Open Council

Council

Open Council

Council

September 14, 2021, at 4:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Councillor J. Morgan discloses a pecuniary interest in Item 19, clause 2.15, of the 11th Report of the Civic Works Committee, having to do with participation in the South London air monitoring network pilot project, and the related Bill No. 388, by indicating that Western University is his employer, and receives funding for this project.

Councillor S. Lehman discloses a pecuniary interest in Item 3, clause 4.2, of the 12th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee, having to do with the Downtown Business Improvement Association Appointment, by indicating that he is a member of the Association.

2.   Recognitions

2.1   His Worship the Mayor recognizes the 2021 Queen Elizabeth Scholarships Recipients (Virtual Recognition)

2.2   His Worship the Mayor recognizes the City of London Employees who have achieved 25 Years of Service during 2021 (Virtual Recognition):

3.   Review of Confidential Matters to be Considered in Public

None.

Motion made by M. Cassidy

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the change in order to move Stage 4, Council, In Closed Session, and the 12th Report of Council in Closed Session, to after Stage 13, By-laws, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

5.   Confirmation and Signing of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting(s)

5.1   11th Meeting held on August 10, 2021

2021-08-10 Council Minutes with Released - Complete

Motion made by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Lehman

That the Minutes of the 11th meeting held on August 10, 2021 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

6.   Communications and Petitions

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Turner

That the following communications BE RECEIVED and BE REFERRED as follows:

6.1. Proof of COVID-19 Vaccination Administrative Policy

(Refer to the Corporate Services Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 13 (5.1) of the 14th Report of the  Corporate Services Committee)

  1. L. Livingstone, City Manager - Vaccination Administrative Policy

  2. Councillor M. van Holst

  3. (ADDED) Councillor M. van Holst

    

6.2. Outcome of Climate Lens Screening Applied to Major Transportation

Projects

(Refer to the Civic Works Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 18 (2.14) of the 11th Report of the Civic Works Committee)

  1. T. Smith

  2. S. Franke, Executive Director, London Environmental Network

  3. (ADDED) M. Miksa, Executive Director, London Cycle Link

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

7.   Motions of Which Notice is Given

None.

8.   Reports

8.3   14th Report of the Corporate Services Committee

2021-08-30 CSC Report 14

8.3.13   (5.1) Proof of COVID-19 Vaccination Administrative Policy

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That the following actions be taken with respect to the “Proof of COVID-19 Vaccination Administrative Policy:

a) the staff report, dated August 30, 2021, with respect to this matter BE RECEIVED;  it being noted that an updated Proof of COVID-19 Vaccination Administrative Policy was provided to Council on the public agenda.; and,

b) the civic administration BE DIRECTED to bring forward to the next meeting of the Corporate Services Committee a similar COVID-19 Vaccination Council Policy, specifically applicable to the Members of Council, for consideration;

it being noted that two communications from Councillor M. van Holst were received with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (11 to 1)

10.   Deferred Matters

None.

11.   Enquiries

None.

12.   Emergent Motions

None.

13.   By-laws

Motion made by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Lehman

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No’.s 387, 389 to 445, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by M. van Holst

That Second Reading of Bill No’.s  387, 389 to 445, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

Motion made by S. Hillier

Seconded by S. Turner

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No’.s. 387, 389 to 445, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

Motion made by E. Peloza

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No. 388, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by M. van Holst

That Second Reading of Bill No. 388, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Motion made by E. Peloza

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 388, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

4.   Council, In Closed Session

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by J. Helmer

That Council rise and go into Council, In Closed Session, for the purpose of considering the following:

4.1    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending lease of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality. (6.1/12/CPSC)

4.2    Personal Matters/Identifiable Individual

A matter pertaining to personal matters about an identifiable individual, including communications necessary for that purpose, as it relates to interviews for the nomination to the London Hydro Inc. Board. (6.1/14/CSC)

4.3    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality. (6.2/14/CSC)

4.4    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

4.5    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

4.6    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

4.7    Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

4.8    Land Disposition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending disposition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

4.9    Litigation/Potential Litigation / Matters Before Administrative Tribunals / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to litigation or potential litigation with respect to the partial expropriation of property located at 920, 924, 928 and 930 Western Road including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board, Board of Negotiation file number BN 21-22; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, in connection with the expropriation of property located at 920, 924, 938 and 930 Western Road; and directions and instructions to officers and employees or agents of the municipality regarding settlement negotiations and conduct of litigation or potential litigation in connection with the expropriation of a property located at 920, 924, 928 and 930 Western Road. (6.8/14/CSC)

4.10    Labour Relations / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to reports, advice and recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation concerning labour relations regarding the Corporation’s associations and unions and advice which is subject to solicitor-client privilege and communications necessary for that purpose and for the purpose of providing directions to officers and employees of the Corporation. (6.9/14/CSC)

4.11    Litigation/Potential Litigation / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to employment-related matters; litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice or recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation, including communications necessary for that purpose and for the purpose of providing instructions and directions to officers and employees of the Corporation. (6.10/14/CSC)

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

The Council convenes, In Closed Session, from 6:23 PM to 7:19 PM.

9.   Added Reports

9.1   12th Report of Council in Closed Session

2021-09-14 Council - Released in Public

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by M. Cassidy

  1.    Property Acquisition - West of Cantebury Park and the London Hyde Park Rotary Link Trail - Stanton Drain Remediation Project

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the Director, Construction and Infrastructure Services, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the property located at West of Cantebury Park and the London Hyde Park Rotary Link Trail, further described as Part North ½ lot 25, Concession 3, London Township, designated as Part 1, 2, and 3 on reference plan 33R-1961, being all of PIN 08053-0503 (LT), containing an area of approximately 18.10 acres, as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B”, for the purpose of remediation work to accommodate the Stanton Drain Remediation Project, the following actions be taken:

a)    the offer submitted by 1390226 Ontario Inc. (the “Vendor”), to sell the subject property to the City, for the sum of $552,300.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement attached as Appendix “C”; and,

b)    the financing for this acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

  1.    Partial Property Acquisition - 2118 Richmond Street - Sunningdale Road Improvements

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the Director, Transportation and Mobility, and Division Manager, Transportation Planning and Design, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the acquisition of a portion of property from 2118 Richmond Street, further described as Part Lot 16, Concession 6, in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being part of PIN 08145- 0151, designated as Parts 15, 16, and 17, Plan 33R-21022, as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B”, for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Sunningdale Road Improvements Project, the following actions be taken:

a)    the Agreement of Purchase and Sale, attached as Appendix “C”, submitted by Encore at Upper Richmond Village Inc. (the “Vendor”), to sell the subject property to the City, for the sum of $323,600.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement;

b)    the Grant of Temporary Easement and Consent to Enter, attached as Appendix “C”, submitted by Encore at Upper Richmond Village Inc. (the “Vendor”), for the sum of $30,900.00, for the term of twenty-four months (24) with an option to renew for twelve (12) months for an additional $15,450.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement; and,

c)    the financing for this acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

  1.    Partial Property Acquisition - 135 Villagewalk Boulevard - Sunningdale Road Improvements

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the Director, Transportation and Mobility, and Division Manager, Transportation Planning and Design, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the acquisition of a portion of property from 135 VIllagewalk Boulevard, further described as Part of Block 90, Plan 33M-633, in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being part of PIN 08138- 0849, designated as Parts 4 and 5, Plan 33R-20957, as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B”, for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Sunningdale Road Improvements Project, the following actions be taken:

a)    the Agreement of Purchase and Sale, attached as Appendix “C”, submitted by 2560334 Ontario Inc. (the “Vendor”), to sell the subject property to the City, for the sum of $161,650.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement;

b)    the Grant of Temporary Easement and Consent to Enter, attached as Appendix “C”, submitted by 2560334 Ontario Inc. (the “Vendor”), for the sum of $75,000.00, for the term of twenty-four months (24) with an option to renew for twelve (12) months for an additional $37,500.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED set out in the agreement; and,

c)    the financing for this acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

  1.    Property Acquisition - 267 Wellington Road - Wellington Gateway Project

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the Director, Construction and Infrastructure Services, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the property located at 267 Wellington Road, further described as Part of Lots 68 and 69, Plan 452 (4th), being SLY 33 FT 6 in LT 68 & NLY 3 FT 6 In LT69, being all of PIN 08364-0095 (LT), containing an area of approximately 4,456 square feet, as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B”, for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Wellington Gateway Project, the following actions be taken:

a)   the offer submitted by Victoria Elizabeth McCracken (the “Vendor”), to sell the subject property to the City, for the sum of $463,000.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement attached as Appendix “C”; and,

b)    the financing for this acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

  1.    Property Acquisition - 269 Wellington Road - Wellington Gateway Project

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the Director, Construction and Infrastructure Services, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the property located at 269 Wellington Road, further described as Part of Lots 69 and 70, Plan 452 (4th), as in 603560, being all of PIN 08364-0096 (LT), containing an area of approximately 4,434.73 square feet, as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B,” for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Wellington Gateway Project, the following actions be taken:

a)   the offer submitted by Neria Lefort (the “Vendor”), to sell the subject property to the City, for the sum of $463,000.00, subject to the terms and conditions BE ACCEPTED as set out in the agreement attached as Appendix “C;” and,

b)    the financing for this acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

  1.    Offer to Purchase Industrial Land – 10264539 Canada Ltd. – Innovation Park, Phase I

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to the City-owned industrial land located in Innovation Park, Phase I, containing an area of approximately 5.47 acres, located on the west side of Innovation Drive, more specifically described as Part of Block 3, Plan 33M-544, designated as Part 7, Plan 33R-20553, in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being all of PIN 08197-0293, as outlined on the sketch attached hereto as Appendix “A” and the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (the “Agreement”), attached as Appendix “B”, submitted by 10264539 Canada Ltd. (the “Purchaser”) to purchase from the City, 5.47 acres of the subject property, at a purchase price of $382,900.00, reflecting a sale price of $70,000.00 per acre BE ACCEPTED .

  1.    National Day for Truth and Reconciliation

That, on the recommendation of the Director, People Services with the concurrence of the City Manager, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED that the Corporation recognize and observe the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, which seeks to honour First Nations, Inuit and Metis Survivors and their families and communities and to ensure public commemoration of their history and the legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process, by closing all but its essential services and providing its employees with a paid holiday (save and except our casual employee group).

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Motion made by M. van Holst

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That Introduction and First Reading of Added Bill No.’s 446 to 451 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Motion made by E. Peloza

Seconded by S. Lehman

That Second Reading of Added Bill No.’s 446 to 451, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Motion made by M. Cassidy

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Third Reading and Enactment of Added Bill No.’s 446 to 451, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

14.   Adjournment

Motion made by S. Turner

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 7:38 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (2 hours, 51 minutes)

[6:44] I’ll ask colleagues, please, to have screens on, please. I would ask anyone who doesn’t have their picture on, I need a verbal confirmation that they are at their screen, please. Councillor Sallie.

[7:43] I’m looking for confirmation present of Councillor Sallie, verbally, if not by picture, and Councillor Van Merberg, I’m pleased. That leaves Councillor Sallie. Apologies, Mayor, I’m present. Thanks very much, I appreciate that, thank you, Councillor. All right, colleagues, and to the public, welcome to the 12th meeting of City Council, a virtual meeting held during the COVID-19 emergency.

[8:18] We’d invite you to check the city’s website for current details of the COVID-19 service impacts. Meetings can be viewed via live streaming on YouTube and the city’s website. The City of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council standing or advisory committee meetings and information upon request. Now to make a request for any city service, please contact accessibility at London.ca or 519-661-249, extension 2425. Colleagues, I’ll look for any disclosures, please of funerary interest.

[8:55] I see Deputy Mayor Morgan, go ahead. Thank you, Your Worship. On the Civic Works Committee agenda item number 19, which is item 2.15 and the committee reports related to the South London air monitoring network. I’ll declare an interest on that as part of the project flows funding to my employer at Western University. Thank you, any other items to be dealt with separately based on beginner interest. Thank you, I see none.

[9:28] Colleagues, under the recognitions, we have two particular categories and I’m going to stand to recognize the individuals if you’d allow me, please. First that I’m going to recognize, and it’s my honor on behalf of London City Council to recognize five exceptionally brilliant young Londoners as recipients of the 2021 Queen Elizabeth Scholarship. The $2,000 scholarship awarded annually normally recognizes two high school students with the high scholastic achievement based on the average of the students’ best six subjects in their graduating year.

[10:06] This year, however, four students shared identical top marks resulting in five high school students being recognized for their exceptional academic achievements and council determined that all were deserving of the $2,000 scholarship. So we are delighted to acknowledge that right now. I will share with you that we have three individuals present through Zoom, I believe, in one of our meeting rooms and who will make a few comments in a moment.

[10:40] But first, let me start by acknowledging that the four graduating students each with an average of 99.5% unbelievable. And Langio, who is a graduate from London Central Secondary, now attending the University of Toronto Life Sciences Program as of this fall. And in a few moments, we’ll ask her to speak. The second is Caitlyn Pringle, a graduate from H.P. Beale Secondary School, now attending university to pursue her goal becoming a secondary school teacher, and we’ll speak a little later.

[11:17] The third is Mia Sherba, another graduate from Beale, now attending Western for Business Management, Organizational Studies. She’ll be our third figure tonight. And Nadine Shabaya, who is an Oak Ridge Secondary School graduate, now attending Western for Engineering. Now as I’ve indicated all four of these incredible Londoners graduated with a final year average of 99.5%. So what I’m going to do, if I might, is I’m going to invite first, and Langio, to make a few comments if you please would.

[11:55] And Lang, go ahead. This is a very big moment for me, and I’m so honored to be invited here. First of all, I’d like to thank the city of London for your generosity in presenting this award. Next, I’d like to thank my home school, London Central Secondary School, for a wonderful four years of learning. Central taught me how to push myself to the limit, and the teachers I met inspired me many times.

[12:29] And finally, I’d like to thank my family for their continued support and encouragement. I will always remember this award. It is a perfect bow tie on my high school career. Moreover, it will be an equitable motivation in my future academic pursuit. Thank you. Bravo, thank you very much. Now we’re going to hear from Caitlin Pringle, please. Caitlin, go ahead. Hi, I’m Caitlin Pringle. First of all, I just want to say thank you to everyone who was involved in this award, who made it happen.

[13:07] The three of us, like a five in total, wouldn’t be here talking to you without all of you supporting. And it’s so generous. And when I found out, I was so over the moon. And I think for all of us, you know, we do the marks and get the marks that we do for ourselves, and that’s a victory in itself. But it’s nice to be recognized by somebody else as well. And it is that cherry on top. So it’s just, it’s a great moment. And I want to say congratulations to everybody else because I know how it feels. And you should be proud. It’s a no compliment, it’s really exciting. And I’d like to thank my friends and my family, and of course my teachers throughout elementary school and high school.

[13:49] It wouldn’t be where I am today or who I am today. And, you know, everyone who’s been to high school knows that it’s not all flowers and unicorns. So there are tough times. And without them, I don’t know where I’d be. So they really pushed me forwards. And I’m just so grateful for having the support system that I have. So I’m excited to see what comes next, but thank you. Well, congratulations and thank you. And now please, we’d love to hear from Mia Sherba. Mia, go ahead. Hi there, my name is Mia Sherba. I would just like to thank the city of London for recognition for this award.

[14:24] On behalf of myself and others, I can express how wonderful it feels to be recognized for all of our hard work and hours that went into this school year, especially in a school year where we didn’t really receive a final graduation or goodbye. I think this really sums up the high school experience that we had and worked so hard for. I would also like to thank my parents for their endless support and love and for always being there when I was stressed out over a test and not getting mad at me for yelling at them in a moment of panic. And I would like to thank my teachers at Biel for always believing in me and providing me with the resources that I needed to grow.

[15:00] This award really sums up my high school experience and it will help me with my future academic endeavors. I am very grateful, thank you. Well, congratulations as well, Mia. And Nadine wasn’t able to be here, but expressed her sincere appreciation as well. So congratulations to our 99.5% graduates. That is absolutely unbelievable and outstanding. You are extremely, extremely worthy. We have one other recognition, if I could please, and we have one student who finished with an even higher average, Cindy Sun from London Central Secondary School completed her year with an amazing 99.67% average.

[15:48] She recently started her first year studying health science at Science, excuse me, Health Sciences at McMaster University. She asked that I would share the following with colleagues and here’s what she’s written. Council, I’m ready to thank you sincerely for your generous $2,000 Queen Elizabeth Scholarship. I’m thrilled to receive this award and I am deeply honored by and appreciate your invaluable support. I am currently in the Bachelor of Health Sciences program at McMaster and plan to pursue a career as a family physician. The financial assistance you have provided me will aid in paying for my education expenses and allow me to better focus my time and my education.

[16:30] Thank you again for your generosity and support. I am truly grateful and we keep working hard in the future. So I need to say on behalf of Council to all five of these students that we’re grateful for your commitment and your dedication, not only to your studies and your education, but to your community and fellow citizens as evidenced by the various careers you’re pursuing. So to all of you, to Anne Lund, to Caitlin, to Mia, to Nadine, to Cindy, may I say, congratulations to each of you and we as Council wish you the best of luck in your post-secondary education.

[17:06] You know, that’s a thrill that we get to do every year so I couldn’t be more pleased. The second item for which I am also delighted to acknowledge is the 25-year City of London Employee Service Recognition. Now on behalf of London City Council, it’s a privilege to take this opportunity to honor and celebrate who live and who breathe public service. Tonight we recognize the most recent members of our illustrious 25-year club. Those who have provided 25 years of service to the City of London.

[17:42] We say thank you for all the hours, all the care, and all the service you’ve devoted to fellow Londoners. We all know your patience and resolve. We’re sure has been tested through these last 18 months in particular, like perhaps no other time during your respective careers. We have needed your experience, your skills, and your professionalism like never before. And each of you has stepped up in a major way. Before, during, and eventually after the pandemic, it is your example that has and will continue to inspire and guide your co-workers and fellow Londoners into the future.

[18:21] So I’d like to recognize each of you by name. First, from Enterprise Supports, we’d like to recognize Yaya Ibrahim. We would also like to recognize Walter Fimentel. From Environment and Infrastructure, we’d like to recognize Andy Beaton, so again, he’s got to focus already. From Finance Supports, we’d like to recognize Susanna Yumeri. From Social and Health Development, Deerness Home, we would like to recognize Laura Bali, as well Cindy Clark, also Elisa Fernandez-Raffinan, as well Teodoro Gall, as well Robert J. Hatfield, as well Wendy Kirk, as well Rosa Masters, as well Francisca Taekali Wangan, as well Irene Rivera, a huge number of colleagues and staff from Social and Health Development, Deerness.

[19:37] From the London Police Services, we would like to recognize Glenn Hadley, Blair Harvey, Lori Legg, Lisa Molnar, Matthew Morton, Gary Nold, and Pat Node, Trevor Poole, Duane Price, Julie Thompson, and Brian Wolfle. These are all of our senior staff, senior, not just in terms of tenure, but in terms of their connection to our city.

[20:13] And I know I can speak on behalf of council when I say that the work I’m sure can be thankless at times, perhaps under-appreciated or under-recognized, but not by us, but let me say, it’s why occasions such as this are so important, because your contributions are so important. So once again, to all of our 25-year City of London employees, City Council says thank you so much for what you’ve done and what you still do for all of us. Perhaps a round of applause, we can recognize our 25-year employees, please.

[21:00] Confidential matters to be dealt with in public, but we will have some items to be dealt with in closed session, which will require a change in order. So I will look for a motion to move item four in closed session and the 10th Report of Council in closed session two after stage 13 bylaws. For that, I’ll look for a mover, please. Moved by Councillor Cassidy, seconded by Councillor Van Mereberg and we will call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[21:56] And I’d like to deal with the minutes, so we’ll require a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting how August 10th, 2021, and that will require a mover and a seconder, please move by. Councillor Lewis, seconded by Councillor Layman. Any discussion? Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[22:42] Thanks very much, colleagues. So we have a number of communications and petitions under 6.1 proof of COVID-19 vaccination administration policy. One is communication from Ms. Livingston and two are from Councillor Van Holst. There’s 6.2, the outcome of climate lens screening applied to major transportation projects. We have three communications, T Smith as Frankie and then Miska, Miska, excuse me, please. And for those to be considered in the appropriate committees to be dealt with, it’ll require a mover and a seconder.

[23:21] Can I have a mover, please? Councillor Hupp and seconded by Councillor Turner. We’ll call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion is passed 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. Motion is to which notice is given, which turns us now to the reports for the 12th supported planning environment committee of Colin Councillor Square, please.

[23:58] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’ve not been advised of any matters to be pulled from this agenda. So I’m given that I’m prepared to move the entire report. Does anyone wish to have anything dealt with separately? Comments or questions then, please? I have Councillor Hopkins, please. Thank you, you worship for recognizing me and I just wanna thank the committee for supporting the motion that we receive the EPAC comments on the climate change emergency action plan and have it forwarded to the standing committee with a report back and really appreciate the support that the committee gave.

[24:46] Thank you. Thank you, any other comments or questions? I see Councillor Hummer. Thank you, just briefly on the item related to 496 Dundas Street, this is the proposed development by York, just a block or so away from the future rapid transit station. Councillor Caiabaga asked me to fill in for this one since it’s in Ward 13. And we’ll say the community is generally supportive. We had some people come to the meeting and speak in favor of the development. There is a bit of a desire to see some affordable housing integrated into development as the developer doesn’t need or is not asking for bonus zoning.

[25:25] And that’s not possible to fire through the zoning. But I still remain hopeful that something can be worked out where there’ll be some affordable housing as part of this development, which is much needed and would provide some great housing options right here in the court city. Thank you, I’ve Councillor Cassidy, please. Thank you, your worship. And I just want to comment on number seven, which is 2.2 from the committee or the draft Masonville secondary plan. I want to thank the committee. They made a slight amendment to the plan that the community was looking for.

[25:59] And it was endorsed by the committee and it passed. And so I’m really happy to see this plan go forward. It will help to guide development. And there’s a lot of it that is on the horizon in this area, it straddles both Ward 7 and Ward 5. So really happy to see this plan moving forward and looking forward to the final version coming back in October. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Seeing none, we’ll call the question.

[26:58] Mr. Van Holst, using the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero. Councillor Squar, that’s the report. Thank you very much. For the 12th report, this will call on Councillor Homer, please. Thank you, Mayor. I’m not aware of any items that colleagues like to pull separately. So I’m happy to put the entire report on the floor. Thank you, does anyone wish to have any, any one of these items voted on separately?

[27:40] Seeing none, Councillor Homer. Thank you. I just wanted to point out we did have a wonderful delegation about a policy pitch idea of responding to the opioid crisis, which I’m sure city staff are interested in seeing the comments from the students. I thought they did a great job in their delegation. Thank you. Any other comments from colleagues? Dean, no more call the question. Seeing the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[28:37] Councillor Homer. Thank you. Thanks very much. Appreciate that. For the 14th report of corporate services, I’ll call on Councillor Cassidy, please. I’d like to see if we can make it a hat trick. I am not aware of any items being that people would want pulled. I see Councillor Turner and then Van Holst, however. All right. Well, let’s, let’s, Councillor Van Holst, which items would you like to have dealt with separately, please? Thank you, Your Worship. So I believe it’s 5.1 or number 13. I had asked a number of legal questions previously.

[29:16] I have some more. So I wonder if I think there’s an opportunity to deal with that in camera and then, and then come out afterwards and speak to it in public session. So noted. Any other items colleagues wish to have dealt with separately? Councillor Turner. Thanks, Mayor. Your Worship, just with respect to number eight. If we can pull that, I just have a question and perhaps a friendly amendment. So noted. Anything else colleagues wish to have dealt with separately? Back to you, Councillor Cassidy, then, please.

[29:54] And Your Worship, I’ll just say of note, the Industrial Land Development Strategy, staff recommended a price increase there. When we look at every other city around us pretty much, they are charging more for industrial land and what we are offering as described by staff is top-notch A-level servicing of this land. So we have a really good product and we’ve been more than competitive with our neighbors. So it’s about time they do an annual review of the Industrial Land Development Strategy, including the pricing and committee endorsed the staff recommendation to increase the pricing on that somewhat.

[30:34] Another item of note is the proclamation of Orange Shirt Day, recognizing the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation and going along with that as well, is that a letter that came from Councillor Hopkins that will see the flag raised on the community flagpole on that day. So with that, I put all of this on the floor, except for the items that have been pulled. So with the exception of 4.1 and 5.1, any comments or questions on the balance of the report from colleagues?

[31:08] Councillor Hopkins, please. Yeah, thank you Your Worship. And again, many thanks to the committee for supporting the direction of getting municipal support as we deal with truth and reconciliation. I know it was a big conversation at the AMO board that we had in August. And there’s some information that is being passed through with this motion. I want to send my thanks to city staff in the spirit of the agreement that we have with the Nammert Center. We were able to get the flag every child matters and have it raised on September the 30th.

[31:49] And also with that came comes the support of a report coming back as we deal with our flag policy and continue the conversation on how we can support municipalities through truth and reconciliation. So thank you, committee. Thank you, any other comments or questions? I see none. So with the exception of 4.1 and 5.1, we will call the question. Using the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[32:42] Thank you, Councillor Kat. So 4.1 or eight on the council agenda is a letter submission from Councillors Palosa and Lewis regarding vacant residential buildings in the city. Put that on the floor. Comments or questions? Councillor Turner, go ahead, please. Thanks, Your Worship, but just for you, perhaps to either Councillor Palosa or Councillor Lewis, I didn’t have an opportunity to watch the discussion, but I was wondering if there was an opportunity in here to include commercial properties. I have concerns as well with respect to property speculation especially within the core and how that might impair our opportunities for development and realization of our downtown master plan.

[33:26] I’d invite either Councillor Lewis or Palosa or both to respond. Councillor Lewis, you start. Thank you, Your Worship, and thank you to Councillor Turner for the question. It’s actually one that I’ve had from some members of the public as well. So an opportunity to respond to that is appreciated. So the short answer is no. We currently, under the powers that the province granted us in 2017, can only apply this currently to residential class. Although as Councillor Helmer did point out at the committee meeting in a building where there might be mixed use, so some commercial on the ground floor, but some apartment units over top, there may be an opportunity to apply it in those circumstances.

[34:10] Councillor Palosa. Yeah, thank you for the opportunity just following up on that. Definitely interested in Councillor Turner’s desire to help solve some of the issues in London. This one strictly for housing as Councillor Lewis outlined and really hoping for council support for that report back to allow us to make some movement on the housing file. I know it will be small, it’s certainly not a dot gap for everything, but it is a small action we can take that’s in our purview of units that are already built in out there and just sitting vacant.

[34:42] So thank you. Any other comments or questions? Thank you, worship, perhaps an opportunity for a small amendment that might be friendly to the movers is in light of the response. And I appreciate that the powers may not to currently be in our jurisdictions do so on commercial properties, but there might be an opportunity to make an ask to the province for that. And my amendment would be to in addition to ask the province for similar powers with respect to commercial properties. We’d have to take that back to the mover and seconder.

[35:25] So I’ve been advised by the clerk that that would have to be in an amendment form, Councillor Turner. Fair enough. And I’d like to move an amendment that there might be a clause B to this that, sorry, I made just motion right in front of me. An additional clause, an additional letter clause that states that a request be also made to the province to expand vacant property taxation to commercial class as well. Do you have a seconder for that? I see Councillor Hopkins, thank you.

[36:01] Comments or questions? Councillor Lewis, please go ahead. Thank you, Your Worship. And through you to Councillor Turner, I just wonder if he might consider rather than just commercial if he might see the language of additional property classes. As amenable, I know that we also have certainly in my ward some vacant, light industrial classes, things of that nature. And I think if the province wants to expand the power, I would be open to any sort of expansion that they wanna give us, at least in discussion with them.

[36:38] So I wonder if he would see that as a way forward to address all property classes. Let’s take that back for a moment to Councillor Turner for his perspective on what was requested as a friendly amendment to Councillor Turner. Through Your Worship, I’m welcome to that. I think it’s reasonable. I think our largest branches are both on residential and commercial, which is why I raised commercial specifically, but I can see the point as Councillor Lewis raised. So I’d look to your seconder, Councillor Hopkins, if she’s amenable, I see a yes there. So that would be deemed a friendly amendment, other comments or questions.

[37:15] And I’m sorry, Councillor Lewis, were you done then? I’m done, Your Worship. All right, thank you very much. Then I have Councillor Cassidy, please. Thank you, Your Worship, and I just wanna thank Councillor Turner for bringing this up as well. And I think we’re all sort of on the same page with this. And it’s the idea of expanding our availability of space for housing. So it’s not about going after empty or vacant commercial lots. This is what I’m, where my thinking is, but it’s about going after available space that we can then repurpose for housing.

[37:57] And that’s the first step is having those, that land or that space or whatever is out there, sitting vacant and being able to use it for the people that need a place to live. Thank you, next I have Councillor Vanholst. Thank you, Your Worship. And I’m happy to entertain this. However, I think I would prefer to see this come as a separate motion to committee rather than as an add-on, it seems like quite a different thing. The lobbying the government is different than what’s being asked for by our Councillors.

[38:35] Just as a point, it’s been accepted as an amendment subject to the vote. So we’ll treat that accordingly. If you want that dealt with a separate item, I would suggest the Councillor. I think the activity, if I can just add some clarity, is would involve more proactive productivity, but it is an amendment to the main motion. Any other comments, Councillor Vanholst? No, no, I realize that in this case, that would have been my preference, but I still think it’s a worthy idea. So noted, thank you, Councillor Hopkins.

[39:12] Yes, my thanks. First of all, to Councillor Louis, and Palosa for bringing this forward, I really do appreciate the conversation when it comes to vacant properties and the need to address. And I also want to thank Councillor Turner for bringing this amendment forward too, because I think we all know more needs to be done. And this is an opportunity to address the needs of the housing crisis that we have in our city and to send a letter to the province to address looking at all classes, tax classes.

[39:49] So very supportive and many things to all three Councillors for this. Thank you. I have no other speakers to the amendments. So this is on the amendment. We will call the question. Well, as in the vote.

[40:32] All these will now look to the motion as amended. Answer questions. Seeing none, we’ll call the question. So the as amended will require the mover and seconder. So I’ll look for a mover for that, please. Councillor Louis, seconded by Councillor Palosa. Thank you very much. We’ll call the question. Posing the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[41:40] Councillor Cassidy. Item 13 on the floor, but I believe Councillor Vanholz had requested that this be dealt with after we go in camera. Yes, and then what we can do is put that back into public session following the confidential session. So anything else for you then, Councillor Cassidy? That is it. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. 11th report of civic works. I’ll call on Councillor Palosa, please. Thank you for worship. I have been given notice to pull items 18 being 2.14 and 19 being 2.15.

[42:14] Not sure if there’s any others. Does anyone have any other items they wish to have dealt with separately? Councillor Palosa. Thank you. I’ll put the remainder of the items on the floor noting there was several condition assessments laid out before a specific works dealing with culverts and wastewater management, which will help for better informed budget decisions until the ratio is going forward in the future.

[42:47] And the committee did receive a delegation for several delegations for you scooter feedback that’s still being publicly collected on the city’s website if any other members of the public wish to have feedback as there will be a staff report later this fall for committee and council’s consideration. Thank you. Any colleagues wish to provide any comments or have any questions? Councillor Turner. Wanted to draw attention to 2.11 and 2.12 the corporate energy consumption and activities report and the community energy use and greenhouse gas inventory emissions report.

[43:24] These are really helpful for us to be able to best target our climate to action initiatives and understand where we can have the most impact and the most room for improvement in terms of our greenhouse gas production or reductions in those areas, especially around transportation and buildings and taking a look at both what we can do within the corporation and what we can help support within the community.

[43:56] The way we build and our building patterns and helping to rehabilitate buildings so that they are not a significant contributor of greenhouse gases. Our transportation networks and choices go a long way towards helping to reduce greenhouse gas and that goes right into the corporation in terms of us looking at how we maintain our fleet appropriately and make sure that we’ve made the right choices as well as impacts. So I think staff for producing these, I draw it to both the council and the public’s attention because I think these are really important and you’ll see that there’s a couple of other discussions today that kind of hinge around what these findings are.

[44:39] Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Councillor Closer. Thank you. I put those items on the floor for a vote excluding item 2.14 and 0.15. Then we’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motions passed 14 to zero.

[45:21] That’s closing. Thank you. One four is the outcome of climate lens screening applied to major transportation projects. Council declared the climate emergency in April 2019. Ms. Sherra joined our committee and had a five minute presentation as this is the first time we’re discussing the climate lens and staff’s recommendation regards to our project. I will put this item on the floor. Thank you. Any comments or questions? Councillor Lehman. Thank you, your worship. I’d like to address the portion of this motion to the Wonderland Road widening.

[46:01] What I’d like to do is I’d like to put an amendment on the floor and then after a seconder is presented, then I’d like to speak to it with your permission. The amendment which the clerk has a copy reads. That clause 2.14 of 11th report of the civics works committee be amended by adding the following new part the civic administration be directed to include specific actions to address traffic congestion, areas of Wonderland Road and the development of the future master mobility or mobility master plan.

[46:40] It being noted that the corridor will be valued as part of the upcoming plan with focus on transit, high occupancy, vehicle use and active transportation. Thank you. Do you have a seconder for that? I see Councillor Squire seconding comments, questions. Councillor Lehman, back to you. Thank you. Colleagues, this is a big change in direction for the city. For at least two terms, the widening of Wonderland Road has been going through the EAA process and part of a bigger plan for the development in the West.

[47:20] And rightly so, the city had foreseen residential development both in the Northwest and then the Southwest and the increased volume of traffic that would come from those developments. Ever since I’ve been in office, heard serious concerns and witnessed every day, the congestion on the North South route on Wonderland and no surprise, this is the last bridge across the river on the West.

[48:00] There’s folks coming up to major commercial centers with Costco and then within a kilometer farm boy mall and then farther up access to the Walmart big box development on Fanshawe. We’re going south access to the 401 and not to mention people going to and fro from work at rush hour. The congestion is not just at rush hour though, it’s consistent throughout the week and on weekends with both those things. This is the last, it’s our access to the 401 for many commuters as well.

[48:39] In the future, it’s going to be only enhanced as more development is happening in the North and the South and with such things as the Casino and Amazon, Talibil, et cetera, et cetera. It’s congested now and it’s going to only, that congestion is only going to increase. My constituents have been told by me that the choke points that they’re experiencing, we can’t do anything for.

[49:13] Don’t worry, that’s going to be addressed when we widen the road. And now we’re changing course of that plan. So the purpose of this motion is to highlight the need for staff to address these choke points. If we’re not widening Wonderland, we need very specific action in this area that a general master plan might not include.

[49:48] So for those that are using Wonderland, both in my ward and in fellow counselors ward that are on Wonderland, I have to ensure that these concerns are going to be held because now we’re going to have to wait for a few more years while another plan is being developed. So hence my motion to amend this to really highlight these areas and to focus staff on bringing credible solutions in lieu of widening. Thank you for your consideration.

[50:25] To the amendment, any other comments or questions? I see Councillor Squire. I will also have extensive comments on the main motion and the report that staff submitted, but those may get me in trouble. So I’ll present those later. What I want to say right now is I’ve spent, I’m like Councillor Layman, I spent my entire term getting concerns and complaints from people, particularly people who reside on Proudfoot Lane in the many buildings that are located there, the seniors that are there, very concerned about their safety in using Proudfoot Lane.

[51:04] And the issue of course is that people often use Proudfoot Lane as a cut through to avoid the congestion that is there on Wonderland Road. So they’ve asked over a period of time for solutions to that problem. And I think one of the solutions that’s going to have to be looked at, quite frankly, if we don’t go with the widening of Wonderland Road is controlling somehow the access from Proudfoot Lane onto Oxford Street, so it isn’t used as a cut through. And I need to ensure for all those constituents, who I said to the same as Councillor Layman, while we’re working on it, we’re going to make some changes to Oxford Street that will hopefully help, so stay tuned for that.

[51:45] I have to ensure that when staff goes back, if the widening is put on hold, that their concerns are addressed. And I certainly couldn’t be a responsible Councillor if I didn’t make sure all of those concerns were addressed. And quite frankly, the mobility master plan, I mean, we love using creating things at City Hall, and now we’re creating a mobility master plan. Quite frankly, and I hope staff hears this, I have no idea what that is. I don’t know if that’s going to address the infrastructure. I don’t know if it’s going to adjust address bosses.

[52:19] I don’t know, I really don’t know what it is. It’s very generally described in this report, but again, it’s a creature that’s going to be created. I don’t know how long this plan is going to take, is it going to take a year, is it going to take five years? And so this amendment will at least help me with that, but I have many more concerns that I’ll be voicing when the main report comes forward for approval, because quite frankly, the approach that staff took is not one that I accept. Thank you, I next to the council office.

[52:57] Yes, thank you, Your Worship. And I’ll just speak to the amendment only. And I do have a question reviewing the amendment. It addresses congestion areas on Wonderland Road and this is my question and maybe through you to staff. First of all, I’d like to make a comment that there’s a lot of confusion out there in the community when it comes to the two lanes that are going to be widened on Wonderland. And I have a ward that abuts Wonderland to the south, but it doesn’t really have any part of the widening of Wonderland that is before us.

[53:41] And I think that’s important for the public to understand that we’re looking at eight kilometers from Sarnia to Southdale in that area only. And I wanna make sure that first of all, this amendment only pertains to that area because I understand there are plans, future plans through the transportation plan and through the mobility master plan that is going to be coming to us soon that will address widening or not on Wonderland.

[54:20] And I really wanna be specific here to what exactly this amendment means. Is it specific to the widening to six lanes? First of all, to the Councillor and secondly to staff if they have any concerns. Let’s start with Councillor and then we’ll go to Misha. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, my concern here is definitely as in the choke points that I touched on. We see choke points at the bridge, both ways.

[54:57] At rush hour we see choke points at commercial developments along Wonderland and all the way up to Fanshawe. But my purpose here was to address the specific suspension of the widening of Wonderland Road that’s in the original motion. Misha. Thank you, Your Worship. As Councillor Hopkins correctly noted, we are looking from Southdale to Sarnia with respect to the Discover Wonderland DA that is the subject of this report.

[55:33] Staff, do you not have any concerns about the motion to look at means to better manage congestion, traffic flow, reduce volumes, provide for more efficient and safe flow along the corridor limits within Discover Wonderland as part of the environmental assessment or part of the mobility master plan process. And certainly this recommendation in the report does not preclude the consideration of other aspects of Wonderland and what the future operations and design need to be on those sections as part of that mobility master plan.

[56:07] Just to note the mobility master plan is a replacement to our former transportation master plan. But what has changed is that we want to integrate our active modes, including cycling and pedestrianism as well as walk as transit into one comprehensive transportation plan focused on the movements of good and peak goods and people versus having separate plans by load. Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, thank you for the clarification from staff and from Councillor Layman. I hear you loud and clear that this only pertains to Wonderland road widening to six lanes from Sarnia Southdale.

[56:41] I would appreciate maybe that being put in the motion to prevent further confusion out in the public when we talk about lane widening on Wonderland. I think the conversation here is specific to six lanes in this area and nowhere else. And like Ms. Shear said, we are going to have further conversations through the mobility master plan to deal with the challenges that exist along Wonderland Road, like Councillor Layman mentioned the casino.

[57:19] So, but this has got nothing to do. This amendment has nothing to do with these other stress areas on Wonderland other than the between Sarnia and Southdale. So I would make that a comment. I’m okay after hearing staff’s comments to support the amendment for further clarification. I think it’s important that we really, when we talk about the changes that we’re making, that we are as clear as possible in what our intentions are.

[57:53] So I would encourage that friendly amendment. Thank you. I’m not sure if a friendly amendment is required, but it was, I thought it was clear that the intent was that this amendment apply to the area as described in the original motion. And I think that’s implicit in the amendment. I’m not sure it needs to be any more explicit, but I’m at the pleasure of council on that. Councillor Hopkins, any other comment on that? I know you signed off, but I’ll bring you back and if you have any other final comment. No, those are my comments. And this is just to the amendment.

[58:25] Yes, it is. Thank you, Councillor Analst. Thank you, Your Worship. And my first question through you to staff is about the timing of the mobility master plan. When do we hope to see that? Mr. Chair. Thank you, Your Worship. We are in the process of developing and providing the terms of reference that would go to a consultant right now. So the intent would be to provide that information about the scope and scale and schedule to committee and council later this year. The process itself, including a very extensive public consultation plan, is likely to take all of 2022 and part of 2023.

[59:05] So we are looking at options potentially to bring that back in phases if that’s possible, but there’s some work that needs to be done around that. So I would expect that you would hear from us at some point in later 2023. Councillor Van Halst. Thank you very much. And my next question is how far are we into the EA for the Wonderland widening? And when would that be completed if we were just to go forward with it? For sure. Thank you, the EA for the Wonderland widening.

[59:39] It was about 18 months or so under way at the time. We had been up for some public consultation. There’s probably another year’s worth of work that would need to happen on the EA before it was submitted for consideration and approval through the provincial process. So fair bit of work there yet. Okay, yes, thank you. And the amendment is for other strategies to deal with the congestion. Can you suggest what some of those other strategies might be?

[1:00:15] Is there a realistic hope in this amendment? For sure. Thank you Your Worship. I guess I believe there is. So this quarter carries between 30 and 50,000 vehicles a day depending on the time of year of those are one occupant vehicle. So single occupant vehicle. So there certainly are some options related to increasing vehicle occupancy that can make a significant difference. The peak and congestion times along this corridor are very defined and quite significant versus some of the after hours use of it.

[1:00:48] So there are some abilities through things like transportation demand management which could spread the peak out by just changing people. Can you have it slightly? That could be very valuable. There are currently 19 transit routes along this location that we can provide some consideration about how those are accommodated through things like Q-jump lanes that could potentially improve flow. There’s also a number of commercial driveways each of which represent the conflict point along there. And we also have a number of locations that create some issues. I think the one that Councillor Layman referred to might be Beaverbrook.

[1:01:20] And he correctly notes that staff has said there is a widening that needs to happen to address some of the congestion there. But the widening is actually on the East West Road. It’s actually on Beaverbrook. And this decision would not preclude us making intersection improvements to ensure things function safely and effectively. Councillor, I have a host. Thank you very much. And my next concern is that we might want to extend the amendment to Adelaide Street because we’re doing the underpass. And if anything is going to induce traffic flow to Adelaide Street, that would be it.

[1:02:00] As a matter of fact, that’s what we’re hoping is that people will take that street. So what’s the impact going to be on Adelaide Street when we finish that if we don’t widen the road? I’m inclined to bring that forward to the main motion. That’s not specific to this motion here. If that’s all right, Councillor and host. Well, your worship, I might be, if it seemed like we needed some congestion management strategies for Adelaide as well, then I would ask if there’s a friendly amendment to Councillor Layman’s motion.

[1:02:41] So that’s why I’m asking this question. If that’s being directed to Councillor Layman, I’ll ask the question of Councillor Layman. With all respect to Councillor Reynolds, this motion, the amendment is specific to Wonderland. And I would ask that he would bring another amendment to in another format, not included into this. Councillor Reynolds, you still have the floor. Thank you very much.

[1:03:13] Well, I think that’s reasonable. So at your suggestion, your worship, I’ll ask this question again in the main motion, at which point I could request another amendment. So noted. Thank you very much. Anything else, Councillor and host? I don’t think so. All right, good. Thank you, Councillor Cassidy. Thank you, Your Worship. And realizing that Councillor Vanholst is going to speak to this again. I just want to try to put it to bed now. This area of Adelaide is in Ward 5. It’s nowhere near.

[1:03:45] The underpass project is in the far north end of Adelaide and there are road improvements scheduled to take place along Sunnydale Road, which is where Adelaide meets at this point. And there is significant intersection improvements also being planned at Adelaide and Sunnydale Road. So with respect to the Councillor, the underpass project is kilometers away from the section of Adelaide that is in this report and will not be affected by the underpass project.

[1:04:27] That Mayor may not have seen safe time on the main motion, Councillor Cassai. I guess we’ll see any of their comments or questions, please. I’d ask the Deputy Mayor to take the floor to the chair, please. Yes, I have the mayor and the list. Thanks very much, colleagues. I think what we’re being asked to consider feels quite reasonable to me when you look specifically at what the amendment says, that we look at congestion areas or pinch points, if you will, on Wonderland Road in the area that’s impacted by the main motion. So it seems to me, particularly when you consider the high use in peak times, particularly, the impact on transit, pedestrians and the like and all various forms of active transportation.

[1:05:09] I think that Councillor Layman’s amendment feels extremely reasonable and I hope colleagues will support that. Thank you. Back to you, Chair. I’ll turn the chair back to you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I have, I showed no other speakers on the, oh, I do, pardon me, Councillor Van Merebergen. Thank you, thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to ask a basic question, and that is currently we have a mobility master plan, the 2030 mobility master plan.

[1:05:46] Why do we need another mobility master plan? I see the current one, the 2030 mobility master plan also talks about things like Q jump lanes and so on. Maybe this is a good time to ask staff, how much should we spend? I think it was ACOM, that was the consultant on that. How much should we spend for that master plan that we’re currently under? Let me share over to you. Your worship, I don’t have that information available to me at this point, but mobility master plans are typically updated as certainly with each decade, we are in a position where that ours needs to be updated at this time to reflect changes and development and growth within the city.

[1:06:30] Councillor Van Merebergen. Is there, is there somebody from finance that might be attending this meeting that might have that information? Let’s turn that over to finance. I’m not sure if any advanced prep on that might have been offered, maybe they’ll have a response, not sure. I’ll go to finance. Ms. Barbone, are you able to respond or one of your colleagues? Yes, through the chair, the number that we did spend on the transportation master plan, the smart moves, which the work was done in 2009 and concluded in 2013 was a total of $687,000.

[1:07:08] Councillor Van Merebergen. So if I could just understand, what are we trying to achieve with this current one that’s not already in the, or sorry, the one that we’re proposing, that isn’t already achieved in the one that exists now to take us to 2030. Ms. Chair? So thank you, Your Worship. These are 20 year plans that get updated halfway through. So this one will take us to 2040 and it will reflect changes in travel patterns, the implementation of the new rapid transit routes, the growth and intensification of the city.

[1:07:44] So the data that underlies our current plan is from 2009. It was analyzed through 2010, 2011. This one went a little bit later. So it is time for us to make that review to reflect not only what has changed in our city so far, as well as the changes that we’ve project based on the anticipated growth patterns in the city that we did not know about a decade ago. Councillor and Merebergen. Yes, thank you. The way I look at the way Wonderland is functioning right now and has been for some time or non-functioning is that it’s a continual choke point.

[1:08:22] There’s this talk that will address the choke points. The whole stretch is a choke point. It’s over capacity as we speak. I want to know if voting for this type of an amendment will forego any hope of widening in the next couple of years. Let’s say 2025, which is supposed to be scheduled to begin. Are you sure? Your worship, so should council support the motion to discontinue the environmental assessment, discover Wonderland staff would cease any work on the environmental assessment at this point?

[1:09:07] Should council, once the mobility master plan is concluded, direct us to revitalize that. We would probably have about a year’s worth of work in order to move to detail design and construction. It would not preclude a future council from directing us to widen, but it would create delay in implementation from the current schedule. Councillor Rimever. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Colleagues on the amendment? I see none.

[1:09:40] We’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed, 13 to one. So colleagues, we’re now looking at the motion as a councilor Lehman, seconded by Councillor Lewis. Oh, excuse me, Councillor Lehman?

[1:10:18] That was, you weren’t moving? Just clarify, please. No, that wasn’t to move. It’s requesting the floor again. Well, not yet, but we’ll get you there just now. ‘Cause it’s referred to the motion that you want to vote on or want to put on the floor. We have just approved an amendment. So now we’re looking to the motion as amended. I have another motion towards that, a referral. Furls take priority.

[1:10:51] Are there, is there a seconder for referral? No, this is on the main motion. Can I be allowed to read it? A moment, please. Go ahead, Councillor Lehman, please. Thank you. That consideration of part A1 of clause 2.14, the 11th report of the Civic Works Committee be referred to a future meeting of the Civic Works Committee following the consideration of the future mobility master plan. And then after a seconder, I’d like to speak to it again. I’ll be brief.

[1:11:25] On the referral, do you have a seconder? I see Councillor Squire. Councillor Lehman, go ahead. Thank you. So a lot of work, a lot of years have been put into planning. I’ve been to many PPMs as have other Councillors where I’ve seen the plans. I’ve seen designs for another bridge as part of the widening project of Wonderland which included many different types of mobility upgrades. I think be remiss to put aside that plan until I see what is replacing that plan to address the congestion that we’re currently seeing and we’ll see in future years.

[1:12:11] So that’s a purpose behind the referral is to allow me to make the best decision possible by seeing will the new options and plans put forward as we’ve just approved an amendment be sufficient. My point of view, my concessions point of view to sufficiently address the challenges that we’re facing on Wonderland. So thank you for your consideration. Thanks for much other comments or questions. Councillor Turner, please.

[1:12:48] Through you, your worship, perhaps Ms. Chair, what would be the impact of that such a referral in terms of being able to move forward on a material components as the rest of this motion? Ms. Chair. Thank you, Your Worship. I would seek clarification from the Councillor if I’ve interpreted this incorrectly, but the effect of this motion is would still be that we cease work on the Discover Wonderland EA but that we would retain six laning as an option for consideration through the Mobility Master Plan. I’ll go back to the Councillor for clarification.

[1:13:23] Yeah, my, the reasoning behind this referral is I’m concerned with suspending Wonderland Road widening without an alternative, a sufficient alternative plan in place of it. I don’t mind, you know, a temporary delay. I know it’s semantics, I get it. However, I’ve learned in my time here council semantics can sometimes bite you when you didn’t consider it one way or another.

[1:13:55] So I’m very cautious about putting an official suspension until I see what’s replacing it. Back to you, Councillor Turner. Thanks to you both. Through Your Worship, I would encourage my colleagues to defeat the referral. I think this confuses the process. I can appreciate the amendment to that was brought forward to previously by Councillor Layman. I think that was considered well considered and seeks to address the concerns that he’s had or referral, I think significantly risks in pairing the project, it risks in comparing the other components of this.

[1:14:44] I think it also seeks only to confuse what might come back and perhaps prejudice the outcomes as well. So I’m not supportive of the referral. I hope my colleagues won’t as well. Thank you, other comments or questions? Councillor Squire. The reason I supported this is quite frankly, I do not believe, and again, this will come out. I don’t believe there’s enough information in the report provided by staff to justify even the suspension of the widening at this time.

[1:15:19] But in the hopes of having an open mind, I think the next best alternative is to say look, as you go through this master mobility master plan, keep it on the table. My biggest concern is the opposite of what Councillor Turner is saying. My concern is it’ll be put to the side and no longer considered an option for this area. We’ve heard much from this year today about all these different options, different types of lanes. Well, let’s get them all out on the table through this process, including the widening, and then council will be in the best position to determine which of the options is the best.

[1:16:03] It will also enable us to speak to our constituents, many of mine who are very concerned about what’s going on on Oxford Street. And let staff come forward and explain to us why widening is not the best option. Is that unreasonable? I don’t think it is at this point in time. And I think all Councillor Lehman and I are saying is, look, when you say you’re suspending it, that’s not the language we want. We still want this on the table as part of the consideration that’s going to be made in this process.

[1:16:36] And I don’t think that’s unreasonable. Other comments or questions? Councillor Hummer. Thank you. So I’m definitely not going to support the referral. I would encourage my colleagues. Sometimes we have to actually make decisions. And we can’t just put things off endlessly without deciding what to do. And we have in the transportation master plan, which came forward many years ago, a plan to take Wonderland Road from four to six lanes and having applied the climate screening tool to the major transportation projects that are in that plan.

[1:17:26] The staff are recommending that on two of them, the widening of Adelaide from two to four lanes and the widening of Wonderland from four to six lanes in that section, that both of those things be suspended because they don’t meet our climate change adaptation and mitigation objectives. Widening the road just doesn’t make sense. Beyond the climate rationale for it, it’s also unbelievably expensive project. It’s very expensive. It’s like the most expensive project floating around there in the transportation master plan is that widening of Wonderland Road.

[1:17:58] And you can understand why it’s got to widen a bridge. It’s got to go through the train overpass. Like this is a very expensive undertaking that’s very disruptive. And so when you look at it and you say, it doesn’t make sense from a climate perspective. Also, it’s really expensive. I mean, what more do we need to know to know that that’s not a good option anymore? And by making a decision now to suspend the CA, staff can focus on all the other things that could be done that aren’t going from four to six lanes. And it’s clear to me that that is what needs to happen.

[1:18:32] And so I would like to make that decision now so that staff can work around what are the constraints now and how can we optimize the movement of people along that corridor, whether they’re in vehicles or buses or they’re walking or taking bikes, that they can get around better without widening and without incurring that huge cost. So over $200 million, just a wide and eight kilometers of roadway. There’s lots of things that could be done on Oxford Street. It’s come up a lot. The one that’s approved in the transportation master plan and it’s in the rapid transit master plan that we’ve approved and all we haven’t done is funded it is widening Oxford Street to add transit lanes as part of rapid transit.

[1:19:14] So if people want to do something to help out Oxford Street, let’s do that project, let’s put it in for funding and go ahead and build it. But Wonderland Road going from four to six lanes, it’s just going to get more expensive. It just could be worse and worse for the climate as time passes. And I’m not interested in taking it from four to six lanes. The staff recommendation is a very good one. We need to be decisive about this project. I think the other amendments that were suggested, I supported them. I think those were reasonable. There’s lots of things that could be done that are not widening, but widening from four to six lanes should be suspended.

[1:19:47] And now I hope you defeat the referral, which would be a referral for multiple years and just make a decision now. Thank you. Next I have Councillor Unholst. Thank you very much, Your Worship. And may I ask our staff the cost of completing the EA for Wonderland Road? Mr. Chair. Your Worship, I’m just going to check in with staff on that I don’t seem to have that number and my many pages ahead of me in front of me or if I do, I’m on the wrong page.

[1:20:22] So as soon as I have that number, I’ll provide it. Are you able to ask another question or make a comment? Councillor Unholst, while that’s being tabulated? Okay, well, I’ll extemporize Your Worship. I do question the change. It seems to me that we’re already in need of options to get people from the north to the south along this corridor and widening would work despite the cost.

[1:20:59] It does seem like a good approach to think about telling people you can’t travel alone in your car when people are wearing masks to avoid and are trying to avoid being two meters from others. I think driving alone maybe become more popular and then I understand people maybe are looking at getting cars just to do that.

[1:21:33] So I wonder about our plans for the future. Certainly people aren’t going to be walking from the southwest to western in the mornings to get to work or to get to school. That’s a little too far. So I may not support this particular part of the project. However, I might like to see this EA done so that when the amendment that Councillor Layman first brought forward is looked at, we can have a pretty excellent look at what a widening would be.

[1:22:22] And I think that would be a decision we could be very confident with because we’d have all the information there. So maybe I could ask if there’s an answer to the question about the cost for the finishing of the EA. I understand it would take a year to finish that. That might be worth it for me. Let’s ask that question. May I share any luck with that? Thank you, Your Worship. Thank you, Councillor.

[1:22:53] Thank you for your patience. We have about $250,000 in outstanding work to complete the EA. I would caution against trying to do that in parallel to the mobility master plan. I think that is a difficult conversation to have in terms of engaging the community in two separate processes related to some of the same assets. Nice. So thank you for that question, Your Worship. So is our city engineer suggesting that if we went forward with the Wonderland EA, we should just complete that first and then move on to the mobility master plan.

[1:23:28] May I share? Your Worship, unfortunately, we were at position that if there’s a desire to proceed with both, we would do both. But to do both, just as potential input into the mobility master plan, we would be challenging. So if there is a desire to proceed with six-laning and our clear recommendation from a climate change perspective is to not proceed with six-laning, we would have to pursue both at the same time. What I understood from the Councillors’ thought process or sharing was that he would like to have the EA completed as an input to the mobility master plan or to have data from the EA.

[1:24:00] I don’t know that we generate anything different from the EA than the mobility master plan we get up unless the intent is to pursue six-laning. Councillor Reynolds. Okay, thank you. So again, I’ll make just a couple more comments about my reservations with respect to the climate-strange strategy. I see not doing a widening early as something that’s gonna create a lot of congestion and that’s gonna mean a lot of greenhouse gases emitted while people are idling and going bumper to bumper to try and get through the intersections.

[1:24:46] In terms of long-term, we’re moving towards other technologies. I have lots of faith in the engineers of the world in terms of dealing with EVs and things like that. So I think we’ll be in the latter years not really worrying about the emissions because we’ll have cars that don’t have many. And of course, here in Ontario, most of our energy is clean. And with the expansion of the Bruce planet, it’ll remain clean.

[1:25:23] So however, we’ll still have trouble moving the growing number of people around the city. And so I think there’s still value in some widening despite the expense. And so I would like to see that back still on the table. So those are my comments. I’ll see what’s required when it comes to the vote. Thanks, I was calling, so I was trying to balance out a discussion about the referral with some other comments that were added in.

[1:25:57] We’re speaking of the referral. Councillor Hopkins, please go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. And I am only speaking to the referral here as well. So I appreciate the conversation we’ve had to date on this and appreciate staff’s comments. Well, on this referral, to Councillor Lehman’s motion, I will not be supporting the referral and I’ll probably be very brief with my comments. I am and heard from the Councillor loud and clear the concerns in his community on the choke points along Wonderland and supported the amendment that we just had.

[1:26:41] I hear those concerns loud and clear. What I don’t hear though is why we would even refer this. We know it’s going to add the confusion to the process of the mobility master plan as we continue with the conversation of widening. I appreciate the fact that he’s just trying to to keep this open, but the reality is, we have a recommendation in front of us that is asking us with the work that went into this to suspend.

[1:27:23] And I’m not here to debate if we, I have not heard one reason why we would suspend this. If anything, comments from the community want us to take a stand here and to do something and be leaders, not only when it comes to climate change, but when it comes to moving around the city and as a ward representative in the southwest part of the city that has difficulty moving around, this almost makes me want to cry inside because we are not moving forward here when we start doing the confusion and the semantics of where we’re going to go as a city.

[1:28:08] I think we owe it to Londoners to make hard decisions. That’s why we’re elected. It’s not easy, but we owe it to Londoners to be as transparent with them and to make these hard decisions. So I will not be supporting this referral back. Thank you. Do I have any other comments or questions? I see Councillor Cassidy. Thank you Your Worship. I’m sorry that in all of the discussion going on, I was a little confused, I want to know if going ahead or referring this means that we go ahead with the EA and I just want this clear from the city engineer.

[1:28:50] So we go ahead with the EA and the mobility master plan is delayed while we go ahead with this EA. You sure can answer that? Your Worship, the way I would understand this motion is that we would not proceed with the EA. It would be put on hold versus canceled. We would, however, keep six laning of wonderland as an option in the mobility master plan. And that would be one of the things we’d consider through that process. I would remind that this is here as a result of the screening of our major transportation projects through the climate change lens.

[1:29:27] So we’ve gotten to a bit of the scoping of mobility master plan through this debate, but that’s the way I would see this motion should it succeed instead of deciding six laning is not an option for wonderland. We would retain that option, go through the mobility master plan and that at that point to make a decision as to whether or not to shelve the widening or proceed with concluding the EA after the mobility master plan is done. That’s for Cassidy. That’s good for me.

[1:29:59] I won’t be supporting the referral though. Thank you. Other comments or questions then? That’s for Madam Mayor Bergen. Mayor, I just wanted to ask you what we have an opportunity after the referral loan to speak to the whole motion or are we doing everything now? It’s kind of like if the referral passes, then that’s exactly what it is and it will be dealt with at a future time. All right, well, then perhaps I’ll just make some comments now since others have.

[1:30:39] We have for a reminder ourselves, there’s basically three major arterials that service London continually from the 401 right through the city. And that’s Veterans Memorial Parkway, Highbury and Wonderland. Two are on the east side of the city, only one services the west. And that’s Wonderland. We’re asking an awful lot from this little four-lantern. And then of course, when you get closer down towards the 401, it’s only two lands. So there’s a lot of pressure in this corridor.

[1:31:13] And as has been pointed out earlier, there’s a lot of development that’s taking place in the north end of the city, as well as the south, southwest. All of this feeding and funneling into the Wonderland corridor. And what we have right now just doesn’t suffice. I think any of us knows that. Certainly deep down in our hearts, we know there’s a problem on Wonderland. And it’s a problem that’s greater than just tweaking with buses and bicycles. We’ve got more and more trucks, transport goods that have to move up and down this corridor.

[1:31:54] So our engineering staff have known this. The consultants that we’ve used in the past have known this. So much so that we’ve been building development charges to fund this project since 2004. And we are continuing to do so. My understanding right now, maybe I could ask staff, what percentage of the amount for the total project do we have right now in development charges?

[1:32:27] What’s the percentage that would be funded through DCs? Is there sure? And then Mr. Barbonne is here to answer any questions related to DC then finally. Let’s go to Mr. Barbonne then, please. Yes, thank you for the chair. So there are 10 discrete different projects for the Wonderland Road widening. Each of them have varying levels of budget allocations with respect to development charges. They range from 94.7% growth down to 58.1% growth based on the discrete part of the project that’s been allocated.

[1:33:04] So that is being collected for under the development charge study background study that is currently in effect. All of development charges are in fact collected on a broad level and go into the reserve funds but are not actually allocated into the projects until the spending is actually scheduled to occur. So they are held through the reserve funds until they are needed. Council Member. Is it correct to say, Ms. Barbonne, that the average DC funding for the entire project is around 75%.

[1:33:39] Sir, do you mean in the aggregate, Council Member Bergen? Correct, yes. Ms. Barbonne. All 10 projects. Ms. Barbonne. Yes, thank you through the chair. So the weighted average based on the dollar value of the projects is approximately 75% for those 10 projects. That’s correct. Councilor. And as we’ve heard earlier, this project’s not even scheduled at the earliest to be finished until 2037 which gives 16 years to plan additional funding over the course.

[1:34:14] So clearly, the whole system knows that we needed to get things set up. As I said, it started in 2004. This has to go, we’re on the very, I think we’re dancing on a pin here a little bit because we can’t make another mistake transportation wise for the people of this city, similar to what happened in 1970 when the no was given to the Ring Road Expressway, the Ring Road Freeway.

[1:34:51] So we just can’t afford as a community, as a city to make a mistake with Wonderland. I’ve heard it said that, yes, we have to move people and of course we do. And how do people in London, Ontario choose to move? They move in vehicles. And we’re not gonna change that. It’s not gonna happen. Yes, transit, bicycles, yes, a secondary system, important, we should have that. In fact, this current EA is already encapsulating transit and bicycles as part of this project.

[1:35:29] So I guess just to wrap up, what we’re doing here originally with the widening of Wonderland makes a lot of sense and it cannot be off the table because I think anybody, if you look at this thing objectively and rationally, knows that it’s gonna have to go another lane. And if that lane means it’s an HOV lane with buses and cars with two or more passengers or two or more people in them, then so be it, at least you have that option.

[1:36:04] But if you don’t have the six lanes, much more constrained and ongoing, horrible congestion. And the talk that this is somehow related to climate change, we all know the cars are getting more and more electrified with— - 30 seconds, Councillor. With no greenhouse gas emissions. So clean technology, this works. We’re ready to go. The system’s in place to finance it. I just wanna keep that front and center. Thank you. - Thank you, Councillor Closer.

[1:36:39] Thank you, Your Worship. I’ll lead with a spoiler alert that I will not be supporting the referral. I did support clause D, but I do believe in the hard decisions that we need to make as Councillors that put us here. In 2019, Council declared a climate emergency. We asked for clear transparent rules to help us make these decisions. And that’s what staff’s done for us. This is what they brought back. This is our first opportunity to show if we’re gonna actually follow what we’ve asked for. It might not be popular, but that’s the job that’s before us tonight.

[1:37:13] Staff have come back and said, does not get the climate emergency screening tool that they’ve now implemented that we’re looking with. There’s a $212 million project before us, and staff say they could do better, being better accounted for with money, and recognizing there’s huge maintenance costs for snow removal and concrete and asphalt repairs as we move forward with this. And of course, Londoners pick cars. It’s all we build for. We don’t have active transportation. We don’t have bike routes. We don’t have a full rapid transit plan in front of us. Of course, people are gonna have a car.

[1:37:46] Those who are privileged and wealthy enough will buy a car. The rest will still figure out how to do what they need to do with public transit, bikes, and walking, ‘cause that’s what we left them with. And for me, let’s be honest, if we’re going from four to six lanes, we’re not winding a road. We’re building a highway. We’re building a highway that’s gonna divide our city even more, making it even more horrifically ugly sides of the streets as much as staff tries to make them beautiful. They’re not pedestrian friendly. There’s gonna be setbacks to businesses. Those with transportation mobility issues are gonna have a hard time crossing six lanes of traffic in the amount of time that any traffic light will give them.

[1:38:26] We know that people block sidewalks and people have a hard time using intersections as it is. London’s only gonna keep growing. The transportation’s gonna get worse for traffic congestion and flow. And by time, even if we did move forward and build and expand Winterland Road, by time it gets built because we only built for cars, it’s gonna open at capacity if not over. And we’re gonna have induced demand by having the same conversation, whoever sits around this horseshoe, three councils from now is gonna be back talking about the same issues.

[1:38:58] So I will not be supporting the referral. I will be supporting staff doing better traffic management through a mobility master plan, through TIMS and other opportunities we have, as I do not believe this is the option. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Deputy Mayor. Thank you, worship. This is one of those debates where I chose not to speak to sit back and listen. And I think as the discussion has continued, I’ve gotten a little more confused about what we’re talking about.

[1:39:36] Earlier in the debate before Councillor Lehman even raised his point of a referral, I heard the city engineers say that suspending the Discover Winterland assessment meant we do the mobility master plan. And there was the point made that a future council could actually revive that and have about one year worth of work left. And it seems like the referral does the same thing. So at first, I’m not gonna support the referral. I don’t see, it’s redundant.

[1:40:08] But now words like cancel and councils are interpreting the current wording and the current motion differently that I had understood based on earlier in the debate. So I guess I wanna go back to the city engineer and understand the earlier comments about what suspend actually means because I heard the answer before and it sounded to me like you said to decide we’re doing the mobility master plan. That’s gonna have its result in that there are decision points. We can’t bind a future council. So someone else could pick it up where it left off and carry it forward.

[1:40:41] Is that true? And that’s the only question I have. Let’s ask Ms. Schur. Thank you Your Worship. So what we would take the referral to mean is that we would continue to consider six laning as an option through the mobility master plan. The recommendation from staff as we suspend all additional work on discover wonderland and do not consider six laning as part of the mobility master plan. What is still true is a future council should they decide they wish to pursue six laning. Of course, could instruct staff to do differently in the future at any time.

[1:41:17] Thanks very much. Any other comments or questions then? On the referral, we will call the question. Closing the vote, the motion is lost six to eight. So colleagues, that takes us now back to the original motion as amended and for that, I will look for a mover and a seconder please.

[1:42:01] Councillor Lewis seconded by Councillor Turner. Thanks very much. We’ve had a fairly healthy discussion colleagues on referral which really I think addressed a lot of the issues that may come up in this. So if there are some new comments or other comments you’d like to make, I know that the public would love to hear them. So any comments or questions? Councillor Cassidy. Yeah, sorry, Your Worship. I did not speak at all on the main motion and I just want to say I support it. I support it at that committee.

[1:42:34] There are countless studies around the world that show exactly what Councillor Palosa said that by the time these projects get built and done they’re either already at capacity or over capacity. And also people over the time of, over the course of time where they have made adaptations for the current congestion and traffic patterns by carpooling, by traveling at off peak hours, by taking transit or cycling, all of those things, when there seems to be added capacity on the road, they drop those options and move to a single occupant vehicle. And there for these projects that around the world have cost billions of dollars, end up seeing at the finish point of the project, traffic moving slower than it was moving before.

[1:43:19] So this is what induced demand is. This is what we have to avoid. We’re not solving any problems by building as Councillor Palosa. So eloquently put it a highway down the middle of our city, which is not what a livable, beautiful city is about. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Square. So I’m gonna try to stick to my concerns about the report. I just wanna make it clear that I was more than happy to consider alternatives to widening Wonderland Road. But from what I’ve heard today, that’s not in the cards with this motion.

[1:43:55] I think the city engineer made it clear that staff would really be looking at all other options. And certainly my colleagues who are prepared according to them to make tough decisions that some of us aren’t prepared to make, they’ve made it clear that they don’t want this. And you know what, at the end of the day, whatever the vote is, I will respect that. So I’m gonna try to stay away from a motion, but I just wanna provide my rationale. And it’s primarily a concern about the report. And I felt that the report was not sufficient to move me logically to the point of saying that widening was no longer the option that needed to be taken with regard to Wonderland.

[1:44:39] There’s a lot of things in the report that I reject. I reject the assumptions. I have a lot of the analysis and the conclusions. You know, it talks about things like induced demand as if induced demand is just a bad thing. In other words, induced demand always bad. And that’s just, for me, that’s just absolutely not correct. And when I looked at that, a lot of people said, you know, just because more people use a wide road doesn’t make it bad policy. It can enhance economic activity, which we’ve seen on Wonderland Road as a wide road.

[1:45:13] It can produce short-term reduced travel time. It can indeed produce short-time emission decreases as less cars are idling on the highway. What I’m saying is, if you’re gonna look at these issues like induced demand, you have to look at them in totality. Similarly, we have a lot of lenses at City Hall. And it seems to be we’re moving to the point of saying, if one lens and one part of one lens doesn’t conform with something, it’s done, it’s done. And I don’t think that’s what these lenses are meant for.

[1:45:49] I think what we’re supposed to be doing is applying all of these lenses to the various decisions we make and apply other logical information and make a decision. I reject the idea that a lens, whatever it might be, by itself, is conclusive as to whether something happens or doesn’t happen. And I wanna make that clear now because I think this is going to happen again in debates. People are gonna say, well, it doesn’t fit this part of a particular lens, so we gotta cancel it or we can’t do it. I don’t think that’s the proper approach.

[1:46:22] And it’s an approach that I don’t accept. People talk about Wonderland Road. I think it’s really important that we should have had a full look at the nature of Wonderland Road. Let’s look at it. People call it, say, it’s a highway. It’s a very busy road. And somebody who was against this sent me a film and talked about the comparison of streets and roads. And said, streets should have that full street approach with bike lanes, but a road is something different. A road is something that carries major amounts of traffic.

[1:46:57] It has an extended space. It should have much less egress. It should have more traffic on it. That’s something that this expert was telling me was acceptable. So when one goes and says, well, we hate this Wonderland Road, Wonderland Road provides access from the extreme north end of the city to Highway 401. And by the way, it has an interchange. An interchange to allow commercial and automobile traffic to access Highway 401. And I think that’s an interchange that most people in the city have London advocated for.

[1:47:31] So this idea that Wonderland Road is somehow this quaint road that we have to preserve, I don’t think that’s where we are anymore as a large city. I also want to be— are you raising a point of order? The other point I really want to stress is just because you widen a road doesn’t mean you’re not going to do anything else. This idea that it’s the only thing you’re going to do— I reject that also— all of the things that people are talking about doing to make the road better. They can be done.

[1:48:05] And I really want to deal with the mobility master plan. Having sat on London Transit— and I hear this again in the arguments. Well, if this road gets really crowded, which it is now, by the way, people will stop using cars, and they’ll jump into buses. And they’ll jump into other methods of transportation to get across the city. There’s absolutely no evidence of that, of course, and any other jurisdiction that that’s happening. 30 seconds, please. And it’s not happening in the city of London. I know that well from London Transit. We have a 7.6% share. So let me put it to this way.

[1:48:39] I don’t think this report is complete in satisfying the illness of showing that Wonderland shouldn’t be widened. But let me be clear. My colleagues have been really clear that it’s sufficient for them to make this determination. And I’ll tell you one thing. I’m not going to get emotional and angry. I’m going to accept the decision that this council makes. Thank you. Next, I have Councillor Hopkins, please. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. And I’ve been waiting. And glad that we’re here speaking to the main motion. And I guess I’d like to just start off with the conversation around congestion.

[1:49:16] And throughout my years, I’ve seen Wonderland go from two to four. And now we’re having that conversation around six. And I can say from my own personal experience, we know widening Wonderland does not believe congestion. I understand from my fellow colleagues that about Wonderland Road, there is congestion. It’s just down the road from where I live. I use Wonderland quite often. I have learned, and I think COVID has taught us and has given us flexibility on how we use our streets. I don’t use it before nine o’clock, ‘cause I know it can be very congested.

[1:49:54] I’m lucky enough to be able to use it at 9.15, where I’m able to move freely. And I think that brings to the greater conversation of how we build our city and how we move around. I’m going to wear my Ward 9 hat here. I’ve heard comments made around the Ring Road. That was a big conversation back in the ’80s, and we shelved that conversation. The Ring Road was 401-402 to the North Clark Road in 401. It had nothing to do with Wonderland.

[1:50:28] In fact, Wonderland cuts the west part of our city, and we cannot move around, and we need better plans. Widening Wonderland will not help us move in the west. It will not do that. I want to also address, I met with our representative from London Youth, who did a, they’ve done a number of surveys on what the youth in London want. And in Ward 9, the youth had a number of concerns around housing affordability and diversity, but the other conversation that came loud and clear was the need for transit.

[1:51:07] Not only transit, but affordable transit. So these are the conversations. These are the decisions that we’re making today for the future of Londoners that want a movable city for all. Climate change, I want to address climate change here. We very easy to declare an emergency. A lot of municipalities have done that. I know what a number of conferences that I’ve gone that come and approached and said, “Oh, London’s declared an emergency. We’re thinking of doing the same thing.” And I’ve responded easy to declare an emergency on climate change, what are we doing about it?

[1:51:46] And this is exactly what we’re doing about it. And I want to thank staff for their work, reviewing these projects. And yes, tough decisions for us to make now, but I look forward to making even more decisions, tough decisions that we need to make for a livable city for everyone here in London. I just want to thank staff and very supportive of their recommendation will be supporting it. And I know that moving forward with the master mobility plan will have further conversations with the community and having their input and how we can better address the need, not only for affordable housing, but also as we move around this city, it is going to be imperative as we grow that we do so.

[1:52:41] So thank you again to staff. Thank you, Councillor Luz. Thank you, Your Worship. And first let me apologize when I spoke earlier. I didn’t rise, we’re in council, so that was my full pop. My apologies to colleagues for that. I didn’t speak to this earlier. I wanted to wait until the main motion. I will be supporting this. And I want to pick up on a couple of comments that the colleagues have made. We heard about the possibility of electric vehicles coming online much more quickly and reducing greenhouse emissions.

[1:53:19] Yes, they will reduce it, but building six lanes of roadway itself is going to cause greenhouse emissions from the production of the materials that go into the road. And even after that fact, electric vehicles are not emission free because of course there are emissions created in producing the electricity that charges them. They’re certainly a big step forward and the sooner the better that they arrive. But they’re not going to be a single silver bullet to this climate problem that we have. I listened a lot to both Councillor Squire and Councillor Hopkins.

[1:53:56] And I appreciate their comments about transit and transit routes and transit ridership share. And I agree with Councillor Squire that in a nation like Canada, which is much different both culturally, geographically and climate-wise than Europe, that people are not going to give up their personal automobiles because there’s a little bit of a traffic congestion and jump on transit. But we’ve heard that there are 19 transit routes on Wonderland. And maybe one of the solutions to dealing with congestion is amalgamating and reducing some of the transit traffic into a more efficient route there.

[1:54:34] Affordable transit, I think we have. When you look at what a rider pays to ride transit in the city, so I don’t think that there’s really an affordability issue with transit. In fact, I’m mindful of the fact that this council has approved student passes for secondary students at a discounted rate. Our post-secondary students get an incredible discounted rate through their deal with London transit. We have discounts for seniors and for folks who are blind. So there are a number of ways that this council’s already tackled making transit affordable.

[1:55:08] The council’s choir mentioned the video and I received it to the streets versus roads. Maybe one of the solutions to Wonderland Road’s traffic is to perhaps limit some of the egresses on and off the road. That’s a valid point. A road that’s meant to carry high volumes of traffic. Can’t have people getting off at every single intersection and turning into neighborhoods. That’s just the reality. I’m also mindful of the fact that we’ve approved the traffic, the TIM system, which will improve our traffic light signalization signals and synchronization across the city.

[1:55:51] That’s something that we approved through the federal funding arrangements and staff are working on that. That will also have a role to play. I am the first to say I spend more of my time in the east than the west. I don’t drive Wonderland Road frequently, but I certainly acknowledge that there are some choke points there. In fact, visiting Postwick Arena for hockey games is sometimes difficult if it’s an early start and you’re still dealing with that rush hour traffic. But by the time you come home, there’s no problem because the demand is at peak periods only. And to create more lanes of traffic to sit empty, the majority of the hours of the day is something that I would really struggle with approving.

[1:56:32] So I think that there are alternatives to addressing Wonderland’s congestion problems. That’s why I was supportive of Councillor Layman’s motion. I’m also supportive of putting this EASI and letting our staff work on those other options and focus on the ones that are going to give us the best bang for the buck. Because while the car is not going away, we also are not just going to be able to continue to expand roads endlessly. And I do agree with Councillor Ploza on the fact that we would just be creating a highway through the city that’d be very difficult for individuals to cross.

[1:57:06] Even individuals in good shape let alone any individuals with mobility issues to get across six lanes of road in a short traffic cycle. 30 seconds, please. I appreciate the debate. I appreciate the discussion here, but I think our staff have presented a report that makes sense to me. And so I’ll be supporting it and looking forward to working with them on what options might increase the traffic flow and mobility on Wonderland in the future. Thank you, colleagues on the motion is amended and any other new comments. I have Deputy Mayor Morgan.

[1:57:39] Thank you on the main motion, Your Worship. I know there’s been some talk about the climate screening tool aspects of this. A component that it was important for me as well is certainly the cost for this project. As staff have articulated, it’s a $212 million project with 10 phases stretching over 12 years. In the report, they suggest that widening to six lanes to address traffic congestion is predicted to experience a return to your congestion at the end of that. And it is challenging to me to spend that volume of money when we might end up exactly in the place that we are at the end of it.

[1:58:17] And so if staff say that there are alternatives that are possible to try to address this, I think Councilor Layman’s motion was excellent to get the focus on the challenging portions of the road. And I will be for sure looking for the alternative solutions to those portions of the road that are much more cost effective. It would have been one of the most expensive projects we ever voted on taking the time to see what the alternatives are. Moving away from simply widening roads all the time, I think is something that I’m certainly supportive of.

[1:58:53] On the climate screening tool, I’ll say there are lots of really great projects that made it through the screening tool as well. There are lots of really important transportation projects and many parts of the city that we’re going to be proceeding with fully. And I think that that’s certainly one of the successes that we have in adding a review to the process and seeing what comes out the other end. So certainly, I know this has been a very interesting and challenging debate for some, particularly in the community.

[1:59:25] I trust the judgment of our staff on this and the work that they’ve done leading up to and continuing on with finding solutions to some of the challenges along Wonderland Road. And I look very forward to the results of Councilor Layman’s motion as well. Thank you, Councilor Turner. Thanks, Your Worship. And thanks for the good debate, everyone. I recognize there’s a lot of perspectives and passions on this one. The question at hand for us has to be what we want to accomplish and what behaviors we want to reward. If we were to accept the argument that single occupant vehicles were good, then we’d want to incentivize that and we wouldn’t incentivize that by creating more space for them.

[2:00:14] But if we want to accept that argument, if we were to say that single occupant vehicles created a harm to the municipality in some way, then we wouldn’t want to incentivize things. And so we want to take a look and say, what could we do in such a way that wouldn’t create more benefits for an undesired behavior? But if we want to create more benefits for the undesired behavior, then yeah, it’s widened Wonderland Road to six lanes because that’s all you’re doing. So I have some challenges with that.

[2:00:52] It comes from a whole bunch of different perspectives too. We have to take a look at cost. That’s a huge one. I think Deputy Mayor Morgan raises the right points. We have to say, are there alternatives that are better use of our money? If we’re looking at business as usual, business as usual, 1970s planning, yeah. Councilor Van Mirgen and Van Mirgen addressed the question of the ring road, 1970s blind. And widening Wonderland is 1970s planning. The challenge with ring roads is it doesn’t constrain development.

[2:01:25] It becomes the center of development. And it’s a huge incentivization for sprawl, which is a really poor use of land. A significant driver of climate impacts. And just really bad policy. Same thing with widening Wonderland to six lanes. I’d like to address what Councillor Squire loves to debate. And I’d love to debate him. We have a lot of fun sparring back and forth. He uses a few palaces in his argument.

[2:01:58] One of those is about the climate lens tool. The climate lens tool isn’t easy, they’re all reasoning. Climate lens helps us to say, okay, there’s going to be some impacts. We’ve got the gender lens. We’ve got other lenses. Councillor Squire is quite right. What those do is help flag issues associated with those things because we’ve identified those as concerns that should be on our radar. And as those projects come forward to us, we would like staff to be able to flag those for us. We can accept them or not, that’s our prerogative. We can accept them in part or in a hole, again, or prerogative.

[2:02:32] This isn’t an either or thing. If the climate lens was applied and it’s absolute, you can imagine there would be a lot of stuff that wouldn’t happen. In fact, we probably wouldn’t support cars because those are probably one of the worst things for the climate in the city as evidenced in the report that we had on climate impacts within the city. So that’s not what the report is suggesting. The report is suggesting, let’s take a look at ways of mitigating those impacts. Councillor Layman’s motion identified some opportunities to let’s say, let’s try and improve where those choke points are as he’ve turned them.

[2:03:10] And I think those are quite appropriate. So what’s before us and unfortunately, Wonderland Road became a bit of a lightning rod for this discussion because what this is is what the climate lens approach should be doing to how we approach our major engineering road projects. I looked at a few of them on the books. I identified some of the recommendations associated with that change in perspective and then also allows us to use that tool in a prospective basis too as new things come forward.

[2:03:49] By rejecting this, it means that we don’t even get to really look at these things anymore. It’s not just about these projects. It’s about the tool, it’s about the concept of being able to flag these things and bring them forward and say, yeah, there might be some concerns here because business as usual, 1970s planning doesn’t really work anymore. So I encourage you to support the motion. I, again, I really respect the points that people have made. A number of us have wards that abut Wonderland Road. In fact, Wonderland Road ends up being the boundary for a lot of our wards.

[2:04:28] 30 seconds. So we all have a bit of a stake in this. All of Londoners have a bit of a stake in this, absolutely. We need to make the right choice and supersizing a road. I don’t really believe it’s the right one. And I think the climate tool as proposed by staff is quite reasonable, measured. And I think it allows us the discretion to be able to look at projects on that basis. Thanks. Thank you, Congressman Holst. Thank you, Your Worship. So again, a lot of good points made. A bunch of conjecture as well.

[2:05:02] I wish we had supported Councilor Layman’s second motion ‘cause I would have been content with that. I believe that there might be some places along Wonderland Road where widening is appropriate. And at that point, it would have been fine. Here, I was still think that there’s some virtue in completing that EA. Of course, we may never widen a road, but we’d be able to see where it could be widened and what would the impacts for those 10 phases would be.

[2:05:39] So I guess to make things quick, what I want to do is move that the EA be completed. And then I’ll look for a seconder and that doesn’t go through or doesn’t pass and then I’ll support the motion as it is. But that’s because I would like to see that in more detail. That would be my motion. From my perspective, that’s contrary to the motion is amended if the motion is amended is defeated, Councilor Ebe, welcome to bring that forward.

[2:06:20] Okay, well, in that case, perhaps I’ll just vote against the motion and thank you. Thank you, next day of Councilor Layman. Thank you, yeah, good debate and it’s taken a lot of time but I think it needs to is a serious issue, a serious way forward that needs a full some discussion. I was hoping for a referral on this because there has been a lot of time spent by staff, a lot of money, a lot of planning and effort has gone in the last eight plus years to arrive at this point.

[2:07:03] And I’m concerned about setting that aside without seeing the alternatives. There was mention of the costs for sure that gets my attention and that alone would suggest a second look for sure, are there alternatives? And I think that’s, we’re not wrong to look at that. Any big road project that involves another bridge is gonna be expensive and DC charges have we heard have already been put aside for that up to 75%.

[2:07:36] This is a multi-decade project. We’ve got a river through our city. Cities that have rivers through it have bridges and is this time for bridge? I don’t know, I wanna see the alternatives as I said but I cannot go forward and just put aside the work that’s been done and the money that’s been spent and public consultations that have been done without seeing the alternative.

[2:08:11] I look forward to seeing what alternatives are out there and I’m hoping that it will be a much more cost-effective way of moving traffic. What I know right now is there’s congestion, serious congestion and in the years ahead that’s only going to increase and that has to be addressed some way, somehow. So I cannot support this motion as I do not see the alternatives. I look forward at some point for staff to bring forward the alternatives.

[2:08:46] I thank everyone for supporting the amendment to address the choke points in Wonderland and I’m fairly confident that that will bear fruit as providing an alternative to a big menu project. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hummer. Thank you. I just wanna talk about the financial side of the road widening projects and why it’s so important that we use the existing road network as efficiently as we possibly can.

[2:09:24] So I’m gonna use two examples. In Toronto, every 1,000 residents, it basically is on the hook for five and a quarter lane kilometers of road. So they need to look after financially, five and a quarter lane kilometers. In London, that number is nine and a half. So a thousand residents in London were on the hook financially for nine and a half kilometers of road. And the reason that that has happened is that we have built in a much less dense way and we have built out the road network to accommodate that pattern of growth and it’s expensive.

[2:10:02] That’s why in our infrastructure gap, roads and transportation and the structures related to transportation like bridges is the number one contributor to the infrastructure gap. Even though over the past many number of years every year that I’ve been on council, we have increased the capital lifecycle budget. So we can close the gap on the infrastructure. We’ve increased that capital budget, lifecycle capital budget for transportation, by $125 million over the 10 year period. Huge increase and we still have over $200 million infrastructure gap.

[2:10:39] We’ve made a dent in a very big problem. And so we really have to avoid adding even more lane kilometers of road when we don’t get a great return from them. And that’s what the report is telling us is there’s not a great return for adding this lane kilometer road in this segment. It’s too expensive and it’s not in line with our climate objective. So when we declare climate emergency, we’re gonna have to do some things differently, right? We’re gonna have to decide what are the things we should do differently. For me, I’m looking for things that are good for the environment and will save a bunch of money.

[2:11:14] And this is one of those things that does both things. We can avoid doing it. We can do some other things that are cheaper that will have improvements that have better returns. And we don’t have to add all those lane kilometers which not only the current residents are responsible for, but we’re on the hook for the maintenance ongoing into the future. And that’s not paid for by development chargers. That’s all property taxes. We have to repave that section of road 30 years from now. It’s the future property taxes we’re paying for it. If you look at the property activity let’s say, why is it so expensive? The way we build our city is the number one thing that drives the cost of property taxes in the city.

[2:11:52] And this is a key piece of it. So if you wanna save some money, suspend this environmental assessment. We can figure out some ways to improve things along this corridor that don’t involve adding more lane kilometers of road. Thank you. I have no other speakers on the list. Therefore, colleagues, we will call the motion as amended. Seeing the vote, the motion’s passed, nine to five.

[2:12:42] I do your worship item 2.15 being item 19. The participation in the South London Air Monitoring Network pilot project, a great project to the South End of the city recognizing that there is more than one order producer in the South End and this project will help us identify more precisely how and when those come. And it was pulled separate just due to a bikini interest by Deputy Mayor Morgan. Then I’ll ask if there are any other comments or, excuse me, comments or questions with respect to the item. I see none.

[2:13:17] We’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed, 13 to zero with one. Thank you. Councillor Floses, is that it?

[2:13:49] Yes, that concludes the 11th meeting as civic works. Thank you. Thank you very much on our call on the Deputy Mayor for the 12th report of the strategic priorities and policy committee. Thank you, Your Worship. There are six items on the agenda. There was a bikini interest noted on item 4.2 related to the Downtown Business Improvement Association. So I’ll put everything except that item on the floor unless colleagues would like something else dealt with separately. Does no item wish to have the other item voted on separately? I see none.

[2:14:23] Back to you, Deputy Mayor. Okay, then I’ll put items one, two, four, five and six on the floor for approval. Comments or questions? Do you know what we’ll call the question? I’m gonna clarify ‘cause a colleague would like a different one pulled as well.

[2:15:21] So I’m gonna put one, four, five and six on the floor. That includes everything except the Downtown BIA and the receiving of the correspondence from Councillor Vanholst. Call that question. Opposing the vote, the motion’s passed 14 to zero.

[2:16:42] Deputy Mayor. Yeah, my apologies. I said it was a piece of correspondence from Councillor Vanholst, that’s not correct. 4.1 is the request for delegations of which we received the information, but I’ll put that on the floor. Thank you very much. Comments or questions? Councillor Vanholst? Yes, thank you, Your Worship. And regarding this item, of course, the delegations were requested to a committee where we weren’t actually making a decision that perhaps would have been better suited to the CSC committee that was looking at looking at the decision for Councillor vaccine policy.

[2:17:32] However, I hope that when that comes up, we do entertain the delegations. And the reason is I was listening to an interview with the Honorable Brian Beckford, who was the last surviving architect of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And he was saying that at the time of that creation, there are reasonable limits clause that they put in there. They never would have entertained the kinds of things that have been happening recently.

[2:18:13] And so I see that there’s definitely a challenge because of the constitution being made to our policies and other things that have happened. So for that reason, I think it’d be well worth listening to those concerns from the residents. So I hope that at a future time, we will entertain those delegations. If not, if not setting up a PPM for it.

[2:18:49] So those are my comments. I voted against not hearing them. So I think I’ll just vote against that again here this time. Thank you very much. Any other comments or questions? As is my custom colleagues, if someone has left the meeting and I try to advise Councillor Sully has left the meeting to make colleagues aware. So with no other comments or questions, we will move 4.1. Sir Turner, posing the vote, the motion’s passed 12 to one.

[2:20:10] Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Yes, the remaining item on the committee is item three in the Council agenda 4.2 Downtown Business Improvement Association appointment. It’s the appointment of Councillor Halmer to the Downtown BIA at the committee. Councillor Lehman declared a punitive interest. So I’ve pulled this separately. Thanks very much. Comments or questions? Dean, we will call the question just a minute.

[2:21:32] Councillor Halmer, posing the vote, the motion’s passed 12 to zero with one recused. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. That is all. We will let you sit down and thank you colleagues. There are no deferred matters nor inquiries, of which I’ve been made aware and no emergent motions. So that’ll move us to the by-laws. So colleagues, we’re going to deal with this stage by-laws 387 through 395, but we are going to exclude and deal with separately item 3D8 due to a conflict as declared by the Deputy Mayor.

[2:22:17] So with that for first reading, introduction for first reading of bills, 3D7 through 395 exclusive of bill 3D, I’ll look for a mover please. I see Councillor Lewis seconded by Councillor Lehman. Thank you, let’s vote. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed.

[2:23:06] 13 to zero. Thank you. Now for second reading of bills 3D7 through 395, exclusive of bill 3D8, please, I will look for a mover. I have Councillor Hopkins seconded by Councillor Van Holst. Any comments or discussion? I see none. We will call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 13 to zero.

[2:23:53] And colleagues for third reading. An act made of bills 3D7 through 395. 3D8, I look for a mover please. Councillor Hillier seconded by Councillor Turner. Thank you, we will call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed.

[2:24:44] 13 to zero. colleagues, I look for a mover and seconder for introduction in first reading of bill 3D8, please. Councillor Close, the seconded by Councillor Lewis, thank you, we’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 12 to zero with one recuse.

[2:25:26] colleagues for second reading of bill 3D8, I look for a mover and seconder with Councillor Lehman, seconded by Councillor Van Holst, thank you. Any discussion? Call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 12 to zero with one recuse.

[2:26:07] And finally, I find the colleagues for third reading of bill 3D8, I’ll look for a mover, please. As Councillor Close, the seconded by Councillor Hillier, thank you, let’s call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 12 to zero with one recuse.

[2:26:44] Well, thank you, colleagues. Before we go into closed session, just for the benefit of the public, we will be returning, following, dealing with a number of items in closed session and report out publicly. And I will ask the clerk to advise you now what— Thank you through the chair. The matters to be dealt with in closed session are 11 matters that are outlined on the public council agenda.

[2:27:20] They include various land acquisitions, personal matters, land disposition, and matters related to litigation or potential litigation, labor relations, and matter with respect to solicitor client privilege device. Thank you, clerk. So at this point now, I’ll look for a mover and a seconder to move into closed session. Moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Helmer. Thank you very much. We’ll call the question.

[2:28:15] Councillor Palosa, both the motion’s passed 13 to zero. Thanks, and colleagues. We will be setting moving over to closed session protocols, but I think it’s appropriate. We take a refreshment break. But if I can ask you, we’ve got a number of items, but we feel we’ll be able to deal with those appropriately and in reasonable order.

[2:28:53] Maybe at just a 10 minute refreshment pause, if we could, please, as we move into closed session. We ask colleagues for screens on, please.

[2:32:21] There we are. So colleagues, I need to report Councillor van Mirberg and has had to excuse myself from the meeting. So again, this is our custom we advise you accordingly. So with that, I’d like to welcome the public back into public session. We had one outstanding item that was not dealt with at that time in public as we went into confidential session. So I’ll turn this to now over to Councillor Cassey to complete a report.

[2:32:57] Thank you, Your Worship. So that is number 13. So 8.3 on the Council agenda item 13 or 5.1 from the report of the community and protective services committee. The proof of COVID-19 vaccination administrative policy. And I will put that on the floor. Thank you very much. Comments or questions? Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you, Your Worship.

[2:33:30] So I’ll speak to this and may make, ask for an amendment as well. The, this is based on some advice that the Councillor Morgan said he had received from the chief medical officer of health. I haven’t, I haven’t seen that advice. And I would very much like to the, as I said previously in the meeting, the last framing architect of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms considers these policies a clear violation of the charter.

[2:34:14] And for that reason, I think that it’s going to go all the way to the Supreme Court in a challenge. And I don’t want us to be found offside for any reason. And my concern is what I find at the beginning of the charter. It says the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law that can be demonstrated, demonstratively justified in a free and democratic society.

[2:34:50] But I, I look at requiring proof of vaccination for this product is something that, that can’t really be justified. They, it’s a prototype product. It really didn’t do what we hoped it would. It doesn’t prevent transmission or contraction or morbidity. We’re seeing more and more health problems associated with it. And for that reason, I would say it’s, it’s still experimental. If we knew these problems were going to come up, they would have certainly been described to us earlier on.

[2:35:28] And so on top of that, we’re looking for such a high degree of vaccination that we’re eliminating a control group, which also seems unjustifiable. So what I would like is to see our chief medical officer of health provide us with those, those not only health justifications, but how that is justified in a free and democratic society. So we can meet and see that we have met the requirements of the charter.

[2:36:06] So I may have some more comments, but just let me first try and put that on the floor as an amendment that, and I look for a seconder that we request the chief medical officers health to provide the justifications contemplated in the charter at our next, at the meeting when we’re going to consider the council policy. So Councillor, to be clear, you’re looking to put an amendment on the floor.

[2:36:39] Yes. Do we have that information available for colleagues? Thank you through your worship. I am working on it. We would require a seconder. Let’s see if there is a seconder for the motion. Councillor, I see none. Okay, well, thank you, Your Worship. So at this point, it’s just simply a matter of voting on the policy or not.

[2:37:12] I’m afraid I can’t support this. The policy is, I see it as a violation of my own belief system, which I haven’t shared publicly but will do so in the form of a creed that can be used as a human rights exemption. And I offer, I will offer that to others to adopt for themselves as well. I’m also very concerned about, as I said, the control group.

[2:37:46] And I may look to create such a group of volunteers who wants to be part of that because I think it would be a responsible thing to do scientifically. So those are my comments. I’ll be voting against this. And thank you for the time and consideration. Thank you, other comments for questions. Seeing none, oh, excuse me, Councillor Morgan. Yes, I just want to make a clarification.

[2:38:18] The Councillor mentioned voting on the policy. What’s before us at committee is accepting the staff report that the city manager has put forward about the administrative policy and asking civic administration to bring back a potential policy that would be obviously debated and discussed by this council. So there’s no actual policy before us today. I just wanted to be clear about exactly what we’re voting on. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Any other comments or questions? I see none, excuse me, I may have missed someone with a hand signal, I did not want to exclude anyone.

[2:38:57] In the spirit of that then we’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion is passed, 11 to one. Thank you, colleagues. Now for the 12, oh, anything else in Councillor Cassidy? No, that’s it, you’re on your worship, sorry.

[2:39:33] Thanks, one title at a time, please, thank you. So now off to report on the report out on the 12th report of Council on closed session. I will call on Councillor Lehman, please. Thank you, Your Worship, I’ll report out on the 12th report of Council on closed session. Council on closed session reports, one, the property acquisition west of Canterbury Park and the London High Park Rotary Link Trail, Stanton Drain Remediation Project, that on the recommendation of the deputy city manager, finance supports with the concurrence of the director, construction and infrastructure services, on the advice of the director of Realty Services with respect to the property located at west of Canterbury Park and London High Park Rotary Link Trail, seeing an area of approximately 10 or 18.10 acres for the purpose of remediation work to accommodate the statin drain remediation project, the following actions be taken.

[2:40:31] A, the offer submitted by 1390226 Ontario Inc, the vendor, to sell the subject property to the city for the sum of $552,300, subject to the terms and conditions be accepted and set out in the agreement as Appendix C and B, the financing for this acquisition be approved as set out in the source of financing report here to as Appendix A. Number two, partial property acquisition, 218 Richmond Street, Sunnydale Road improvements, then on the recommendation of the deputy city manager, finance supports with the concurrence of the director of transportation and mobility and division major, transportation planning and design on the advice of the director of Realty Services with respect to the acquisition of a portion of property from 2118 for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate Sunnydale Road improvements project, the following action be taken.

[2:41:32] A, the agreement of purchase and sale as Appendix C submitted by Encore at Upper Richmond Village Inc, the vendor, to sell the subject property to the city for the sum of $323,600, subject to the terms and conditions be accepted to set out the agreement. B, the grant of temporary easement and consent to enter as Appendix C submitted by Encore at Upper Richmond Village Inc, the vendor, for the sum of $30,900 for the term of 24 months with an option to renew for 12 months be for an additional $15,450, subject to the terms and conditions be accepted as set out in the agreement.

[2:42:16] And C, the financing for this acquisition be approved as set out in the source of financing report here to as Appendix A. Three, partial property acquisition, 135 Village Walk Boardwalk or Boulevard Sunnydale Road improvements that are the recommendation of the deputy city manager finance supports with the concurrence of the director of transportation and mobility and division major transportation playing and design on the advice of the director of Realty Services with respect to the acquisition of a portion of property from 135 Village Walk Boulevard for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate Sunnydale Road improvements project, the following actions be taken.

[2:42:59] A, the agreement of purchase and sale as Appendix C submitted by 2560334 Ontario Inc, the vendor, to sell the subject proper to the city from the sum of $161,650, subject to the terms and conditions be accepted as set out in the agreement. B, the grant of temporary easement and consent to enter as Appendix C submitted by 2560334 Ontario Inc, the vendor, for the sum of $75,000 for the term of 24 months with an option to renew for 12 months for an additional $37,500 subject to the terms and conditions be accepted, set out in agreement.

[2:43:37] And C, the financing for this acquisition be approved to set out in the source of financing port here to as Appendix A. Four, property acquisition, 267 Wellington Road, Wellington Gateway Project, that on the recommendation of the deputy city manager finance supports with the concurrence of the director of construction and infrastructure services on the advice of the director of Realty Services with respect to the property located at 267 Wellington Road for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Wellington Gateway Project.

[2:44:12] The following actions be taken. A, the offer submitted by Victoria Elizabeth McCrack and the vendor to sell the subject property to the city for the sum of $463,000 subject to the terms and conditions be accepted as set out in agreement as Appendix C and B, the financing for this acquisition be approved as set out in the source of financing port here to as Appendix A. Five, property acquisition, 269 Wellington Road, Wellington Gateway Project, that on the recommendation of the deputy city manager finance supports with the concurrence of the director, construction and infrastructure services on the advice of the director of Realty Services with respect to the property located at 269 Wellington Road for the purpose of future road improvements to accommodate the Wellington Gateway Project.

[2:44:58] The following actions be taken. A, the offer submitted by Muriela Fort, the vendor to sell the subject property to the city for the sum of $463,000 subject to the terms and conditions be accepted as set out in agreement as Appendix C and B, the financing for this acquisition be approved as set out in the source of financing port here to as Appendix A. Six, offer to a port to purchase industrial land 10264539 Canada Limited Innovation Park, phase one, then on the recommendation of the deputy city manager finance supports on the advice of director Realty Services with respect to the city owned industrial land, located in Innovation Park, phase one, containing an area of approximately 5.47 acres located on the west side of Innovation Drive, submitted by 10264539 Canada Limited, the purchaser to purchase from the city 5.47 acres of the subject property at a purchase price of $382,900 reflecting a sale price of $70,000 per acre be accepted.

[2:46:13] Seven, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, that on the recommendation of the director, people services with the convergence of the city manager, civic administration, we directed that the corporation recognized and observed the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, which seeks to honor first nations, Inuit and Metis survivors and their families and communities and to ensure public commemoration of their history and the legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process by closing all but its essential services and providing its employees with a paid holiday, save and accept our casual employee group.

[2:46:59] Thank you for that. I’ll look for a seconder, please. Councillor Cassidy, thanks very much. Comments, questions, colleagues? Seeing none, we will call the question. Councillor Van Halst?

[2:47:44] I vote, yeah. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed. 12 to zero. Thank you, Councillor Lehman. I appreciate that colleagues. That turns our attention now to item 13, the bylaws. And we have added bills 446-451. And I’m gonna look for mover and seconder for introduction of first re-inavided, those added bills 446-451 inclusive move by Councillor Van Halst, seconded by Councillor Hopkins. We’ll call the question.

[2:48:41] Closing the vote, the motion’s passed. Fall to zero. Thanks for much colleagues. For second reading, I’ve added bills 446-451 inclusive. I’ll look for mover, please. Anyone? Councillor Palose, seconded by Councillor Lehman. Thank you very much. Comments or questions? Seeing none, we will call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed.

[2:49:18] 12. For third reading enactment of an added bills 446-451. And please, Councillor Cassidy, seconded by Councillor Hillyer, we’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed.

[2:49:50] 12 to zero. Thanks colleagues. Before we adjourn, here we are in the era of recent post-Olympics where London has become the gold city, post-paralipics. We’ve had regional players do exceptionally well and almost post-summer. We’ve had a lot going on in this community and a lot going on in City Hall and not withstanding the dealings with COVID in terms of return to work, work at home and all the things that we’ve had to deal with. And to staff, I just wanna say thanks very much.

[2:50:22] You’ve had a lot to deal with and yet you continue to work not only hard for our community, but also what you do is you help our council members with the questions you answer so directly and that’s incredibly helpful. So Ms. Livingston, I ask you to pass that on to all of our staff. I appreciate that very, very much. And with that, I’ll look for a mover to adjourn. Councillor Turner, seconded by Councillor Hillyer. Thank you very much. Can we just do a show of, oh, sorry, Councillor Hopkins, do you wanna say something before? Oh, you just wanna vote.

[2:50:54] You wanna get out of here. Okay, my show ends. All of those who wanna get out of here. That motion’s passed. Thanks very much. We’ll see you all really soon. Appreciate it. Thanks for worship for a good meeting.