PUBLIC – Minutes of the Gatineau City preparatory caucus meeting held in the committee room of Maison du citoyen, 25 Laurier Street, Gatineau, on Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:30 p.m., at which were present,

3.12 Project number 137247 - Conditional Use - Construct a building of 117 units (building D1) - Lot 6 308 - 974, rue Katimavik - Mitigomijokan electoral district - Anik Des Marais

3.13 Project number 137249 - Conditional Use - Construct a building of 317 units (building C1) - Lot 6 308 974, rue Katimavik - Mitigomijokan electoral district - Anik Des Marais

Councillor Marc Bureau raises his potential conflict of interest for these two items. Councillor Anik Des Marais requests the deferral of these items. She asks why there is no updated traffic study for this project and mentions that the Allumettières and Vanier intersections are problematic in terms of mobility. Councillor Mario Aubé gives some explanations on these items. He indicates having had discussions with the developer who was in agreement with the withdrawal of item 3.13. However, the latter wishes to keep item 3.12 on the agenda. This file dates back to 2008 and at the time, there was a project of 200 units which is now more imposing. The SUDD responded favorably to the land exchange for phases 1 and 2 while it was unfavorable to phase 3. President Steven Boivin mentions that the withdrawal of item 3.13 must be done by majority. He asks if anyone requests a vote on the withdrawal. No vote is requested, the item is therefore withdrawn from the agenda.

Councillor Caroline Murray is in favor of the withdrawal of item 3.12 in order to perform the necessary traffic studies. It concerns the quality of life of citizens and the infrastructure must be built to accommodate a project of this magnitude. Councillor Bettyna Bélizaire indicates that this project provides for the addition of 1000 doors in the west of the City. She indicates that it is necessary to perform a global mobility study for this sector. She continues to think that transitional actions are needed before obtaining the results of this study. Councillor Olive Kamanyana mentions that if the City refused to end real estate activity in this sector, she wonders how the municipal council should determine which projects are more interesting. She mentions that the council lacks leadership in order to determine what must be done with this reality. She highlights the dissatisfaction of developers in this type of file. Ms. Bélizaire had filed a notice of motion to obtain interim control in the western sector and she would have liked to have a moratorium for this sector. To be able to move forward, she mentions that data is needed to authorize projects and that this data is missing. Councillor Daniel Champagne asks if there are post-pandemic studies concerning mobility that have been performed in this file. Ms. Marchand specifies that one must distinguish between studies performed by the City and those prepared by the developer. She specifies that the studies required of the developer concern only the targeted project and do not take into account other projects in the sector nor global traffic. Mr. Champagne adds that the question of predictability is important and that the City's urban plan must be respected. This social contract was adopted 2-3 years ago and the question of mobility is important. He mentions that there are also traffic problems in the east of the City.

Mayor France Bélisle mentions that we are going to live a perpetual tearing between mobility and densification. We must be able to have plans that will advance simultaneously. The data on which we rely for the tramway project dates back to 2011; we must keep this information in mind. The cities that will receive funding for structural projects are those that are capable of justifying densification. If we wish to have a tramway, we must mobilize behind a densification that will contribute to the cost of the tramway. Ms. Des Marais says she has a very clear vision of her district. The citizens of her district are in agreement with densification, but there must be an alternative to the use of the automobile. The options do not exist for the moment nor for the next 10 years. She requests the vote for the withdrawal of item 3.12. Mr. Aubé mentions that the CCU looks at each of the projects one at a time. Densification brings more traffic and he believes that as a municipal council, we must give a clear vision. If we wish to decongest traffic, let us act on the Vanier road problem as soon as possible. The Mayor reminds us that there is a mobility department that will come to help the council make these difficult decisions. She believes that we should be able to propose short-term solutions to our citizens. We need leadership from the STO and have a clear vision in the development of mobility. On the other hand, she questions the fact that it is elected officials who share their discussions with developers. She would like to have a directive from the administration on this way of doing things. Mr. Tanguay indicates that there are different types of regulations that govern the municipal environment, notably the Code of Ethics for municipal elected officials. When we are in our role as legislator, we can be contacted by certain people and there is then the Loi sur la transparence et l'éthique en matière de lobbyisme and the obligation to respect the applicable standards belongs to the person who made the approaches to the elected officials. Globally, we must be aware of the legal environment in which we evolve.

Mr. Tanguay specifies that the agenda is submitted to the municipal council and that there are exchanges around the table that will lead to a decision by majority in order to decide on the possibility of withdrawing or not an item from the agenda. Ms. Kamanyana mentions that the Commission on transport, sustainable travel and safety will propose an analysis of Vanier road within the framework of its work plan. Councillor Steve Moran says he agrees on the possibility of withdrawing or not an item from the agenda. He believes that it is important to know if a developer agrees with the withdrawal of an item, but this should not be an absolute condition and this decision belongs to the municipal council. Councillor Marc Bureau declares his potential conflict of interest on this item and declares that he will not participate in the deliberations, will abstain from voting or attempting to influence the vote on this item. Councillor Anik Des Marais requests the vote and the president asks the members present to vote by voice on the withdrawal of item 3.12: [Vote Tally Table omitted for brevity, result: rejected]. The request for withdrawal is rejected by majority and the item remains on the agenda for this evening's council session.

10.1 Project number 136984 --> CES - Redevelopment of the Montée Paiement and Highway 50 interchange - Carrefour de l'hôpital and Versant electoral districts - Olive Kamanyana and Daniel Champagne

Councillor Champagne wishes to provide some clarifications on this resolution. The MTQ presents the different projects on which they are working. We come to confirm the City's commitment to carry this project to term in collaboration with the MTQ. There will be the widening of several lanes and the improvement of the access ramp to the highway. There are important real estate projects coming in the next few years in this sector. Councillor Olive Kamanyana mentions that the fact of having this development will allow for better traffic and will have a positive impact on the projects to come. This project is in concordance with what will be done on boulevard Gréber.