Mar 07, 2022 Governance & Priorities Committee

[00:00:03]

OK, I WILL CALL OUR GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE MEETING FOR MONDAY, MARCH 7TH, 2022 TO ORDER AND A BIG WELCOME TO EVERYBODY AFTER TWO YEARS BACK IN THE CHAMBERS.

[1. Opening Statement]

FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL, IT'S BEEN THE TRADITIONAL LAND OF THE YELLOWKNIFE DENE FIRST NATION.

WE RESPECT THE HISTORIES, LANGUAGES AND CULTURES OF ALL OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, INCLUDING THE NORTH SLAVE METIS AND ALL FIRST NATIONS METIS AND INUIT, WHOSE PRESENCE CONTINUES TO ENRICH OUR VIBRANT COMMUNITY.

AND JUST TO NOTE, WE HAVE COUNCILLOR PAYNE ON THE LINE.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD TO THE AGENDA?

[2. Approval of the agenda]

THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST IN THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF.

IT IS THE ZONING BYLAW, WHICH IS AN INTEREST TO US ALL.

SO SEEING NONE.

[4. A memorandum regarding whether to amend Schedule A of By‐law No. 5045, a by‐law to repeal and replace Zoning By‐law No. 4404, for the purpose of incorporating public comments received at the Statutory Public Hearing.]

A BYLAW TO REPEAL AND REPLACE ZONING BYLAW NUMBER 4404 FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCORPORATING PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED AT THE STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, I WILL PASS IT OVER TO YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

SO AS COUNCIL MEMBERS KNOW VERY WELL, THE CITY HAS BEEN WORKING TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING A NEW ZONING BYLAW THAT REFLECTS OUR COMMUNITY PLAN.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE LATE 2020.

AND IN EARLY 2021, ADMINISTRATION UNDERTOOK PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

ON THE OVERALL APPROACH.

SUBSEQUENTLY, IN EARLY FALL 2021, WE SOUGHT INPUT ON A DRAFT, FOLLOWED BY COUNCIL'S INITIAL REVIEW AND THE STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WAS HELD IN NOVEMBER, WHERE WE RECEIVED FORTY SEVEN SUBMISSIONS, BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN.

ON FEBRUARY 14TH OF THIS YEAR, WE PRESENTED THE COMMENTS RECEIVED THROUGH THE STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS TO THE GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE.

AND IN THAT DELIBERATIONS, THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS MADE BY MEMBERS OF THAT. SO TODAY WE RETURN WITH RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS RAISED.

WITH ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDED.

I WILL NOW ASK CHARLSEY WHITE OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND ROB LOCKE, OUR MANAGER OF PLANNING LANDS TO PROVIDE SOME HIGHLIGHTS IN THE RESPONSES THAT WE.

OVER TO YOU, CHARLSEY AND ROB.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO ROB LOCKE, MANAGER OF PLANNING AND LANDS AND I HAVE PREPARED A PRESENTATION TODAY.

IT'S FOLLOW UP INFORMATION, WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE ITEMS. AND REGULATION QUESTIONS PROVIDED AT GPC ON FEBRUARY 14TH, 2022.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO WAIT.

YEAH, WE'LL JUST TAKE A QUICK MOMENT BECAUSE, MS. BASSI-KELLETT, YOUR MIC DOESN'T WORK.

YEAH, THERE WE GO.

JUST WORKING OUT THE LAST KINKS AFTER TWO YEARS, FEW OF THE THINGS NEED TO JUST BE DUSTED OFF. THANK YOU.

BACK OVER TO YOU, MS. WHITE.

GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO THIS INFORMATION TODAY IS PROVIDED IN ADDITION TO THE SUMMATION DOCUMENT THAT IS UPDATED AND INCLUDED WITHIN THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING AS WELL, WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED THE PREVIOUS DOCUMENTS AND A LINK TO THAT AGENDA AS WELL FOR FEBRUARY 14TH, 2022.

YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

GREAT. THE UPDATED SUMMATION DOCUMENT INCLUDES THE PUBLIC COMMENTS UP TO AND INCLUDING THE STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING.

SO A ZONING BYLAW, IT'S PUT INTO EFFECT FOLLOWING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE, OURS IS FROM 2019.

IT INCLUDES REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICIES THAT ARE FOUND IN THAT COMMUNITY PLAN AND THE ZONING BYLAW MUST NOT CONFLICT WITH THE POLICIES, BUT IT DOESN'T COPY THEM EXACTLY. SO WE'RE INCLUDING IDEAS AND REGULATIONS TO HELP THE COMMUNITY PLAN POLICIES COME INTO EFFECT OVER TIME.

THE BYLAW IS JUST ONE PART OF THE SYSTEM, SO THE ZONING BYLAW WORKS TOGETHER WITH OTHER POLICIES, PLANS AND BYLAWS AT THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE.

AN EXAMPLE BEING THE SMART GROWTH PLAN, THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW, THE BUILDING BYLAW, AS WELL AS GROW, WHICH IS THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL STRATEGY.

SO THAT'S JUST TO NAME A FEW.

THESE POLICIES AND PLANS ALL WORK TOGETHER, AND ONCE IN EFFECT, THE ZONING BYLAW WILL BE

[00:05:05]

AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO BE INCLUDING MONITORING AND EVALUATION, BASICALLY TO COLLECT DATA THROUGH TIME. AND THAT INFORMATION WILL HELP INFORM OUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS OF COUNCIL POLICY AND BYLAW REVIEWS IN THE FUTURE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THANK YOU.

SO ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS THAT WE WANTED TO GO OVER THAT CAME UP AT THE LAST DISCUSSION AT GPC WAS IS THE PROPOSED DEFINITION CHANGE FOR WORKERS ACCOMMODATION MORE RESTRICTIVE TOWARDS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE USES? AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION WAS WHY IS THERE A LIMIT TO EIGHT UNITS? SO WE SPENT SOME TIME LOOKING BACK ON THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION THAT WE HAD PROPOSED TO EVERYBODY AND WE FEEL IT STARTED TO CONFUSE THE ISSUE.

WHEN WE INTRODUCED THIS LANGUAGE OF RELOCATING INDUSTRIAL ACCOMMODATION UNITS, I THINK IT IT INTRODUCED A BUNCH OF CONFUSION, AS WELL AS A BUNCH OF NEW THINGS THAT NEEDED TO BE EXPLORED. SO IN FACT, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT CLAUSE THAT WE ADD WOULD BE REMOVED AS YOU SEE, STRICKEN OUT HERE IN RED AND WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DEFINITION THAT WAS DECIDED ON IN THE ZONING BYLAW WHEN IT WAS AMENDED IN 2014 FOR SORT OF THE CAM LAKE AREA FOR WORKERS ACCOMMODATION.

WE AGREE WITH COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT THE LAST GPC THAT IF THE STRUCTURE CAN MEET THE TEST OF A DWELLING UNIT AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS IN THE BUILDING OF OUR NATIONAL BUILDING CODE, THEN IN FACT WE DON'T HAVE OBJECTIONS WITH THESE STRUCTURES.

AND PERHAPS WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALTERNATIVE DWELLING TYPES AND ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURE TYPES IN THIS TIME OF BOTH WORKER SHORTAGE AS WELL AS MATERIAL SHORTAGE. GOING ON TO THE SECOND QUESTION, WHY IS THERE A LIMIT TO EIGHT UNITS? SO THE CAM LAKE RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY WAS INTRODUCED IN 2014, AND AT THAT TIME EIGHT UNITS WAS THE MARK THAT WAS SET.

BUT THAT IS NOT EIGHT BEDROOMS, THAT'S EIGHT FULL DWELLING UNITS.

SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT A GOOD SIZED MODULAR HOME IN TODAY'S CONTEXT, THAT CAN BE UPWARDS OF FOUR BEDROOMS TIMES BY EIGHT.

THAT'S AS MUCH AS THIRTY TWO BEDROOMS AS A WORKER'S ACCOMMODATION UNIT.

AND WE THINK WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF CAM LAKE ON SORT OF THE ONE FIFTH TO A HALF HECTARE SIZE LOTS THAT THAT'S PROBABLY APPROPRIATE WHEN WE THINK OF THINGS LIKE PARKING DEMANDS, EQUIPMENT STORAGE, SERVICING, PLOT COVERAGE, SCREENING AND SPECIFICALLY SAFETY.

SETTING IT A EIGHT UNITS SEEMS REASONABLE IF A DEVELOPER COMES FORWARD AND HAS A BUSINESS MODEL THAT REQUIRES A COUPLE MORE, PERHAPS THEY CAN CONSIDER APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE OR ALTERNATIVELY, IF THEY'VE GOT A MUCH, MUCH LARGER PROJECT, THEN THEY CAN CONSIDER A BYLAW AMENDMENT. ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WAS POSED WAS WHY? ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WAS POSED WAS WHY ARE THE PROPERTIES SOUTHEAST OF 52ND AVE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DOWNTOWN ZONE? SO THIS WAS A QUESTION FROM BOTH THE CHAMBER AS WELL AS FROM COUNCILLOR PAYNE.

SO THE PRIORITY IN THIS ZONING BYLAW REVIEW WAS REALLY TO ENSURE THAT THE REGULATIONS WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD TO COUNCIL INFORM AND CONFORM TO THE POLICIES FOUND IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN. NO CHANGE TO ANY OF THE DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY PLAN HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, AND THEY REALLY HAVEN'T BEEN CONTEMPLATED AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED THEM AND HAD ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THEM AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT WASN'T BROUGHT FORWARD AS PART OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS.

THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF INFILL AND DENSIFICATION, AS IDENTIFIED BOTH IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND TO BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE REGULATIONS WE HAVE IN THE DRAFT ZONING BYLAW, REALLY WILL REALIZE THOSE OBJECTIVES AND THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN ZONE, AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT RC ZONE TO FACILITATE CHANGE WITHIN THOSE AREAS.

IF REVISIONS TO THE DOWNTOWN BOUNDARIES ARE TO BE REQUESTED, A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW WOULD HAVE TO BE UNDERTAKEN OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN FIRST WITH A JUSTIFICATION THAT REQUIRES A SEPARATE PUBLIC PROCESS AS WELL.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT KNOWN THAT ANY LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY PLAN WOULD NEED TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD FOR APPROVAL TO MACA.

AND BASICALLY, THE ZONING MUST FIRST IMPLEMENT WHAT WE HAVE OUTLINED IN OUR COMMUNITY PLAN AS AS IT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND THE ZONING DOESN'T COME FIRST IN THIS PROCESS. SO IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BEING REQUESTED OF STAFF TO LOOK AT, WE WOULD HAVE TO INITIATE A SEPARATE PROCESS TO BRING LANDS INTO THAT DOWNTOWN ZONE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND AT GPC, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT WE SHOW THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE

[00:10:06]

AS WE STATED PREVIOUSLY, EACH PROPERTY IS TO BE EVALUATED OR REVIEWED INDIVIDUALLY.

AND IF THERE IS A PROPERTY OWNER WHO IS LOOKING TO DO A DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA, THEY'RE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND MAYBE THERE ARE WAYS WITHIN THE CURRENT REGULATIONS THAT WE CAN WORK OUT AN APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT.

SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE THAT CAN BE MADE TO THAT DOWNTOWN ZONE.

THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE.

ONE OF THE NEXT QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP WAS IT APPEARS THAT ADDITIONAL SORRY.

THERE YOU. MY APOLOGIES.

EXACTLY. ONE OF THE, ANOTHER ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP WAS IN REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT OF SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS, AND SPECIFICALLY THE QUESTION WAS IT APPEARS THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT PERMISSIONS ARE GRANTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SECONDARY SUITE WHEN IT IS LOCATED ABOVE A GARAGE.

OUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE DWELLING UNIT DIDN'T FACTOR INTO IT. AND IN FACT, WE SET THE REGULATION AS NO MORE THAN THREE METERS HIGHER THAN THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING TO A MAXIMUM OF 12 METERS AND BY THREE METERS, WE MEAN ANOTHER FULL STOREY. AFTER THE STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING AND FACTORING IN ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD FROM RESIDENTS, WE PRODUCED A REVISED RECOMMENDATION WHICH WAS NO HIGHER THAN THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING OR WHERE ABOVE A GARAGE NO MORE THAN THREE METERS HIGHER THAN THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING. AND IT MAY SEEM LIKE WE'RE SORT OF BENEFITING A PROPERTY OWNER WHO MIGHT HAVE A GARAGE.

BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THAT IF YOU'RE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE A DWELLING UNIT AND A DETACHED GARAGE, YOU LIKELY ARE COMING UP AGAINST YOUR SITE COVERAGE MAXIMUMS ALREADY.

AND SO THE NOTION OF HAVING A THIRD BUILDING ON THE LOT LIKELY DOESN'T FIT BECAUSE THE SITE COVERAGE DOESN'T WORK.

YOU STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE ROOM FOR PARKING FOR THAT RECREATION AREA, FOR YOUR LANDSCAPING, FOR YOUR PATIO DECKS.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME AS WE'RE TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO INTRODUCE DENSIFICATION AND ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE CAME UP WITH THE SOLUTION THAT IF YOU'VE GOT A GARAGE FOOTPRINT, THAT THAT FOOTPRINT CAN BE USED A SECOND TIME FOR A DWELLING UNIT.

AND WE SEE THOSE APPLICATIONS COME IN.

WE SEE TWO OR THREE A YEAR WHERE WE GET SOMEBODY EITHER CONVERTING AN EXISTING GARAGE WITH A SUITE ABOVE IT OR THEY BUILD BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

WHAT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING, BUT THIS WOULD BE A MORE EXTREME WOULD BE IF WE SET THE REGULATION AT NO HIGHER THAN THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING.

SO IF YOU WANTED A SECONDARY SUITE, A DETACHED SECONDARY SUITE IN BLOCK 501, IT COULD ONLY BE A SINGLE STOREY.

WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING GOING THAT FAR.

AND THEN ON TO URBAN AGRICULTURE.

SO THE QUESTION THAT WAS POSED OR THAT WE TEASED OUT OF THE LAST GPC MEETING WAS, DOES THE URBAN AGRICULTURAL DEFINITIONS CAPTURE THE EXISTING AND POTENTIAL USES FOR COMMUNITY AND COMMERCIAL? AND THERE WAS SOME CONCERN EXPRESSED THAT ALREADY SOME EXISTING ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES MIGHT BE GRANDFATHERED IN OR LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING, AND THAT WAS NEVER, EVER OUR INTENT.

FIRST, WE'LL FOCUS ON THE URBAN AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL DEFINITION, AND THAT MEANS COMMERCIAL FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES FOR PROFIT AS THE PRIMARY USE, INCLUDING GREENHOUSES, FISH PROCESSING, SELLING SMALL LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS AND SERVICES FOR SALE.

AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT EXISTING BUSINESSES IN TOWN THAT MIGHT FALL UNDER THAT CATEGORY OR POTENTIAL BUSINESSES, BUSH ORDER PROVISIONS IN CAM LAKE I THINK REALLY FALLS WELL IN THIS CATEGORY. I THINK OF AN EGG PRODUCTION FACILITY WAS SET UP OUT IT IN THE ENGLE BUSINESS DISTRICT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A FANTASTIC EXAMPLE OF.

URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL, OTHER EXAMPLES MIGHT INCLUDE SOMETHING LIKE A NURSERY, A YOU PICK FARM FOR POTENTIALLY HOUSE KEPT BERRIES OR, SAY, A MULTI BUSINESS GREENHOUSE.

ALL, I THINK, ARE REASONABLE EXAMPLES OF URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL.

WHEN WE GO ON TO URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY AND AGAIN TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DEFINITIONS MATCH EXISTING USES, AS WELL AS THE MARCHING ORDERS OR THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GETTING IN THE IN THE GROWTH STRATEGY.

WE NOTE THAT URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY MEANS COMMUNITY FOOD, AGRICULTURE, INCLUDING ANY INDIVIDUAL FAMILY, SCHOOL, HOSPITAL OR GARDEN ORGANIZATION WHO IS GROWING AND RAISING FOOD FOR SHARED PERSONAL USE AND OR SHARING WITH COMMUNITY FOOD AND HEALTH PROGRAMS. AND THEN THAT DEFINITION GOES ON FURTHER TO HAVE A QUALIFIER WHICH STATES PRODUCT GENERATED FROM COMMUNITY URBAN AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES MAY BE SOLD AS A COMMERCIAL

[00:15:04]

WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS DEFINITION, THOUGH, WE REALIZED WE HAD EMBEDDED A BIT OF A FLAW IN HERE. AND THIS IS WHAT WAS COMING UP AT THE LAST GPC MEETING IS THAT SOME PEOPLE FELT LIKE SOMETHING LIKE FIREWEED FARM WOULDN'T QUALIFY HERE BECAUSE THEY WERE IN FACT HIRING SOMEBODY DOWN THE STREET OR FROM WHEREVER TO HELP ON THE PROPERTY.

WE GAVE THAT FURTHER THOUGHT, AND WE BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE'RE INTRODUCING URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY, WE'RE INTRODUCING A NEW USE.

WE'RE NOT INTRODUCING A SUBSET OF A HOME BASED BUSINESS USE.

SO THIS QUALIFIER THAT WE HAD IN HERE THAT TALKS ABOUT IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES WITHIN AN APPROVED HOME BASED BUSINESS PERMIT ACTUALLY DOESN'T APPLY BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IT STANDS ALONE. AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE ADJUSTMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE TODAY.

AND THAT'S IT. END OF THE SHORT PRESENTATION.

ON TO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

OPENING IT UP TO QUESTIONS NOT ONLY FOR THIS PRESENTATION, BUT ALSO FOR THE MEMO, SO COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. YEAH, JUST JUST MORE OF THIS INFORMATION.

GLAD TO SEE IT.

GOOD TO SEE THOSE REVISIONS.

I DIDN'T SEE IT REFLECTED IN THE PACKAGE TODAY.

IS THAT CORRECT? OR DID I MISS WHERE IT IS IN THAT PACKAGE? YEAH. SO FOR WORKER ACCOMMODATION, IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THE MEMO BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY THE DEFINITION AS PER FIRST READING.

SO THERE'S NO AMENDMENT.

52ND AVE PROPOSAL IS NO CHANGE.

AND THEN THE ONLY CHANGE WOULD BE THE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY DEFINITION, WHICH IS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE MEMO.

OKAY, GREAT. AND SO YEAH, BECAUSE I WAS PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT THOSE WORKER ACCOMMODATIONS. AND SO THAT'LL JUST BE A REVISED DEFINITION WHEN WE SEE THAT MEMO AT FIRST READING, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO, BECAUSE WHAT WAS CROSSED OUT WAS ADMIN'S RECOMMENDATION TO REVISE THE FIRST READING, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE NO LONGER MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION, FIRST READINGS DEFINITION IS WHAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING.

OK, SO I GUESS WE'RE TO WAIT TO SEE THAT PACKAGE, SO THE ONE THAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING IS WHAT IS ON THE PRESENTATION HERE TODAY WITHOUT THE THE USE OF [INAUDIBLE]? SORRY.

PAGE 33 OF THE PACKAGE.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, DID THE ADMIN WANT TO? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND THAT, UM.

THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN THE FACT THAT ADMIN'S RECOMMENDING NO CHANGE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

I'LL ASK MS. WHITE IF SHE CAN SPEAK TO WHERE THIS IS SPECIFICALLY LOCATED IN THE DRAFT BYLAW ITSELF.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT IS LOCATED ON PAGE 28 IN THE DEFINITIONS SECTION UNDER SECTION TWO OF THE DRAFT.

SO YOU'LL NOTE THERE IS NO RED LINE CHANGE, IT'S AS IT WAS FOR FIRST READING.

OKAY. SO PAGE 74 OF THE GPC PACKAGE. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, GREAT, I'LL CHEW ON THAT ONE FOR A LITTLE BIT AND COME BACK.

OK, THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER? COUNCILLOR KONGE? THANK YOU. SO ON THE WORKER ACCOMMODATION, THE DEFINITION THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING WITH, IT MEANS A FACILITY CONSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WORKERS IN THE FORM OF COMPLETE DWELLING UNITS, TYPICALLY FOR RELATED BUSINESS, FOR AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT TERM OR SEASONAL PURPOSE.

THAT'S CORRECT. OK.

EVERYBODY'S NODDING. WHAT'S A COMPLETE DWELLING UNIT? MS. BASSI-KELLETT? MS. WHITE? THANK YOU, EXCUSE ME, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO COMPLETE DWELLING UNIT WOULD BE A DWELLING UNIT THAT HAS YOUR SLEEPING ARRANGEMENTS, AS WELL AS LIVING SPACE WASHROOM AND A KITCHEN FACILITY.

[00:20:03]

THANK YOU. DO THEY ALL HAVE TO BE UNDER THE SAME ROOF? MS. BASSI-KELLETT? MS. WHITE? SORRY, MY COMPUTER HAS NOW GONE BLUE.

ROB, DO YOU MIND ADDING INFORMATION? THANK YOU. I BELIEVE IT'S ASSUMED THAT THEY WOULD BE UNDER ONE ROOF.

YES, AS OPPOSED TO IN SEPARATE BUILDINGS.

OK. AND THEN DURING THIS PRESENTATION, THERE WAS MENTION OF THE EIGHT UNITS, IS THAT? ARE WE? ARE WE GOING WITH EIGHT UNITS OR ARE WE NOT GOING WITH EIGHT UNITS? ON PAGE 149 OF THE GPC PACKAGE IS THE CAM LAKE, 12.1.3C.1.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS STILL WORKERS ACCOMMODATION A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT DWELLING UNITS.

SO. HERE'S MY VIEW ON THIS.

YOU KNOW, IN YELLOWKNIFE, WE HAVE A LACK OF ACCOMMODATION.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH RENTALS OUT THERE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH WHEN WE HAVE TOURISM, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH HOTEL ROOMS. IF WE'RE TRYING TO SUPPORT TOURISM, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GIVE CONTRACTORS THE ABILITY TO HOUSE PEOPLE SOMEHOW. OTHERWISE, WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO GET ANYTHING BUILT HERE.

SO. UM.

I BELIEVE THAT WE'RE BEING SO RESTRICTIVE IN OUR DEFINITIONS AS WELL AS IN OUR EIGHT UNITS THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWING THE CONTRACTING COMMUNITY TO COME UP WITH CREATIVE IDEAS, AND WHEN I SAY CREATIVE, I DON'T MEAN LIKE UNSAFE.

BUT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE SAY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE IN A COMPLETE DWELLING UNIT.

I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT WORDING, AND I WOULD LIKE TO GET IT CHANGED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN BRING IN SLEEPING UNITS AND YOU CAN BRING IN.

I DID A LITTLE BIT OF MATH, LIKE IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU NEED 20 GUYS FOR A PROJECT AND YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND FIND HOTEL ROOMS AND YOU CAN FIND HOTEL ROOMS AT ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS A NIGHT. WE'RE TALKING SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH IN ACCOMMODATION THAT DOESN'T EVEN REALLY EXIST.

IF THE PROJECT'S 12 MONTHS LONG, EVERYBODY CAN DO THE MATH.

YOU KNOW, IT'S 720 THOUSAND JUST IN HOTELS THAT DON'T EXIST AND YOU CAN'T FIND RENTALS.

SO IF YOU BRING UP THE SAME STYLE CAMPS THAT THEY'RE USING ALL OVER THE NORTH, ALL OVER CANADA. AND ALLOW, YOU KNOW, A CONTRACTOR OR DEVELOPER TO USE THOSE.

AND WE GO WITH, YOU KNOW, LIKE ALL OF OUR LOTS, INCLUDING CAM LAKE, WE HAVE SITE COVERAGE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE SAYING EIGHT UNITS WHEN WE ALREADY ARE RESTRICTING ON SITE COVERAGE, WHY DON'T WE JUST GET RID OF THE EIGHT UNITS, SAY SITE COVERAGE? ALLOW, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO CALL THEM, MOVABLE, PORTABLE CAMP STYLE UNITS.

SOME OF THEM ARE JUST BEDROOMS AND THEN THEY HAVE LIKE A DINING HALL RECREATION HALL THAT'S A SEPARATE UNIT BESIDE IT.

UM. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S, WE HAVE TO SOMEHOW MAKE THAT WORK WITHIN OUR ZONING BYLAW. THERE WAS ALSO MENTION DURING THE PRESENTATION ABOUT OUR ENERGY REQUIREMENTS.

I'M NOT SURE EVEN WHY THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, MAYBE ADMIN CAN ANSWER THAT BECAUSE OUR ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT PART OF OUR ZONING BYLAW.

THEY'RE PART OF OUR BUILDING BYLAW.

SO WHY WOULD THEY BE MENTIONED IN THIS PRESENTATION? MS. BASSI-KELLETT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE COMMENTS.

I'LL ASK MS. WHITE IF SHE HAS SOME THOUGHTS BETWEEN HERSELF AND MR. LOCKE, IF THEY'D LIKE TO COMMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTIONS.

SO THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF BASED ON HISTORICAL USE AND APPLICATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITHIN THE CITY.

IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT THAT WE REMEMBER SOME OF THE OTHER REGULATIONS WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD THROUGH. THE ZONING BYLAW ARE GOING TO HOPEFULLY FACILITATE NEW DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING IN THE AFFORDABLE REALM.

IN ADDITION, IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THE CITY TO HAVE VARIOUS TYPES OF USES THROUGHOUT THAT WILL SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT.

COMING FORWARD FOR EXACTLY AS YOU KNOW, HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE SOME WORKERS COME IN. MAYBE IT'S 30 DAYS, MAYBE IT'S A WHOLE CONSTRUCTION SEASON, AND BEING ABLE TO MEET THE NEED IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TRIED TO BUILD IN WITH OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS

[00:25:03]

WE'RE TRYING TO ACTUALLY RELEASE SOME OF THOSE RULES OR WHAT MAY BE SEEN AS CURRENTLY STOPPING DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING IN CERTAIN AREAS.

SO WE THINK THERE ARE OTHER TOOLS AVAILABLE THAT WILL ADDRESS THIS NEED AND WON'T HAVE TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL UNITS OUT IN CAM LAKE, WHICH REALLY IS THE ONLY PLACE FOR THESE AT THIS TIME. BUT AGAIN, IT'S YOU KNOW, THIS IS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

SO THANK YOU. WHAT ARE THEIR TOOLS? I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY, LIKE LET'S PICK ON AVON'S, AVON'S HAS BEEN THAT PROJECT WAS IN FRONT OF COUNCIL SEVERAL TIMES.

THERE'S A PROJECT THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO LAST, YOU KNOW, 14 OR 16 MONTHS.

THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED TO BRING UP 40 PEOPLE.

YOU KNOW, THAT PUTS AN ADDITIONAL $2 MILLION OF COST ON THAT PROJECT WHERE IF OUR ZONING BYLAW WAS MORE FLEXIBLE, WE COULD DROP THE PRICE OF THAT BUILDING BY A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS. SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE, AS COUNCIL, WE NEED TO REALLY LOOK LIKE I THINK WE CAN ALL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ISN'T ANY RENTALS AVAILABLE IN TOWN.

IF THERE'S 19 HOUSES THAT ARE FOR SALE ON THE MARKET, SO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT OUR HOUSING STOCK AND YOU'RE BRINGING IN 40 GUYS, I GUESS YOU CAN GO AND BUY EVERY HOUSE THAT'S ON THE MARKET TODAY TO PUT YOUR WORKERS IN.

WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING AND I DON'T THINK WE GO FAR ENOUGH IN WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US.

SO. DO WE MAKE CHANGES HERE? SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS IN WORKER ACCOMMODATION, WE SAY THAT IT MEANS A FACILITY TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WORKERS.

THAT CAN BE IN THE FORM OF COMPLETE DWELLING UNITS, CAMP STYLE UNITS, OR ANY OTHER BUILDING TYPES THAT MEET NATIONAL BUILDING CODE.

AND I BELIEVE THE NATIONAL BUILDING CODE ALSO TAKES IN LIKE ALL THOSE CAMP UNITS, THEY ALL FALL UNDER THE NATIONAL BUILDING CODE FOUR, I BELIEVE.

AND THEN WHEN OUR BUILDING BYLAW COMES TO US, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE DO NOT MAKE THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS PART OF THIS TYPE OF, THESE TYPES OF UNITS.

IF THEY'RE ON SKIDS, THEY DON'T NEED TO MEET THAT, BECAUSE CURRENTLY NONE OF THOSE ARE BUILT TO OUR ENERGY REGULATIONS IN YELLOWKNIFE, BECAUSE WE ARE SO MUCH HIGHER THAN EVERYBODY ELSE. THEY'RE TEMPORARY.

THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN. THEY'RE GOING TO LEAVE AGAIN.

AND THEN THE EIGHT UNIT ONE, WE GET RID OF THE EIGHT UNITS AND WE JUST GO BY OUR SITE COVERAGE. WE WERE PROBABLY SUPPOSED TO WRITE ALL THAT DOWN, BUT, YOU KNOW, NIELS AND WRITING, I CAN HARDLY READ WHAT I WROTE YESTERDAY.

YEAH, I'D PROBABLY COME IN AND THEN MODIFY A LITTLE BIT.

IT SOUNDED A LITTLE WORDY.

SO PERHAPS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR FROM THE DEFINITION IS MEANS A FACILITY CONSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WORKERS, SCRATCH IN THE FORM OF COMPLETE DWELLING UNITS.

AND JUST CONTINUE WITH TYPICALLY RELATED FOR BUSINESSES, FOR AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT TERM OR SEASONAL PURPOSE.

YES. AND THEN YOU'RE LOOKING TO STRIKE.

I WOULD EVEN SAY IN THERE LIKE IT MEANS A TEMPORARY FACILITY.

THAT COST OF. WE DON'T WANT THESE THINGS AROUND FOREVER.

WE DON'T WANT THEM TO TURN INTO PERMANENT.

MEANS A TEMPORARY FACILITY CONSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WORKERS, TYPICALLY FOR RELATED BUSINESSES, FOR AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT TERM OR SEASONAL PURPOSE.

YES. AND THEN IN THE CAM LAKE SECTION, 12.1.3C, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE STRIKE ONE, WHICH IS A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT DWELLING UNITS.

I ASSUME YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE STRIKE POINT TWO BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT THE PERMITTED DWELLING UNIT TYPES.

YEP. UM.

AND, I DON'T THINK YOU THEN THIS WOULD BE A QUESTION TO ADMIN, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OTHER REGULATIONS IN CAM LAKE AND RIGHT NOW, MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IS ALL BUILDINGS, INCLUDING PRINCIPAL BUILDING, ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND OTHER ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, 50 PERCENT.

SO I'M NOT SURE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE REITERATED THERE.

UM, THE OTHER THING WOULD BE THAT IT STILL HAS TO APPLY TO, UM, TO ALL OF SECTION SEVEN.

SECTION SEVEN TALKS ABOUT TEMPORARY USES, WHICH ALSO MIGHT HAVE

[00:30:06]

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, ADMINS, PERFECTLY FINE WITH ALL THAT, CORRECT? ON THE FLY. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT OUR OWN PROJECTS TOO, LIKE, I MEAN, HOW MANY PEOPLE, FOR SURE, IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO BUILD A POOL? AND WHERE ARE THOSE PEOPLE GOING? YEAH. YEAH, NO, THERE'S DEFINITELY A LOT ON THE MACRO PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S THE JTFN BUILDING, THERE'S THE POOL, THERE'S AVON'S, THERE'S THE [INAUDIBLE], WHICH IS THREE PROJECTS ALL HAPPENING AT ONCE.

SO THAT IS A PRETTY BIG LOAD.

THEY GO AND BOOK ALL THE HOTELS UP.

THERE'S NO TOURISM. NO TOURISM OPERATORS.

AND I MEAN, THOSE ARE PART OF OUR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, THESE THINGS.

YEAH. MS. BASSI-KELLETT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE THAT UNDER ADVISEMENT? UM, WITH A RETURN TO GPC NEXT WEEK? OR THOUGHTS ON PROCESS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR, AND THANKS VERY MUCH TO COUNCILLOR KONGE AND ROB WILLIAMS, WHO ARE LOOKING AT THE WORKER ACCOMMODATION PIECE.

WE'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS AND JUST CONSIDER IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

WE ARE MINDFUL OF, YEAH, BEING TIMELY WITH THE COMPLETION OF THE ZONING BYLAW, SO WE WOULD SEEK TO EXPEDITE THIS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND BRING IT BACK FOR MONDAY AND THEN POSSIBLY LOOK AT BEING ABLE TO BRING THE ZONING BYLAW PENDING GPC'S REVIEW ON THE 14TH TO COUNCIL THAT EVENING.

I'LL SEE IF MS. WHITE WOULD LIKE TO SUPPLEMENT.

THANK YOU. GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I WOULD JUST IN REVIEWING WHILE THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN GOING, I WOULD ALSO IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT COUNCIL DECIDES TO TAKE, RECOMMEND THAT THE DEFINITION AS WELL AS WITHIN THAT CAM LAKE ZONE, THAT THERE BE A REQUIREMENT THAT ALL TEMPORARY USES MUST ENTER INTO SOME SORT OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE MUNICIPALITY SO THAT WE CAN FACILITATE EITHER A DEPOSIT, AS WELL AS ENSURING THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN PLACE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THIS TEMPORARY USE IS ACTUALLY APPROPRIATELY REMOVED AND THAT THE SITE IS IS PUT BACK TO THE WAY THAT IT WAS.

THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

YEAH. AND ACTUALLY, I'M JUST SEEING FURTHER UP ON PAGE 149 OF OUR GPC, WHICH IS 12.1.2 WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT OUTDOOR STORAGE AREAS, SHALL COMPLY WITH ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS IN SECTION 9.2.4.

SO PERHAPS WORKER ACCOMMODATION CALLS OUT AGAIN, COMPLY WITH ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS IN SECTION 7.10 OR SO, YEAH.

IS THERE GENERAL SUPPORT FOR ADMIN LOOKING INTO THAT? NODDING HEADS, YES.

SO ADMIN WILL REVIEW THAT.

I THINK THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT IS REALLY ENSURING THAT THEIR TEMPORARY RELOCATABLE IS GOOD.

RECOGNIZING LIKE IF I THINK OF THE [INAUDIBLE] WORKERS ACCOMMODATION CAMP, THEY WEREN'T NECESSARILY COMPLETE UNITS IN THAT IT WAS LIKE SLEEPER CABINETS AND THEN THERE WAS A KITCHEN AND RECREATION AREA, SO NOT NECESSARILY ALL UNDER ONE ROOF, BUT AND AND THAT DOES ENCOURAGE IF FOLKS TO GET OUT TO THE RESTAURANTS, PERHAPS.

BUT UM.

OK, SO THERE'S THAT ONE.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE PRESENTATION OR THE MEMO? I HAVE A QUESTION, REBECCA.

COUNCILLOR PAYNE. THANK YOU.

IN REGARDS TO THE 52ND AVENUE DOWNTOWN ZONING REQUEST.

WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE NOW TO MOVE FORWARD? WE HAVE I MEAN, WE HAVE TWO DEVELOPERS THAT ARE REQUESTING THIS CHANGE OF ZONING.

SO HOW DO WE BRING IT FORWARD? I KNOW YOU SAID THAT IT HAS TO BE.

IT'S NOT CONSIDERED AT THIS TIME, BUT WE HAVE TO GO IN AND MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY PLAN. SO WHAT'S THE PROCESS INVOLVED THERE? PROBABLY RECOMMEND THAT IF COUNCIL WANTED TO CONSIDER THAT AFTER WE APPROVE THE ZONING BYLAW, THAT WE PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO REVIEW AND UPDATE THE COMMUNITY PLAN AFTER THE ZONING BYLAWS APPROVED, THERE PROBABLY BE BEFORE WE GET TO THAT STEP WOULD BE REACHING OUT TO THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS TO SEE IF IT NEEDS THE DOWNTOWN OR IF THE RC WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE TIME.

BECAUSE, YEAH, UPDATING THE COMMUNITY PLAN ONCE YOU OPEN THAT UP, BUT IT DOES.

WE'LL HAVE A STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARING AND PEOPLE CAN COME IN AND MAKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF

[00:35:03]

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, ANYTHING FURTHER FROM ADMIN? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NO, WE'RE FOOD.

COMPLETELY BELIEVE THAT WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS FINISH THE ZONING BYLAW PROCESS NOW.

AND IF THERE IS AN INTEREST FROM COUNCIL TO LOOK AT OPENING UP THE COMMUNITY PLAN, IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT TO OPEN UP.

WE WOULD WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO OUR FULL RESEARCH AND REVIEW ON THAT AND BE ABLE TO PRESENT SOMETHING BACK TO COUNCIL SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING BYLAW.

SO THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW THAT WE GET THIS COMPLETED. AND IF THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES TO ADDRESS IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN, LET'S MAKE IT A SUBSEQUENT PROCESS.

THANK YOU. YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY UNDERSTANDABLE, AND I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK GONE INTO THIS.

YOU KNOW, I DO FEEL THAT RIGHT NOW, WHERE OUR BOUNDARIES ARE FOR THAT DOWNTOWN ZONE HAVING IT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET WHEN IT SHOULD BE LIKE IN AN ALLEYWAY OR SOMETHING TO INCORPORATE THE WHOLE STREET WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE MAYBE I'M JUST READING INTO THIS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE REALLY CLIPPING THE WINGS OF DEVELOPERS THAT WANT TO DEVELOP IN THIS AREA.

I MEAN, ONE OF OUR MAIN OBJECTIVES WAS TO INCREASE DOWNTOWN DENSIFICATION, AND HERE'S TO DEVELOPERS THAT WANT TO ADDRESS THAT AND IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.

PLUS, WE GOT SOME OLD BUILDINGS AROUND THAT AREA THAT MAYBE IF THE ZONING WAS CHANGED, IT MIGHT BE VERY APPEALING FOR THE OWNERS OF THE BUILDING TO EITHER BUILD NEW BUILDINGS OR, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY REDO THE ONES AND ADD ON TO THE ONES THAT ARE EXISTING.

SO, YOU KNOW, I'M INTERESTED IN MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY PLAN.

I DON'T SEE THE NEED OF OPENING UP AND LOOKING AT EVERYTHING IN THAT COMMUNITY PLAN.

BUT IF THIS IS IF THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR US, I MEAN, DOWNTOWN DENSIFICATION IS ONE OF OUR GOALS.

AND I THINK THIS WOULD MEET IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

YES, WE CAN DEFINITELY HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION ONCE THE ZONING BYLAWS THROUGH AND THEN THE OTHER ONE, I WOULD SAY NOT THAT IT'S FULLY ON THE 52ND AVE, BUT FOLLOWING THE ZONING BYLAW IS THE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE BYLAW UPDATES, SO ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN AND IN OTHER AREAS THAT WE WANT TO SEE GROW.

BUT TO YOUR POINT, IT'S YEAH, FOLLOWING THE ZONING BYLAW, UPDATING THE COMMUNITY PLAN WOULD HAVE TO BE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL TO DIRECT STAFF TO DO THAT WORK.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS, I SAW YOUR HAND UP, BUT YOU'RE GOOD, OK? COUNCILLOR MORSE? THANK YOU. JUST KIND OF FOLLOWING UP ON THIS.

I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT'S BEEN HIGHLIGHTED FOR ME BY THIS 52ND STREET THING IS IT DOES SEEM REASONABLE AT ITS FACE TO KIND OF SUGGEST THAT WE JUST REQUIRE DEVELOPERS TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE IN THIS AREA.

THEY COULD POTENTIALLY BUILD SOMETHING WITH A VARIANCE THAT MATCHES A DOWNTOWN ZONING.

SO WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO DO THE ZONING CHANGE.

IN TALKING TO A POTENTIAL DEVELOPER ABOUT THIS, HOWEVER, THE CONCERN IS JUST THE RISK OF THE MONEY PUT INTO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION AND ALL THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE TO DO UP TO THE POINT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION INVOLVING QUITE A LARGE OUTLAY OF FUNDS WITHOUT KNOWING WITH ANY KIND OF CERTAINTY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THE DEVELOPMENT. SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD INTRODUCE AN APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE PROCESS THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE THAT MUCH PREPARATION AHEAD OF TIME. I'M WONDERING IF ADMINISTRATION COULD COMMENT ON THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING DEVELOPERS SORT OF APPLY FOR VARIANCE IN THE SENSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER THERE'S PUBLIC SUPPORT OR LACK THEREOF WITHOUT HAVING TO COME FORWARD WITH DETAILED DESIGNS AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT PLANS THAT COST QUITE A BIT OF MONEY BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY THE PROBLEM I SEE WITH THE VARIANCE ISSUE.

I THINK IF DEVELOPERS COULD GO IN WITH A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CERTAINTY ABOUT A VARIANCE PRIOR TO GETTING ALL THOSE DETAILED DESIGNS DONE, THEN MAYBE IT WOULD BE A LOT SIMPLER AND IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LESS OF A RISK.

BUT THE ISSUE THAT'S BEEN COMMUNICATED TO ME SO FAR IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.

IT SOUNDS SIMPLE, BUT FROM THE DEVELOPER'S PERSPECTIVE, IT'S QUITE EXPENSIVE TO ACTUALLY GO THROUGH THAT, NOT KNOWING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET A YES.

SO I'M WONDERING IF ADMINISTRATION CAN KIND OF COMMENT ON THAT AND THE POSSIBILITY OF HOW WE MIGHT ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

I'LL ASK MS. WHITE IF SHE CAN RESPOND.

[00:40:03]

SO VARIANCES AND JUST LIKE ZONING ARE OUTLINED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LEGISLATION FROM THE TERRITORY, SO WE DO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ARE LAID OUT, WHICH REQUIRES WHAT IS AND IS NOT PART OF AN APPLICATION TO BE REVIEWED.

SO I MEAN, WE COULD GO TO THE MINIMUM THAT IS NOT WHAT'S PROPOSED IN HERE.

THERE IS SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER.

THOSE OTHER PLANS, BYLAWS THAT WE HAVE IN EFFECT AT THE CITY.

SO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THE ZONING BYLAW, IT'S LOOKING AT DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE AND THE WAY IN WHICH IT INTERACTS WITH THE THINGS THAT SAY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DOES, AS WELL AS OTHER PIECES OF INFRASTRUCTURE OR SERVICES LIKE COMMUNITY SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE GREATER INFORMATION PROVIDES FOR A GREATER DEVELOPMENT.

AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THE LEGISLATION, WHICH THEN HAS A POLICY OUTLINED IN OUR COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH IS THEN IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE ZONING BYLAW.

SO IT'S KIND OF THAT TIERED DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THANK YOU. OK.

WELL, I THINK THAT THE DIFFICULTY I HAVE THEN IS JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A PROCESS THAT IS CONSIDERED TO BE SOMEWHAT I MEAN, AND I THINK THAT THAT CITIZENS HAVE SAID THIS TO US AS WELL, THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE A LOT OF VARIANCES HAPPENING, THAT THEY WANT OUR, AND I THINK COUNCIL'S BEEN PRETTY CLEAR THAT WE WANTED TO CREATE PERMISSIVE ZONING IF WE CAN, AND THAT THE VARIANCE PROCESS CAN BE A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFICULT ONE.

IF PEOPLE APPLY FOR SIGNIFICANT VARIANCES AND CITIZENS KIND OF COMPLAIN, WELL, WHAT'S THE POINT OF ZONING IN THE FIRST PLACE WITH THIS 52ND STREET ISSUE? IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A TOUGH ONE FOR ME BECAUSE I'M KIND OF LOOKING AT IT AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE SUCH A NO BRAINER THAT WE WOULD ALLOW HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE AREA BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT EXISTS ALREADY IN THAT AREA AND IT'S NOT GOING TO INTERFERE WITH USE OF THE AREA OR THE WAY THAT THE AREA, YOU KNOW, THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT WE'RE HEARING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH COMMUNITY PLAN CHANGES TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. DEVELOPERS COULD APPLY FOR A VARIANCE AND DEVELOPERS ARE TELLING US IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. SO IT SEEMS LIKE A PROBLEM THAT IS.

IN A PRACTICAL SENSE, IF I JUST LOOK AT IT, IT SEEMS LIKE A PRACTICAL THING TO JUST SAY, WELL, I DIDN'T SEE RESIDENTIAL SHOULD BE ALLOWED HERE.

IT IS A LITTLE BIT TOUGH THAT WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THE COMMUNITY PLAN, I MEAN, I'M PERSONALLY SOMEWHAT OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING THAT JUST BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE CHANGE TO MAKE AND I THINK WE'VE BEEN HEARING FROM.

ALMOST ALL DEVELOPERS THAT I'VE HEARD FROM ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, IT'S GETTING MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO BUILD HERE, AND I THINK THAT WE'RE SEEING THAT AS CITIZENS AS WELL, I MEAN. PROJECTS JUST KEEP GETTING MORE AND MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUILD UP HERE, AND I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO TRY AS A COUNCIL AND AS THE CITY TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO KEEP THOSE COSTS DOWN BECAUSE IT DOES END UP COMING BACK TO CITIZENS.

I MEAN, EVEN WHEN WE'RE DOING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LIKE THE POOL, IT'S COSTING US CRAZY AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO BUILD A FACILITY LIKE THAT WHERE IN OTHER PLACES IT WOULD COST TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS LESS.

SO I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT FACTORS OF THAT AND WHY IT'S IF WE'RE PUTTING BARRIERS IN PLACE TO CREATING HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND WE HAVE PROBLEMS WITH RENTAL AVAILABILITY AND COST OF LIVING FOR HOUSING.

WE'VE GOT TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO TO CHANGE THAT, SO I THINK THAT I WOULD BOTH BE INTERESTED IN SEEING KIND OF MORE FLEXIBILITY GRANTED TO PEOPLE WHO WANT TO APPLY FOR VARIANCE.

MAYBE THERE CAN BE LIKE KIND OF A PRE-APPROVAL PROCESS THAT WE CAN INTRODUCE WHERE SOMEONE COULD KIND OF FIND OUT, AT LEAST IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY KIND OF PUBLIC PROTEST TO WHAT'S BEING DONE AND IF THERE ISN'T, THEN THEY COULD KIND OF GO FORWARD WITH A CERTAIN AMOUNT MORE CONFIDENCE.

YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SEE US DO WHAT WE CAN TO TRY AND BE.

THE SYSTEM HAS DETECTED THAT A FEW LINES ARE STILL CONNECTED TO THE CONFERENCE AND WILL ATTEMPT TO DISCONNECT THEM.

IF YOU WISH TO REMAIN IN THE CONFERENCE, PLEASE PRESS STAR ONE.

I THINK THE PHONE SYSTEM IS TRYING TO TELL ME I WAS TALKING FOR TOO LONG, SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT WITH THAT QUESTION, BUT I THINK I MADE MY POINT.

[00:45:07]

SO. HIGH, HIGH DENSITY ON THOSE LOTS IS STILL ALLOWED, THERE IS SOME DIFFERENCES, LIKE DOWNTOWN, THE LOT COVERAGE COULD BE A MAXIMUM OF 100 PERCENT VERSUS RESIDENTIAL 60 PERCENT, BUT THERE'S NO MINIMUM HEIGHT FOR THOSE SIX LOTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL CENTRAL, WHERE IF THEY WERE DOWNTOWN AT MINIMUM, THEY'D HAVE TO HAVE TWO STORIES.

THERE'S NO MINIMUM LOT COVERAGE IN THE RESIDENTIAL CENTRAL, THOSE SIX LOTS DOWNTOWN.

THERE'S A MINIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 50 PERCENT, SO IT'S NOT THAT THERE CAN'T BE THE HIGH DENSITY APARTMENTS.

THEY'RE STILL ALLOWED, THEY CAN GO UP TO FORTY FIVE METERS FOR A MULTI UNIT JUST LIKE THE DOWNTOWN. THERE'S DIFFERENCE IN PARKING, BUT IN TALKING TO RESIDENTIAL CENTRAL APARTMENTS, A LOT OF THEM STILL WANT TO HAVE ONE PARKING SPOT PER UNIT.

SO WHETHER ANYBODY WOULD EVEN DO 100 PERCENT COVERAGE AND THEREFORE HAVE NO PARKING FOR THEIR RESIDENTS.

NOT NOT SOLD.

SO JUST TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S NOT AS RESTRICTIVE AS SOME OF THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL AREA IN YELLOWKNIFE, RESIDENTIAL CENTRAL STILL HAS A BIT MORE OPPORTUNITY, AS WELL AS MANY PERMITTED USES VERSUS WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED, SO.

BUT AGAIN, IF COUNCIL IS SUPPORTIVE, WE CAN DIRECT ADMINISTRATION AFTER THE ZONING BYLAW TO REVISE THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND COME FORWARD.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME.

THE RESIDENTIAL CENTRAL DOES HAVE A LOT OF A LOT MORE DENSITY.

THE OTHER THING I'D POINT OUT IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING DEVELOPERS FROM GOING AND TALKING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE ANY RESISTANCE TO THEIR VARIANCE, SO THEY'RE ALWAYS WELCOME TO DO THAT BEFORE THEY SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION.

IT WOULD BE TOUGH FOR THE CITY TO HAVE A HALF CONCOCTED APPLICATION AND DETERMINE IF WE WOULD APPROVE IT OR NOT, BECAUSE THE YOU KNOW, YOU DO NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE SITE'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. YOU DO NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS ARE GOING TO BE.

SO THAT IS A BIT OF THE CHALLENGE OF SAYING.

UH, GIVING A PRE YAY OR NAY WITHOUT A FULL APPLICATION.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT, ANYTHING FROM ADMIN TO ADD ON KIND OF THAT DOWNTOWN VERSUS RC ZONE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.

WE CONCUR THAT THERE ARE SOME OPTIONS THAT COULD BE USED, BUT WE'RE ALSO OPEN.

SHOULD COUNCIL, SHOULD GPC AND COUNCIL DIRECT THE COMMUNITY PLAN TO BE OPENED UP IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE DO THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT COULD MAKE THIS ATTRACTIVE WITH THE CURRENT ZONING BYLAW AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR MORSE? THANK YOU. YEAH.

NO, I APPRECIATE ALL THAT CLARIFICATION.

A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT CAME IN FROM FROM A RESIDENT AND YOU JUST KIND OF RE-EMPHASIZE THEM, AND I WAS CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM ADMINISTRATION ABOUT THOSE.

ONE IS IS JUST WAS MENTIONED ON THE NAMING CONVENTIONS OF THE ZONES.

THE RESIDENT DURING IT WAS MR. [INAUDIBLE] CAME AND PRESENTED DURING OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND SUGGESTED THAT WE HAVE KIND OF NON THE NAMING CONVENTIONS OF THE ZONES NOT REFER TO SPECIFIC AREAS SUCH AS DOWNTOWN OR CAM LAKE OR THIS AND THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD POTENTIALLY CREATE BARRIERS TO ZONING AREAS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY WITH THE SAME ZONING AND WAS JUST SUGGESTING THAT WE CREATE KIND OF. HAVE ZONING SIMPLY HAVE NAMES THAT DON'T REFER TO THE AREA, SUCH AS DOWNTOWN? I'M JUST CURIOUS WHERE ADMINISTRATION LANDED ON THAT AND WHY WE HAVE THE NOMENCLATURE THAT WE DO IN THE ZONING BYLAW OR THE DRAFT ZONING BYLAW.

THANK YOU. ON PAGE 34 OF THE GPC MEMO COMMENT NUMBER 32 TOUCHES ON THAT, BUT MS. BASSI-KELLETT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE'RE CERTAINLY WORKING TO ALIGN WITH OUR COMMUNITY PLAN.

BUT I WILL ASK MS. WHITE IF SHE COULD SPEAK IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL.

THANK YOU. GREAT.

[00:50:02]

SO ZONING AND THE NAMING CONVENTION CAN TAKE MANY FORMS. EACH MUNICIPALITY CAN DETERMINE THEIR OWN.

THIS WAS A, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY, A HYBRID OF SOME OF THE ZONES AND THE NAMES THAT WERE USED IN THE PREVIOUS ZONING BYLAWS.

SO PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AS WELL AS WE HAVE INTRODUCED SOME THAT ARE SPECIFIC.

WELL, ACTUALLY IT'S NOT INTRODUCED. IT'S CONTINUING, SOME THAT ARE SPECIFIC BECAUSE THERE ARE SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE SEE IT IN OTHER COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY NAME A SPECIFIC AREA, WHICH IS A BUSINESS PARK AND THEY NAME IT AFTER THE BUSINESS PARK.

SO THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO COME UP WITH NAMING.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC TO AN AREA.

IT CAN BE GENERAL LIKE R-1 FOR RESIDENTIAL ONE, R-2 RESIDENTIAL TWO.

THERE'S SOME STANDARDS, BUT I MEAN, THIS WAS AGAIN TO CONTINUE ON USING SIMILAR NAMES AND A SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO WHAT WAS ALREADY IN PLACE, JUST NOT TO CONFUSE THE SYSTEM.

IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO REZONE A PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY, THEY COULD SELECT A ZONE THAT IS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE OR USE A ZONE THAT HAS REGULATIONS THAT MAY MEET THEIR DEVELOPMENT NEEDS, REGARDLESS OF THE NAME.

IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE PROCESS FOR REZONING THAT PROPERTY.

SO TO, YOU KNOW, CREATE A ANOTHER PROPERTY THAT MAY BE LIKE CAM LAKE OR LIKE ENGLE SOMEWHERE ELSE, IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT SAME ZONING PROCESS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE CALL THOSE ZONES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OK, THANK YOU.

SIMILARLY, I WAS JUST GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS LAST ONE, AND THAT WAS JUST WHETHER THE ZONING, BYLAW OR STAFF HAD CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY OF SPECIFYING THE SERVICES PROVIDED IN ANY GIVEN ZONE BASED ON THE THE USES PROPOSED WITHIN THAT ZONE.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE IN THE ENGLE BUSINESS DISTRICT, IT SAYS LIKE THESE ARE THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY TO THOSE LOTS OR THESE ARE NOT THE SERVICES PROVIDED.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THAT WAS ANSWERED IN THE PACKAGE OR IF ADMINISTRATIONS ADDRESSED IT.

YEAH. PAGE 39 OF THE GPC MEMO.

SO COMMENT NUMBER 39, BUT MS. BASSI-KELLETT, CAN ADMIN ELABORATE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR.

ABSOLUTELY. SO NOT ONLY IS THE ZONING BYLAW GOVERNING AS WELL, WE ALSO HAVE OUR WATER SEWER BYLAW, WHICH SPEAKS TO LOTS WILL HAVE SERVICING FROM THE CITY.

I'LL ASK MS. WHITE IF SHE'D LIKE TO TALK TO THIS, AND PERHAPS THERE MAY BE OTHER DIRECTORS THAT HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YES, THIS QUESTION WAS RAISED AS PART OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS.

WE HAVE PROVIDED SOMEWHAT DETAILED EXPLANATION IN THE SUMMATION CHART.

SO, YES, IF THERE IS ANY OTHER DIRECTOR WHO MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO IT, REALLY, WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND. THE ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT RECOMMEND THAT WE CREATE THOSE PRE SERVICE ZONES TO BE IDENTIFIED, BUT I WILL ASK OTHERS IF THEY WANT TO SPEAK TO IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

NOBODY ELSE WILL, WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

THANKS. THANKS. THANK YOU.

I'M FINE WITH THE ANSWER THAT WAS IN THERE.

IT WAS JUST SUGGESTED TO ME BY SOMEONE THAT THEY HADN'T ADDRESSED IT.

BUT I DO SEE IT HERE, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I WILL UM, I HAVE A FEW.

YEAH, SO WORKER ACCOMMODATION WAS TOUCHED ON URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL.

I'M NOT CLEAR OR SOLD, BUT THE REVISED DEFINITION IS REALLY GOING TO.

OK. UM.

IF I HAVE A PROPERTY, AND MY PURPOSE IS TO GROW PRODUCE FOR PROFIT.

WHY AM I CONSIDERED URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY VERSUS URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL, WHICH URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL IS SPECIFICALLY SAYING IT'S FOR PROFIT? SO I'M JUST WONDERING FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, SIX EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW, IF WE'RE NOT AROUND THE SAME TABLE, SOMEBODY COMES AND SAYS, I WANT TO GROW FOOD FOR PROFIT.

IS ADMINISTRATION AT THE TIME GOING TO BE LIKE, YEP, THAT'S ALLOWED BECAUSE YOU'RE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY? MY READING OF THE DEFINITION WOULD BE THAT YOUR URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL, AND THEREFORE YOU WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED IN THE RC-1 ZONE, SO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW I CAN SELL MY KALE FOR PROFIT THAT CAN BE MY BUSINESS UNDER URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY.

[00:55:04]

SO I'LL GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN ANSWER AND I WILL PASS IT TO ROB FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, BUT YEAH, SO IF YOU'RE GROWING VEGETABLES IN YOUR BACKYARD AS IF YOU KNOW, JUST EXTRAS AS SOMETIMES THEY HAPPEN, WE HAVE A BUMPER CROP OF KALE OR ZUCCHINI.

YEAH. SO WE WITH THE CHANGE, IT SAYS PRODUCT GENERATED FROM COMMUNITY URBAN AGRICULTURE ACTIVITIES MAY BE SOLD AS A COMMERCIAL PRODUCT.

SO THAT IS SLIDE NUMBER NINE, AND I WILL ASK ROB IF HE WANTS TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.

I THINK ONE OF THE KEY SEPARATING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE TWO IS SCOPE AND SCALE.

SO IN A PLACE LIKE RC-1 WHERE IT'S ONLY URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY PERMITTED, THE LOT SIZES ARE NEVER, WE DON'T BELIEVE, ARE EVER GOING TO GENUINELY SORT OF PUT SOMEBODY IN A POSITION WHERE IT'S HEAVILY DOMINATED BY PROFIT BECAUSE THE LAND SCALE IS SO SMALL, IN ADDITION TO THE SORT OF THE BUILDING FABRIC.

SO WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME PROFITS GENERATED, IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, A VERY I DON'T WANT TO SAY A VERY PROFITABLE BUSINESS, BUT IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY IT WOULD COMPETE WITH SOMEBODY WHO'S ABLE TO SECURE A NUMBER OF HECTARES AND PRODUCE WHETHER IT'S A POULTRY BARN OR A NURSERY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THE SCOPE AND SCALE IS JUST SO DIFFERENT.

AND I THINK FOR US THAT THAT'S A SEPARATING LINE BETWEEN THESE TWO DEFINITIONS.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT YELLOWKNIFERS HAVE THE LIKE WHAT WE DO, HAVE LE REFUGE FARM, THAT'S HER JOB.

AND SO SHE'S SELLING IT FOR PROFIT VERSUS MYSELF.

IF I GET A BIT OF EXTRA KALE AND I'M SELLING IT AS MY BUMPER CROP.

I COULD SEE I'D BE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY, BUT I SEE LE REFUGE FARM AS BEING URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL.

AND I THINK OF SWEET RIDE HONEY THAT THEY WERE A COMMERCIAL BEEHIVES AND THEY WERE IN THE RC-1 ZONE. SO ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW MORE BUSINESSES LIKE THEM? I DON'T WANT THE CITY TO BE THE BARRIER TO THOSE URBAN AGRICULTURE.

SO IF? AND AND FOR ME, I JUST SEE THE I WOULD ALLOW URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL IN RC-1.

AND BASED ON SECTION 7.13.2, NOBODY COULD SET UP A PIG FARM BECAUSE THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH IT, BUT FUTURE STAFF WOULDN'T DENY LE REFUGE 2.0 BECAUSE IT'S COMMERCIAL, IT'S FOR PROFIT.

THAT'S ALL THEY WANT TO DO.

SO WHETHER THERE'S ANOTHER CHANGE TO COMMUNITY URBAN AGRICULTURE ACTIVITIES THAT ALLOW AND IT'S CLEAR THAT PEOPLE CAN CAN HAVE A STAFF MEMBER WORK ON ON THE PROPERTY, BUT THE REFUGE AND AND SOME OF THESE COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE, THEY'RE NOT RAISING THE FOOD FOR SHARED OR PERSONAL USE.

IT'S TO MAKE MONEY.

SO I DON'T SEE THEM AS COMMUNITY, I SEE THEM AS COMMERCIAL AND I WANT, IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS THIS DREAM, I WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO DO IT AND NOT THE CITY TO BE THE BARRIER.

SO WHETHER, AND I HEARD RESIDENTS, YOU KNOW, PIGS WERE SCARY, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT GROWING PRODUCE IS A-OK.

SO WHETHER WE CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL AND, YOU KNOW, LIVESTOCK CAN'T BE AN IG, AN RC-1 OR RC OR WE THINK THAT URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL CAN BE A PERMITTED USE IN RC-1 BECAUSE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PIG FARM WOULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH SECTION 7.13.2.

BECAUSE I WANT TO ALLOW KALE AND CARROTS AND ALL THAT STUFF TO BE GROWN.

I THINK IT'S OK TO HAVE BEES CREATING LOCAL HONEY.

I DON'T KNOW IF IF YOU COULD EVEN HAVE TWO CHICKENS TO LAY SOME EGGS TO SELL, THAT PROBABLY HAS SOME ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, BUT UM YEAH, I DON'T WANT TO THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER BY SAYING NO TO URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL.

WHEN THERE AREN'T MANY LOTS IN CAM LAKE THAT ARE FOR SALE EVER.

IT'S ON TRUCKED WATER, WHICH IS A COMPLICATION BECAUSE THE GNWT'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

[01:00:02]

SO YEAH, I JUST DON'T WANT TO BE THE BARRIER TO FUTURE COMMERCIAL URBAN AGRICULTURE.

SO JUST WONDERING.

WHETHER THERE'S A CHANGE TO THE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL DEFINITION TO ALLOW IT IN RC-1, BUT NO LIVESTOCK OR WHETHER SECTION 7.13.2 COULD ADDRESS THOSE PIG FARM CONCERNS.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT? MS. WHITE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.

AND IT REALLY WAS A GOAL WHEN WE WERE GOING BACK AND REVIEWING THE COMMENTS THAT CAME IN FROM THE PUBLIC TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY WASN'T BEING THAT BARRIER TO THESE TYPES OF USES THAT WE WERE ENCOURAGING THEM.

AND THEN WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT HOME BASED BUSINESS PERMIT REQUIREMENT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE WERE LIKE, OH, MAYBE WE ARE BEING A LITTLE BIT TOO RESTRICTIVE.

SO BY CHANGING THE LAYOUT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEMO, THE LANGUAGE THERE SPECIFICALLY MOVES INSTEAD OF HAVING IT AS A SUBSECTION B, IT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THAT ORIGINAL LANGUAGE IN THE DEFINITION THAT PRODUCT GENERATED FROM COMMUNITY URBAN AGRICULTURE ACTIVITIES MAY BE SOLD AS COMMERCIAL.

SO THAT EXACTLY AS YOU'RE SAYING, YOU COULD COME IN TOMORROW IN A YEAR AND FIVE YEARS AND THAT USE WOULD BE PERMITTED WITHIN THOSE AREAS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND YOU'RE CORRECT THAT IN RC, RC-1, THE CONCERNS ABOUT LIVESTOCK WOULD BE MANAGED THROUGH THAT SECTION SEVEN OF THE ZONING BYLAW, SO THAT WAS OUR INTENT TO TRY TO MEET THE OBJECTIVES AS OUTLINED IN THE GROW PLAN, BUT ALSO ENSURING THAT THERE WAS SOME DIFFERENCE AS ROB WAS MENTIONING WITH SCALE.

SO IF YOU WERE COMING FOR COMMERCIAL THAT YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT SOME DIFFERENT PROPERTIES TO DO THAT LARGER SCALE AGRICULTURE? THANK YOU. SO I GUESS IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY FUTURE LE REFUGE FARMS ARE ALLOWED.

LE REFUGE FARM DOESN'T NEED A BUSINESS LICENSE OR THEY'RE ALLOWED TO OPERATE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE, AND NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE HOME BASED BUSINESS? JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT INTERFACE IS GOING TO WORK.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT> MS. WHITE? THANK YOU.

YES. ORIGINALLY WE WERE SAYING YOU NEEDED TO HAVE A HOME BASED BUSINESS IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS COMMUNITY USE.

WHAT WE'RE SAYING NOW IS, NO, YOU DON'T, BUT YOU STILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE OTHER BYLAWS IN THE CITY.

SO WE ARE REMOVING ONE REQUIREMENT, BUT YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE THAT BUSINESS LICENSE. AND SO FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, PEOPLE CAN GET A BUSINESS LICENSE. BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A HOME BASED BUSINESS, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE UNLIMITED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WORKING ON THEIR SITE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

MS. WHITE? THANK YOU. SO WHAT I WOULD NOTE IS WE'RE HOPEFULLY GOING TO BE BRINGING FORWARD THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW WITH AT THE SAME TIME AS THE ZONING BYLAW.

BUT MAYBE IF I COULD ASK IF MS. THISTLE HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

YES, THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW AMENDING BYLAW 5008 WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD AT THE SAME TIME AS THE ZONING BYLAW IF COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL REMEMBER COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

SORRY, THAT BYLAW RECEIVED FIRST READING.

AT THE SAME TIME, THE AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING BYLAW HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND IT WAS HELD IN ESSENTIALLY ABEYANCE UNTIL THE ZONING BYLAW NEARED COMPLETION.

SO A MEMO WILL BE COMING FORWARD ON MONDAY, THE 14TH AT THE SAME TIME AS THE ZONING BYLAW, IF THE ZONING BYLAW GOES FORWARD THAT NIGHT, OK, I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH ALLOWING AGRICULTURAL BUSINESSES TO OPERATE IN RC-1.

IF WE CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY FURTHER TO SAY MEANS FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, INCLUDING ANY INDIVIDUAL FAMILY, SCHOOL, HOSPITAL BUSINESS OR GARDEN ORGANIZATION, BUT THEN I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOT A SIMILAR DEFINITION FOR COMMUNITY AS WE DO COMMERCIAL, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT ASPECT OF SCALE, BUT THAT'S WHERE I THINK YOU CAN EASE THE CONCERNS OF COMMERCIAL IN AN RC-1 BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE MUCH OF A SCALE, YOU KNOW, [INAUDIBLE] OPERATING ON A LOT THAT'S FOR A MODULAR TRAILER AND THAT'S HER BUSINESS.

[01:05:05]

BUT IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT SMALLER SCALE BUT STILL SELL FOR PROFIT.

UM YEAH, I JUST SEE THIS BEING MURKY TO SAY BUSINESSES CAN BE CONSIDERED URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY.

BUT ADMIN HAS NO CONCERNS WITH THE MURKINESS OF ALLOWING BUSINESSES TO BE CONSIDERED URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY? MS. BASSI-KELLETT? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, YES.

MS. WHITE? GREAT, THANK YOU. AGAIN, GOING TO THE SCALE, NO, I MEAN, WE'VE HAD THESE CONVERSATIONS, WE'VE LOOKED OVER WHAT WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE WITHIN CERTAIN AREAS.

SO WHERE THEY ARE PERMITTED AS A PERMITTED USE, WE'RE WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT THIS IS GOING TO PROMOTE AGRICULTURAL USES, ALLOW PEOPLE TO HOPEFULLY EITHER INITIATE OR START A SMALL SCALE BUSINESS OR, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE MYSELF, MAYBE I HAVE A BUMPER CROP OF ZUCCHINI, SELL THEM AND YOU KNOW THE EXTRAS.

BUT IF I THEN, LIKE SOME VERY SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE IN THE CITY, CREATE A BUSINESS THAT IS VIABLE SCALE, THEN I'M GOING TO NEED TO GO BIGGER.

I'M NOT LIKELY GOING TO WANT TO BE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA ANYWAYS TO DO A LARGER SCALE AGRICULTURAL USE. SO WE'RE PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY, BUT ALSO MAKING SURE THAT THIS COMMUNITY ALSO HAS THE SMALLER SCALE AND NONCOMMERCIAL.

SO THAT'S YOUR, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT'S A GARDEN AT THE HOSPITAL OR WHETHER THAT'S YOUR COMMUNITY GARDEN, WHICH WE HAVE MANY THROUGHOUT THE CITY THAT THOSE ARE CAPTURED AS WELL.

AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO BE FLEXIBLE AND ALLOWING OR ENCOURAGING AGRICULTURAL USES IN THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

AND SO WITH THE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL, WOULD THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW HAVE ANY RESTRICTIONS OR CRITERIA FOR THAT BUSINESS? BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY IS CONSIDERED A BUSINESS BUT COMMUNITY URBAN AGRICULTURE, THEN THEY WON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL CRITERIA.

MS. BASSI-KELLETT? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

I'LL ASK MS. THISTLE IF SHE HAS ANY COMMENTS IN RESPONSE.

SORRY. THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.

THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW IN ITS ENTIRETY IS GOING TO BE OVERHAULED IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. PART OF THE REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION REGARDING URBAN AGRICULTURE, COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE WILL DEFINITELY INVOLVE ENGAGEMENT.

WE ALSO WORK CLOSELY WITH THE ONLY FARMER'S MARKET AND A LOT OF THE INITIATIVES THAT THEY HAVE PLANNED. WE DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AT THIS POINT AT THIS EARLY STAGE IN THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE BYLAW, THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW WOULD HAVE TO WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH WHAT IS PERMITTED IN THE ZONING BYLAW.

BUT THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW WON'T DICTATE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE THINGS COULD HAPPEN.

IT'S JUST GOING TO LICENSE THE BUSINESS ITSELF.

THE ZONING BYLAW WOULD DICTATE WHERE CERTAIN TYPES OF ACTIVITIES COULD BE UNDERTAKEN ON THE LAND, SO THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW, AS I SAID, WILL BE REWRITTEN IN ITS ENTIRETY.

IT'S QUITE OLD AND NEEDS A COMPLETE OVERHAUL.

IT'LL BE A LOT OF THE DIRECTION OUT OF GROW.

THE AGRICULTURE STRATEGY THAT COUNCIL ADOPTED IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOCUSED AROUND CHANGES IN THE ZONING BYLAW TO PERMIT URBAN AND COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE TO EXPAND AND GROW. SO A LOT OF THE DIRECTION THAT'S BEEN TAKEN IN THE ZONING BYLAW IS A RESULT OF GROW AND THAT STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.

BUT AS FOR SPECIFIC CRITERIA AND THE BUSINESS LICENSE BYLAW, THEY ARE NOT SOLIDIFIED AT THIS POINT. SO I GUESS WHEN I TAKE A LOOK AT THE ZONING BYLAW, IF I LOOK AT 7.13.2 URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMERCIAL SHALL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN, BUT THEY WON'T HAVE TO REQUIRE A SITE PLAN IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY. UM, IS THAT CORRECT, MS. BASSI-KELLETT? I BELIEVE SO, BUT LET'S ASK THE EXPERTS.

MS. WHITE? AND I'M STILL SCROLLING, ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.

PAGE 91, ONE OF THE GPC PACKAGE.

[01:10:12]

SO IF APPLICABLE, WHERE THOSE GOODS ARE GOING TO BE SOLD, AS WELL AS SITE GRADING ALTERATIONS AND ANY OUTDOOR STORAGE AND IRRIGATION WORKS.

THANK YOU. BUT THEN BUSINESSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE CONSIDERED URBAN AGRICULTURE, COMMUNITY AND RESIDENTIAL ZONES WON'T BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT.

IS THAT CORRECT? MS. BASSI-KELLETT? MS. WHITE? SORRY, YES. SO AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE SCALE AND THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS, THAT WOULD BE ONGOING, IT'S ASSUMED AND NOT ALWAYS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT THAT THERE ARE OTHER USES ALSO ON THE PROPERTY.

SO IT'S MY HOUSE. I'M GARDENING IN THE BACKYARD OR I HAVE SOME OTHER.

I MEAN, IT COULD TECHNICALLY BE THE WHOLE OF THE SITE, BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRING THESE SAME SCALE. I GUESS THESE ARE THE TOOLS THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE TO EVALUATE IF IT IS THAT COMMERCIAL SCALE, LARGE SIZE, WHERE IF IT'S IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, IT'S ASSUMED BY NATURE, BY THE PARCEL FABRIC AND THE OTHER USES SURROUNDING.

IT'S GOING TO BE SMALLER IN SCALE.

SO NO, WE HAVEN'T REQUIRED IT.

IF STAFF ARE COMFORTABLE THAT FUTURE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SET UP IN RC-1 UNDER THE DEFINITION OF URBAN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY OF.

I'LL GO THAT WAY. I JUST REALLY HOPE WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A REZONING WHEN WE GET A BUSINESS THAT WANTS TO GROW FOOD IN THE SUMMER AND RUN, YOU KNOW, WITH HER WAITRESSING IN THE WINTER OR DOING, YOU KNOW, MEDICAL TRAINING COURSES, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT HAPPENS RIGHT NOW WITH SOME OF THE GARDENERS.

SO, UM YEAH, I JUST HOPE THAT ALL STAFF IN THE FUTURE HAVE THE SAME INTERPRETATION.

ANYTHING FURTHER FROM COUNCIL? SEEING NONE, SO WE WILL COME BACK NEXT GPC WITH THAT AMENDMENT, POTENTIAL FOR THE WORKERS ACCOMMODATION AND THEN IF IT ALL WORKS, THEN WE CAN WALK IT ON TO THE AGENDA FOR COUNCIL TO NOTE BECAUSE THERE WAS A LITTLE LAST MINUTE THE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THE LIFTING OF RESTRICTIONS.

THE NEXT TWO WEEKS ARE MARCH BREAK, AND A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE TRAVEL PLANS, SO WE WILL GO ONLINE, SO WE'LL BE BACK TO OUR GO TO MEETINGS FOR GPC ON THE 14TH AND THE 21ST, AS WELL AS COUNCIL ON THE NIGHT OF THE 14TH.

AND WE'LL BE BACK IN PERSON ON MONDAY, MARCH 28TH AT NOON.

SO STAY TUNED FOR THE GO TO LINKS AND HOPEFULLY AFTER APRIL 1ST, WE WON'T HAVE TO WEAR MASKS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, THEY'RE A LITTLE WARM.

WITH THAT, IF I CAN GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR SMITH.

SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS. ANYBODY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE, I WILL SEE YOU VIRTUALLY NEXT MONDAY.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.