Chalk River update

After years of advocacy on this issue led by the Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County, which the GA has supported throughout, the planned nuclear waste storage facility at Chalk River has finally made it to the agenda of City Hall. On a motion from Councillor Kavanagh, Council has directed that the question be considered by the Environmental Protection, Water and Waste Management Committee, where public delegations will be heard. The meeting is scheduled for March 30. There is some confusion over an additional motion sponsored Councillor Brockington inviting industry representatives to speak at committee as well. J.P., who has been the lead on this file throughout, will make representations at committee on behalf of the GA.

Goulbourn PSW appeal settlement

Paul reported that the City has reached a settlement with one of the appellants on the designation of the Goulbourn PSW as Significant Wetland under the Official Plan designations. Some minor boundary adjustments have likely been agreed to by both parties. Another appeal remains outstanding.

Paul gave a brief update on the status of advocacy efforts led by Daniel Buckles to preserve this greenspace north next to the Ottawa River, adjacent to the Mechanicsville neighbourhood. The Mechanicsville CA is also actively opposing this development application by the NCC. Paul mentioned the security risk posed by locating a multi-embassy complex so near a residential area, a point highlighted by a resident of nearby Champlain Park, a retired architect with a security background. This seems to have gained some attention, Iola mentioned that the location would also expose the site to surveillance and even assault from the river, a new point that will be reported to Daniel.

The GA was invited to a special briefing by the team at Public Services and Procurement Canada responsible for shoring up and reforesting the northern slope of Parliament Hill. Paul, Daniel and Owen Clarkin, of the Ottawa Field Naturalist Club, attended. It was clear that our previous advocacy for the parliamentary elm had raised our profile at PSPC and motivated this invitation to a special briefing.  A very comprehensive presentation was given by the deputy project manager on the engineering and construction side, and also by the lead biologist on the project, whose task involves coordinating all the professional input. Detailed reports were shared and invitations extended to host site visits in the spring. An update was also given, at our request, on the propagation of saplings from the parliamentary elm that was removed in April 2019. Happily, a half dozen young scions are flourishing as part of the elm recovery project at the University of Guelph Arboretum. Iola offered to share her expertise on the removal of invasive plants, in particular buckthorn, stemming from her leadership of the Ontario Invasive Plant Council for many years, which offer has now passed along to PSPC.

A Provincial court decision upheld the 60/40 agreement struck between the former City of Kanata and Campeau Corporation in 1985, meaning that 40% of the Kanata Lakes development is legally required to remain as greenspace, including the Kanata Golf and Country Club. Clublink, the current owner of the golf course, had made an application to the City, in partnership with Minto and Richcraft, to convert the golf course to a residential development. The City took the case to court to enforce the 60/40 agreement, and won their case. The Kanata Greenspace Protection Coalition, a grassroots community movement that emerged from the controversy, gained intervener status and was very successful in mobilizing the community and raising funds. They deserve a share of the plaudits for this outcome.

We have reached out and provided advice and assistance, along with other tree preservation advocates, dealing with an infill application that could result in the removal of several distinctive trees. The builders has submitted a variance application on zoning matters for the project and, while the City had no zoning based opposition to the application, the forestry staff did have issues with the proposed tree removals. The new tree bylaw was judged not to apply as the application to COA predated the coming into force of the bylaw, which was January 1 2021, but new internal City processes to catch potential threats early in the planning stages, including variance applications to COA, have come into effect and this case is thus being treated under these new guidelines. As a result, a COA decision was deferred until additional information and potential design changes were worked out between the builder and the City. The case will be taken up again by the COA on April 7.