Kingston council discussing zoning bylaw amendment for 223 Princess Street (old movie theatre).
WATCH LIVE:

AGENDA: https://www.cityofkingston.ca/documents/10180/38708792/City-Council_Meeting-25-2020_Agenda_October-6-2020.pdf/f382215e-9757-849a-2bd2-eca34508b399?t=1601562212376

Councillor @J_mclaren_ suggests, using examples from downtown Toronto, that building a tower at 223 Princess will result in higher MPAC propoerty assessments, and ultimately higher property taxes for nearby business owners. Says he can't support motion #ygk #ygkc

Councillor @WayneHill_YGK says he is surprised by McLaren's assertion, saynig that he has spoken to other business owners who want more residents living downtown. "We need to restart the process of bringing people to live downtown."

Hill uses a sketch of a "fortress" like building that "would be allowable under the current zoning provisions." asks if this is something we really want for our city.

Neill asks if 12-story plan adheres to peer review. Staff says yes

Neill: This has been a really difficult decision for me. I have opposed every development with exception of 9-storey development, along this corridor.

Neill: At 16 storeys, this was not appropriate development. And I opposed it. If we continue to say no, we will indeed block any further development. I think the way they've tried to address this (architecturally), is a great improvement over original design.

. @JimNeill3: I'm going to frustrate some of oldest friends by voting in favour of this project.

. @PMStroud : I represent a downtown district. I'm very confident that a majority of constituents I've heard from remain opposed. It was almost 90% opposed. I'm confident I speak for my residents when I vote against this project.

Stroud: This exceeds the guidelines. Not just in height. The angular plane is the problem. (When yo're looking at buliding, how steep you have to look up). A "canyon feeling"

Stroud: Not true this would block development. Anna Lane for example. Downtown development, people residing downtown. IN8 has history of making purpose built housing for students. Small units, marketed to investors. Many proponents probably already own units & want to see it pass

. @RyanBoehmeYGK: Why is student-focused a bad thing? We're seeing elsewhere that people are losing units to students. If this does turn hypothetically into just student housing, wouldn't that ease pressure on other neighbourhoods?

Boehme: When interpreting the official plan, you can't just pick the sections you like. There is flexibility based on certain factors..... with regards to property taxes, Boehme says that COVID is putting pressure on city finances. This could be a boost

Boehme: We do have to build something at some point. So I'm going to support this.

. @KTownHutchison : We got an email before the meeting that this development intereferes with their "neighbourhood development rights"(?) (might have misheard that)

Hutchison: The question is from a building owner half a block away. They're claiming they wer not consulted about this, and that it affects their development potential.

Staff: There was signage. There was notice to property owners nearby, as well as in the newspaper. I don't recall concerns from adjacent property owners that we need to address.

Hutchison: I can assure you we have now.

Hutchison: The point is that the surrounding area is 2, 3, 4 storey buildings. It's part of two heritage policies. What's being proposed is 50 per cent higher than allowed. I appreciate Councillor Hill's art, but the building won't look like that.

Hutchison: If we're interested in protecting our heritage core, we will not vote yes, It's as simple as that. So I will not vote for that.

(So I've got 3 yes -- Hill, Boehme, Neill -- and 3 no -- Hutchison, Stroud, McLaren)

. @MayorPaterson: People agree that we need more housing downtown. And that we need to preserve our heritage. It's all about how best to balance them. TO be clear, this is a compromise proposal. It's an attempt to balance off those two things.

Paterson: If ever there was a time when council needed to find a way forward, surely it is now. This is our chance to send signal that we are investing in the growth and revitalization of our downtown right at the moment when it needs it. #ygk #ygkc

Paterson: This is an application for a bylaw amendment, not to change the official plan.

Paterson: I certainly would encourage council to support this project.

@robert_kiley: We've heard a lot about angular plane. I'm wondering at what distance is that angle measured? If I'm downtown walking beside the building and I look up, will I be able to see the tower, or will I need to be a few blocks away?

Staff: The angular plane that is proposed on Princess St meets the 45 degrees. On Queen St... sits within angular plane ecept for portion of floors 11 and 12. Two different angles, two different facades.

Staff: You have very significant stepback... a signifiacnt portion of the height that is pulled more centrally to the area of the lot. Unless you crane your head, you're not going to see the top if you're standing right beside it.

Kiley: I ask this because when I look at the concept drawings, I would def admit that it will be a big building... I don't think it actually gives a true sense of the scale.

Kiley: Obviously one single project won't solve the affordability issue, the fact of the matter is we do need to add to the unit count. Also the climate emergency: what you put and where makes a big impact on reducing emissions.

Kiley: This ticks off the boxes. I am proud to support this tonight. (that's 5 in favour, 3 against by my count)

@Chapelle4K: Kingston has long proud history. We're like the Quebec City of eastern Ontario. This identity is critical to supporting the longevity of our tourism market. This is why so many people adore our downtown. The perversion of skyscrapers doesn't exist.

Chapelle: Supporting this doesn't conform with the official plan. For that reason, Kingstonians want 8 storeys. There will be a mad dash by other developers if we allow this.

Holland: Given that we have official plan, and that it's a living document, and that its supposed to help us move forward through conflicting goals. I understand fully the concerns about heritage.

. @MaryRitaHolland : Heritage is more of a feeling, and less of what the building actually looks like. It's one of the reasons I live in Kingston. That's the feeling we cherish and want to preserve.

Holland: What I've learned, working on housing issues closely... The type of affordable housing we need is challenging and requires a lot of public investment. I don't believe this project is going to dramatically increase the type of housing we need.

Holland: So I'm not that excited about this building. But over the course of the last several years, I heard that this is exactly the kind of compromise that people want to see. ... I will be supporting the recommendation.

Doherty: Could staff explain what LPAT appeal stuff actually means right now?

Staff: This is currently before divisional court. The court has determined that there are issues of law that remain unclear and that it's worthy of hearing the matter a second time. There has not yet been a decision on this matter. City took no position. But is a live issue

Doherty: What about if there is a new LPAT awarded?

Staff: We have heard from developer that they wouldn't pursue appeal if this was approved.

Doherty: If we turn down?

Staff : Still very much a live matter.

Doherty": A no vote could lead to a 16 storey building through LPAT?

Staff: Council decision has no bearing on court's ruling. The only caveat is that applicant has expressed willingness to abandon appeal. That's only way council would have impact on court proceedings.

Chapelle: Quoting the Headstones: In kingston, everything is legal, as long as you dont get caught