AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to subsection 34(17) of the Planning Act , no further notice be given.
Moved by G. Gower
Carried
Note: The Councillor A. Troster Motion of which Notice was previously given at the April 10, 2024, Planning and Housing Committee meeting was replaced with the following revised motion pursuant to Subsection 59(5) of the Procedure By-law. WHEREAS on January 24, 2024, the Council of the City of Hamilton unanimously adopted Ontario’s first “anti-renovictions” by-law together with significant related investments to increase staffing enforcement capacity, in order to deter landlords from using renovations for bad faith evictions and to assist in preserving existing housing stock; and WHEREAS Hamilton’s Renovation License and Relocation By-law will require a landlord to obtain a renovation license prior to commencing any renovation that requires that an N-13 eviction notice be issued to a tenant under the Residential Tenancies Act, and to provide proof of a building permit and an engineering report confirming that vacant possession of the unit is required to carry out the renovation work; and WHEREAS the Council of the City of Ottawa has implemented new regulations to address the availability and quality of rental housing such as the Short-Term Rental By-law, the Rental Housing Property Management By-law, and complementary amendments to the Property Standards By-law, as well as the 10-Year Housing and Homelessness Plan and various housing loss prevention programs which are currently being reviewed and updated; and WHEREAS Ottawa City Council also considered a landlord licensing re