okay, everyone. I know that many residents are watching our vote today. So I just want to touch on a couple things, on the course I think I've been talking too much today. So we had a community meeting at the robtown Community Center, which was well which is well attended as well. The developer attended remotely, and he had his architect there, and the residents were able to voice their concerns. Those concerns, unfortunately, really weren't, weren't dealt with at that meeting. And the hope is that the developer was going to come back with a smaller, shorter, shorter building to address some of their main concerns. One big issue that they have, which I'll get in second, is parking. But you know, to touch on some of their other concerns, they believe the community is already overcrowded. There's a big concern with roads, and I wanted to ask staff, and they can ask answer after I finish. But is there a policy where we ask developers, when they go into these green fields, that they go in and pre deal with rodents, because it's a big concern in a lot of parts of the city when we do developments, but I want to just, I'll reserve that that answer to later. There is some concern with any blasting or any digging that has to be done that might impact foundations. One of the residents are going to lose their daylight in their backyards, which is a big concern in particular. There's a there's a couple. There's one in particular who only purchased her home a little while ago and and is really, really going to be missing that part. She just took out her plum trees. And you know, it's a big part of her mental health to be able to have that opportunity when she gets home from work, to be able to join her backyard. There's significant concern with the sewer system. There's already a number of residents on Graves and on Hoyles, that experience sewer backups and and although staff has said that's not really big concern. We did have a water main break on Hoyles this week, just to give an indication of potentially the susceptibility of the infrastructure there. You know, we did have a petition with 150 names on it. And anyway, I've spoken to the developer, and I want to see him succeed and his family succeed. I want to see him be part of the solution for our housing crisis. I really do believe him when he says he really wants to do something that's good for the community. You know, obviously it'd be great if everybody could have a have a single detached home. You know, studies do prove that that people's mental health and their quality of life, if they can afford these homes, is better. And so this is the balance we're trying to strike here. So, you know, I really do feel that, you know, there's been a little bit of a change to the project now with these micro units, which, as we do know, generally, we assume that people may or may not need parking. But, you know, with a total of 96 units, and, you know, looking for over 40 vehicles, basically, or 40 vehicles to be spared, assuming every unit did have a parking place, there's already some significant issues with parking in the area. Residents already complain about the fact they go up sometimes and and, you know, they can't get out of driveways because students park there. There's rentals in the area where people are parking on the on their landscapes, lawns. Already, we've, we've heard from businesses in the area who say there's a great deal of pressure put on their parking places. So for on the basis of the parking and the concerns, and that brings the neighborhood, I will not be supporting this proposal as it is right now. I'd love to see a smaller building with a few with less units on it. Thank you
councilor Burton,
thank you your worship. Thank you councilor Bridger, for bringing this one in. So I'd like to acknowledge the residents concerns and say that I have read the petition and have read the submissions that were received over the time that this development has been before us, and I do sympathize with the concerns that have been brought forward. However, I believe very strongly that developments like this that accommodate a large number of housing units on a less square footage of land, pushes construction away from more sensitive greenfield development areas and towards locations suitable to utilizing existing infrastructure and services, which makes a good economic situation for the city and is better for the environment. I also believe that this development is in a walkable and public transit oriented neighborhood, and living without a car, for example, can improve affordability by the tune of about $1,300 a month on average in Canada, and a monthly transit pass is just a fraction of that cost. The development is also near the shared use paths that we've been building, and includes bike parking in the proposal. So in my opinion, it just makes sense in. This area, I believe that one bedroom units are desperately needed within the city, as we've seen in our housing needs assessment reports. And I also believe that the most important markers of quality of life when it comes to housing, which have been, you know, studied many times, are affordability, stability, quality, safety and the surrounding neighborhood. And I think that this development gives the opportunity for many, many people within the city to have the things that they need in order to be happy and live healthy lives. So I believe that this is a great development, and I think that the number of units is is great, and that we should proceed with it today, as is. I yeah, I think that it's just it's a really good thing for the area, and that bringing more people into the neighborhood is beneficial in many ways, and increases the sense of community within within the existing area, with a more diverse group of people moving in as well. So I'll be supporting the application today.
Thank you. Councilor Burton, any further comments? Councilor richley,
thank you. Motion. I too was at the Rabbittown community center and met with residents. And one thing that I want to reiterate is that the residents are not opposed to a development happening in this location. Actually, all of them, most of them, if not all of them, were in agreement with it. I still have concerns about the parking spaces. I understand the micro units. And, you know, going with micro units that there's no parking needed, but you know, 40 micro units, are we really going to have 40 micro units with no nobody, nobody having a car? I find it hard to believe. So I just don't want to get into a situation where we're going to create a problem for the residents and for the tenants of this building. So I still, based on, even, you know, the last time this was discussed, I want to see more parking spaces for 96 units. And so for that, I will be voting against it today, just based solely on the under parking I did ask staff, you know, can we do smaller parking spaces? And so, you know, a lot of cars on the road now are somewhat smaller vehicles. You don't see as many pickups anymore. So you know, what is there a solution that we can do better with parking or with the size of the lots, or, you know, the proponent is going to have to come up with with a solution to this problem, whether that's making the building smaller or or, you know, doing what he got to accommodate more parking. So, so I will not be supporting this today.
Thank you. Thank you, Deputy
Mayor. Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you Council Ridgeley for bringing it in, and certainly to the ward councilor for all of the engagement that he has taken on in this in this development, I have to tell you, I've really, really, truly struggled with this development because it's it suits everything that I want and need to see, and certainly the mandate for affordable housing and more units. We know that we we certainly are desperate for it. But not unlike with my desire for urban a smart urban forest management plan, we certainly have to try to continue to balance all of the needs of community. And when we get a petition with 150 names on it, and we hear from local business owners who have detailed an already existing parking issue in an area it continues to raise flags. For me, I think that the developer certainly has been, certainly trying to address some of the needs and the concerns of the community that we've heard loud and clear from however, I would like to see, you know, if I could, I would like to see a slightly smaller development. The idea of micro units and single units, I think, is fantastic, and certainly the proximity, as councilor Burton has talked about, absolutely we know that we need to continue to build more in areas around post secondary areas around our you know, multi use trail, you know, where all the amenities are, and, of course, next to transportation. But I, unfortunately, I'm still not convinced that we're not compounding an already existing problem in an area. Yeah, so my wish would be for the developer to go back and try to see if it could be slightly revised to still put in those kind of units in that area, but again, not to compound the parking issue that is already existing in that particular neighborhood. So as difficult as it is for me to make this decision, I will not be supporting this motion. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor,
any further comments?
Your Worship? Yes, yes. Councilor, his quick comment. I truly believe that this site is worthy of development. Infill is really important to avoid urban sprawl and to utilize city services at best possible. But I I'm afraid, I think this needs it's a bit too dense for this area, which is totally surrounded with housing. If it was set off to the side of a housing area, it would be something else to consider. But the buildings are going to be close to the backyards these houses. I think it could probably work if there was a little less dense, if there was a few somewhat less units. I realized that made with hardship on the developer, but I think I'm going to have to vote against it and hope that he can go back and sharp his pencil out. Thank you.
Any further comments?
I've read all the information on this, and I've I think the residents have done a very good job in articulating their concerns with it. I have struggled with with the decision, because there's really two points in it that I have concern about. It's the size of the building in its proximity to the houses that surround it. It really does create kind of a jammed effect for me. And although it meets regulations and everything, it just seems the height and the footprint is very, very large to me in that in that area, the second one I struggle with, the parking impacts, the micro units are great, boss. You know, you can't be assured that people renting the micro units are going to not have a car, and you're still going to be left with a fairly significant part in parking shortage, I believe. But then again, I really like the idea of having more of the micro unit options on the market today. But I'm not so sure this is the right place for this development. So I won't be supporting the application. I struggle with it. I think it's - I commend the developer. It's, it's a, it's a good piece of piece of work here, but it just for me, it doesn't fit into that neighborhood and into that specific area. So I'll be, I'll be voting against approval any
