September 18, 2023, at 4:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 4:01 PM; it being noted that Councillor S. Hiller was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

None.

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   1588 Clarke Road

2023-09-18 - Staff Report -1588 Clarke Road

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with respect to the demolition request for the heritage listed property located at 1588 Clarke Road:

a)    the Chief Building Official BE ADVISED that Municipal Council consents to the demolition of the built resources on the property;

b)    the property located at 1588 Clarke Road BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources; and,

c)    the property owner BE ENCOURAGED to commemorate the historic contributions of the Tackabury family in the future development of this property;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

-  A. Haasen, Sifton Properties Limited;

  • L. Tackabury;

  • G. Tackabury;

  • C. de Hart; and,

-  B. Johnson;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-R01)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by A. Hopkins

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.2   Request to Remove Property from Register of Cultural Heritage Resources - 176 Piccadilly Street

2023-09-18 - Staff Report - (3.2) 176 Piccadilly Street - Full

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the property located at 176 Piccadilly Street BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources;

it being pointed out that no action be taken with respect to the communication dated September 15, 2023 from A.M. Valastro, with respect to this matter;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-R01)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

Motion to take no action with respect to the communication dated September 15, 2023, from A.M. Valastro relating to the property located at 176 Piccadilly Street.

Motion Passed (3 to 2)

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by S. Lewis

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by A. Hopkins

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.3   3030 Singleton Avenue (Z-9640)

2023-09-18 - Staff Report - (3.3) 3030 Singleton Avenue (Z-9640)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, based on the application by Schlegel Villages Incorporated, relating to the property located at 3030 Singleton Avenue, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated September 18, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on September 26, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential R5/R6/R7 (R5-5/R6-5/R7D100H30) Zone TO a Residential R5/R6/R7 Special Provision (R5-5/R6-5/R7(_)D100H30) Zone;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

-    B. Rosser, on behalf of Schlegel Villages Incorporated;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  • the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020;

  • the recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including, but not limited to the Neighbourhoods Place Type and Key Directions; and,

  • the recommended amendment facilitates an appropriate land use within a new development in the Built Area Boundary; and,

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-D09)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by A. Hopkins

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.4   1208 Fanshawe Park Road East (Z-9539)

2023-09-18 - Staff Report - (3.4) 1208 Fanshawe Park Road East (Z-9539)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by Masar Development Inc. (c/o Abdul Zaro), relating to the property located at 1208 Fanshawe Park Road East:

a) the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated September 18, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on September 26, 2023, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan, for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential R1 (R1-14) Zone TO a Residential R5 Special Provision (R5-7(_)) Zone;

b) the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design issues through the site plan process:

i) ensure consent to injure or remove boundary trees is provided by the applicant;

ii) additional tree plantings will be required to compensate for loss of trees;

iii) relocate and screen the garbage collection pad away from the shared amenity space and consider providing private outdoor amenity space at the rear of Building B;

iv) retain the walkways from each stacked-townhouse unit entrance to Fanshawe Park Road East, 

v) consider consolidating walkways to minimize impermeable surfaces and provide a wider shared walkway connection to the sidewalk along Fanshawe Park Road East;

vi) screen any surface parking exposed to a public street with enhanced all-season landscaping, including low landscape walls, shrubs, and street trees;

vii) provide additional landscaping or other measures to mitigate noise and lights from Fanshawe Park Road for the basement units located within Building A; and,

viii) include short-term public bicycle parking in the development;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communication with respect to these matters:

  • a communication dated September 15, 2023 from E. Kane;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

-    J. McGuffin, Monteith Brown Planning Consultants;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  • the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS), which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The PPS directs municipalities to permit all forms of housing required to meet the needs of all residents, present and future;

  • the recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions, City Design and Building policies, and the Neighbourhoods Place Type policies;

  • the recommended amendment would permit an appropriate form of development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and the surrounding neighbourhood; and,

  • the recommended amendment facilitates an infill development on an underutilized site and provides a broader range and mix of housing options within the area; and,

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-D09)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Hillier

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.5   3234-3274 Wonderland Road South (Z-9618)

2023-09-18 - Staff Report - (3.5) 3234-3274 Wonderland Road South (Z-9618)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by Southside Construction Management Ltd., relating to a portion of the property located at 3234-3274 Wonderland Road South:

a) consistent with Policy 43_1 of The London Plan, a portion of the subject lands, 3234 and 3274 Wonderland Road South, BE INTERPRETED to be located within the Shopping Area Place Type;

b) the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated September 18, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on September 26, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Associated Shopping Area Special Provision (ASA8(17)) Zone and a holding Light Industrial (h-17*LI1/LI7) TO an Associated Shopping Area Special Provision (ASA8(_)) Zone;

c) the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design issues through the site plan process:

i) ensure all landscaping fronting Wonderland Road S is designed and installed to create a strong built edge with a minimum depth of between 4.0 - 6.0 metres south of the proposed Wonderland Road South access, and that the enhanced landscaped area contemplate a forecourt element to accommodate parking spaces that are located immediately abutting the built edge landscape feature, which also provides for a pedestrian-oriented streetscape and an active street frontage, and the integration of a future Pad (Pad 10) that can be phased in over the life of the plan. 

ii) ensure there is a robust pedestrian network throughout the site, linking the primary building entrances to each other and internal walkways through the parking lot with all crossing connected directly to sidewalks;

iii) locate the principal building entrances and transparent windows to face the public right-of-way to reinforce the public realm, establish an active frontage and provide for convenient pedestrian access;

iv) provide individual unit entrances with walkways leading to the public sidewalks on Wonderland Road South;

v) provide a minimum 40% of glazing along the intersection of the Wonderland Rd South and Bradley Ave facades; 

vi)  reduce the amount of asphalt provided to the minimum amount required and provide additional landscaping to assist with stormwater management and reduce the heat island effect;

vii) ensure the Transportation Impact Study has been updated to the satisfaction of the Transportation Division;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  • H. Froussios, Zelinka Priamo Ltd.; and,

  • K. Mazzone, Tesla Canada;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  • the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS), which encourages long-term economic prosperity to be supported by promoting opportunities for economic development and community investment-readiness (1.7.1.(a));

  • the recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions, City Design and Building policies, and the Shopping Area Place Type policies;

  • the recommended amendment conforms to the Wonderland Road Community Enterprise Corridor policies in the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP). 

  • the recommended amendment facilitates the development of a vacant site within the Built-Area Boundary with an appropriate form of development;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-D09)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by A. Hopkins

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.6   1364-1408 Hyde Park Road (OZ-9635)

2023-09-18 - Staff Report - (3.6) 1364-1408 Hyde Park Road (OZ-9635)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by the City of London, relating to the property located at 1364-1408 Hyde Park Road:

a) the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated September 18, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on September 26, 2023 to amend the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016, to create a new specific policy area for the subject lands within the Neighbourhoods Place Type;

b) the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated September 18, 2023 as Appendix “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on September 26, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016, as amended in part a) above), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone TO a Special Provision R9 Residential (R9-7(_)) and Open Space (OS1 and OS5) Zones;

c) the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design issue through the site plan process:

i) include short-term public bicycle parking in the development;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communications with respect to these matters:

  • the staff presentation; and,

-the project brief from J. Smolarek, Siv-ik Planning/Design;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  • J. Smolarek, Siv-ik Planning/Design; and,

-  M. Wallace, London Development Institute;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  • the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020;

  • the recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including, but not limited to the Neighbourhoods Place Type and Our Tools; and,

  • the recommended amendment facilitates the development of housing on a greenfield site within a residential area; and,

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters. (2023-D09)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by S. Lewis

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Franke

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   (ADDED) 10th Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning

2023-09-13 CACP Report 10

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 10th Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning, from its meeting held on September 13, 2023:

a) the following actions be taken with respect to the Notice of Planning Application and Public Meeting, dated September 5, 2023, from B. Coveney, Planner, with respect to Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments related to Increasing the Number of Additional Residential Units to Permit Four Units as-of-right, City-Wide:

i) the Planner BE ADVISED that that the Community Advisory Committee on Planning (CACP) is supportive of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, recognizing that Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are a form of gentle density that help improve housing supply while maintaining the character of heritage neighbourhoods;

ii) the Planner BE ADVISED that the CACP recommends that definition of height in the Zoning By-Law for accessory buildings serving as ADUs be made more flexible as to not disincentivize any particular architectural roof styles (especially gable and hip roofs) versus flat roofs; and,

iii) the comments of the CACP, herein, BE FORWARDED to the Planner on the ADU file and to the Planning and Environment Committee in advance of their scheduled public participation meeting and to the appropriate Planner for ReThink Zoning;

it being noted that the above-noted Notice of Planning Application and Public Meeting was received;

b)  clauses 1.1, 3.1 to 3.3, inclusive, 3.5, 4.1, 5.1 to 5.3, inclusive, and clause 6.1 BE RECEIVED for information;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application has been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

6.   (ADDED) Confidential

6.1   (ADDED) Personal Matter/Identifiable Individual

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Franke

That the Planning and Environment Committee convene, in Closed Session, for the purpose of considering the following:

A personal matter pertaining to identifiable individuals, including municipal employees, with respect to the 2024 Mayor’s New Year’s Honour List.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

The Planning and Environment Committee convened, in Closed Session, from 5:48 PM to 5:51 PM.

7.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 5:53 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 (1 hour, 58 minutes)

401 welcome everyone open the 15th meeting of the planning environment committee Please check the city website for additional meaning detail information meetings can be viewed via live streaming on YouTube and the city website The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabak Haudenosaunee Lenna Peiwak and Adewandran. We honor and respect the history languages and cultures of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home The city of London is currently home to many First Nations Métis and Inuit today As representatives of the people of the city of London We are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request to make a request specific to this meeting please contact gec@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425 at this time will ask for any disclosures of pecuniary interest Seeing none we have no consent items today so we’ll be moving right on to our scheduled items 3.1 first item public participation meeting regarding 1 5 8 8 Clark Road I’ll look for a motion to open that PPM Councillor Frank seconded by Councillor Hopkins I’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we have the staff report are there any questions of a technical nature at this time Seeing none then I’ll look to see if the applicant would like to address the committee please give us your name and you have five minutes thank you good afternoon to members of committee my name is Alexandra Hawson with sifton properties the applicant and owner of the lands I’d first like to extend a thank you to staff for bringing this report before committee this afternoon we have reviewed the report and we are in favor of the recommendation to remove the property at 1588 Clark Road from the registry of cultural heritage resources I would also like to note to members of committee that sifton is open to opportunities to commemorate the historic contributions of the family that is tied to this property as part of future development of the property thank you for your time and I am available for questions if there’s any questions of committee thank you thank you now I’ll look for anyone from the public that would like to address the committee please give us your name and do you have five minutes all right my name is Leslie Takabari and I am here to ask the council to save the house this house is one of the last remaining relics of the grove community and it represents the family that contributed significantly to its development the Takabari family were very early pioneers that were part of a family unit that traveled here together from New York they were from some of the first settlers in the area and worked together to build a community that lasted over 100 years in the same location many descendants of this community still exist in London today the early partner settlement was established before the war of 1812 it grew and eventually had its own church school post office railway stop and cemetery the grove cemetery is located at 1424 here at 25 here on street and the earliest known burial in the grove cemetery is 1823 decoration services held annually and is attended by many each year my father is a member of the board of directors and has been for many years as well although there are a few other houses still standing from this community this house is special this is the house of John Takabari and Elizabeth Belton who donated their land and contributed to the building of the grove church and the grove school it represents their Wesleyan beginnings and their decision to become Canadians the house is also significant as it operates as the home of the London Township mutual insurance company and was operated by three generations of Takabari’s this company was an early insurance cooperative for farmers to prevent and reduce fire losses they also introduced the concept of carrying fire extinguishers on tractors to reduce losses it eventually merges with Middlesex mutual insurance company and recently the company is undergone another merger but is still in operations to this day this house represents the rich history of the Takabari family and is one that is shared by many Londoners this house was lived in by 38 of my direct ancestors seven of my living relatives and myself this house has been lived in by six generations over the span of over 180 years of Takabari’s and I’m respectfully again requesting the city deny the request for demolition the house was also built on the first land granted in the London Township it was originally granted to John Hale as a strategic military location with high quality farmland later maps in 1818 indicate the property is granted with no name and Nathaniel Takabari is listed on the bottom right hand corner of the map in pencil indicating that he’d likely had applied for a land grant from Cinco Cinco sorry the house was built by my great great great grandparents John Takabari was the son of Nathaniel Takabari and Sarah Newsom they were natives of Ireland that fled due to religious persecution during the 1798 uprising this family left Ireland in 1806 arrived in Eaton New York in 1807 there are also records of Nathaniel and his family arriving in Pennsylvania in 1810 Nathaniel was a veteran of the Revolutionary War and was recruited to go to upper Canada and take up farming to provide supplies to the British military during the war of 1812 he was caught by the American military while traveling along the river he was arrested and forced to declare his allegiance to the United States of America Nathaniel had a homestead in Eaton with many family members living there at the time it was a dangerous time to be a loyalist in the in New York so he and his son James declared and stayed in Eaton however they were not permitted to own land for five years James married Anne Beltan the daughter of John Beltan and hauled a Webster Nathaniel and James became successful hop growers and had many children and they are all buried in Eaton New York sadly Nathaniel was not granted land in upper Canada because he became an American citizen the Beltan family was also arrested as British military pensioners living in New York however they did not declare their allegiance to the US and came to Canada shortly after John Tackaberry made his way to upper Canada with the Beltan family as there are family letters to elude to the fact that he may have been in hiding the Beltan family had been up here very early as well John Beltan had a homestead in the Wharton which was another early pioneer settlement closely connected to the Grove the Tackaberry homestead is halfway between the home of Robert Webster and the home of John Beltan John married Elizabeth Beltan after the death of her father in 1828 which was the beginning or regardless they likely returned to Eaton to bury Elizabeth’s father this is also the year that their first child stayer Anne Tackaberry was born in New York 30 seconds they inherited three hundred dollars and came back to Canada with their young child in early 1829 they lived in their two-story log cabin and their child Nathaniel Tackaberry was born the next day this is also likely the year the house was built they had 12 children in total 11 living to adulthood many of their descendants making noteworthy contributions to the community this modest community began as a group of metathetists and strong abolitionists the first Wesley Wesleyan sermon in London Township was recorded in 1818 at Robert Webster’s house by Samuel Beltan after the war of 1812 Samuel was also a circuit rider through the area and had relationships with many of the natives this would have been Elizabeth’s older brother and the nephew of Robert Webster John and Elizabeth converted to Wesleyan in 1828 it’s also reasonable to believe that the community was a station in the underground railroad assisting escaped slaves and freed slaves from New York this Tackaberry I have to ask you to end now thank you very much is there anyone else that would like to address the committee she’s gonna continue for me all you have to do is read honey can I have your name please please go ahead John Tackaberry also fought in the militia militia to protect his home and family during the Sennian raids the Tackaberry also comes from a long line of masons is my great-grandfather Victor deputy grandmaster being awarded with his third degree at home said this house has been there to see it all it was there during the Tannian raids and the underground railroad of the incorporation of the city the abolition of the slavery us and the american civil war consideration of our country with development of railroad the tv outbreak the invention of electricity wwi the spanish flu wwi world war ii keep going and so on it was there before the bridge to the dam they upward the conservation area it has said the test of time and and it is a shame that the city did not list its property as historical when they were previously given the opportunity it has been left open unprotected and treated poorly those these pioneers cleared that land planted or or cured and crops they built roads and created a community they should not be forgotten to date the group community had no recognition by the city of london is having any historical significance removing relics like this one to show the cultural heritage of our community and eliminates important aspects of our local history these are currently multiple proposals affecting use of land which this house sets a widening on veterans memorial parkway the upgrade on of the bridge on the clerk road and propose subdivision by system today there appears to be significant concern regarding to the the system and no no approval at this time it should not be permitted to demolish a heritage property for an unapproved plan the system family has also been this area very long time their company claims to be a family run this is a live comorade commemorated commemorated their own family history in the birth cemetery and our boat who want to do the same to celebrate their 100 years in operation they clearly value their own youth should understand others wanting to do the same and why this property is so important they claim to support projects that preserve and enhance the environment while in reaching the lives of the people in those communities it sounds like both the taxpayer and siftans family and for the same things unfortunately these actions do not align or support their mission secondly approving the demolition as this house looking for the demolition is neglect except is by neglect acceptable to the city of london the treatment of this property has been shameful in 2019 the city approved the demolition of the barn because it had been damaged for demolishing the silo same that time the house was considered an excellent condition as per the historical assessment 30 seconds performed by the city there were tenants living in the house until 2020 when the former tenants left the home was left open and unoccupied until now it’s become a favorite for urban explorers and it’s now in shameful condition as the pieces of hilster or pilford away however the exterior of the house remains in good condition a request of the house be treated with the respect that it deserves it should be added to the historical register repaired and remain standing as a symbol of our humble beginnings here in what was once once london township any further development of this land shouldn’t incorporate as a last at you did we have other people that would like to address the committee thank you very much one sentence one sentence one sentence one sentence any further development of this land should incorporate this home and its existing landscape okay thank you any others that would like to address the committee on this please go ahead you have five minutes and give us your name please uh good afternoon members of the committee my name is christa heart i am the landowner to the north of uh on the north side of clearly road across from the um property in question um i guess i would just like to speak to what’s been going on there the last three years um this property as well as the property down the road 2331 collately road have been um unoccupied or close to three years and have been completely neglected um uncapped and unsecured um although i completely understand and respect miss tackaberry’s uh request to save this property uh with this cultural significance um we have had to deal with multiple cases of break-ins at both properties unwanted visitors people ditching stolen cars there the list goes on the police have been called in the last ten months six or seven times to deal with altercations i have a small family a three-year old a two-year old a six-month-old my wife doesn’t feel safe taking our kids outside to play on our lawn because there’s people around which is a direct result of the lack of care and maintenance and security at these homes which is a reflection on the property managers um so i see two routes forward one they have to be maintained they have to be monitored security kept up with law maintenance etc the list goes on or they have to be demolished and uh it’s unfortunate that it’s come to this because these were two properties that were lovingly cared for for a long long time um not only by miss tackaberry’s family by the flin family as well uh who had multiple generations of their family living in that uh house as well so um they also won the house we live in so um i just wanted to kind of make that relevant so thank you for time thank you anyone else that would like to address uh the committee on this uh issue please sir give us your name and you have five minutes my name is bruce johnson i reside at 15 11 o’clock road directly west of the tackaberry property and i’ve lived there all my life farming it and i rent the agricultural land around the house that uh i wish to uh speak in favor of demolition of the bit all the buildings on the property since the sellers of this property moved out meaning the tackaberry’s in late 2008 this property has been vacant say for two or three years when an employee of the owner lived there in its years of vacancy trespassers have entered the house numerous times causing many visits from police feeble attempts to board the buildings up have been made the buildings are broken to a game when questioned why they don’t do a better job of boarding it up or if they’re just waiting for someone to strike a match as smirk is made the abandoned buildings are now a haven for trespassers causing problems for neighbors especially the family on the north side of calallie road and just 17 days ago i personally had a trespasser enter my house taking footwear and a blanket now London police were good but all the neighbors have a right to buildings being kept at a certain standard i am asking that all buildings be demolished as soon as possible thank you thank you any others that would like to address mitty the last clerk if there’s anyone in the online or in the other rooms lui mizano would do you like to speak right now to mizano if you can hear us this is your time please let us know if you’d like to address the committee i can hear you thank you okay well please please go ahead you have five minutes my name is kyle mizoni i am the real estate lead for tesla canada and i am thrilled to be in attendance today thank you for having me i just really wanted to uh say thank you thank you for extremely absurd i’m going to i’m going to cut you off i you’re addressing uh i think the next item sorry you’re addressing um 3274 and 3234 wonderland road we are on um we are in 1588 clark road so you might want to hold your comments till we get to the item that you are probably here to talk about okay okay thank you any other uh persons i would like to speak to 1588 clark road okay seeing none i’ll look for motion to close uh ppm counselor hopkins seconded by counselor frank and i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion is required to zero okay uh committee we have a recommendation from staff so i’ll open the floor now for committee members deputy mare louis uh thank you uh through you mr. chair i’ll move the staff recommendation can i have a seconder for that motion counselor halia is indicated he will second the motion so now i’ll open the floor for questions or comments um regarding uh the motion in front of us counselor cutty thank you chair and through you and thank you for uh allowing me to attend uh the committee session today i’d like to begin and i’ll be brief chair i’d like to begin by thanking staff for the extensive and the exhaustive work you’ve done on this uh study a year ago uh by the way i will speak in in favor of demolition of this property a year ago right now this month uh when i was canvassing um campaigning and collalia and uh clark side road i met both mr. johnson and mr.

dahart and my conversation with mr. dahart i remember was more clearly and he said peter if by any chance you happen to win this election please demolish these buildings their hazard their hazard or children their um a fire hazard and we need to have them removed immediately and since that time i’ve been working with both mr. dahart and uh and mr. johnson to uh to accomplish that and properties unfortunately could have could have been saved i think long term and i’m so sorry to to your family that these buildings are in the the condition they’re in today because i don’t believe that they should have been left to fall um and just repair like they have but to be truthful chair these buildings are an absolute hazard uh all of them on the property they need to be removed immediately um i am uh i spoke from this seat not many months ago about what good corporate citizens the owners of these properties were but today i have to say um that that they haven’t done a good job at maintaining these properties and and they could have um so unfortunately we’ve had properties that uh that could have been saved that could have been revitalized but uh but they can’t they’re far too gone now and uh i would highly encourage uh all members of committee to follow staff recommendation and have these buildings demolished thank you counselor counselor opens yeah thank you and i just want to thank um the family for speaking to the heritage that is really important to you i was trying to imagine myself standing up there speaking to the history of where i live and the importance and um it is very difficult we always find ourselves in these difficult situations here when it comes to uh deserted properties and what do we do with them and how do we restore them or can we and how do we retain them and i i wonder if i can just start off through you mr chair just asking that question on how we can can we do a better job when it comes to um especially the heritage buildings to to keep them to certain standards i’m not exactly sure uh what standards they would be but what do we follow and what opportunities do we have as a city to provide the this safety in the community and the protection for these buildings i’ll go to staff for that question i thank you and through the chair um the property of 1588 Clark Road is presently only listed on the register of cultural heritage resources so that’s means it’s treated just like any other property in the city of London in terms of property standards i believe counselor hopkins you might have been alluding to or asking about the enhanced minimum standards for heritage designated properties and unfortunately that’s only available to properties that are designated either in a heritage conservation district or individually and in that circumstance when a property is designated there’s an enhanced ability to ensure that its heritage attributes are being maintained and it’s being properly cared for of course it’s not a perfect system as it is complaints driven but that’s where we’re really able to work and ensure that the properties that are significant the properties that are valued the properties that are designated under the Ontario heritage act are properly conserved councilor yeah so this is a list of properties so there are no protections and i um wonder how do we get out of that cycle of properties maybe uh designated but aren’t and how do we protect them from being um sort of fallen and disarray because i’m sure this isn’t the only building that we have in our city uh so unless it comes forward for designation and we’re here and it’s obvious from the staff’s recommendation that maybe we are too late i am encouraged that the uh owner is encouraged to do a commemorative um plaque or whatever that looks like i think that is extremely important and i maybe uh follow up to to um i know it’s in our recommendation that that happen how in our recommendation we’re encouraging it how do we know that that is going to happen through your go stuff thank you for that question and you were very careful in your in your wording as we were as well um as the property is only listed the question before you tonight is really designate or not uh and it’s not possible to attach any true terms and conditions um so that’s what you’re seeing a recommendation like encourage or be requested in terms of that commemoration um you read in the staff report that we do believe the tagabary family has historical significance however a property has to meet two or more criteria as a minimum to merit designation hence the staff recommendation before you tonight um to recommending the property be removed from the register um what might be a great idea to see is um when we do see that subdivision move forward um that we look for some uh some information from the property owner to be included in that future staff recommendation uh on that subdivision application i i understand we’re still some timeout from that um but that might be something to look forward to councilor thank you thank you thank you chair uh and through you uh i’m going to be brief um i appreciate the properties and and the the house in particular has some attachment to the family there’s family history there um almost every family uh in london has a place in the city with that matters to them from a their their past point of view but um as mr.

gonney was relating um the evaluation criteria requires two of nine to even consider uh and this app and we don’t always designate with two of nine or even three of nine it it is still subject uh to the will of council but in this case only one of the nine conditions were met um and the property uh owner today uh does envision a redevelopment of the land um certainly whether that’s things like street names or things like that in the future um that’s a discussion for our staff to have with them when the plan of subdivision comes in um but uh in in terms of these uh properties uh when we come down to uh properties being vacant for a long period of time um and again as it’s been alluded to um there’s no different set of standards because something is on the cultural registry uh i could take you to three properties in my ward today um that are currently vacant um it’s frustrating because even when the owners do uh secure them uh they still face break-ins um they have wires and plumbing ripped out um there’s unfortunately all kinds of things that happen with vacant properties and and as much as our uh our enforcement wings and our inspection wings uh and i will give a shout out to our London professional firefighters uh we often use them to do vacant building checks uh when they’re not busy on other duties um but we can’t we just can’t be everywhere and unfortunately these things happen to abandoned properties no matter what their age is so that’s the reason um you know i’m going to be supporting this uh redevelopment does occur um i know i’m gonna actually say chair i’ll be saying the same things about the next one um things do uh change and it’s not always an easy process but it’s one where in this case i think the properties are at a state where we have to approve that demolition thank you any other comments from uh many members are visiting counselors we have a uh motion that’s been moved and seconded seeing no other discussion i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you moving on to 176 pickadilly street i’ll look for motion uh to open the ppm counselor frank seconded by counselor or deputy mirror louis i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you any uh technical uh questions uh for our staff uh regarding the staff report that we we have in front of us on the agenda seeing none then i’ll ask if the applicant uh would like to address the committee so clerk if the applicant is uh online okay thank you uh they’ll open the uh or to the public is or anyone from the public that would like to address the committee last clerk if there’s anyone online last chance okay i’ll look for a motion to close the ppm counselor frank seconded by counselor hopkins and i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we have a recommendation from the staff i’ll open the uh to the committee members um at this time deputy mirror louis uh thank you chair i will move the staff recommendation uh but through you i want to noted that the uh added communication i wish dealt with separately not my intention to receive that communication all right so the motion that has been moved um has been adjusted accordingly please refresh your screens to see the see the motion i’ll look for a seconder uh for the motion i’ll second the motion so we have a motion that’s been moved and seconded i’ll open the floor now for uh for discussion okay um the zing counselors seeing none we have a motion moved and seconded i will call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero deputy mirror louis uh thank you uh chair and through you i’d like to move that with respect to the communication uh date in september 15th 2023 from ham velastro uh that the committee uh take no action on that item thank you do you have a seconder sir a seconder for that motion counselor hillier has seconded we have motion moved and second any comments uh deputy mirror louis uh thank you chair through you i will be very brief um the correspondent alleges that counselors mock efforts by staff that is in my opinion an absolutely false statement counsel’s prerogative to agree or disagree with staff is our prerogative as elected officials when we do not support a staff recommendation that doesn’t mean that we are mocking staff it means simply we have weighed matters and have reached a different conclusion than staff and that is our responsibility as elected officials and that’s why no action should be taken on this communication thank you any other comments uh counselor frank thank you yes and this is a question through you to staff i am wondering and i think that counselor hawkins alluded to it but i want uh a bit more straightforward perhaps um question of do we have any penalties for demolition by neglect i’ll go to staff for that question thank you and through the chair um i’m just trying to process how to answer that question is it is a very nuanced one um and i personally do not administer the property standards by a love but trying to share the experience that i’ve gained um when a property is subject to a property standards order there’s a timeline by which they must either appeal or or comply with the the remedies that are noted within that order and if a property owner doesn’t take that advantage an opportunity to resolve those issues as identified um there can be administrative monetary penalties assigned to that or inspection fees that may be incurred related to continued uh staff visits to monitor that property counselor thank you that was wonderfully put um to follow up and i’m perhaps i’m asking you to speculate but are there other municipalities that have um more heavy-handed enforcement uh mechanisms for demolition by neglect more than just property standard by-laws go staff on that one through the chair and from a heritage perspective we see a variety of different approaches from other municipalities in ontario unfortunately demolition by neglect has really been a persistent issue for a variety of factors as i’m sure you can imagine um to as counselor hopkins did highlight earlier in her question to avail of an enhanced minimum standard of property would have to be designated to avail of those standards where uh specific heritage attributes could be sought for repair and conservation uh just general property condition is something that’s covered within the property standards by-law for for any property um i would have reiterate that we are unfortunately working in a reality of complaint based and the squeaky wheel does often get the grease uh but in terms of other municipalities we’ve seen a a whole variety of other approaches from proactive designation without owner consent uh for properties that are very significant um to increased funding for um heritage grants and things like that that will help offset costs for restoration that can help to inspire good work um there’s really a variety of suites there’s unfortunately no magic solution although i wish there were counselor thank you yes now that was very helpful i do personally feel like um both of these items on our list have been neglected significantly leaving us with very little alternative but to approved demolitions um so perhaps moving forward it’s a future discussion for peck folks and i’m fine to accept the submission from um the resident um as i’m not personally offended by some of the language in it so thank you any other comments or questions in the motion before us seeing none i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries 3 to 2. Moving on to 3.3 regarding property at 30 30 singleton app i’ll look for a motion to open the public participation meeting councilor hopkins seconded by councilor frank call the vote closing the vote the motion carries 5 to 0. Thank you um any questions of a technical nature uh for staff uh after reading their report that’s in our agenda being done i’ll ask if the applicant is here i would like to address uh committee these ma’am give us your name and you have five minutes thank you very much uh good afternoon uh chair committee and staff members i’m barber rosser planning consultant to schlatal villages and i’m and their authorized agent for this application for rezoning under consideration by you tonight and it’s relative to it’s the village of glendale crossing use located at 30 30 singleton and of course it has substantial frontage as well on south dale road uh mike schmitt from schlatal villages has also joined the meeting and will be available if there are any questions regarding the proposal it’s to permit what’s uh known as a living classroom or school as defined by the city’s current zoning bylaw and it would be within the development that’s nearing completion on the site by way of a special r7 zoning and the living classroom would be for the purposes of training elder care workers primarily personal support workers uh the building was site plan approved and the building permit issued in 2020 it would occupy a very small proportion of the overall floor area uh and the maximum that would be stipulated by the zoning bylaw amendment that’s before you uh would be 600 square meters it would consist of a skills lab a simulation lab classroom student lounge and then other uh uh related facilities for administration uh would be a basement location no external indication of the existence of the use no external changes to the building from what is site plan approved and there would be more than ample parking on site even though schlatal villages does has the practice of not providing for parking and requiring students to take public transit uh the benefit of the living craft classroom is that it uh provides an opportunity for practical strict training uh for the students with the residents directly and it would be operated in collaboration with a community college excuse me uh schlatal villages is quite experienced with living classrooms operated in this manner in others of its villages including uh Waterloo Hamilton Guelph and Burlington and it’s been a very successful model that predates the pandemic there’s a very strong element of public benefit in this rezoning it would provide training as i’ve noted for elder care workers that would in the London and its region that would work in long-term care facilities hospitals and in home care and it would also provide training leading to employment for local people we’ve reviewed the staff report and concur with its recommendation and conclusions in particular that uh the proposal would be consistent with the PPS and in conformity with the London Plan uh we are available for questions and as i’ve noted there’s a schlatal villages representative present uh but i would also first uh uh like to thank uh staff who’ve been of great great assistance to us in advancing this application and we’re hopeful of committee support thank you thank you to everyone from the public that would like to address the committee at this time on this application ask the clerk or if there’s anyone online through the chair there’s no one online thank you seeing no others uh would like to address the committee i’ll look for a motion to close PPM Councillor Frank Councillor second by Councillor Hopkins i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we have a staff recommendation we’ll go to Councillor Hopkins i’m happy to move the motion motion is moved can i look for a seconder we’ll go to Councillor frank second the motion moved in second and i’ll vote a Councillor Hopkins yeah um i just want to um maybe a quick question through you mr chair to staff this is the first time we’re allowing this special provision in uh for a living classroom no staff on that question for the chair it is the first time so we kept it under the umbrella of the school use and limited the floor area just to be basically keeping it as a small footprint basically Councillor yeah i think this is a great new story almost too as we become an aging population i think the need is going to become greater so i really want to thank the applicant for the innovation i think in how we are going to train and employ people in our long-term facility so i’m very happy to support the motion thank you you know the comments or questions from committee members Councillor van mierberger thank you chair um legal villages are well known throughout western Ontario for their innovative approach to senior care and this is just one more example of that um this is smack dab in the middle of my ward so it’s um it is a good new story and i would certainly wholeheartedly support it and ask that um members of this committee do the same thank you thank you here are the comments uh our questions from committee members the committee would permit me i will just add to what uh councillors have expressed um i was really excited to see this on our agenda i think um you know as our population ages um and we move into special care facilities there is a tendency to be shut off from from the world and i think it i think it’s of great value uh to see uh the residents uh engage with our youth but also for our youth to engage uh with uh the elderly folks at that they will be interacting with on a regular basis um it’s i think both can learn from each other uh so thank you for the innovation and that thought and i hope to see i hope this will lead to uh future such uh endeavors well thank you seeing um no other comments or questions from committee or visiting councillors i will call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we’re now at three point four is 1208 vanchoff park road east i’ll look for a motion to open the public participation meeting counselor hopkins seconded by counselor frank i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero it’s time for any technical questions uh regarding the staff report seeing none i’ll see if the applicant would like to address committee please sir uh state your name and uh you have five minutes good evening mr chair members of the committee thank you uh jay mcguffin montyth brown planning consultants uh vice president principal planner here acting as agent for the property owner um we would like to provide full support to the recommendations of staff we believe that this is an excellent opportunity for infill and intensification along a urban thoroughfare in the primary transit area in the city of london for uh modest intensification in the area i’ll be available to respond to any questions of the committee thank you thank you so anyone from the public that would i like to address the committee i’ll ask clerk if there’s anyone online to the chair there’s no one online thank you one more look around chambers i’ll look for a motion to close the uh ppm counselor hillier seconded by counselor frank i’ll call the motion call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we have a recommendation from staff i will put that on the floor deputy mare louis yes i’m prepared to move the staff recommendation i’ll look for a seconder counselor hillier as uh second so we have motion moved and seconded i’ll open the floor for uh committee members uh at this time uh counselor hopkins uh yeah i just want to uh first of all thank staff uh for the internal agency comments i really appreciate that a report it gives us a lot of information here at committee um as to how the process of the application went through and i really do appreciate it i’m uh supportive of the recommendation in particular i know there’s a number of boundary trees and the challenge is going forward uh there’s 29 trees and i think most of them if not all of them are boundary trees and uh how that’s going to be dealt with i think it’s really important uh the movement um and the changes uh appreciate the applicant making those changes to accommodate the um the space especially to the east and the west i think um bringing forward these units the intensity quick question maybe through you to staff is the uh the development of fenshaw park uh road east for widening uh is that being taken into consideration i know there was a uh request to ask that question go to staff and the uh three rooms to chair um the road widening dedication will be taken essentially at site plan so there is a requirement i’m entirely sure how much that is but i believe it was maybe detailed in the report under the transportation comments so there will be a bit of land dedicated to the city for the ultimate road widening and so therefore that three meters setback will be from the ultimate property which is well so that has been taken into consideration sorry i was a little too quick on on there uh councilor thank you um councilor preble true to chair to the staff and thank you for this work as well and i did meet with our staff and i’m certainly as a ward counselor supporting this project and i think it’s a really good fitting project for infill for this area thank you thank you any other um comments or questions on the motion in front of us seeing none i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero okay moving on we are at three point five regarding 32 34 to 32 74 wonderland road south i’ll look for a motion to open public participation meeting deputy mare louis for a second the counselor frank i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero any questions of a technical nature on the staff report ask if the applicant is here i see you sir uh please give us your name and you have five minutes good afternoon mr chair committee members my name is harry frucio some with salinka preammo limited and together with my colleague taylor whitney we are uh the authorized agents for so side construction for this application uh we want to thank staff initially for their efforts in bringing forward this application a timely fashion under some very time sensitive matters we want to thank them for their uh report and that we support the recommendation that’s in front of you this evening the proposed zoning application would facilitate the construction of a tesla automotive sales and service establishment uh all on this property we’re also currently in the site plan approval process and hope that in the coming weeks we’ll work out the final details of getting that project approved and hopefully construction to commence uh next spring we’re extremely excited to be part of the process of bringing tesla to london uh this this dealership will be the first of its kind and in this part of the province west of kichner waterloo and it will serve a a very large region it will be one of its with the largest of its kind in the in the in the country and we hope that council shares not excitement to bring uh this this development to london uh will be a positive uh addition to the community as well as the london or the wonderland road commercial corridor um you’ve already been topped tipped off a little bit already there are representatives from tesla that would like to address planning committee they’re attending virtually so we’ll allow them an opportunity to speak shortly uh other than that mr chair we’re open to any questions you may have and thank you for allowing us the opportunity to uh bring forward this application thank you um and i’ll ask the clerk do we have those uh folks online uh that from tesla that would like to address the committee um if you can hear me okay um we’re um you’re uh welcome to address the committee uh you have five minutes please give us your name and and go ahead you my name is kyle mazzoni i’m the real estate manager for tesla canada and i’m thrilled to be in attendance state thank you for having me um on behalf of tesla we are really excited with the selected site chosen and the great partnership with the south side group and the city of london um we are really looking forward to getting up and open for business in 2025 and increasing our presence in canada and really just seeing more tesla cars on the road as london uh thank you sir thank you very much is there anyone from the public that would like to address the committee i’ll ask the clerk if there’s anyone online through the chair there’s no one online okay seeing that no one uh from the gallery is here to address us and uh or online i’ll look for a motion to close the ppm deputy mayor luis i have seconder please a councilor hopkins and i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you we have a recommendation from uh staff uh in front of us so i will go to the uh committee on that deputy mayor luis and i’m prepared to move the staff recommendation thank you i’m looking for a seconder uh councilor hillier has seconded the motion i will put uh that on the floor for uh comments or questions councilor vamirberg and thank you chair um again this is in the heart of wonderful ward 10 but it’s going to affect a large area much larger than a single city of london ward the entire city will benefit indeed the entire region of western ontario uh will benefit my understanding is um just at the start will be 50 new jobs and will certainly grow from there uh it’s it’s hard to express what a great new story this is for this entire region so i would humbly ask uh members of the committee to uh support this uh this motion going forward thank you councilor hopkins yeah thank you and i appreciate the word councilor’s comments i do have a couple questions uh through you mr chair uh i guess just starting off with the parking of 504 spaces i’m not sure if the applicant or the consultant can answer but just wondering why so many parking spaces given that uh we try to encourage uh transit in this area and um just sort of the ash felt and and uh how just wanting to know why so many uh i’ll go to the applicant uh on the question of the need for parking spaces thank you and through you mr chair as i noted in the presentation as counselor van mierberg and noted this this this dealership will not serve just the london or not just this area will serve beyond london so it is anticipated that there will be quite a bit of uh sales happening for the entire region so they need this this parking not just for the for the display of vehicles but also to transition cars that have been sold so people can come pick them up at an assigned date customer parking uh there’s there’s a number of of of of different components that are required for the parking of this site and mr mazon can speak to it as well but it is part of the business plan to fully utilize the parking that’s on this site through the site plan process we will be working with staff to make sure there’s an enhanced landscape strip along wonderland road to make sure that you’re not seeing a lot of the ash fault that’s there but it is and and we’ve discussed this to length with our client and it has been told to us that that is the business plan for this site and this the nature and extent of this development to have that many parking spaces available for the for the for the actual use thank you councilor yeah thank you um for the um the answer i know uh as um this area was sort of designed for commercial development and it’s been empty for for many many years it’s it’s really good to see on alternative land use in this area i am just a little curious why we aren’t able to do that mixed use development in this area i’m not sure if the applicant or maybe through staff are there opportunities for mixed land use for development in this area as we go forward given the the challenges that we have in our city i’ll go to staff for that question thank you through the chair this these lands are within the southwest area secondary plan so that plan is a 50-year type plan it allows for adaptive reuse over time plan june of development so that would contemplate residential or other uses that relate to the policy framework within swap but having said that um they as part of this proposal the focus was on the tesla and the tesla building um there are planned units that could be accommodated in the front but in the interim uh they’re showing more we’ll say built-edge type landscape feature enhanced landscape feature which uh the zoning by-law the proposed by-law presents that allows for this use in the interim and then over time uh we’ve got uh policy requirements that would be built into the the development agreement and future that would allow for phasing in future uh but right now the focus was for this of this development site councilor yeah thank you for that i i will be supporting the recommendation i’m glad to see i know parking is always encouraged behind these buildings along this corridor i’m glad to see the enhanced um um um buffering and landscaping that will sort of soften the area uh it’s a well-used corridor it and again i’m glad to see some type of alternative land use even though i’d like to see more but um it’s good to see development happening along the corridor thank you thank you kelborough thank you and following up on that vein um just at first glance the site plan has a nauseating amount of surface level parking so i’m just wondering if discussions were had with the proponent about doing um a building for parking or below ground parking i’ll go to the applicant uh through you mr chair no we have not had those discussions only because of the nature of the use being at autumn water sales and service they do need to display the cars at grade so having underground parking wouldn’t work really well for that type of business model but your point is taken councilor thank you and uh following up on the site plan uh recommendations from staff i’m just wanting to hear a little bit more i guess about some of the low impact um development that could be occurring on the site again based on the site plan it looks very unfriendly to pedestrians and i currently don’t really see that much um uh by way of of green infrastructure and as we know uh heat island effect is in full force and we’ve seen a couple maps recently um as well following up on that too i’m wondering about flooding because we do know this is um close to a area that regularly floods so maybe if you could chat a bit about those two mitigation measures i’ll go to staff on that uh thank you through the chair i believe the applicant should be answering these questions i’ll go to the applicant on uh concerning as a counselor thank you and through you again mr chair these are things we’ll be dealing with through the site plan approval stage we have not received our first round of comments yet we hope to get those shortly uh with respect to flooding we’re actually we’ve already received constant the comments from the conservation authority they have no concerns with the proposal has been presented so we we don’t believe there’ll be any issues with that but again all the engineering will be dealt with through the site plan stage and any it’s many you know low low impact development will be considered at that at that stage as well thank you counselor thank you and then one more follow up um for the southwest area plan given that the vast majority of it is giant box stores with the humongous parking lots that are empty 90 percent of the time i’m just wondering if consideration has been given to um you know that whole area being completely paved over and and where the water goes at that point is that something that is uh already planned out in the southwest area plan because it is a significant amount of water to essentially be dispersing from those areas that used to be agricultural and um and then uh reallocating into either storm water management or into um sewers along that area so i’m just wondering if we’ve um included that in the southwest area plan as well so i’ll go to staff on that uh just storm water management um for not only for this particular property but for the surrounding areas for the carrots peter kavic i’m uh i’m online right now uh manager of subdivision and development inspections just because i’m sick with my kids unfortunately um to answer the counselor’s question um through the engineering review for site plan we do look at the private permanent system that is designed as part of storm water to make sure that we attend weight flows based on what the existing pre-development areas are so that we don’t worsen the impact to the environment in the pincone drain that’s near the site so that’s the main intent with site plan trying to make sure we really match those those pre and post flows to not worsen the environmental impact thank you counselor thanks i appreciate that i just wanted to confirm i assume you guys had already thought it all out but i always like to check and i guess maybe one last question for the applicant um i’m just wondering so um i noticed there are 504 parking spaces and and given that the tesla would like to display some of theirs i’m just wondering like how many they’re going to be like 400 cars on display at any given time or what’s the what’s the plan there i’ll go to the applicant uh i’m not sure if you would have a number of amount of inventory and the end user would be planning but soaring through you was retired i don’t have the exact number but like i said there’s about four or five different areas of parking including the the sale the sale of vehicles that would be on display for the site will be still be an area for cars that are being delivered for short-term stay and and people will pick up their vehicle after because you have to remember with this type of service there is online sales as well in addition to the sales that will be performed on site so because this is supposed to satisfy an entire region there will be the needs to have these parkings on the site for a temporary period of time no different than any other car dealership but they’ll be picked up by the by the ultimate user of the vehicle at some point so there’s also there’s service parking employee parking customer parking there’s going to be the charging spaces as well so there’s again there’s a very various components of the parking we can get into that detail with staff of the site plan process in terms of how those parts those spaces will be used effectively for the site counselor thank you yeah that concludes all my questions and i am having a tough time with this one i mean i have an electric vehicle myself it’s not a Tesla unfortunately but i find this kind of infrastructure it’s just a good reminder that electric vehicles will not solve our climate change issues and just replacing like for like it does not really do a whole lot when you’re going to use this much space simply to store cars but i’m going to continue to think and maybe listen to some of the debate before i cast my vote thanks any other comments or questions from committee or visiting counselors council Roman thank you and through you sorry can you remind us where the other locations of the Tesla dealerships are right now i know kitchen and Waterloo has one but if you’re from the rest of south western Ontario whereas the closest is just kitchen and Waterloo okay so if you’re in the market for a Tesla right now most people i have a couple i know a couple people have ordered one i have not but i know that there is quite a process and it is nice to have an actual facility to go to and to to take a look and be able to look at these vehicles i i i understand at counselor’s point and to others point i think that there’s an opportunity here to again put our regional stamp on a facility that would be beneficial for where we’re going in the future thank you thank you any other comments questions deputy mayor Lewis thank you chair and through you again i’m going to try and be brief it’s not my intent to engage and cross debate with counselor frank we can certainly do that afterwards over a libation if she chooses but i i have said this before and i will say it again the car is not going away so the sooner we facilitate it becoming electric the better i to do not own a Tesla i can’t afford one on what you pay me to be the deputy mayor but perhaps as we bring some of these facilities closer and we see more purchases and then more aftermarket secondhand ones maybe i’ll be able to afford one of those i’d like the vehicle that i’m in to be my last gasoline powered fossil fuel vehicle but unless we’re going to invest and support the infrastructure that supports electric vehicles that transition is going to be slower than i think it needs to be so i’m very supportive of this because i think it’s a step in the right direction both in terms of the long-term transportation transition but also because it’s consistent with the southwest area plan and the envisioned uses here and that there is an opportunity for some future changes to the site as things get developed out so for all those reasons i’m very supportive thank you any other comments counselor opkins yeah thank you for allowing me just go one more time i appreciate everyone’s comments i too had a hard time with this one but i am going to be supporting it but i would encourage the applicant to reduce those parking spaces i just can’t imagine 504 asphalt parking spots in this area so i just wanted to make that comment thank you thank you any other comments from committee members for visiting if the committee will allow me i’ll just weigh in here a bit um uh for me uh i don’t have i don’t have any trouble with this one um i think the faster we move to electric vehicles the better and just noting where this is located uh on the south end of our city uh it’s near two smaller communities and smaller communities don’t enjoy the same transit that large urban centers like one and half uh so i think the faster we can get those folks uh into vehicles uh with uh much lower carbon footprint uh the better and i think tesla’s thinking the same um i imagine uh from the location of this uh to hit the st. thomas’s of the world and you know even chat them and all the way down to winzer that will be one less barrier to considering alternative fueled car essentially and the other comment i’d like to make is uh thank you to staff i heard the applicants say kudos on the timely fashion of getting this through so uh good to hear that uh so well done thank you there are no further comments or uh questions i will call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero thank you moving on to three point six which is 1364 to 1408 i park road i’ll look for a motion to open the pvm else or frank seconded by deputy mayor louis so call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero so any technical questions at this time based on the staff report in front of you in our agenda if not then i’ll look to see if the applicant would like to address the committee at this time please sir uh give us your name and you have five minutes good evening mr.

chair and planning committee my name is jersey smart and i’m a partner at civic planning and design we are the authorized agent for uh for the applicant which in this case is the municipal housing development division of the city of london i want to acknowledge that we are in full agreement with planning staff’s recommendation brought before you tonight i want to thank all staff who have taken part of this process uh we are proud to work have worked closely with municipal housing development staff on this exciting project that seems to that seeks to rezone surplus city owned lands at 1364 1376 1390 and 1408 hide park road to allow for much needed residential development working with municipal housing development staff civic was able to help identify highest and best use and lay out for the site in keeping with the london plan as well as look at opportunities to go beyond the plan to best maximize the number of units based on the existing context and functionality of the site what you see before you today is a conceptual development plan uh with the company and visual plan and zoning by-law amendment to allow for up to 440 units apartment units and 17 townhouses as you’ve also hopefully seen we provide a project brief that provides further details uh and also outlines the comprehensive uh community engagement strategy that we ran for this application there are any questions i will be here to answer them thank you very much thank you any comments from the public for uh committee members mr wallace uh you know five minutes please go ahead thank you mr chairman i wasn’t uh planning on speaking tonight but first of all i want to congratulate the city on recognizing uh uh property that has the opportunity become residential that they may have the ability to um put it to the marketplace but my point that i really wanted to make other than the two first public participation meetings the arrests were rezoning now there’s an opa in this last uh application that from the city but the arrests were um as a base zoning by-law amendments that in reality were um relatively uh i think from the public’s perspective and based on who showed up uh we’re relatively minor my point is this when it comes to rethink zoning we need to have a more flexible inclusive zoning by-law so we are not the applicants tonight would have spent a minimum of 12 grand plus another um process uh delay in terms of moving forward on their projects we think that these are the kinds of things that uh uh a more flexible zoning by-law would allow to happen faster and a lot of the decisions that need to be made or will be still be done at site plan but would not take up your time not take up the time of the proponents and move things along faster for the city thank you very much thank you i’ll ask a clerk if there’s anyone online i would like to address committee through their chair there’s no one online thank you anyone else last chance or from the public last call i’ll look for a motion to uh close the ppm uh deputy mare louis seconded by counselor frank i’ll call the vote closing develop the motion carries five to zero um i’m just going to go to staff based on the comments uh from uh mr. loss regarding i know you’re working on rethinking zoning right now um there’s no specific question here and you do not have to say anything if you don’t want but um if you just want to give the opportunity to you know maybe uh give us some of your thoughts through the chair we absolutely agree that we would like to have less of of these zoning applications come forward and it’s actually uh tomorrow we’ll have an opportunity to provide a little bit more detail to council as part of our housing accelerator fund application we have um some very specific zoning uh changes that we’re in bringing forward to support that application that we’ll be doing a lot of the things that the mr. moles has suggested so um stay tuned and we’ll also have an update on the rethink uh report uh process for the rethink zoning in the next month as well to give you some ideas on what you’re gonna see ahead there as well yeah i think um you know the comments that we heard are are valid and uh so i look forward to you know uh the update on the rethink zoning uh process um uh you know it’s timely given the uh fantastic news received from the federal government um and i’m looking forward tomorrow uh to hearing that report to SPPC and uh um again kudos to staff because uh more will be said tomorrow night uh but just from the chair of this committee um i think we are moving in the right direction uh and i think the um announcement from the federal government uh indicated that from from their standpoint so i just wanted to say i keep up keep up the good work um we have a motion or we have a recommendation from staff uh i’ll go to deputy mayor Lewis uh thank you mr. chair and uh through you um i’m prepared to move the staff recommendation um i was going to save my uh comments for tomorrow night as well uh for SPPC but i’m going to take this opportunity to say uh i’m really glad that mr.

mathers and mrs. McNeely and mr. peas and i know you weren’t the only ones involved but i’m glad you got to uh join us last week for that announcement uh and i know it’s because of the incredible hard work uh that your teams did to advance the application as quickly as you did and as ambitiously um and i note the comments that we heard from federal leaders about uh how this has set a new bar uh for other municipalities to strive to match so i want to take that opportunity to just say kudos to all of you um and thank you for all the i can’t even guess if we could total up the hours of extra work that you put into this while doing your other job on top of everything else so thank you for that um happy to move uh this application um i would like to speak to it for a moment but i’ll look to see if there’s a seconder first okay i’ll look for a seconder uh counselor frank um so we have motion moved and seconded now open for a conversation i’ll go to deputy america less uh thank you chair so very happy to see um this coming forward as uh redevelopment uh potentially for affordable housing um this is really key and it’s it’s really consistent with our council policy that before we dispose of any property at the city we send it through the municipal housing division to see if it’s appropriate for affordable housing um this proposal looks not dissimilar to one in my own ward uh at 1958 Duluth crescent with some mix of mid-rise and townhouse uses involved um i know that there was some uh pushback from some members of the community um but uh you know my response to that was affordable housing belongs in every neighborhood in this city um it’s not just uh you know something that we put all in one corner of the city it’s something that belongs everywhere uh and the people who work in uh you know the retail sector or the service sector in this neighborhood deserve an opportunity to live there just as much as the residents who are utilizing those services whether it’s the people pouring your coffee or the the folks i know nobody wants to think about it but pretty soon the season will be upon us to change our tires for snow tires um uh or any of the other number of of service and retail uses that we see in this area of the city um the employees there deserve a chance to have a home there too so that they don’t have to rely on you know 45 minutes or an hour and two transfers of transit to get to their jobs and so i’m really excited to see this opportunity uh being brought forward on this parcel of land i think it’s a great uh proposal i think it’s a good use of this space and it has been in the city’s hands since uh 2013 and and it’s time that we do something with it so uh very very supportive of that thank you other uh call this or happens yeah it’s pretty hard not to support this application and and uh my thanks to staff and and the applicant as well i think the applicant has done a very good job here in uh providing that extra bit of park space the amenity space that’s going to be required reduce parking uh important things uh not only the affordable housing piece i uh hopefully we’ll get some improved transit in this area as well as we develop um and create opportunities for um transit but also the open space zones too sort of keeping them in place and and protecting them so very supportive of this application thank you the other comments uh counselor roman uh thank you and through you so i have some comments and some questions um first i want to start by thanking mr maitland civic and the planning team for their work on this application i’m supportive of and of the need for affordable housing in the ward and across the city in ward seven there’ve only been eight affordable housing units approved four and twenty twelve and four and twenty fifteen so you can see there is definitely a need in this ward i’d like to thank the residents and neighbors who took the time to reach out about this proposal and i appreciate the questions that have come forward uh i’m going to go through some of the questions that have been received um i’m not sure why but it i’m some people had called or reached out today saying they were going to be part of tonight’s ppm so i’m not sure if they just didn’t get a chance to access or something so i want to make sure that their questions are addressed um so my first question is something that a number of residents have brought up and i know this would be dealt with in site plan but i just wanted to ask if it’s possible to comment at all there’s a lot of concern around the traffic on hide park road and the fact that this would be a difficult property to access and therefore create um more traffic challenges on prince of whale gate prince of whales gate uh in south carrage road um so the concern is that um if you were traveling north on hide park how would you access the the one access that’s being uh proposed in this plan i’ll go to staff on that question through the fair sorry it’s uh peter kavic again i was just coordinating with the team i’m online uh manager subdivision development inspections um just to reiterate the question to make sure i have it accurately kellsler it’s for pedestrians traveling northbound or vehicles traveling northbound on hide park and then accessing into the subdivision or site plan sorry uh sorry thank you so um it’s for for vehicle access um my understanding is it’s a single entrance and exit off of hide park um and so if this is the if somebody’s traveling north how would they access this particular location without perhaps turning around onto south carrage and then having to then turn around yes i’m going staff perfect thank you for that clarification i know i understand the question uh through the chair uh it’s part of the transportation impact assessment um through traffic volumes the the site plan would review the end solution some potential options are to remove the what’s the center median right now um to consider you know an access through that um median and to allow those left turns to to access but without doing the transportation impact assessment it’s a bit premature to see if that would be the solution um another option could be a signal but with the the signal at hide park and south carrage um the ti would also review that um unfortunately there’s a number of options but we would want to make sure through that traffic impact assessment that they’re all embedded appropriately and that it does provide a safe uh comfortable access to all residents and homeowners that live in this area hopefully that answered a bit of your question counselor counselor thank you follow up and i’ll move quickly through my questions um there is a property right next door to this uh where when they were going through the application the height was restricted to four stories and in this proposal the the height is um set at six and seven i’m just wondering why the properties next door were restricted in height but this these two aren’t they’ll go staff through the chair uh the property to the north made their application for four stories there was no restriction on the uh or six they just applied for four stories counselor thank you um i think that’s takes care of a lot of the questions that came from the neighborhood um but one that i have been struggling with that i have not been able to answer get an answer for residents is around the um the use of the site so i understand that through our policy when we are when we gain access to a property that through our policy on the sale and disposition of the land um that we would look at affordable housing first and i understand that policy i also understand that we have a need for land in the northwest and i’m just wondering uh if this site was considered for the possibility of a community facility and the reason i’m asking that is again because as we’re looking at the northwest we’re looking at the the great need that we have for community facilities in the area um i want to ensure that we’re looking at the highest and best use and whether that’s a mixed use facility on that property that could be both a community facility and housing i think i’d want to understand that we that we went through that process to evaluate it against our criteria for community facility i’ll go to stuff through the chair so um just to step back what we would go through and if any of these properties come available so absolutely the counselors correct that the first thing we look at is what that could property could be used for so um as far as our op and our our own strategic um choices that we make as far as land if we can use that land for affordable housing knowing we have a three thousand a road map to three thousand units and just the how important new housing is and how limited the supply of land to be able to provide that housing is then we will um start from there to be able to uh move forward with uh an app this process you’re seeing today so um there is uh recreational master plan where they go through the process to identify locations this property was not identified as one of those locations so um what we brought forward to today is an application for for that affordable housing so um absolutely there there’s always opportunities to to look at different properties but this one’s brought forward strictly for affordable housing counselor thank you yes so this property was brought forward strictly for affordable housing therefore was not considered a possibility for a community facility um i would like i’m not a member of this committee so i can’t move a motion but i would like to uh put this forward for consideration of a possibility if someone’s willing to move it as an amendment um i think it’s it’s incumbent on us to consider how we use the land that we have especially as we’ve been building out the northwest um we have very little possibility for for where we can put a community center and i think we have to consider everything that we have so um i’m hoping that someone would consider moving an amendment a d let’s say to the uh what’s in front of us and that is for the consideration um that civic administration be directed to evaluate the property at 1364 through 1408 Hyde Park for a mixed use of both residential and a community facility and that the property be evaluated against the criteria for a community facility um i know it’s not something we’ve done before that we haven’t evaluated a property for both but i’m asking that we think outside the box in this case and think about the possibility where we do not have a lot of land of how we have the best possible use for the land with Canterbury Park backing on to this property um i think it’s it’s a possibility the fact that this property is almost similar size to the Canadian Aquatic Center facility the games Canada Games facility that we have as well um and i think that it should be looked at and at least evaluated against the criteria thank you uh Dr. Mayor Lewis uh thank you chair so um i appreciate the word counselor’s uh comments and and the desire to see um you know community facilities uh developed in her part of the the city as well uh the northwest uh community center has long been um discussed since the 2019 update to the parks and recreation master plan at least um but i’m not going to support asking staff to consider this site at this time and and i want to share a couple reasons for that because i don’t want to suggest that i don’t appreciate uh where the council is coming from but um my understanding is that we have six or seven uh other city owned properties that we are evaluating uh for community center use in the northwest that typically we’re looking for six to ten acres of of land this parcel here’s four um i recognize Canterbury Park is is adjacent um but then we do start losing green space and i say that as somebody who i’m lucky to have a beautiful community center in my ward but we did sacrifice green space to get it um to the size that we have um but more importantly 2024 is the the year for the update to the parks and recreation master plan um and to to ask us to start looking at this now um you know to get a um a feasibility study to to discuss what components would fit in here and and i think at best we would get at best a mid-sized facility um so there would be some sacrifices made on on potentially what components get included um because we wouldn’t necessarily have the land to do everything um that might be ideal in a northwest community center um but we’re we’re nowhere near having um all the funding worked out we’ve got a multi-year budget process coming up um there was an application made to the federal government in the last term of council for some infrastructure funding to advance some community center projects faster um that unfortunately was not approved by the federal government so we still have a fairly long timeline on some of these builds um and so it plus we have to have discussions with like the library the YMCA other potential community partners because we we’re now looking at doing a lot of co-builds on these kind of things not just stand-alone um on their own um and so with all that goes into that and knowing that there are some other municipal properties that are already being evaluated for for their feasibility i wouldn’t want to add work and and hold up what’s already a good plan for affordable housing on what i think based on the size of the parcel already would come back as a this isn’t going to work for us as a community facility anyway um when other sites are being actively evaluated so um certainly when when the opportunity comes to approve a northwest community center i’m going to be fully supportive of the council’s desire to see that happen um as i wasn’t in the last term and will continue to be because i think everybody deserves an and east lions type community center in in uh every part of the city where possible but i think we have to move forward with this one i think there’s other opportunities for community centers here and i don’t want to add work to staff’s load uh on an evaluation where other sites are already being considered other comments or questions counselor opkins yeah just a couple questions so um my first question is around other sites being evaluated in this in the northwest area i hear the counselor’s request um so i don’t know if they are or not so maybe that’s my first question and my second question is with the um the um the added amendment uh to consider an evaluation i’m not thinking the evaluation would be a feasibility study and all that what is the criteria because i did hear from mr mathers that housing affordable housing eating those targets are important that’s what we consider that’s what we have here that’s what i am supporting but i would like to have a better understanding of the counselor’s concerns in in her community uh number one sites number two is there a delay in the evaluation of this property to look at that next use or road staff uh through the chair so we don’t have anyone to attend from our from our parks and direct area so i won’t be able to speak to um what they are what they’re currently looking at um however the one item that i i can speak to is just the timeliness so uh absolutely an evaluation can could be done um if that available like so then i go down to the scenario if it says yes or no if it said said no then that we can progress uh this fairly streamlined way if it did say yes um which i don’t know what it’s going to say i’m just concerned about the timeliness so if we’re looking at uh constructing or designing recreational facilities that’s pushing the construction of affordable um housing on this property out years like it is this is a probably the lowest hanging fruit of we have of all of our affordable housing pro projects right now that we can actually get out there and build some stuff so that’s my primary concern i i very much would value um and i know the community would value this recreational opportunity here as well my concern is just the timeliness so sorry uh thank you for that and uh with that i would not um sort of accommodate a an amendment to the recommendation uh but i do think it’s important to understand um maybe from a parks perspective uh where um what the needs are in in the community of the council’s request and uh given that staff is not here to to speak to that i can follow up with them at a later time so thank you any other uh comments or questions um from committee members if the committee will allow me then i’ll weigh in um but council ramen’s uh uh suggestion for amendment i i totally understand uh her where she’s coming from uh the northwest uh for as long as i’ve been here has been promised they at some point in a community center um and what i’ve heard is that there’s lack of land uh available um so i understand where she’s coming from and i share that because my ward is uh in the it’s not as north but part of i would call the northwest uh just a little south of that um we are lacking uh in those facilities which i’ve had conversations with staff on prior what concerns me is funding you know um which comes first um do we set a site and go above finding finding the the money it sounds like we tried and fortunately um at that particular time uh we’re uh fortunate enough to find access to federal funding um and just the timing given that huge announcement that we just had in the emphasis right now and on housing especially affordable housing uh pretty hard to uh to delay uh a really good example of uh affordable housing build in a property right now that’s sitting vacant and could be used um so at this time uh i will not be putting forth that that amendment but i think the counselor raises some very good uh raises a really good interesting aspect of uh you know considering mixed use we talk about mixed use we talk about commercial residential mixed use maybe we have to start considering uh residential and community center use you know it’s uh especially we’re in land and space is dear um in the northwest i i kind of the more mulled over as counselor was speaking you know i kind of kind of see the logic behind that you know um uh community facilities with community housing um sharing um maybe the opportunity is for uh economies of scale sharing resources etc i don’t know might be an interesting avenue to go down so what i would like to do with uh with the counselor maybe a later time is to talk to staff maybe about possibilities and to drill down on the sites that were mentioned by the deputy mayor you know to uh see where we can uh get this ball rolling again because uh i can understand housing but you know we look 10 15 years down the road what is the community community has different aspects there’s commercial residential but there’s also uh city owned facilities that that add to the experience of living uh in our in our city so um i look forward to those discussions uh at a later date so before i call the vote last chance for any more comments or questions counselor uh thank you and through you um i mean i’ve only been on council for less than a year now and uh i’ll tell you almost every other council meeting is an application in ward seven and with all the growth that we’ve seen in the ward where have we considered the needs for recreation where have we considered the needs for community space where have we considered infrastructure needs where have we considered our school needs we are seeing increasing growth i feel like i meet with a developer almost every other week about an application that is about to come forward to this committee and what i hear is counselor you need to wait and wait till we’re ready to have that conversation about where we can possibly put a community center what i’m saying is we have a piece of city owned property um i understand there’s concerns that it might be too small we own the adjacent properties we own the park we if you look at the east lines i was there yesterday i looked at the facility uh you know if you look at the canadian aquatic games they’re almost identical in size to this part piece of property and i’m not talking about not going forward with the affordable housing i’m saying how do we best use the the pieces of land that we have available to us um so i welcome the opportunity i will be looking to my count fellow counselors when we start to have those conversations about the northwest and about the community center needs but i will say that you know this is a significant parcel in a great neighborhood there is a park backing on to it and green space uh you know the rest of the word we have challenges with transit we did not approve transit in the north and the west for rapid transit and so here we are and so again i would welcome the amendment i’ll try again and counsel we’ll see where we go thank you thank you any other comments or questions before i call the vote the motion moved in second i’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero so we have no items for direction have one item uh deferred matters the tenth report of the community advisory committee on plan that was added uh so i’ll put that on the floor now committee members councilor frank thank you all make a motion to receive that thank you seconded by councilor hopkins any comments or questions they’ll call the vote closing the vote the motion carries five to zero okay thank you that includes um the public portion we do have a confidential uh in-camera um so i’ll ask the clerk to prepare the room for six point one thank you i will go to deputy mary louis report out thank you chair through you i’m happy to report out progress was made on the item for which we went into confidential session thank you that concludes the items on our agenda i’ll look for motion for german deputy mary louis seconded by councilor frank all the favor closing the vote the motion I’m curious five to zero.

Thank you, folks.