7. PROPERTY ACQUISITION, URBAN NATURAL FEATURE -  DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED


ACQUISITION DE PROPRIÉTÉ, caractéristique naturelle urbaine – DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

 

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

 

That Council approve:

 

1. The acquisition in fee simple of approximately 3.04 ha of vacant land owned by DCR Phoenix Development Corporation, described as being part of Lot 22, Concession 9 in the Geographic Township of Goulbourn, City of Ottawa, shown as parcels 1 and 3 on Annex "A", for the consideration of $1,182,825 plus GST.

 

2. WHEREAS the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and Planning and Environment Committee will recommend to Council a wetland policy for the rural areas;

 

AND WHEREAS the wetland policy for within the urban boundary should be compatible;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all acquisition of wetlands in the rural areas be deferred until Council has adopted a policy for same;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council should review the reserve funds available for environmental land acquisition;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that policies for acquisition of wetlands within the urban area continue until this policy is amended.

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS MODIFIÉES DU COMITÉ

 

Que le Conseil approuve :

 

1. l’acquisition en fief simple d’un terrain vacant d’une surface d’environ 3,04 ha appartenant à DCR Phoenix Development Corporation, décrit comme faisant partie du lot 22, concession 9 dans le canton géographique de Goulbourn, Ville d’Ottawa, et indiqué comme les parcelles 1 et 3 à l’Annexe « A », pour la somme de 1 182 825 $, plus TPS.

 

2.                  ATTENDU QUE le Comité de l’agriculture et des affaires rurales et le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommanderont au Conseil une politique sur les terres humides pour les régions rurales;

 

ET ATTENDU QUE la politique sur les terres humides à l’intérieur des limites urbaines doit être compatibles;

 

IL EST DONC RÉSOLU que toute acquisition de terres humides dans les régions rurales soit reportée jusqu’à ce que le Conseil ait adopté une politique à ce sujet;

 

ET IL EST DONC AUSSI RÉSOLU que le Conseil devrait examiner les fonds de réserve disponibles pour l’acquisition de terres environnementales;

 

ET IL EST DONC AUSSI RÉSOLU que les politiques relatives à l’acquisition de terres humides à l’intérieur du secteur urbain continuent d’être en vigueur jusqu’à ce que la présente politique soit modifiée.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Documentation

 

1. Chief Corporate Services Officer’s report dated 10 January 2006
(ACS2006-CRS-RPM-0007).

 

2. Extract of Draft Minute, 17 January 2006.

 

Report to/Rapport au :

 

Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee

Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

 

and Council / et au Conseil

 

10 January 2006 / le 10 janvier 2006

 

Submitted by/Soumis par : Greg Geddes, Chief Corporate Services Officer/Chef des Services généraux

 

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Gordon MacNair, Acting Manager, Real Estate Services

Real Property Asset Management/Gestion des actifs des biens immobiliers

(613) 580-2424 x 21217, Gordon.MacNair@Ottawa.ca

 

Goulbourn (6)

Ref N°: ACS2006-RPM-0007

 

 

SUBJECT:

PROPERTY ACQUISITION, URBAN NATURAL FEATURE -  DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

 

 

OBJET :

ACQUISITION DE PROPRIÉTÉ, caractéristique naturelle urbaine – DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

 

 

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve the acquisition in fee simple of approximately 3.04 ha of vacant land owned by DCR Phoenix Development Corporation, described as being part of Lot 22, Concession 9 in the Geographic Township of Goulbourn, City of Ottawa, shown as parcels 1 and 3 on Annex "A", for the consideration of $1,182,825 plus GST.

 

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

 

Que le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique recommande au Conseil d’approuver l’acquisition en fief simple d’un terrain vacant d’une surface d’environ 3,04 ha appartenant à DCR Phoenix Development Corporation, décrit comme faisant partie du lot 22, concession 9 dans le canton géographique de Goulbourn, Ville d’Ottawa, et indiqué comme les parcelles 1 et 3 à l’Annexe « A », pour la somme de 1 182 825 $, plus TPS.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The subject property forms part of a larger privately owned parcel of vacant land located in the south end of the Village of Stittsville, fronting along the south side of Fernbank Road, west of Etta Street and Stittsville Main Street.  The subject lands are part of a greater parcel that was at one time designated as a Provincially Significant Wetland complexed with what is known as the Upper Pool Creek Wetland.  The wetland complex was protected from development under the provisions of the “Significant Wetlands South and East of the Canadian Shield” policy of the Provincial Policy Statement.

In keeping with the Provincial Policy, City Planners refused to approve an application for another development on lands known as the Westwood Subdivision that contained part of the Fernbank wetlands.  The proponents of the Subdivision appealed the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board that ruled the Fernbank Wetlands should not have been part of the wetland complex, was locally significant only and not protected under the Provincial policy.  The OMB decision was that the subdivision should be approved and that at least a part of the wetland site would be able to be developed.

DCR Phoenix Development Corporation subsequently submitted an application requesting that the City Council Approved Official Plan, the Regional Official Plan and the Goulbourn Official Plan be amended to redesignate the wetland portion of the subject site from Significant Wetlands to a less restrictive environmental protection designation.  A report recommending the amendments is scheduled to be heard by the Planning and Environment Committee on 24 January 2006.

A Zoning by-law amendment application was also submitted requesting to change the current Wetland and Future Development zoning to a Residential and Natural Environment zoning.  The purpose of the application is to implement the Official Plan Amendments and permit the development of the remainder of the lands.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The total development site consists of 28.3ha of land designated in the City of Ottawa Official Plan as General Urban and Significant Wetlands.  Part of the lands were designated as Provincially Significant Wetlands but the designation was changed due to the ruling of the OMB on the Westwood Subdivision and have lost their protection under the  “Significant Wetlands South and East of the Canadian Shield” policy of the Provincial Policy Statement.

The parcel subject to acquisition consists of 3.04 ha of vacant land made up of two areas of property subject to a proposal for development by the landowner, being an upland forest site shown as Parcel 1 on Annex A, and a wetland site shown as Parcel 3 on Annex A.  The City has assessed the natural features on the sites using the evaluation framework of the Urban Natural Areas Environmental Evaluation Study (UNAEES).  The result of this evaluation placed the sites’ natural features among the urban natural areas considered to have a “High” overall ecological significance relative to the 191 sites identified within the City's urban area.  In the Greenspace Master Plan Public Consultations Details report to Planning & Environment Committee on 24 May 2005, City staff presented a draft implementation strategy whereby all high and moderate rated urban natural features be protected, where feasible.

A report (ACS2006-DEV-APR-001) scheduled to be heard by the Planning and Environment Committee, 24 January 2006, will recommend an amendment to the Official Plan to designate part of the subdivision lands from Significant Wetlands to Urban Natural Feature.  In keeping with this draft implementation strategy, staff is recommending that Council purchase that portion of the property which is being proposed for development within the wetland as well as the upland forest area of the feature.  This report recommending acquisition for this "High" rated Urban Natural Area is meant to complement the recommendations of the 24 January 2006 report to Planning & Environment Committee.

 

Negotiations to purchase the 3.04 ha locally Significant Wetland and upland forest portion of the subdivision have resulted in an agreement being reached with the owner for the total consideration of $1,182,825 plus GST.  This amount is supported by two independent appraisals, one commissioned by the City, the other commissioned by the developer. 

 

The appraised values for the property are based on a residential use despite the Urban Natural Feature designation in the Official Plan. 

 

 

CONSULTATION

 

The Ward Councillor is aware of the proposed development on the site, and is in support of the property acquisition.  Planning and Growth Management have provided the justification for the purchase in report ACS2006-DEV-APR-0001 pursuant to their policy with respect to the preservation of significant Urban Natural Features. 

 

 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The acquisition of this property will protect environmentally sensitive lands from development.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Funds have been provided in the 2006 Capital Budget (reference page 342) and are available in Internal Order 900138.

 

FINANCIAL STATEMENT

 

Approved Budget to $ 15,551,000

 

Total Paid and Committed $ (13,024,460)

 

Balance Available $ 2,526,540

 

This Request including GST $ (1,265,623)

 

Balance Remaining $ 1,260,917

 

 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

 

Annex "A" attached.

 

 

DISPOSITION

 

Corporate Services:

 

 

 

 

PROPERTY ACQUISITION, URBAN NATURAL FEATURE - DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

ACQUISITION DE PROPRIÉTÉ, caractéristique
naturelle urbaine – DCR/PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

ACS2006-CRS-RPM-0007

 

Steve Finnamore, Director, Real Property Asset Management; Gord MacNair, Manager, Real Estate Services; Ned Lathrop, Deputy City Manager, Planning and Growth Management; and Cynthia Levesque, Program Manager, Environmental Management, appeared before the Committee on this item.  Mr. Finnamore provided a brief overview of the staff report.  As additional information, he noted the total development consists of 28.3 hectares of land and indicated the developer would be conveying approximately 40% of the total land (i.e. Blocks 171, 174, 175 and 207) to the City at no cost, as part of the subdivision agreement.  Parcels 1 and 3, totalling approximately 3 hectares are the subject of this acquisition report.  If approved, the total amount of land that will be in the ownership of the City will be 14.4 hectares – more than 50% of the total land mass.

 

Mr. Lathrop addressed some of the planning aspects of this matter.  He opined the Committee should view this acquisition in a similar context to that of the Trillium Woods development.  The City lost its appeal at the Ontario Municipal Board and had to purchase that environmentally significant land in the same manner.  He noted this land is within the urban boundary and is an area that is under threat of development.  The developer has agreed to donate the majority of this wetland but the only way the City can preserve and protect the remainder, is through acquisition.  Mr. Lathrop noted the subject land rates very highly in the City’s wetland policy (i.e. in the Urban Natural Features Study) and as a result staff are recommending the purchase of this parcel of land.

 

The Committee then heard from the following delegations.

 

Bob McKinley, Chair, Rural Task Force indicated he found himself somewhat conflicted on this issue (i.e. his personal point of view as opposed to his role as Chair of the Rural Task Force).  He said he has been in the rural development business for the last 30 years and was a strong advocate of dealing with the conflict of protection of environmentally sensitive land, while respecting property rights at the same time. 

 

Mr. McKinley advised the subject land is 69.7 acres in size and the deed, registered on 1 June 2005 (six months previous) shows that the entire parcel of the wetlands and the development area had a purchase price of $1,128,119.20 ($16,157 per acre).  He pointed out the staff recommendation is to purchase 3 acres of this land, at an average consideration of more than ten times the purchase price six months earlier.  Mr. McKinley also provided an example of another transaction for similar land in Stittsville.  That sale of 137.97 acres, which closed on 1 May 2003, had a purchase price of $16,105 per acre.  He felt the significant discrepancy between these recent acquisition costs and the staff recommendation, merited further explanation.

 

Mr. McKinley went on to say that one of the significant issues the Rural Task Force’s Policy Sub-Committee must deal with (i.e. arising out of the Rural Summit), is how property rights come in conflict with the legitimate obligation to protect the environment.  This discussion is scheduled to begin on 24 January 2006 and he urged the Committee to defer this item for a few weeks to allow for this discussion and subsequent consideration by the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee (ARAC) and Council.  He said although this parcel of land is in an urban area, it impacts the rural area because this acquisition would require one-third of the total amount of money available to purchase wetlands on a City-wide basis.  Meanwhile, he said much larger parcels of wetlands in the rural area, are not being given any consideration until or unless some comprehensive strategy for acquisition and/or protection evolves.

 

Nick Tilgner advised he was before the Committee as both a landowner affected by a potential wetland designation and as a member of the Rural Task Force.  He indicated he shared Mr. McKinley’s concerns with respect to the cost of this land, although he would be happy to sell his wetland property to the City for the same price.  Mr. Tilgner stated his main concern was that the City had asked some 60 landowners affected by the potential of Provincially Significant Wetlands to wait (e.g. stop development proposals, etc.) for the City to conclude its discussions with the Province (i.e. find out how the wetland survey was done, points of process etc.).

 

Mr. Tilgner then made reference to the map of the subject property and noted the defining line of the wetland runs through Parcel 2 and into Parcel 3.  He stated the City had a 120 metre setback distance from a define wetland and he wondered how this development would be allowed to proceed.   He asked that the Committee defer its decision on this matter until such time as the City and Province can further discuss the methodology of the entire Goulbourn Wetland Complex. 

 

Ken McRae (a copy of Mr. McRae’s speaking notes are held on file with the City Clerk) Mr. McRae indicated he was supportive of the City having a policy to purchase environmentally significant lands.  However, in this instance, he was concerned about the potential impact on the remaining part of the wetland on the south side of Fernbank Road. He posited that unless conditions have been imposed on the purchase, to ensure it is conditional upon a stormwater management plan, stormwater management facilities, and a road crossing of the wetland (i.e. Westridge Drive) that will have no net negative impacts on the wetland, first being finalized and receiving all necessary government approvals, then he felt this purchase to be premature.

 

Mr. McRae went on to note that according to the map in the staff report, Block 207 (which is in the wetland) is proposed to have a stormwater management pond.  He made reference to an e-mail from Glen McDonald of the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) which pointed out the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) specifically does not allow stormwater ponds in wetlands (regardless of whether or not they are Provincially Significant Wetlands) because of the potential impact on the wetland.  Further, Mr. McDonald also expressed concern that no assessment had been done to demonstrate the proposed SWMP will not have an adverse impact on the wetland and that the City was asking the RVCA to approve draft conditions for the subdivision without a copy of the revised draft plan.  In their initial comments, the RVCA had also expressed concern about the potential disturbance by the proposed subdivision on a watercourse in the wetland, which they believed to be a source of recharge to the groundwater aquifer.

 

In concluding his remarks, Mr. McRae opined a hydrogeological and terrain analysis should have been carried out prior to the Committee’s consideration of this purchase and before the Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) considers the Official Plan Amendment (i.e. scheduled for 24 January 2006). He urged the Committee to either defer approval of this purchase or impose sufficient conditions on it."

 

Metin Akgun, Vice President, Stittsville Village Association (SVA), expressed the SVA’s support, in principle, for this proposal to acquire this piece of land.  He felt that Stittsville was in need of more greenspace and this purchase will preserve a very unique wetland.  Mr. Akgun noted the Urban Natural Areas Environmental Evaluation Study, considers this land to be of high ecological significance.  He stressed this land was in the urban area (and not in the rural area) and felt it should be considered on its own merits.  Mr. Akgun did not feel further delays to this purchase were warranted and expressed concern that such delays could result in the loss of this opportunity to retain this piece of urban land with unique characteristics.  .

 

Iola Price, Chair, Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee (OFGAC) provided a written copy of her speaking notes, which are held on file with the City Clerk.  Ms. Price expressed OFGAC’s support for the purchase of these two blocks of land and the purchase of wetlands in general because they help the global ecosystem function.  She pointed out the staff report does not speak to the fact that other land in the same wetland (i.e. Parcel 2) is being provided to the City at no cost (although additional detail is contained in the report dealing with the Official Plan amendment and zoning change scheduled to be considered by PEC on 24 January 2006).  The conveyance of this land to the City will ensure that connectivity (for water and wildlife) will be maintained and the integrity of the wetland will be assured (assuming that the development to the north does not dry up the wetland in the future).

 

Ms. Price went on to say that although Council is being asked to approve the purchase of this land at residential prices, the addition of the wetland Parcel 2 (at no cost) does bring down the price on a per hectare basis.  She also pointed out that two additional blocks of land (i.e. Blocks 174 and 175) will also be conveyed to the City (at no cost) along with Block 207 which is proposed to be used as a stormwater management pond.  The location of the stormwater management pond will be addressed later in the development approval process, along with the Westridge Drive location.  She noted she had received assurance from Councillor Stavinga that Parcel 1 (the upland forest) will be managed as a forest for passive use and will not be cut down.  Ms. Price also indicated she would be seeking assurance that there will be no acceptance of Cash-in Lieu of parkland and that if possible, the required 5% parkland set-aside will be taken as land and added to either of the parcels of land being purchased or “gifted” to the city.

 

In conclusion, Ms. Price stated OFGAC applauds any decision to acquire wetlands and she urged the Committee to support this purchase now and not defer consideration to a future date.  

 

William Buchanan, Manager of Planning, DCR Phoenix Development Corporation advised the Committee his company’s initial purchase of this property was made over two years ago in May 2003 and the transaction simply closed six months ago.  He said during those two years, DCR has worked diligently to come up with a plan that is satisfactory to all parties, including the City and the area residents.  When he was given responsibility for this project, the first thing he did was consult with the MOE to determine the boundary of the wetland area and it was based on this information that Mr. Buchanan developed the plan for this subdivision.  As a planner with more than 30 years experience, he said more of the site than what is proposed could be developed (and more money achieved) but DCR has chosen not to do this. 

 

Drawing the Committee’s attention to Annex A of the staff report, Mr. Buchanan referenced the Park Block on the east side of the map.  He said DCR has provided 5% of the land total for park purposes and did not have to include this parcel as part of the subdivision or they could have developed this land for at least one single-family dwelling.  Instead, they chose to add this parcel to the lands being dedicated to the City. 

 

In conclusion, Mr. Buchanan noted his company has worked with the various community associations and the Ward Councillor from the outset and said he was more than satisfied with the end result before the Committee.

 

Written correspondence from the following individuals and/or organizations in support of the staff recommendation, was previously distributed and is held on file:

§         Robert Taylor

§         Christine Hartig, Goulbourn Wetlands Group

§         Eric Maniloff

§         Quentin Bistrow

§         William Buchanan, Manager, Planning, DCR Phoenix Development Corporation

§         Shad Qadri, President, Stittsville Village Association

 

Having heard from all delegations, the matter returned to Committee.  The following is a summary of the main points raised during questioning of staff:

§         When the developer entered into negotiations for this land, it was still designated as Provincially Significant Wetlands and the purchase price reflected this fact;

§         The Ontario Municipal Board ruling on the Westridge lands occurred in 2004, after the negotiations for the purchase of the subject lands took place;

§         An appraisal for the Westridge lands (2003 to 2004) indicate that land was valued at $140,000 per acre;

§         Over 40% of the total land mass will be conveyed to the City at no cost (as part of the subdivision agreement);

§         60% of the land proposed to be purchased by the City is solid developable land;

§         Two independent appraisals (one on the part of the proponent and one for the City) were carried out and both of those appraisals were within 5% of each other.  Negotiations for the purchase of these lands was based on those appraisals and a purchase price of $157,000 per acre was agreed upon;

§         The legal basis on which an appraisal must be based is highest and best use of the land.  Both judicial and administrative case law indicates that when a municipality acquires land of this nature, it has to pay pursuant to the highest and best use – based on the Official Plan, zoning and on the intended and probable use of the land.  The subject lands are three months away from draft plan approval, therefore it is the City Solicitor’s opinion that compensation would have to be paid for this land based on residential use;

§         A decision on this parcel of land in the urban area is independent from the policy discussions regarding wetlands in the rural area; 

§         The City has a policy that dictates that when environmentally significant land (and especially wetlands), is under threat for urban development, it is a priority for acquisition. Staff felt strongly (through the subdivision and draft plan approval process) the developer had a right to develop this land and unless the City acted on the purchase, the opportunity would be lost forever;

§         Staff estimate the discussions with the Province and other stakeholders on the rural wetlands issue will take some time (e.g. sometime later this year).  Deferral of this matter pending the outcome of these discussions would result in a much longer delay than a few weeks;

§         Because the of the OMB ruling regarding the Westridge lands, the subject lands are not considered Provincially Significant Wetlands and therefore the 120 metre “flag” (requiring an impact study to be undertaken) does not apply;

§         Staff will ensure that appropriate conditions are imposed on the development to protect the integrity of the wetlands (e.g. re the stormwater management pond, the impact of the extension of Westridge Drive, etc.).  These issues will be further discussed at Planning and Environment Committee on 24 January 2006;

§         The agreement of purchase and sale (between the City and DCR Phoenix) was signed on 13 December 2005.  Because this land is in the urban area and the development is fully serviced (sewer, water, etc.), staff did not see this as a rural issue and therefore felt it did not require consideration by the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.  Council has defined “rural issues” as those relating to the Rural Area as designated in the Official plan.  The subject land is in the Urban Area as designated in the Official Plan and is therefore outside of the jurisdiction of ARAC;

§         The compensation fund for the purchase of environmentally significant lands is City-wide (i.e. it is not broken down between urban and rural areas);

§         Staff will be bringing forward to the Rural Task Force (on 24 January) for consideration and recommendation to ARAC and Council, a process on how to move forward on the issue of wetlands in the rural area;

§         The rural area begins immediately below this property and there are contiguous wetlands to the south west of the subject property.  Parcel 1 is part of an upland area that extends into the rural area;

§         If the Committee and Council were to defer this matter for six to eight weeks to give the Rural Task Force an opportunity to look at this, the Developer (because they have the right to proceed with the development approval process) would have the right to forward this on to the Ontario Municipal Board on appeal.  ;

§         Staff expressed their opinion that approval of the subject acquisition would not adversely affect any future decisions in terms of rural or urban wetland policies;

 

Councillor Jellett noted he had intended to put forward a motion of deferral on this matter.  However, because staff had indicated their opinion that this was a “one-off” event to prevent the loss of this environmentally significant urban land and because of staff’s assurances that approval would not impact the upcoming discussions on rural wetland policies, he felt deferral was not necessary.  He indicated he had questions of staff that would have to be dealt with In Camera and put forward the following motion in this regard. 

 

Moved by Councillor R. Jellett

 

That the meeting of the Corporate Services And Economic Development Committee move In Camera to consider this item, pursuant to Section 13(1) c) A proposed or pending acquisition of land for the purposes of the City, of the Procedure By-Law (205-431).

 

CARRIED

 

Upon resuming in open session, Councillor Stavinga put forward a motion, which she felt would address some of the concerns expressed by the Chair of the Rural Task Force and landowners within the Goulbourn Wetlands complex.  She urged the Committee to support this motion.

 

Speaking to the staff recommendation, Councillor Stavinga noted this had been a significant issue in her community.  She spoke of the existence of pockets of wetland within the Village of Stittsville (i.e. an urban area) and noted that Council in 2003 carried out a land swap with another developer, for Provincially Significant wetland to the north of this property, that would have been threatened by intense development.  As well, Council rejected a subdivision application for land immediately to north of the subject property, as it contained Provincially Significant Wetland.  Unfortunately, the OMB overturned Council’s decision and as a direct consequence of the OMB decision, the framework was laid for the subject subdivision. 

 

Councillor Stavinga advised that DCR Phoenix has shown tremendous corporate stewardship in dedicating 40% of the lands to the City.  Further, they worked with her and staff to negotiate the sale of the subject land to the City and have respected the City’s Official Plan policies and the objectives of protecting these lands in perpetuity.  Councillor Stavinga opined this was a winning solution for the City, the community, the developer and most importantly the environment.  She urged the Committee to support her motion and the staff recommendation unanimously.   

 

Mayor Chiarelli stated he felt it very important to send a signal to the Rural Task Force and ARAC that their position will be respected.  He said the motion to defer any acquisition of wetlands in the rural area until a policy has been evolved is the right thing to do.  As well, he noted the importance of making the rural policy compatible with the existing policy for the urban area.

 

Moved by Councillor J. Stavinga

 

WHEREAS the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and Planning and Environment Committee will recommend to Council a wetland policy for the rural areas;

 

AND WHEREAS the wetland policy for within the urban boundary should be compatible;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all acquisition of wetlands in the rural areas be deferred until Council has adopted a policy for same;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council should review the reserve funds available for environmental land acquisition;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that policies for acquisition of wetlands within the urban area continue until this policy is amended.

 

CARRIED

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve:

 

1. The acquisition in fee simple of approximately 3.04 ha of vacant land owned by DCR Phoenix Development Corporation, described as being part of Lot 22, Concession 9 in the Geographic Township of Goulbourn, City of Ottawa, shown as parcels 1 and 3 on Annex "A", for the consideration of $1,182,825 plus GST.

 

2. WHEREAS the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and Planning and Environment Committee will recommend to Council a wetland policy for the rural areas;

 

AND WHEREAS the wetland policy for within the urban boundary should be compatible;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all acquisition of wetlands in the rural areas be deferred until Council has adopted a policy for same;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council should review the reserve funds available for environmental land acquisition;

 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that policies for acquisition of wetlands within the urban area continue until this policy is amended.

 

CARRIED as amended