MINUTES

 

GCA Board Meeting

Tuesday, May 23, 2023

7:00 – 9:00 p.m. in-person at the GCC

 

Chair: John Crump, President

Secretary and timekeeper: Janet Mayhew

 

Board members present: John Crump, Janet Mayhew, June Creelman, Colette Downie, Angus McCabe, Rochelle Handelman, James Stuewe, William Price, Carol MacLeod, Della Wilkinson, Elizabeth Ballard, Vaughn Guy, Laura Smith, Carolyn Mackenzie, Janna Rinaldi, Bob Brocklebank, Brenda Perras, Judy Wilson, Maggie Gorman-Velez, Catherine Waters

 

Others present: Evan Potter, Linda White, Liz McKeen, David Swiner, Richard Corbeil, Monica (DLRA)

Welcome and approval of agenda and draft minutes from April 25, 2023

John opened the meeting with an Indigenous land acknowledgement.

Changes to agenda: city councillor update removed.

A motion to approve the agenda was put forward by Rochelle and seconded by Janna.

Motion carried. Agenda was approved.

A motion to approve the minutes from April 25, 2023 was put forward by Carol and seconded by Della.

Motion carried. Minutes were approved.

Report from the City Councillor – item deferred

MOTIONS:

 

Motion 1: that the GCA approve the cost to renew the Zoom account for next year

 

Be it resolved that the GCA allocate $200 plus applicable taxes to renew its Zoom account from June 2023 to June 2024.

 

Board members discussed the need to include this as a topic on the next agenda to determine the format of the meetings going forward and whether the group will continue to alternate between virtual and in-person meetings, or if they will return to in-person meetings.

 

Motion was put forward by June and seconded by Carol.

Approved. Motion carried.

 

Motion 2: that the GCA submit a request to the City of Ottawa to implement automatic tree planting for city-owned land in front of residential properties.

Whereas the City of Ottawa has declared a climate emergency[1] and has adopted an ambitious Climate change master plan1 that recognizes the value of green infrastructure in mitigating the impacts of climate change;

Whereas trees are known to capture carbon dioxide, improve air quality, provide shade to mitigate the urban heat island effect, reduce stormwater runoff, and provide habitats for wildlife;

Whereas the City of Ottawa acknowledges that the “… urban forest makes critical contributions to the daily quality of life of those who live, work and play in Ottawa. An ever-increasing body of scientific and technical literature shows that trees and green spaces in urban areas provide direct and indirect benefits to human health, and can also help improve indicators of economic and social health and well-being.”[2];

Whereas the City of Ottawa’s New Official Plan proposes increasing the urban tree canopy target from the current 25% to 40% at a neighbourhood scale[3];

Whereas the City of Ottawa’s Mayor has promised to double the annual tree planting goal by increasing the number of trees planted each year to 250,000 as part of his environmental platform[4];

Whereas the City of Ottawa lost 25,000 trees this year to clear-cutting on Tewin lands[5];

Whereas the City of Ottawa owns frontage on private and commercial properties for installation of public infrastructure such as lamp posts, hydro poles, fire hydrants, traffic signs and street trees which play an essential role in providing a safe and healthy community;

Whereas the City of Ottawa currently relies on property owners to request tree plantings on the city-owned frontage of their homes and rental properties through the voluntary Trees In Trust program[6];

Whereas the Glebe Community Association Environment Committee has supported the Trees in Trust program by canvassing the neighbourhood and handing out hundreds of pamphlets to residents over a two-year Tree Canopy Regeneration campaign[7] which prioritizes native canopy trees;

Whereas the City of Ottawa’s tree planting targets are unlikely to be achieved with the current voluntary model for planting street trees and would be better supported through an automatic tree planting model as practiced by the City of Montreal[8];

 

Therefore:

Be it resolved that the GCA President write to the Mayor (copied to all Councillors) urging that the City adopt a proactive tree planting strategy where City of Ottawa staff automatically plant street trees on the city-owned frontage of private properties to achieve the 40% tree canopy coverage necessary to mitigate the impacts of climate change in Ottawa neighbourhoods.

Suggestion was made to include a bullet for consideration by other community associations.

Questions:

  • Who is responsible for the care of the new tree? Response was that the homeowner is responsible.
  • A comment was made about the fact that many front yards are being used for parking and there may not be space to plant a new tree. Suggested perhaps trees could be planted in backyards as well.
  • A question was raised about what kind of trees are being planted. Response was that analysis is being done to determine the best kind of tree depending on circumstances.

Motion was put forward by Della and seconded by Catherine.

Approved. Motion carried.

 

Motion 3: that the GCA urges the province to reconsider their decision and reallocate greater funding to the city of Ottawa from the Homelessness Prevention Program (HPP).

 

Whereas Ottawa declared an affordable housing and homelessness emergency in January 2020;

 

Whereas despite significant investments from the City in recent budgets, there are over 12,000 households on the Centralized Waiting List for affordable housing with wait lists up to five years;

 

Whereas Ontario’s Homelessness Prevention Program (HPP) only allocated $840,000 to the city of Ottawa when the city anticipated $15 million;

 

Whereas this lack of funding would mean Ottawa will fall behind on its 10-year housing and homelessness plan and leave the city severely under-resourced;

 

Whereas affordable housing projects with deeply affordable housing units are now scrambling for funding (eg. Dream Le Breton);

 

May it be resolved that the GCA urges the province to reconsider their decision and reallocate greater funding to the city of Ottawa from the HPP program.

 

Motion was put forward by June on behalf of the Health, Housing and Social Services Committee and seconded by Carolyn.

Approved. Motion was carried.

Motion 4:  that the GCA write to the Mayor and Council re: Lansdowne redevelopment 

WHEREAS Lansdowne Park is adjacent to the UNESCO-designated Rideau Canal in the heart of downtown Ottawa. This city-wide asset has a long history of bringing residents together to enjoy green parkland, for sports, exhibitions, entertainment, as well as a weekend farmers’ market;

WHEREAS The GCA has been working with the City of Ottawa, the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) as well as the Glebe BIA for many years to enhance the vibrancy of Lansdowne Park and improve the site so that it can continue to benefit both this community and residents across the City;

WHEREAS The GCA is a party to an Ontario Municipal Board agreement on the zoning of Lansdowne Park;

WHEREAS it is in the best interest of the GCA to improve the redevelopment plans for Lansdowne 2.0. and ensure they contribute to the City and this  neighbourhood while limiting possible negative impacts;

WHEREAS the City’s new Official Plan designated Lansdowne Park as one of its “special districts” and we support good stewardship of this publicly owned land in the centre of our city;

WHEREAS the GCA is in favour of the City’s growth management objectives for intensification, which includes increased density in the Glebe and the downtown core and we support the City’s overall objective of becoming the most liveable mid-sized City in North America;

WHEREAS the GCA has been calling on the City to build deeply affordable housing and the redevelopment plans for Lansdowne 2.0. provides the City with an opportunity to ensure additional affordable housing is built;

WHEREAS the GCA is concerned about overdevelopment, the loss of accessible green/park space, and the impact on public space of the proposed redevelopment that could make the site less, rather than more, attractive to visitors;

WHEREAS a City investment of roughly $200M to build a brand new arena/performance centre must consider where such a new facility should properly be located, proximity to the LRT being a key factor in any location decision, and that all reasonable options should be considered given OSEG has initiated this reopening of a Partnership agreement that they proposed,

WHEREAS decisions are expected in the next 3-4 months re: new Sens ownership, and importantly, the location of a new Sens arena, and the availability of the current Sens arena, which will have implications for Lansdowne 2.0

WHEREAS the GCA has been informed that City Council may make a decision on the current Lansdowne 2.0 proposal as early as July and has been requested to provide its views to the City of Ottawa on an urgent basis. 

  

MOTION:

BE IT RESOLVED that the Glebe Community Association write to the Mayor and Council reflecting the following initial positions on the Lansdowne 2.0 redevelopment.  It is understood that the GCA will continue to refine its positions through community consultations, should the City’s timeline allow: To reiterate our earlier calls for informed and meaningful consultations – including the sharing and provision of relevant facts and information in a timely manner, and not be shielded from public view through claims of commercial confidentiality, unless there is a strongly compelling and specific rationale that is in the public interest.

  •         Asking that they provide direction to staff to develop alternative concepts for the revitalization of city-owned Lansdowne Park (consideration should be given to alternative concepts proposed as per www.betterlansdowne.ca/alternatives) that

 1) is fully transparent about the funding model including the proposed diversion of city tax revenues and no longer positions the current funding mechanism as “revenue neutral”

2) includes an option that incorporates relocation of the arena/performance centre and/ or rebuilding in its current location,

3) while drawing on important redevelopment criteria (see text box).

  •         Asking that they provide direction to staff to evaluate location options for a new arena/performance centre including outside of Lansdowne Park and/ or rebuilding in its current location, and that this evaluation process involve robust community consultations;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the GCA request that Council defer any decisions regarding a potential redevelopment plan for Lansdowne, until decisions are taken regarding a new Ottawa Senators arena, and the implications of this arena and a major sports and entertainment district/hub at LeBreton flats is evaluated on and reported on to Council by staff.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the GCA call on the city to develop and commit funding to a realistic transportation plan to get visitors and new residents to-and-from Lansdowne Park in keeping with whatever decisions are made to redevelop or enhance the site.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the GCA ask the City to disclose detailed financial analysis for any alternative redevelopment plans.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the GCA call on the City not to schedule any decisions for such an important file during the summer months of July and August when it is clear to all that public engagement is compromised. 

 

Lansdowne Redevelopment Criteria:

o  Draws increased daily resident/visitor traffic to Lansdowne

o  Does not include additional retail

o  Ensures accessible and sustainable transportation for visitors

o  Results in no loss of greenspace

o  Provides the City with appropriately modernised sports facilities/infrastructure that provides at a minimum the same number of seats the current civic centre and north side stands provide (i.e. we should not be building smaller facilities than we currently have)

o  Contributes to the City’s priority housing objectives, including affordable and deeply affordable objectives

o  Maintains the visual primacy of the Aberdeen Pavilion as a designated National Historic Site

o  Maintains built form compatibility with surrounding scale and massing 

o  Results in a welcoming and inviting civic environment and visitor experience

o  Ensures that new city facilities at Lansdowne are constructed to a net-zero standard for maximum efficiency (i.e. carbon neutral)

o  Enhances amenities to support intensification in surrounding area (for example a community pool, gymnasiums)

o  Complements the City’s long-term strategy for growth (LeBreton Flats/Market, etc.)

o  Reduces the impact of the planned 7 year construction schedule 

 

The board discussed the wording of the motion and suggested some friendly amendments which were approved.

 

Motion was put forward by Carolyn and seconded by Elizabeth.

Approved. Motion carried.

 

COMMITTEE UPDATES:

 

  • Membership: there remains a gap in block reps. Looking for more volunteers to do a blitz of approx 2 hours. Will try to build upon the membership process in the coming year.

 

  • Transportation: kick-off meeting took place with the consulting company from Montreal. It is expected that work will be completed by September. There will be an open house on June 7th at St. Giles church. June to send text to Janna for a social media post. Survey link to be shared.

 

  • GGGS: expecting a large turnout and busy weekend. Road closures will be a factor with GGGS and Ottawa race weekend taking place. Porta potties will be set up at St. Matthews. Catherine may need assistance with postering to encourage participants to donate to the Ottawa Food Bank.

 

PRESIDENT’S REPORT: item was deferred

 

GCA BOARD RETREAT: item was deferred

 

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:

 

  • Nomination Committee: June informed the board that there will be 2 vacancies. Board members were encouraged to put names forward if they know anyone who might be interested. 

 

  • Annual General Meeting: scheduled for Tuesday, June 13th at the GCC. More info to come by email.

 

  • GCA Financial Statements: with the accountant for review and they will be presented at the AGM for board approval.

 

ADJOURNMENT:

 

Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Bill and seconded by Angus.

Meeting was adjourned.