General Meeting – March 18, 2024 – Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital

Members present: Paul Johanis (chair), Nicole Des Roches, Iola Price, J.P Unger, Jason Kania, Erwin Dreessen, Tony Keith, Arto Keklikian, Janice Seline, Terry McIntyre (guest), Jean-Claude Etheart (guest)

Adoption of the agenda

The proposed agenda was agreed upon, with the addition of item 4(c)I, update on Distinctive tree litigation. Moved by Iola, seconded by Erwin.

Administrative items

a. Minutes of February 26 2024 meeting (for approval)

Moved by Erwin, seconded by Arto. Carried.

b. Website report

Paul reported on the Board’s activity since the last meeting regarding the selection of a software development firm to complete work on the automation of website updates as part of our project to improve the timeliness and comprehensiveness of our website content. Five firms were invited to submit proposals, three replied, from which one was selected. The successful contractor has now started work, with a kickoff meeting of the full tech team held on the evening of March 14. With the work undertaken by our volunteers and Jason’s support, the addition of these resources bring us much closer to the realization of our goals for this project.

c. Association reports

Ecology Ottawa has invited the GA to attend the second annual iteration of Grassroots Groundswell, a province-wide gathering of environmental NGOs. Paul and David McNicol will attend on behalf of the GA. The day long event will be held on March 26, 2024.

d. Membership report

Paul reported that all membership renewals for 2023 have now been finalized. Total numbers are holding steady, sustained by the registration and retention of several new members. He also took the opportunity to introduce a new applicant, Jean Claude Etheart, who attended as guest. A motion was passed to approve his membership, moved by Erwin and seconded by Jason.

Bill 162, Official Plan Restoration
Ontario Bill 162

This Bill reverses the additions made by the provincial government to Ottawa’s new Official Plan and restores the provisions of the OP to the version approved by Council in 2021. We have ascertained that the urban boundary was restored to the status quo ante and take no position on the provision that, at Council’s request, remained as per the provincial diktat regarding building heights on minor corridors. It was agreed however that we should comment on the Bill decrying the unilateral process used to make these changes, from the initial ministerial additions to the City’s response and requests in advance of this restoration bill, all without public input nor transparency.

Action: Paul to prepare a submission on Bill 162 regarding the process.
Community Benefits Charge By-Law Workshop, April 20
Community Benefits/Development Charges Working Group

Ewin reported on a meeting of this FCA led working group with staff in Councillor Menard’s office. Councillor Menard is part of the Sponsors group for the Development Charges bylaw. The Background Study for the next iteration of the Development Charges Bylaw is now available, a dense 350 page document that is unfortunately based on data that is 10 years out of date. City staff are aware of this shortcoming but are in a bind as they are compelled by provincial legislation to adopt a new bylaw by the end of May. The main inputs to the development charges are the Infrastructure Master Plan, which may be approved in the fall, and the Transportation Master Plan, which will not be approved before 2025. A proper DC study is not possible until these are finalized. The view at this time is that this current Background study and DC Bylaw will have a very short shelf life and that we should put our efforts on the new study that will likely be conducted in 2025. As it stands, the report calls for very hefty increases. However, because of the mandatory 5-year phase-in period and the interim nature of the report, only Year 1 is likely relevant. For Year 1 the increases for residential development are mostly minimal but there are huge decreases for non-residential charges.

Threats and Opportunities

RURAL
Anaerobic Digester Waste to Energy Project Carleton University
Anaerobic digester waste to energy project

GA member Sharli Jodhani is part of a team at Carleton University that has obtained funding to support design, installation and operation of an anaerobic digester to convert animal farm waste to energy. They are a looking for a municipality to partner with. We provided a few leads with our network in rural Eastern Ontario. Any other leads would be welcome.
MAJOR URBAN
Brian Coburn Extension – Discussion with Rachelle Lecours
Brian Coburn extension

An agreement between the NCC and the City of Ottawa on the use of Greenbelt lands has opened the door to the finalization of the Environmental Impact Study for this new roadworks. The NCC has agreed to open a corridor through agricultural Greenbelt land from Navan Road to the western segment of Renaud Road for bus rapid transit and motor vehicle lanes. In exchange, the City will cede to the NCC the eastern Renaud Road corridor, closest to the boundary of Mer Bleue, which will closed to traffic and re-naturalized. This is not the position we supported, which was to run the new rapid transit lanes through the existing Blackburn Hamlet bypass, furthest from Mer Bleue. The nature of this study leaves little recourse other than posting comments on the report. A request for a Part 2 Order can only be made if aboriginal treaty rights are somehow impinged. Members agreed that we should post a comment on the report reiterating our position and rationale. It was also agreed to reach out to Algonquins of Ontario, whose land claim includes this area, to inform them of the outcome of this study.

Action: Paul to post GA comments on this report, determine if local indigenous groups were consulted on this agreement and reach out through our contacts with Algonquins of Ontario.
Central Experimental Farm
Update on CEF shading working group

The GA and Heritage Ottawa have reached out to members of the Coalition to Protect the Farm, a group that was formed during the controversy over the location of the new campus of the Ottawa Hospital, to seek to their support in obtaining a seat on the working group being established by the City to deal with the issue of building heights on the perimeter of the Experimental Farm. Seven members have agreed to co-sign a <letter to the Mayor> and local Councillors, drafted by the GA with Heritage Ottawa support. A parallel letter will be sent to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, drafted by Heritage Ottawa, with the GA’s support. As of the time of the meeting, only an acknowledgement from the Mayor’s office had been received. However, later that evening, Councillor Devine replied indicating that he would be following up, with Councillor Brockington, on our request.
OTHER
Concord Tree
Old Ottawa East distinctive tree litigation update

The GA has for a few years been following the case of a homeowner who has sued a developer for the loss of a distinctive tree as a result of an infill project on an adjacent lot. This case is still making its way through the courts but in a recent development, the developer sued the homeowner in Small Claims Court for defamation. The homeowner prepared a defense based on the anti-SLAPP provisions of the Courts of Justice Act of Ontario. Unofficially, we have learned that a judgement has been made that would establish that an anti-SLAPP defense would no longer be available to litigants in Small Claims Court. This exposes residents and not-for-profits to unfounded defamation suits up to $35,000, with no recourse to the expedited anti-SLAPP process. It seems the only way forward would be to seek a legislative amendment that would make explicit that the anti-SLAPP provisions are available to defendants of defamation suits in Small Claims Court. Members agreed that this was serious concern and that we should seek advice and support on alternative legal or legislative means of closing this loophole.

Current Issues