MINUTES

 

GCA Board Meeting

Tuesday, April 26, 2022

7:00 – 9:00 p.m.

 

Chair: Laura Smith, President

Secretary and timekeeper: Janet Mayhew

 

Board members present: Laura Smith, June Creelman, John Crump, Janet Mayhew, Angus McCabe, William Price, Elizabeth Ballard, Janna Rinaldi, Rochelle Handelman, Judy Wilson, Della Wilkinson, Carol McLeod, Silvia Grandi, Sue Stefko, Anthony Carricato, Colette Downie, Sarah Viehbeck, David Kelly, Carolyn Mackenzie, Christina Honeywell-Dobbin, Deborah Long, Dan Chook-Reid

 

Others present: Shawn Menard, Jonathan McLeod, Steve Zan, Brian Tansey, Randal Marlin, Gail, Beatrice

 

Welcome and approval of agenda and draft minutes from March 22, 2022

 

Laura Smith opened the meeting with an Indigenous land acknowledgement.

 

A motion to approve the agenda was put forward by Della and seconded by Colette. 

Agenda was approved.

 

A motion to approve the minutes was put forward by John and seconded by Janna. 

Minutes were approved.

 

Report from the Councillor

 

Shawn Menard provided an update on the following topics:

  • Motorcycle convoy to be in Ottawa the weekend of April 29-May 1, 2022.
  • Traffic calming plans
  • Firehall Park – the commence work order was given April 25th with work to be completed this year.
  • Upcoming events: 
    • Developer Influence Town Hall on Thursday, April 28, 2022
    • Future of Bronson session on May 4, 2022
    • Older Adult Forum on May 19, 2022
  • Lansdowne 2.0 – more consultation needed

 

Questions:

  • One member reported a sidewalk issue requiring repairs to 311, but it has not yet been resolved. Shawn’s office to follow-up.
  • Bike corrals are missing from several areas. Shawn indicated that these would be replaced.
  • Potholes in certain areas are causing a tripping hazard and reported injuries. Shawn’s office asked the community to report to 311 and provide exact location and photos, if possible.

 

Motions:

 

Motion 1: GCA Board appointment

 

Whereas the GCA’s treasurer, Ahmed Ibrahim, has submitted his resignation.

 

Be it resolved that the Board appoint David Kelly as Treasurer effective immediately.

 

Motion was introduced by June and seconded by Carolyn. Motion carried.

 

 

Motion 2: that the GCA allocate $120 to purchase a Zoom webinar add-on feature for the all candidates debate on May 12, 2022.

 

Motion was introduced by June and seconded by Dan. Motion carried.

 

Motion 3: that the GCA allocate funds for the Annual General Meeting.

 

Be it resolved that the GCA allocate a sum of up to $750 for the Annual General Meeting which covers:

  • A 1/4 page colour ad in the Glebe Report  ($265.55)
  • Rental of Scotton Hall ( $65.93)
  • A special events license ( $50)
  • Printing  — up to $100  
  • Refreshments — estimated at $400 which was the budget for the 2019 AGM

 

Further to a vote by Board members, a decision was made to revise the motion to move forward with a virtual meeting and organize a separate in-person social event for those who wish to attend. Given this revision, the only cost associated with the AGM would be $205 for an ad in the Glebe Report to announce the meeting.

 

The motion was introduced by June and seconded by Carolyn. Motion carried.

 

Committee motions:

 

Motion 4: to approve spending of $435.05 for an ad in the Glebe Report and to move forward with the 2022 Great Glebe Garage Sale, in-person while confirming we will continue to follow all guidance from Ontario Public Health and Ottawa Public Health.

 

Question was raised about porta-potties. Ecology Ottawa used to cover the costs, but it is unclear who will pay for this.

 

Motion was introduced by Colette and seconded by Carol. Motion carried.

 

Motion 5: that the GCA allocates up to $330 for the 2022 Membership campaign

 

The Membership Committee moves that it be given permission to spend up to 330 $ to cover the costs of the 2022 membership campaign.

 

Below is a proposed budget.

 

GCA Membership Committee Proposed Budget, 2022

Printing costs for door-to door campaign (paper and cartridges) $130

 

Online membership system (excluding per use fee) $100 

 

Contingencies $100

 

Total $330

 

Note: The Glebe Report ad ¼ page B&W (cost $200) was paid with the Membership committee discretionary funds and is not included in this motion.

 

Board members were asked to remind committee members to renew their memberships.

 

Motion was introduced by Silvia and seconded by Carol. Motion carried.

 

 

Motion 6: Parkland Dedication Bylaw Review and Replacement (Parks Committee)

 

WHEREAS a fundamental goal of the Glebe Community Association is that city-designated park land (per capita) [2 hectares per 1,000 residents] (not including NCC or school board held lands) be available as equally to the residents of a necessarily more densely populated downtown and inner core as it is to anyone else in the city; and

 

WHEREAS the reason for the City’s current Parkland Dedication By-law Review and Replacement process is because of a provincial government requirement that municipalities put in place a new parkland dedication bylaw by September 18, 2022 in order to preserve the use of a formula for calculating parkland allocation requirements that is tied to the number of dwelling units created (as is the current standard set by the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan and Parks and Recreation Master Plan); and

 

WHEREAS without a new parkland dedication bylaw, parkland requirements would be calculated based on a percentage of the area of the property being developed, and therefore make parkland less available to the residents of a necessarily more densely populated downtown and inner core; and

 

WHEREAS it follows that any new units added to the downtown/inner core, including those built by not-for-profit affordable housing initiatives, in whatever fashion (i.e., building permits for additional units – as is the practice in other major Ontario municipalities – and development applications); and mixed use (residential-commercial) buildings, adhere to a clear (provincial and/or municipal) requirement/formula for hectares per-capita of new parkland; or, alternatively, generate dollars cash-in-lieu (CIL) of new city-owned parks from the builders or from the City itself (particularly in the case of not-for-profit affordable housing initiatives); and

 

WHEREAS current deficiencies of parkland per capita in the urban core (or, as needs be, any other ward) could be addressed in the updated Parkland Dedication By-law through the designation of “special districts” that should justifiably receive 100% of CILP (rather than the current 60/40% local ward/citywide split); and

 

WHEREAS it is reasonable (in order to simplify the process) that calculations for required city-owned parkland per capita emanating from mix use (residential-commercial) building permits and development applications be based on whichever is the predominant usage, as long as the end result is that the amount of parkland created (or CILP received) is consistent with the city-designated park land (per capita) goal; and

 

WHEREAS the GCA is encouraged that City staff remain open to such stakeholder input from the community as they and their consultants (Watson & Associates) continue their preparation of the report scheduled to go to committee in May; and

 

WHEREAS the GCA is encouraged that in their considerations, the city and its consultants are taking into account data which demonstrates the current deficiencies in different areas of the city, particularly the downtown core and neighbouring communities, vis-à-vis parkland per-capita and the standards of the Official Plan and the Parks & Recreation Master Plan;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the GCA provides this input, as delineated above, to the City and its consultants for their consideration as they prepare their recommendations on the Parkland Dedication By-law Review and Replacement to the Planning Committee in May, in addition to the input already provided by the GCA Parks Committee.

 

Motion was introduced by Angus and seconded by Elizabeth. Motion carried.

 

Discussion about Lansdowne Park revitalization

 

Motion 7: GCA reaction to revitalization plans at Lansdowne Park

WHEREAS Lansdowne Park is a city-wide asset designated in the City’s new Official Plan as one of the City’s “special districts” that brings Ottawa residents together for sports, exhibitions, entertainment, as well as a weekend farmers’ market, and can also play a positive role in meeting City housing objectives;

WHEREAS appropriate public stewardship of such a unique and important site demands that meaningful public consultation take place prior to any level of approvals being sought or provided with respect to revitalisation proposals;

WHEREAS the GCA has been working with the City of Ottawa, the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) as well as the Glebe BIA to enhance the vibrancy of Lansdowne Park and improve the site so that it can continue to benefit all City residents and has been pleased to be active members of the Lansdowne Community Working Group and more recently, the Lansdowne Stakeholder Sounding Board;

WHEREAS the information provided to date by the City to the GCA raises a number of key issues relevant to all Ottawa taxpayers, providing further rationale for engagement with the public on the future of this site;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Glebe Community Association work to have the City’s Finance and Economic Development Committee (FEDCO) receive the forthcoming report for information as a “check-in with Council” on the status of the negotiations with OSEG since the July 2021 motion was passed;

BE IT RESOLVED that the GCA insist that/strongly support the City undertaking meaningful public consultations with Ottawa residents of proposed revitalization plans before any significant decisions to revitalize Lansdowne are made.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Committee (and eventually Council) hold off on proceeding with any further work (such as rezoning or a request for expression of interest in air rights) and making any decisions that bind the city to these plans until consultations are completed.

BE IT RESOLVED that in the interests of good public decision making, the City address key issues that include, but are not limited to, the following key issues/questions, prior to FEDCO/Council giving approval in principal to any revitalisation plan:

  •         What is the long-term vision for Lansdowne, and how will it complement or compete with other planned and existing investments of taxpayer funds in sports/entertainment/park facilities in Ottawa?
  •         How does the City justify any reductions to the urban park and public greenspace, particularly with a proposal for such a significant number of new residents to be added to this site?
  •         Will the three high-rise towers contribute or actually take away from the ambience, visitor experience and ability to attract visitors to Lansdowne? 
  •         How will selling air rights in the centre of Lansdowne Park affect the ability of the City to manage this public place in the future? How has the land been valued?
  •         Would the proposed housing really meet the significant growth challenges of the City, namely affordable and/or family-sized, ground-oriented units?
  •         Does the plan include a transportation/transit plan to get future visitors and roughly 3000 additional residents to and from Lansdowne?  Has it been costed and included in the financial modelling?
  •         The site is not on an LRT line.  Where will new residents in the proposed towers park, and how will added congestion on site restrict the ability of Ottawa residents to visit Lansdowne?
  •         How will heritage/cultural assets like the Aberdeen Pavilion and Horticulture building be impacted by this plan?
  •         Are reduced capacity sports facilities of the right size for a growing city? What will be the impact on future ticket prices of reduced seating?
  •         What are the environmental impacts of this plan? Does this plan contribute or detract from the City’s ability to progress climate change objectives?
  •         The Lansdowne Partnership financial plan agreement failed to meet financial objectives even prior to COVID.  What financial transparency and accountability measures are being put in place to improve management and oversight?

Questions/comments:

  • This initiative requires more public consultation. Community associations and City Councillors could have a public meeting.
  • This will be discussed at the FEDCO meeting on May 6, 2022
  • The City has said that they will do a consultation after approval in principle.
  • Option to hold a press conference or proactive media outreach to seek more information from the Mayor and City Councillors.
  • Previous motions on this subject could be used to develop talking points. Sarah Viehbeck offered her assistance.
  • Board members commended the work that was put into this motion and all of the considerations that were brought forward.

Motion was introduced by Anthony and seconded by Colette. Motion carried. 

 

Items for discussion

  • Nomination Committee: June announced some proposed changes to the Board executive for next year:
    • John Crump would be the new GCA President
    • June would remain the Vice President
    • Janna would remain the Communications Advisor
    • Janet would remain the Board Secretary

 

June asked for assistance from Board members for the nomination committee. Dan and Della expressed interest in participating and will have further discussion with June.

 

President’s Report:

 

Laura Smith provided an update on the following items:

  • NCC Bistro survey
  • FCA initiative re: how the city works (Synapcity)
  • Neighbours of the Glebe (Laura graced the cover of the last issue)

 

 

Other Business:

 

  • Dan informed Board members that the affordable housing proposal for Bank and Chamberlain was supported by Yasir Naqvi and now they are looking for a third party provider. More info to come.

 

Adjournment:

Motion to adjourn the meeting was put forward by Della and seconded by Elizabeth

Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned.

 

Other:

 

*Additional motion: that GCA support the replacement of the existing play structure at the GCC

 

A motion was put forward via email on April 25, 2022 to support the replacement of the existing play structure in the playground at Glebe Community Centre. The City required a letter of endorsement from the local community association to be submitted with the application and, due to time constraints, this was voted on by the GCA Executive between GCA Board meetings.

 

Motion: Be it resolved that the GCA write a letter to support GNAG’s application for a City of Ottawa Minor Capital Grant to replace the existing play structure in the playground at the Glebe Community Centre to update it and ensure that it meets the requirements laid out in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. 

 

Motion carried. A letter of endorsement was sent to John Richardson by Laura Smith.