Committee of Adjustment

2:19Good afternoon, Guelph, calling to order the June 13th hearing of the Guelph

2:24Committee of Adjustment.

2:26This hearing shall be held in a hybrid format with attendees appearing in

2:29person and or remotely.

2:32It's being live streamed and recorded.

2:34Please be advised that public hearings form part of the public record and the

2:39words, names and images of those who are participating shall be recorded and

2:44posted online.

2:46I've received regrets from members Siegel who will not be in attendance this

2:50evening. Before I outline the hearing format, if you wish to speak to an

2:54application that's listed on our agenda and have not yet submitted a request in

2:59advance of the hearing, please call the number displayed on the screen now.

3:04That number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

3:13That's 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

3:19And you will receive instructions on how to participate.

3:23A final call for delegations will be made when each application has been

3:27called. The agenda for this hearing has been posted online at guelph.ca

3:33forward slash cofa.

3:37I'll remind all committee members and staff who are participating in the

3:41hearing to please mute your microphones when not in use.

3:44And that goes for the chair as well.

3:47Applicants will be unmuted when their application is called.

3:51I'd also like to share the hearing format we'll be using to navigate through

3:55each application.

3:57Each applicant will be called by the secretary, treasurer and the call in

4:00number for those wishing to speak to an application shall be displayed on the

4:04screen. Afterwards, the applicant will be given an opportunity to add anything

4:09further to their application to a maximum of 10 minutes.

4:14You will hear a chime when there is 30 seconds left in that 10 minutes and

4:18another when the 10 minutes has elapsed.

4:22If you are the applicant and have nothing further to add, then you can simply

4:26say so. The committee will then be able to ask questions of the applicant or

4:31staff. After that portion, we will hear from members of the public who may

4:37wish to comment on the application. Please note that all comments should be

4:41directed through myself, the chair. Please avoid repeating concerns already

4:46stated by others and focus on adding new information.

4:51Comments from the public are also limited to 10 minutes or less.

4:55You will hear a chime when there are 30 seconds left and another when 10

4:59minutes have elapsed. Any members of the public who have submitted a

5:04request to speak prior to the hearing will be first invited to provide

5:08comments. For those watching the hearing online, if you wish to speak to an

5:12application and have not yet submitted a request in advance of the hearing,

5:17please call the number displayed on the screen now for those attending the

5:20hearing in person. You'll also be given a chance to come forward to the podium

5:26and address the committee under the same rules I've outlined.

5:29Once all comments from the public have been heard, the applicant or staff

5:33shall be given an opportunity to respond to comments. Finally, as the chair, I

5:38will turn to my colleagues on the committee for emotion and deliberation.

5:44As well, then we will conduct a vote on the application. When the committee is

5:48making its decision on an application, as the chair, I will be asking the

5:53secretary treasure to conduct the vote by roll call. The secretary treasure will

5:57call each of our members names and they will respond if they are in favor or

6:03opposed to a motion. And I will announce the results of the vote. If you wish to

6:10receive a copy of the decision on an application, including information about

6:15the appeal procedure, you must submit a written request. A written request may

6:22be made by contacting staff using the contact information shown on the screen

6:26now. To receive a copy of a decision, please email cofaatgualf.ca with your

6:35name and the file number you're interested in. Please note that owners and

6:40applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision. At this point, I'm

6:46going to turn to member Spears to provide our territorial acknowledgement.

6:52Member Spears.

6:54As we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in

6:58Guelph, a city built over rich indigenous histories. We are guests here and we

7:03should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land, the people who live

7:07here today, and the generations to come. If our actions today can move us towards

7:11reconciliation, we should take pause and make those decisions with intention and

7:16gratitude. This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands and a place

7:20of refuge for many peoples over time, but more specifically, the Attawanda Rock

7:25and the Haudenosaunee. This land is held as treaty lands and territory with the

7:30Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation. Wealth lies directly adjacent to the

7:35Haldeman Tract and is part of a long-established traditional hunting

7:38ground for the six nations of the Grand River. Many First Nations, Inuit and

7:43Métis people who have come from across Turtle Island called Guelph home today.

7:50Thank you, Member Spears. Committee members, are there any disclosures of

7:55pecuniary interest? If so, please raise your hand. Seeing none, I would like a

8:03motion from my colleagues on the minutes of the last meeting. Member

8:13Mambreno and a seconder. Member Sears, all those in favor? I believe that's

8:28carried, Madam Secretary Treasurer. I've confirmed with the Secretary Treasurer

8:32that we've not received any deferral or withdrawal requests. Before I turn it

8:40over to the Secretary Treasurer, I'm going to announce one housekeeping

8:43measure. That is, given the interest in the first application, I am going to move

8:50that to the end of the agenda as long as I have consensus with our committee

8:56members. That would mean that the first item we see is B-16-24 at Six

9:07Nicholas Way, and that would be the first item. Committee members, are you in

9:12agreement with this? I've seen no negative comments, so we will proceed under that.

9:20At this point, Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the first applicant?

9:32The first application is VAL-B-16-24, Consent to create maintenance easement for

9:37eaves in favor of Eight Nicholas Way at Six Nicholas Way. If you wish to speak to

9:43this application, please call the number displayed on the screen. That number is

9:47519-822-1260, extension 2524, and when you call in, staff will give you

9:53instructions on how you can delegate remotely.

9:57Thank you and welcome. Can you state your name for the record, please?

10:01Yes, it's James Laws from Van Hurt and Surveying.

10:05And your relationship to the application?

10:09Just the planning person for this.

10:13You're the agent, I take it. And can you tell me if the

10:16sign was posted as per the planning? Yes, it was.

10:19Thank you. And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement?

10:23Yes.

10:24Thank you. You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

10:27Okay, so these, it became aware that the eaves for the one property crossed over

10:35onto the adjoining property. It was pretty tight there. And so we were asking the

10:45committee to put on an easement for a right to access over the one property to maintain the eaves.

10:54For that, for, I think it's, I can't really see that. I think it's number four, lot four.

11:04Thank you. That was concise. Thank you. And if you want to wait right there,

11:09we will see if there are any members of the public who would like to address this issue.

11:15Madam Secretary Tresher, do we have any delegations?

11:20Mr. Chair, I can confirm we haven't received any delegation requests.

11:24Yes. Okay. Committee members, do we have any questions of, oh, yes. Are there any members

11:32of the audience who would like to comment on this? Seeing none, I will now turn it over to our

11:40committee. Committee members, do you have questions of this applicant? Seeing none,

11:47I will accept a motion. Member Spears. I move to accept this application as requested with the

12:01conditions recommended by city staff. Thank you. And do I have a seconder? Member Sears,

12:08is there any question or debate on the issue before us? Seeing none. Madam Secretary Tresher,

12:17may we have the vote, please? Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote

12:23by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application. Chair Smith.

12:29In favor. Member Balaban. In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor.

12:38Member Membreño. In favor. Member Sear. In favor. And Member Spears. In favor.

12:46That's carried, Mr. Chair. Your application has been approved. You're free to leave the meeting.

12:51Thank you. Madam Secretary Tresher, may we have the next applicant, please? The next applications

13:06are files B-17-24, B-18-24 through to B-24-24. Consent to create eight new residential lots with

13:17one retained residential lot at 42 Lowe's Road West. If any members of the public wish to

13:25speak to this application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

13:29That number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524. And when you call in, staff will give you instructions

13:38on how you can delegate remotely. I'll also note that the, there is revised condition wording for

13:46condition number 10 that staff is recommending, and that will just be displayed on the screen shortly.

13:53So we do have revised wording that for condition number 10 that prior to the issuance of a building

14:00permit on the proposed severed lands, the owner agrees to pay the estimated cost of all proposed

14:05works within the city's right-of-way to the severed lands to the satisfaction of the general manager

14:10slash city engineer. The owner further agrees to pay the actual cost of all proposed works within

14:16the city right-of-way to the severed lands to the satisfaction of the general manager's city

14:20engineer. So there's been some slight re-wording of that condition, so that's just noted for the

14:25committee's benefit. Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer. Is the applicant here? And if so,

14:35please approach the microphone. Welcome. Can you state your name and your relationship to the

14:44application for the record, please? Good afternoon. My name is Emily Elliott, and I'm with MHBC

14:49Planning, and I'm the applicant for this application. Thank you. And can you tell me if the sign was

14:55posted as per the Planning Act? It was, yes. Thank you. And have you read staff's comments,

14:59including the amended one? I have, yes. And are you in agreement? Yes, I am.

15:05Now that we have that out of the way, you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

15:09Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, and thanks to staff for the

15:15thorough and accurate report and the revision to the condition number 10 this afternoon. It's

15:19appreciated. I will just try to be pretty brief in explaining these applications. There are eight

15:26applications that are being considered today, and they are with respect to the lands municipally

15:30addressed as 42 Lowe's Road West. The lands are within the block bounded by Dawn Avenue to the west,

15:37Lowe's Road to the north, and Gordon Street to the east. The total area of the lands is about 2.13

15:45hectares, and the site has about 93 meters of frontage on Dawn Avenue, 55 meters of frontage on

15:52Lowe's Road, and 75 meters of frontage on Gordon Street, and they're currently vacant. By way of

15:59background, the portion of the lands with frontage on Dawn Avenue is designated low density residential

16:06in the official plan, and the remainder of the lands are designated medium density residential.

16:12There was a zoning bylaw amendment that was approved in December of last year to permit the

16:17redevelopment of the site with a residential development, and there was a copy of the site

16:22plan included with the submission folder, and I can bring it up on the screen if it would be helpful,

16:27but basically it proposed eight Lowe's for single detached dwellings along Dawn Avenue,

16:34and each of those Lowe's had a frontage of 10 meters and a depth of 32 meters,

16:39and then a multiple residential block on the remainder of the site which was proposed to be

16:43developed with Sacktown House units. And yes, thank you, there's the site plan, the current site

16:50plan, so you can see the lots along Dawn, and then the multiple residential development on the

16:54remainder of the site. With respect to this application, the purpose is to divide the land

17:01into nine parts. Parts one through eight shown on the consent sketch are for those single detached

17:08dwellings that would front, or single detached lots that would front on Dawn. Each of these Lowe's

17:13has a frontage of 10 meters and a depth of 32 with the exception of part eight, and that has a

17:20slightly wider frontage of 11.3 meters, or sorry, 11.5. Part nine, as you can see, is the retained

17:29lands, and it represents the lands to be proposed or to be developed with the multiple residential

17:34development. And as I mentioned, we're working through the site plan process with city staff

17:40right now, and that's ongoing. Just generally, the proposed applications are in conformity with

17:46the provincial policy statement and the growth plan, as well as the official plan. They allow for

17:51the intensification and efficient use of the lands as contemplated through the recent zoning

17:57by law amendment application. As I mentioned at the beginning, we do support the staff recommendations

18:03and would be pleased to answer any questions of the committee at this time. Thank you.

18:09Thank you very much. And if you want to wait there, we'll see if there are any members of the

18:12public who would like to speak to this application. Are there any members of the public in the

18:18gallery who would like to speak to this application? Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer, are there

18:25any online? Mr. Chair, I can confirm we haven't received any delegation requests. Thank you.

18:32Committee members, do we have any questions of this applicant? I was hoping Member Goodfellow

18:42would have a question. Member Goodfellow? Yes. So through the chair, I believe the city staff,

18:49there was some commentary about the depth to groundwater, and then also in relation, my question

18:56is in relation to stormwater management at the site. You know, depth to groundwater being very

19:02shallow and relying on an infiltration gallery or galley for stormwater management seems to me

19:10to be a bit of a conflict of ideas. And so wondered if city staff might be able to comment

19:16on that question and perhaps how that was considered for the site? Through the chair,

19:28through the 2022 Zoning By-law Amendment file, the infiltration gallery and stormwater management

19:37for both the retained parcel and the proposed severed parcels were approved through that file.

19:43And there's no holding provisions for the stormwater management at that site, so they were

19:48correctly addressed at least at a conceptual level. Thank you to city staff. And I do have an

19:58additional question if the chair will permit. So through the chair, again to city staff, but

20:06I did notice that one of my favorite conditions was not included on this one. It's about the

20:11environmental questionnaire. And perhaps again, this was covered as part of the Zoning By-law

20:18Amendment, but wondered if city staff could just comment on whether or not that might be

20:22appropriate here as well. Thank you. For the chair, if you'll just bear with me for a second.

20:29I believe I investigated that, but I want to look into the Zoning By-law Amendment file just for

20:33a moment and confirm that the environmental reports were addressed through the Zoning By-law Amendment.

20:38Yes, certainly take your time. Did you have another question, member Goodfellow, in the meantime?

20:47No, actually those were my two today. Thank you. Okay. While city staff is delving into that,

20:57let me go to other members of the committee if they have any questions.

21:02They don't. I do have one, and I was wondering about the ground, the surface water and the drainage.

21:16Are there any issues that have been raised in the site plan process as per the site topography?

21:26Sorry, that's to staff or the sir, your mic, there you are.

21:40Through the Zoning By-law Amendment process and the ongoing site plan application,

21:44stormwater management plans are being prepared and reviewed by city staff to address those issues.

21:50And then with respect to the lots, fronting lows, there are also conditions related to the

21:55stormwater management grading and drainage. The intent is to manage all water on site,

22:02so there's no impact on surrounding properties. I guess my concern is regarding the emergency exit

22:08and in the event of a storm surge of some kind, that that wouldn't flood the

22:16some of these these lots that have been would be severed. Right. And again, stormwater management

22:25in the event of a storm would be managed on site and wouldn't impact the lots that are

22:30planned to be created or any of the proposed or existing surrounding lots.

22:35Thank you. I can also speak to pass environmental related work if that's helpful.

22:46Yes, please. If you like, you have the floor. Again, through the Zoning By-law Amendment process,

22:53an EIS was prepared that looked at impact of the site on surrounding natural features,

23:00and that there an update to that was provided through the site plan application that's ongoing,

23:04and we're working with environmental staff to address their comments. I'm not sure what the

23:10specific questionnaire you mentioned as a condition was, but we have done an EIS for the site,

23:16and it's satisfied staff through the zoning process.

23:21Member Goodfellow, did you want to elucidate on your question?

23:27Yes, thank you, Chair. So through the Chair to the applicant. Yeah, thank you. That

23:32clarification is helpful. Do you know if as part of the EIS there was an environmental

23:38contamination assessment done, the questionnaire I'm thinking of is kind of more related. It's

23:44that precursor to a phase one, phase two process. And through the Chair, that would have been done

23:52through the Zoning By-law Amendment process. Chair, if you'll permit, I have a little bit to add.

23:59Yes, please. I do. I do chime in. Thank you very much. I do have the comments

24:05through the first submission of the Zoning By-law Amendment file, the engineering comments

24:09that do confirm the questionnaire that Member Goodfellow is referring to is called

24:14site screening questionnaire, and it's sort of the precursor to a phase one and then potentially a

24:18phase two, depending on the findings of the report. And the Zoning By-law Amendment comment

24:26from the engineering department does confirm that staff reviewed a phase one environmental

24:30site assessment with no concerns during the Zoning By-law Amendment application.

24:36Thank you. Member Goodfellow, does that answer your question?

24:39It does indeed. And thank you so much to City's Deputy Applicant.

24:45Awesome. Members of the committee, do we have any other further questions? No. I don't have.

24:53Looks like no. I guess the point, we will now take up the motion. I'll entertain a motion from

25:02my colleagues. Member Bellaman. I move that we approve the several applications,

25:15B17 through B24 for 42 Lowe's Road West with conditions as recommended by staff.

25:26Thank you. And do we have a seconder?

25:32Member Sears, turn it over to the Secretary-Treasurer for a vote.

25:43Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or

25:47opposed to the motion, which is to approve the applications with the recommended conditions

25:54by staff, as well as that revised wording for condition number 10.

25:59Chair Smith. In favor. Member Bellaman. In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor.

26:07Member Mbrenio. In favor. Member Sear. In favor. And Member Spears. In favor. That's carried, Mr.

26:16Chair. Your application has been approved. You're free to leave the meeting. You're welcome.

26:23Madam Secretary-Treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

26:39The next application is file A-27 slash 24, variances to permit reduced front yard setback

26:45for proposed addition and closed front porch and reduced setback and increased projection for

26:49exterior stairs at 121 Stewart Street. I'll note for those attending remotely, if you wish to speak

26:55to the application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen. The number is 519-822-1260

27:03extension 2524. And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate

27:08remotely. I believe the applicant is coming to us from video. Is that right? And are they present?

27:20I am. Welcome. Can you state your name and your relationship to the application for the record,

27:26please? My name is Greg Fukukusa and I'm the property owner.

27:32Thank you. And can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

27:36It was. Thank you. And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement?

27:42I have and I am. So far so good. So you have 10 minutes to address the committee. If you'd

27:50like to make use of that time, please go ahead. I really don't have anything new to add. I think our

27:56request was a fairly simple and straightforward one, but I'm happy to address any questions.

28:03Well, that's concise. Thank you. Committee members, do we have any, pardon me,

28:08before I ask for committee members, are there any members of the public in the gallery or online

28:13who wish to speak to this application? Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any

28:22delegation requests. Thank you. And at this point, I'll turn to my colleagues to see if they have

28:27any questions of the applicant. Seeing none, I guess at this point we can entertain a motion.

28:38Colleagues, do we have a motion? Member Goodfellow and a seconder. Member Spears,

28:49are there any, is there any debate on this motion before us? Seeing, yes. Oh, yes. Member Goodfellow,

29:02can you state the motion for us? Certainly. I move we approve the application as presented with no

29:10conditions. Thank you. Thank you. And at this point, I'm going to call on the Secretary of

29:18Treasury who has saved me once again from embarrassment to call on the vote. Thank you,

29:25Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the

29:29motion, which is to approve the application. Chair Smith. In favor. Member Balavan. In favor.

29:36Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Mbrenio. In favor. Member Serre. In favor. And Member Spears.

29:45In favor. That's carried, Chair. Thank you. Your motion has been approved.

29:52Thank you. You're welcome. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

30:07The next application is file A-28-24, variance to permit increased fence height and reduced setback

30:14for proposed daycare center at 47 to 75 Willow Road West. A note for those attending remotely.

30:20If you wish to speak to this application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

30:25Numbers 519-822-1260 extension 2524. And when you call in staff, we'll give you instructions

30:32on how you can delegate remotely. Is the applicant here? Good afternoon. Please come forward.

30:45Welcome. Can you state your name and your relationship to the application, please?

30:50My name is Nancy Shoemaker. I'm the planning consultant for the owner on this property.

30:55And can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

30:59Yes, the signs were posted. Thank you. And you read staff's comments and are you in agreement?

31:07Yes, we're in agreement with the comments. Thank you. You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

31:16Just briefly, Mr. Chair, I'm on the, I don't know if the staff will put up the plan,

31:23but we're proposing a daycare center to be included at the Willow Plaza. And in order to

31:32accommodate the daycare center, the ministry has asked for an outdoor living area, a play area,

31:38for the children. And the fencing requirement for that play area, you can see

31:49up at the east end of the property, we have a fence that is three meters set back from

31:58the property line and a height of 1.5 meters. So a portion of the building will be removed

32:07to accommodate the outdoor play area. And then there will be an expanded area along the Dawson

32:13Road Frontage. Now the bylaw allows for a 1.6 meter high fence at a four meter setback.

32:23So we're asking for the variance to permit the 1.5 at a three meter setback. And just for the

32:30committee members' information, if we were to actually physically build a building here,

32:37we could put that building at the three meter setback. So that is a setback for a building. It's

32:43just the fence that has created the issue on this application. So we're hoping the committee members

32:50will support the variance. I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Thank you very much. If

32:57you want to wait right there for a few minutes, I'll first check to see if there's anyone in the

33:02auditorium who would like to speak this application. Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer, do we

33:10have anyone online? Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests. Thank you. Committee members,

33:18do we have any questions of the applicant? Member Mambreno. Through the chair, two staff,

33:28I was just wondering for the two spaces, parking spaces that have been

33:33removed, the parking spaces that are required for the whole site, are they met?

34:11Through the chair to the committee member, this is an existing plaza with a number of

34:18existing uses. So the parking that is in existence currently meets the requirements. So there is no

34:24parking deficiency as a result of the removal of these two spaces to accommodate the outdoor play

34:30area. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Committee members, any other questions? Seeing none,

34:45I'll entertain a motion at this point. Members Sears. I'd move to approve this application.

34:54And we have a seconder, Member Balaban. Do we have any debate or

35:02discussion on this motion before us? Seeing none, I'll call the question. Madam Secretary

35:10Treasurer, will you conduct the vote please? Committee members, please indicate your vote

35:16by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application. Chair Smith.

35:21In favor. Member Balaban. In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Mambrenio. In favor.

35:30Member Sear. In favor. And Member Spears. In favor. That's carried, Chair. Thank you. Your

35:36application has been approved. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

35:57The next application is file A-29-24, variants to permit partially visible loading space at

36:03160 Southgate Drive. For those attending remotely, if you wish to speak to this application, you can

36:09do so by calling the number displayed on the screen. That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

36:17And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely.

36:24Thank you. I believe I see the applicant online. Am I correct? Yes, Chair. Hi. Can you state your

36:32name and your relationship to the application for the record, please? So my name is Connor

36:37Parent. I represent Tacoma Engineers and in this case we're the applicant representing GSF Limited.

36:45And can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act? It was.

36:51Thank you. And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement? I have read and I am also in

36:56agreement. Thank you. And so you have 10 minutes to address the committee. Please make as much use

37:03of that as you would like. Thank you. Yeah, so this is just a simple application to allow for a

37:10partially screened loading dock at an existing industrial building located at 160 Southgate.

37:20We're adding a large addition at the back and adding a loading dock facing the road is

37:27it's going to allow us to utilize the site a lot better. I don't really have any other comments in

37:38regards to that. That's great. Thank you. And if you want to wait right there, there may be some

37:44questions. So just hang tight for a moment. Are there any members of the gallery who would like

37:52to speak to this application? Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer, are there any online?

38:01Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

38:06Thank you. Committee members, do we have any questions of the applicant? Member Mambarino.

38:16Through the share to staff, I was wondering by increasing the size of the building,

38:22does it change the parking requirements? It does change the parking requirements,

38:29but we still fall under the required amount, I believe. Okay, thank you.

38:45Thank you. Any other questions? I do have one of staff and that is we've had similar applications

38:57in the past and they have been a little more contentious. I'm just curious about staff's

39:03support of this with no qualifications. Is there anyone who'd like to speak to that for me?

39:14Yes, to the chair. I do recall we have had a couple of these in the past. You're probably

39:20thinking of the same one I am. We have taken a look at this one. I think we do review applications

39:28on a case-by-case basis. They don't set precedence and we do review an application on

39:32its individual merits and I believe looking at this one it is quite different than the other one.

39:37In this case, the building, it is in addition proposed at the far back of the building,

39:43quite far away from the road, whereas the other one was much closer, different.

39:48We didn't include any conditions in this one because they are going to be going through

39:52site plan approval and we can look at landscaping and screening and anything like that as part of

39:57that process. Looking at it and referring back to the other one, they are quite different even

40:05though the variance is under the same section but I think they are quite different when looking at them

40:11in terms of the four tests but we did support the other one as well after working with the applicant.

40:18Thank you very much. That's what I recall as well but I just wanted to be sure. 100% clear.

40:25Are there any other questions we'd like to raise on this issue?

40:30Seeing none, I will support a motion. Members, peers. Yes, I move that we accept this application

40:40as it is with no conditions. Thank you and do we have a seconder?

40:47Member Marene Brano and Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the vote?

40:55Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or

41:00opposed to the motion which is to approve the application. Chair Smith? In favor.

41:07Member Balaban? In favor. Member Goodfellow? In favor. Member Mambrenio? In favor. Member Seyer?

41:17In favor. And Member Spears? In favor. That's carried, Mr. Chair.

41:22Thank you. Your application has been approved and you're free to leave the meeting. Thank you.

41:29Thank you. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

41:44The next application is felt at a-30 slash 24, variance to permit reduced front yard setback

41:50for proposed second story addition to existing dwelling at one Edge Hill Drive. I'll note for

41:56those attending online and wish to speak to the application, you can do so by calling the number

42:02displayed on the screen. That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524 and when you call in staff will

42:10give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Yes,

42:17please come forward. Good afternoon. Can you state your name and your relationship to the

42:28application for the record please? Andre Hazel, agent for the homeowner and one of whom is here

42:35in the gallery. Thank you. And can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

42:42Yes, it was. Thank you. And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement?

42:47I am in agreement, yes. Now that we have that out of the way, you have 10 minutes to address the

42:54committee. The only comment I have is there is a lot of evidence of similar construction in the

43:01neighborhood. So lots of precedent. That is all. Okay. That's brief and to the point. So thank you

43:15for that. If you want to wait right there, there may be some people who would like to speak to this

43:21motion. So I'm first going to ask if anyone in the gallery would like to speak to this proposal.

43:32Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer, is there any one online who would like to speak to this?

43:37Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

43:42Thank you. Committee members, do we have any questions of this applicant?

43:49Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. Committee members, what's your pleasure?

43:57Member Balaban. I move that we approve the application as submitted.

44:09Thank you. And do we have a seconder? Member Mamboreno.

44:15And Madam Secretary, before we do that, is there any debate or discussion on the

44:22motion before us? Yes, Member Bellaman. I neglected to add that there is a recommendation

44:30from Elector Utilities that should be included. Yes. Thank you for catching that. I guess at

44:40this point, Madam Secretary Treasurer, we can have a vote. Thank you, Chair. Committee members,

44:46please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to

44:49approve the application with the one recommended condition. Chair Smith. In favor. Member Balaban.

44:57In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Mamboreño. In favor. Member Seyer. In favor.

45:06Member Spears. In favor. That's carried, Mr. Chair.

45:11Thank you. Your application has been approved. You're free to leave the meeting.

45:17Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next application?

45:34The next and final application is file B-10-23 consent to create new residential lot with one

45:43retained residential lot at 61 Herne Avenue. I'll note for those attending remotely, if you wish to

45:50speak to this application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen. That

45:54number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524. And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on

46:02how you can delegate remotely. I'll also note for the committee's benefit that correspondence was

46:08received after the comment deadline from Catherine Goddard and Paul Freud-Enthaller with concerns

46:14about the application. And that correspondence has been circulated to the committee members and staff.

46:23Welcome. Can you state your name and your relationship to the application, please?

46:27My name is Jeff Buisman from Van Hurtens-Fürving and I'm the agent for the property owner.

46:32Thank you. And can you tell me if the sign was posted as for the Planning Act?

46:38Yes, it was. Thank you. And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement?

46:43Yes, I have read them and I am in agreement with them.

46:47Thank you. So as you know, 10 minutes, it's all yours.

46:51That's great. If we could kindly put on the severance sketch, we can see the application.

46:58So this property is in the corner of Herne and Chadwick. Herne goes up and down on the

47:04piece of paper. Chadwick goes left and right. So this is the corner lot. The house that's there

47:09now sits more on the south end. And we have determined that it's an ideal situation to sever

47:16that the new vacant lot will be on the north side. Both lots will be fronting onto Herne.

47:24The main, this was before the committee before. The main concern was the black walnut tree that's

47:30at the corner. And so as a result of that hearing, we had a deferral and we commissioned an arborist

47:39an expert to complete a tree inventory protection plan. I'll call it TIP for short.

47:47And that was reviewed by city staff, the forestry department in particular, and they have no concerns.

47:55I brought James Dennis, the author of the TIP with me. I do just want to talk about the severance

48:02itself a little bit in that it meets all the requirements for zoning in terms of area and size.

48:08The setbacks, so there's no minor variances required.

48:14The other thing I want to say is that staff is in support and they feel that it's,

48:19it fits the character, fits the neighborhood. Some highlights I'd like to make out of the report is

48:24that the proposed severance is considered to be reasonable and in the best interest of the community.

48:30The report goes on to say city staff, forestry staff have reviewed the tree inventory preservation

48:37plan and are satisfied with the revised proposal and it would preserve the black walnut tree.

48:46The other thing I do want to make mention of too is one of the things that we decide to do in this

48:51to make it work better is to push the house back. So it sits back from the road a little more than

48:57normal. Often we set the houses back six meters. In this case, we're setting the house back nine

49:03meters and also keeping the house as much to the south as possible. We've also oriented the proposed

49:10deck to be at the corner closest to the tree and then that would be supported by a single post that

49:18would be drilled in into the ground to help preserve the roots. Our client has done some

49:25investigation on some construction techniques. One is to use a pile of pile, some call it a helical pile.

49:34It's a thermal pile where they basically you with the experience and there's some pictures we can

49:43show but maybe you want to show a couple of those pictures but basically they kind of scrimmage around

49:50a little bit to figure out where the roots are and once they realize find a spot where it's not

49:55heavy with roots they drill down and put in a pile then that pile will support the structure that's

50:02being built. So this is one example of them drilling and then maybe the next picture.

50:09Again you can see the little things in the ground. They've been working on saving that big tree that

50:15you can see in the distance there and then one more picture I think. Yeah that helps. I think the

50:24one more maybe. Yeah that one there you can see was used to save and protect that tree.

50:30So we're looking at this technology to at least do that front porch and maybe even front part of

50:35that house. It'll depend exactly where the roots are. So in summary I'd say it's a great

50:42severance and we've addressed the major concern of protecting this tree. If you mind Mr. Chair if

50:48I could pass it on to maybe a new delegation, a new time clock on the 10-minute thing I think

50:54he said it'll be five minutes. Please go ahead. Thank you. My name is, oh Chair through you to the

51:06committee. My name is James Dennis. I am the partner or the Arboriculture Lead and a partner

51:12at Abudan Associates. We're a consulting firm in Guelph and I prepared the tree inventory

51:19and preservation plan for this application. I have 12 years experience at Abudan Associates

51:29and our main work is to prepare these Arborist reports and preservation plans for

51:36developments both for private and municipal clients. So we've had extensive experience

51:47working in these situations and I think relative to this project I'd say the main constraint is

51:56definitely the black walnut. We did inventory 17 trees on the property and certainly Chief among

52:05them was that black walnut and just for background this tree was measured at 114 centimeters diameter

52:13at breast height and on the plan it's it's the large tree at the top left corner. 114 centimeters

52:23diameter breast height approximately 20 meters tall an approximate crown reserve or drip line

52:31or canopy with 26 meters and in terms of protection zones the City of Guelph requires a minimum

52:41tree protection zone for this tree of six meters or what we've given here is 7.2 because it is

52:49greater than 100 centimeters in diameter and then the potential area would be double that so 14 meters.

52:59In terms of the the development of the the plan another constraint that I come across

53:06quite frequently is developers' willingness to alter their plans to save trees and in this case

53:16we had a very sympathetic developer and through the first iteration this iteration has reduced the

53:28impact within the minimum tree protection zone to essentially nothing as Jeff has mentioned the

53:35pile for the deck is likely going to be the the only impact within the minimum tree protection zone

53:42we do show some impact within the drip line and that is the hatched area and this equates to

53:50approximately 58 to 59 square meters within the drip line the drip line total area as we've measured

53:59on that circle is roughly 530 540 square meters so roughly roughly well no I can say it's 89 percent

54:15it's going to be left intact more or less or left undisturbed so I would like to speak to

54:24some of the comments that were received through the comment period from the public and

54:37the first comment would be the impact to roots there will possibly be some impact to roots

54:47and feeder roots were mentioned and those are the roots that are most likely to be impacted

54:54in my experience and in my opinion my qualified opinion these impacts are the most tolerable

55:02to a tree just the biology of tree roots the the smaller roots which these are are vigorous and

55:11essentially they're they're designed to grow quickly and in response to pruning and damage

55:26we would be concerned if if we were going to cut larger roots let's say larger than

55:34three inches in diameter or seven and a half centimeters in diameter where we would be concerned

55:40about stability and long-term survival survival so at the distance of of the impact the closest

55:50excavation is approximately six meters away from the from the trunk and that is the the pile

55:57the foundation and the driveway are at at their closest nine meters away from the tree trunk

56:04so in my experience again without having seen the roots I don't expect large roots of any

56:11structural significance or any feeding significance to be encountered and I'll get to that a little

56:19bit later but the other issue that was raised was affecting the soil pH and again since we're

56:30affecting just over 10 percent of the of the tree's rooting area the amount of soil that would need

56:37to to be added to affect that pH is is way beyond what we're going to be affecting and in the water

56:44table comments also spoke to that I'm not a hydrogeologist but I understand that grading has to

56:52maintain water volumes for the for the site so I don't expect that to be an impact on the the

56:58long-term survival of this tree um this is my time so I'm happy to answer your questions if there

57:06are anyway thank you if you want to um if you both want to wait right there there will be an

57:12opportunity to address um any of the comments that are made and I'm sure my colleagues may have

57:19questions as well so if you want to hang back for a moment um are there any members of the

57:25auditorium who would like to speak to this application I do not see any um

57:35Madam Secretary Treasurer are there any online who would like to speak to this application?

57:42Chair Smith we do have a couple of delegates um that have registered the first is uh Shirley

57:48Marsh and she's appearing via video and she's just joining us here shortly. Miss Marsh? Yes. Welcome.

58:04Can you hear me? We can hear you and we can see you so it's a delight to have you here this afternoon

58:11and if you would like to keep your comments to 10 minutes we would love to hear what you have to say

58:18so please go ahead. Okay I'll try my best to keep it in 10 minutes. First of all thank you very much

58:26to Mr. Chair, committee members and staff for the opportunity to speak. I uh I'd like to speak

58:35as a very concerned neighboring resident as well as a professional landscape architect who has dealt

58:42with many similar developments with substantial impacts on surrounding vegetation. Just a bit

58:52background I moved to this area about five years ago and the reason I moved here was because of the

58:58trees the lush green diverse mature vegetation all around and the second reason I moved here

59:05is because of of Guelph. Guelph is known to be very progressive on many important issues especially

59:13on environmental conservation and sustainability. I am so proud to move here to be a Guelph resident

59:20so I do hope we can maintain this great reputation as well as the beautiful tree canopy in our

59:28neighborhood that we love and cherish. So like many of my neighbors I am deeply concerned about the

59:34health preservation and and the protection of this significant walnut tree. It is not just another big

59:41tree such a large majestic walnut tree with perfect structure and beautiful arching canopy

59:50is rare to find in our urban landscape. What's important to note is that in my entire 25-year

59:58career in landscape architecture I have not come across such a magnificent significant tree as this

1:00:08one. So it is absolutely crucial for us all to do everything possible to preserve this walnut tree

1:00:14for the long lists of benefits that we had mentioned before the support of biodiversity,

1:00:21wildlife, climate resilience, reduction of heat island and pollution and many more. So while we

1:00:28are very appreciative of the revisions that have been made to the location and footprint of the

1:00:35proposed building to reduce the impact on the walnut tree I still have many concerns and questions

1:00:42about the application. The submission of the Arbor's report was very important but we are

1:00:48still missing many of the critical information such as the detailed proposed building plans

1:00:54and what the proposed grades are compared to the current topography. These information are very

1:01:01necessary to better assess the degree of impacts to the health of the walnut tree. So currently

1:01:09the assessment is done just based on plan view a two-dimensional horizontal ground pain perspective

1:01:17rather than a holistic assessment where both the horizontal and the vertical planes of the site

1:01:24are considered and analyzed. We need to know is there a basement within the drip line or the tree

1:01:31protection zone? If so how deep will the excavation be six feet down, ten feet down? We don't know this

1:01:39none of this is supplied to us. Likewise for the deck well I do appreciate the applicant mentioning

1:01:46that the footing for the deck will be a single post but prior to today we didn't know whether it was

1:01:56going to be wood footings or a wood deck or a slab on grade concrete deck. Those details make a

1:02:04difference to us. Same for the driveway would it be six inches deep excavation or would it be one foot

1:02:10deep excavation? The depth and method of excavation affects the level and impact on it on the root zone

1:02:17so the deeper the excavation the wider and the larger the hole will be created and therefore

1:02:23the greater the negative impacts on this one at three roots. As well the finished floor elevations

1:02:31or the top of foundation grade of the building and deck are not provided so we can have a full

1:02:38some review and assessment without these information being supplied to us and in my experience where

1:02:45we are making decisions and recommendations in the absence of these crucial information the failure

1:02:51rate to preserve these significant trees are very high. I am strictly speaking from experience.

1:03:01The Arbor assessment is based on like the tree's ability to withstand impact but there is no

1:03:09recommendation from the architect or the builder in terms of what methods are taken to minimize

1:03:16impact to the tree. What creative building construction techniques are being proposed.

1:03:24Further this tree is the boundary tree based on the City of Guelph's tree inventory and database.

1:03:33The walnut tree is designated as a boundary tree located on shared property between the subject

1:03:38property and the city right away meaning that this tree is common property which is subject to Ontario

1:03:46Forestry Act. So according to this act any person who injures or destroys this tree growing on the

1:03:54boundary between the adjoining lands without the consent of the landowners is guilty of an offense

1:04:02and no development should happen at the expense of public property. I emphasize that the expense of

1:04:08public property being damaged and destroyed and there is very good chance of this happening.

1:04:15So for example how would the city ensure the tree protection fence is installed properly and

1:04:24maintained throughout the construction. The fence shouldn't be moved by the contractors during

1:04:30construction for easy construction equipment access and maneuvering and storage of materials.

1:04:38So my question is what is the city doing to ensure that the contractor actually follows

1:04:45recommendations of the arborists. Are there going to be any securities or letter of credit taken to

1:04:50guarantee that the rules are followed as required and if there are no securities taken chances of

1:04:57harm and destruction to the tree is very high. Although the tree may die may not die right away

1:05:04but the decline can happen over time and I'm especially concerned with statements in the report

1:05:11that says and I quote if the routes encountered are to be assessed by the project arborists

1:05:23and the project arborists determined that the extent of route pruning is required and based on

1:05:29the findings other treatments may be required and in bracket these treatments include crown

1:05:36reduction and tree removal. So that could possibly happen that the tree can be removed

1:05:45and so that concludes my my my comments. In summary the two important points I wanted to

1:05:57make is that we are still lacking information in terms of a holistic review and secondly

1:06:04what securities are taken by the city in order to ensure proper preservation and protection of this

1:06:13great general one actually. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. If you want to

1:06:20stand by for a moment I'll see if any of the committee members have any questions for you.

1:06:25Committee members do we have any questions of this delegate? Seeing none thank you very much for

1:06:34your very concise delegation. I've made some notes and I'm sure the proponent has as well

1:06:43and I'm sure these will be addressed in the fullness of our meeting so thank you very much

1:06:48and if you'd like to continue to view our meeting online I'd encourage you to do so.

1:06:55Madam Secretary Treasurer do we have another delegate? Chair Smith yes we do the next delegate

1:07:02is Jamie Miller and that individual is appearing via video as well. Thank you.

1:07:12I see you there can you state your name for the record please. My name is Jamie Miller.

1:07:17I'm welcome and you have 10 minutes to address the committee. Thank you chair and thank you

1:07:25committee I appreciate the opportunity to reconvene and discuss this this topic. Similar to Shirley I'm

1:07:32representing both a neighbor and I'm also a global director of Biomemigrary for an international

1:07:38design firm where we are seeking to build more regenerative designs across the world so I also

1:07:45have a PhD in engineering with a specific interest in hydrology. I think to speak on that global

1:07:52level as we're all aware the tree canopy the ecological services that it provides mount in the

1:07:58trillions of dollars in North America so within our city it offers ecological services as Shirley

1:08:04mentioned like rain dissipation, temperature control, stormwater management, many ecological

1:08:11services so I think we all understand the importance of this tree not just as an individual tree but as

1:08:16a part of an ecosystem it's also interconnected through its root systems other trees into the

1:08:21health of the ecology. I want to mention I've been in great contact with the applicant we've had some

1:08:29great dialogue he's continued to seek my advice and input and as I've mentioned to him the with

1:08:39the updated design my biggest concern stands with the grading. Shirley mentioned too that this is a

1:08:46two-dimensional plot if you've seen the site there's a two meter drop between the bottom of the tree

1:08:56and the depression where the building is being proposed and it's in this pretty intense little

1:09:01valley so a lot of the stormwater that doesn't come through the tree will end up pooling or

1:09:07heading in that direction and then the natural grade is actually to the back of the property

1:09:11it's a very steep decline from the sidewalk on Herne Avenue and so my concern is that if we are

1:09:20to build on that specific plot we're going to be infilling if we're infilling we're going to be

1:09:28putting obviously fill over top of the roots and if you could share the photo that I provided

1:09:38is that available? Just a moment they're working on it here we are. Excellent.

1:09:45So you can see that the tree canopy in a lot of the in the reports shows that the drip line is

1:09:51well within the boundaries but you can see that that is at the edge of the property and you can see

1:09:56the edge of the tree the drip line reaching over almost into the other property so recognizing

1:10:02that the drip line represents like traditionally the radius of the roots and right behind that

1:10:10fence is where that large depression is it's two meters below the bottom of the tree so a pretty

1:10:16significant grade so and this is where the proposed driveway would be in about that area so as I

1:10:23mentioned my biggest concern is infilling that covering those feeder roots which are at the

1:10:29surface and you recognize too that they're at the surface because that's where there's most

1:10:35organic matter it's also where they get some warmth and they also get access to the water so if

1:10:40you bury those feeder roots you're taking away that opportunity for those key ingredients to life

1:10:46the food the water and the warmth it also means that the water I'm not even sure where the water

1:10:53would grade to if it's like a steep slope off the driveway would you push the water and continue it

1:11:00back to the back of the lot and if that were the case there's a general concern in this area that

1:11:05there's already flooding you may be familiar with 87 herne which is just down the street

1:11:12down downstream I'll call it downgrade it put in additional rental unit in the backyard and with

1:11:20their construction they noticed that the water level is very high that they actually had to put in

1:11:25a drainage pit and use some low impact designs to deal with that water so we're we're up closer to

1:11:32the property the applicants property and so I'm as I'm afraid that there's going to be

1:11:36overland flow and water drainage that will continue to flood our backyards and my backyard is also

1:11:43it it is pretty pretty wet as it stands so cutting that tree down would take away

1:11:49that dissipation that that tree canopy is providing so the rain would hit harder

1:11:53it would flow faster and because the roots weren't there there's no absorption rate

1:11:59that there is today so it's having a pretty significant impact on maintaining the stability

1:12:04of our ecosystem and I think I just want to highlight that this this project we need to

1:12:09think in terms of systems not just in terms of the isolated applicants property and so I think

1:12:16that's what we're representing the last two things I'll mention is that in conversation with the

1:12:20applicant I suggested that the most effective I'd say the most effective compromise would be to put

1:12:30the house on the west side of the property fronting Chadwick where it's out of that drip line where

1:12:38kind of works better with the grade and he did propose that to the city and the city apparently

1:12:45said that you cannot do that but did not give any reason so he's forwarded my concerns to the city

1:12:51I still haven't returned or heard back so that's one one thing I'd like to know why we couldn't do

1:12:57a frontage on Chadwick the other conversation we had is you know the safest way to deal with this

1:13:04is to put some sort of liability like a five-year or ten-year liability on the homeowner

1:13:11that if the tree were to die or to get sick that he would be liable as they do in other cities

1:13:16including Toronto and he said that he proposed that to the city and the city said no so those

1:13:22I think as a compromise I guess to summarize my biggest concern is drainage the water and my two

1:13:30solutions are frontage on Chadwick and and a liability as potential options which I have

1:13:35not received a response from so I will end there but I appreciate the time thank you very much and

1:13:43great comments I've taken note of some as I believe my colleagues have and as will the proponent so

1:13:51if you want to continue watching and follow the discussion you're free to do so and we want to

1:13:57thank you sincerely for your for your comments committee members do you have any questions of

1:14:02this applicant seeing none again thank you very much Jamie oh sorry uh member ballaban

1:14:14through you uh mr chair I'm looking at the site plan that we were provided and there is

1:14:22some elevation shown on here and I'm not there's a dip at the very I guess the southwest corner

1:14:32of the property like down you know maybe 319 like you know maybe a half a meter maybe difference

1:14:43to the top corner where the tree is but not that not that drastic that you seem to be

1:14:52describing I don't know I I maybe I'm just looking at the elevation shown on the site plan here

1:15:00yeah if I direct you to the the the east side of the property there's a spot

1:15:07a spot elevation near the tree that says 321 28 yeah and if you go directly south

1:15:14to the edge of the tree line you can see 319 70 so I think that's the great I'm talking about

1:15:23and when I stood there when I walked the property with the with the landowner I'm six foot two and

1:15:30I cannot see the sidewalk so I just want to put it into perspective that when I'm looking east

1:15:34towards the sidewalk on her I could not see it so it's a depression that's about two meters

1:15:40from the sidewalk as well so you mean the sidewalk on on her that's correct yeah oh okay all right

1:15:49but it's also it's kind of a equal elevation if I'm looking north the tree is the base of the tree

1:15:56is about the top of my head when I'm standing in that depression okay okay thank you for the

1:16:01clarification it just you know when you're on the road I didn't walk into the site I was on the road

1:16:09walking on the side and I just didn't see that drastic of a difference in elevation

1:16:16it makes it hard to judge right when you're looking at it from the perspective that we sometimes

1:16:23look at it yeah and then I look at this elevation on the on the site plan here and it doesn't look

1:16:31that drastic but I guess when you're standing in it if there is that kind of a drop off

1:16:40okay I appreciate it thanks yeah thanks for the comment and question no thank you for the question

1:16:49any other questions of this delegate seeing none madam secretary treasurer do we have any other

1:16:58delegations chair Smith I can confirm we haven't received any online delegation requests unless

1:17:06there's others in the audience I was just going to ask again of the gallery if there's anyone

1:17:12who wishes to speak to this application seeing none I think but at this point it would be respectful

1:17:21to turn it over to the applicant to answer any questions that have been raised by the two delegates

1:17:27thank you I appreciate Jamie's been Jamie the one that just spoke has been working with our

1:17:37our client with the property or mark quite a bit on these things and yes we mark gave me that idea

1:17:44of putting the house on the west side and I bounced that off planning staff and they felt like it was

1:17:49would would not be appropriate in terms of planning perspective and they didn't support that so

1:17:54I felt like well then we shouldn't go there

1:17:59mark has offered this idea of a bond idea but that's not a the city doesn't I understand I don't

1:18:04I'm not just mark has told me that or maybe Jamie mentioned that the city doesn't have a process to

1:18:10deal with the bond but mark is open to that idea if there can be a reasonable process to that

1:18:19we've talked about the grades and so on a little bit I had some of our staff look at the

1:18:23grading a little bit and yes the draw new driveway is going to be built in that one area and will be

1:18:30will be raising grades there that's been identified on the tree protection plan that area and you know

1:18:36the roughly 10 11 percent that's going to be covered on the roots is covered and is acknowledged

1:18:44we feel that the preliminary grading looks that we've had designed we've looked is that we're not

1:18:50going to have much change to the grades especially in the vicinity of the tree

1:18:56you know what really I asked James you know it would the grading the additional grading

1:19:00information or a top of foundation really impact his decision he said no it's really the tree

1:19:05protection fence that he's put in place is the really the is the key factor and you can you can

1:19:10comment on that in a minute I just want to just say that maybe just maybe just clarify that we've

1:19:19you know james p engine got a lot of experience and so on and and the first speaker was landscape

1:19:25architect and has a lot of experience but I don't but that probably the difference is that James is

1:19:29a certified arborist and he comes with that qualification to this meeting I think that addresses

1:19:38all the things they wanted to address okay thank you um any well on else from your team want to

1:19:47address this well yeah I think uh chair to the committee through you um the the grading is important

1:19:57on our plan um we're using we're using the the information that's provided at this stage of

1:20:04of the application and development process um if it's required to have detailed grading at this

1:20:11point it would be helpful but I don't think that's a requirement so we we don't have that um but our

1:20:17plan does show where tree where tree protection fence is proposed and that is mostly outside the

1:20:24drip line of the tree um as plans get more developed we may need to alter that however I think that

1:20:34given the space on the site and the the space away the the buffer from the tree the development

1:20:42we do have some some room to move um if we have to uh grade close to the tpf or yeah I think that

1:20:53ultimately the grading is important um but I don't see it changing significantly in a way that will

1:20:59impact the tree negatively my my ultimate opinion is that this development has considered the tree

1:21:05constraint um amid all the other constraints to developing the site um and has done a fairly

1:21:14respectful job of doing that my opinion is that the the tree will um continue to thrive in its

1:21:20location with that house there um as I understand it now and I'll leave it at that okay thank you if

1:21:28you want to stand by my colleagues may have some questions so um colleagues member bellamand will

1:21:35start with you through you mr chair I just I I understand that the frontage and depth thing the

1:21:43front of a property under the zoning bylaw would be the narrower of the two under the zoning bylaw but

1:21:51if there was a variance to the to to recognize that the the wider width of the property was the

1:21:59frontage like then you could have the front facing facing uh the other property the other street

1:22:11could you not maybe staff could answer that question is that something that's been done

1:22:16before or could that rectify the issue and maybe then the house could face the other street and we

1:22:23could have the driveway away from the tree and push the house away more from the tree I'm just asking

1:22:37I'm just going to jump in here for a second and remind all including myself that this is a consent

1:22:45agenda and we're talking about a severance and so we're not we're not talking about a variance

1:22:53yes I realize that but but I'm going to allow you to to ask question certainly but I just want to

1:23:01put that out there so that we don't go down a path exactly but I mean if if we could do something

1:23:10like that to create a situation where we could move the house to a different spot on the lot and

1:23:18protect the tree I don't I don't know like I understand that you know in the zoning by law the

1:23:24narrower of the two is the front of the property and you would have your driveway off the front of

1:23:29the property etc I'm just you know trying to think of a way to make it safer for better for the tree

1:23:37totally understood and I'm not sure if staff has a comment that would that would satisfy you member

1:23:43ballaban through you mr. chair to member ballaban I think that that is something that is potentially

1:23:51an option looking at a variance route in order to permit frontage onto Chadwick I think originally

1:23:58when staff reviewed that proposal the rationale was that this proposal that you see before you today

1:24:05was one that was able to conform with both the 1995 and 2023 zoning by-laws while also preserving

1:24:11the tree given the the results of that tree inventory and preservation plan okay thank you

1:24:22thank you member ballaban and staff for that answer do we have any other questions or comments

1:24:30member Spears through you mr. chair to staff if if we approve this application for severance today

1:24:39what is the ongoing involvement with the city and the and the keeping track of the building process

1:24:48that protects the tree and the interests that have been talked about here by the delegates

1:24:59through you mr. chair to member Spears my understanding is that um we're this application

1:25:05approved with the recommended conditions um perhaps the secretary treasurer can correct me if I'm

1:25:10wrong but I believe condition 12 states that prior to the issuance of the certificate official which

1:25:15would make the severance official the owner shall enter into an agreement with the city registered

1:25:21on title agreeing to satisfy the above noted conditions and to develop the site in accordance

1:25:26with the approved plans my understanding is that the tree inventory preservation plan that was

1:25:31provided would be one of those approved plans that would that the development would have to

1:25:36remain in accordance to okay thanks member good fellow I was waiting actually I have that was a

1:25:51the last question was a perfect setup to one of mine um so I think member Spears for that uh so

1:25:57through the chair to city staff um one of my questions has is is related to um kind of this

1:26:06the idea that um um yeah sorry I've just kind of lost my thought here okay I'm going to go ahead

1:26:20with a different question I might turn or I might come back uh sorry about that um we've been talking

1:26:26here about the conditions and the one of the questions I have is has to do with the setbacks

1:26:33as limitations on the location so um I understand that we're not getting into variances and I

1:26:39appreciate that but in terms of what we are approving one of the conditions does relate to

1:26:46the construction being consistent with the general site plan that was provided as part of the application

1:26:53which then I think does kind of get to the location of the construction on the site and I'm trying to

1:27:00reconcile that with the discussion we're having about um you know variances and whether it's

1:27:07appropriate to talk about that but yet it does seem like we've got a condition here that does

1:27:12limit perhaps where the construction of the the new building would be on the site so um I guess

1:27:19I'll put that back over to to city staff um with thanks through the chair to a member good fellow um

1:27:35it the required exterior side yard on this property is six meters as shown the required

1:27:41front yard setback is only six meters and they are showing 9.1 meters um there is nothing specific

1:27:50that says it shall maintain a nine meter front yard setback but um in accordance with the sketch

1:27:58zoning staff would review that and um unless a specific condition for 9.1 meters it would need

1:28:08to be close to that setback but in general accordance means close to the plan submitted not exactly

1:28:22thank you to staff I appreciate that I think it is um then if there if there was more flexibility

1:28:31would then the applicant have the opportunity to move the building back further

1:28:39towards the rear of the property um and and I think I would have to defer to the applicant and

1:28:45their technical staff whether that would reduce that 10 percent or 11 percent um impacted area but

1:28:53it was a question I had when I'm looking at the drawings that it did seem like there was still

1:28:58more space at the back but I understand the the need for a setback from the back of the property

1:29:05so I guess yeah to clarify my question is if there was more flexibility would the could that

1:29:12could the building be moved further back on to the site um I'm going to jump in here um for a

1:29:19second and my my concern with that is um that we're acting as designers on this and it it it um

1:29:30we're really looking to uh to the applicant to uh to come forward with a proposal and as I said

1:29:37earlier this is a consent agenda item so um I'm I'm happy that the the applicant might want to

1:29:45respond to that but um and I see the owner flagging us so if if you'd like to come to the

1:29:52microphone and speak to member Goodfellow's point I'd I'd appreciate it and if if possible

1:29:59chair if I could just clarify I think my question is more just about is that condition as written

1:30:05locking things in a bit too much not that we are trying to design anything I just want to

1:30:10provide that clarification I think just thank you about walking us in to something okay thank you

1:30:18just to be clear on your comment um we've set up the rear yard now to meet the minimum rear yard

1:30:27setback it's 20 of the depth that works out to in this case 6.1 meters I'd hesitate to move it in

1:30:35you further back in terms of taking away a mani space the idea brought forward by Jamie and actually

1:30:42supported by Mark about putting the house that you orientated um uh facing Chadwick the driveway

1:30:51facing Chadwick and the house much more just completely on the west side you know the city

1:30:56staffs that just suggested knowing it creates variances incredible uh because rear yard is

1:31:02going to be one meter or one half meters instead of seven and and so on but the biggest thing is the

1:31:08the this lot will lose its amenity space behind the house if you will if you end up doing that and so

1:31:16that corner lots are always tough on those on to deal with so we were given the advice from

1:31:21city staff to move forward with the application as is and make the end if the if the tip works in

1:31:29favor of the tree then you know that's probably the best way to go and that's what we've chosen to

1:31:33move forward with did you want to add more to that my major my name is mark pension um I just wanted

1:31:46I guess make something clear to everyone um I'm not a builder per se I have built the first recycled

1:31:54plastic house in this country and I I do very unique projects the reason I'm actually at 61

1:32:02her and is because the previous owners had asked me to revitalize the property and to

1:32:08maybe put another property on there they always envisioned doing it but the owner had actually

1:32:14had a stroke or the the brother and and had asked me to take over I'm not doing this project to

1:32:22you know build the biggest house or to create you know problems with the neighbors I actually

1:32:29looked at this as a challenge to create something that that the neighborhood would actually be very

1:32:35proud of I've tried to work with the city I've offered to put up these bonds that they don't

1:32:41accept I've offered to change the layout and do things I've I with Jamie the previous person who

1:32:50spoke recommended that I be to a builder I've called that builder they suggested these they call

1:32:57I call them screw piles but these these different methods of not using footings and concrete slab

1:33:04that would actually protect even more of the property it may or may not cost more I it's

1:33:11it's not a matter of cost for me it's really about trying to create something unique for the community

1:33:18as I've been a member of this community in my family for over a hundred years so um

1:33:25I just wanted you to understand that that I'm I'm not a builder looking to throw up a house and

1:33:32and do whatever originally we wanted to maybe even just build a nice little tiny cottage

1:33:38in that area and move there I'm quite honestly right now isn't sure of that but but the idea would

1:33:45be to create a property that would fit the neighborhood as I did in another area on

1:33:51Elizabeth Street where I built a house with original Ontario red brick matched all the other

1:33:57homes didn't have to do that cost me $80,000 more than than I would have no other builder would

1:34:03but I I wanted to and I would love to be able to create something that I think the neighbors would

1:34:09be proud of and it will cost me a lot more than any other builder in this town to do because

1:34:16their bottom line is about maybe making some profit on this in my case it's creating something

1:34:23unique and to create maybe or leave a legacy because that's sort of what I'm what I like to do so

1:34:31I just want you to understand that if they said move the house back more make it only 800 square

1:34:38feet because that's all we want then that's fine I don't even have to put a basement in I don't have

1:34:43to do any of that stuff I just wanted to sever the lot create a nice little home and and hopefully

1:34:52make the neighbors proud of me and not just mad at me I guess so anyways I'm set enough so thank

1:35:01you I think that's that's helped our discussion a lot remember good fellow did you um did you

1:35:09find your thread and have come back to I guess actually I think we eventually got there I apologize

1:35:16but it's been a long day um and thank you I did have one more question and it had to do with the

1:35:24engineering notes on the drawings and the tip I read through those in quite a bit of detail

1:35:31appreciated all of the ideas that were kind of embedded in that do I I think this question is

1:35:37to city staff but do I understand that there the condition that was read out earlier um encompasses

1:35:46that tip plan so if we approve this application with that condition the requirements of the tip

1:35:54or the recommendations of the tip would be kind of come along with that condition if that makes

1:36:01sense through the chair to member good fellow that is my understanding yes um if it would make the

1:36:14committee more comfortable they could always add additional condition that that the tip be adhered

1:36:18to but my understanding is that condition that I've read out previously condition 12 would would cover

1:36:23that off yes yes thank you for that clarification because you went exactly where I uh I thought

1:36:33this might go um and was going to ask whether a condition that um you know said something to the

1:36:42effect that this construction would have a consistent with the tip and again recognizing that there

1:36:48are probably site conditions we're not aware of at this time um you know might be an appropriate

1:36:54condition to add pending of course the feedback from the applicant um that's that's very good I'll

1:37:04ask the applicant um would that be something that a condition that you'd be willing to accept

1:37:12can you clarify I mean I feel like condition 12 takes care of it uh and and and that's uh that's

1:37:18been that's been clear did you want to add more to that you may re uh re explain what you wanted

1:37:24to add in addition to that condition 12 because I think it takes care of it member good fellow did

1:37:31you want are you satisfied with condition 12 or did you want to expand upon that I'm madly reading

1:37:44sorry can you repeat that please I'm I'm reading very quickly sorry I haven't read through condition

1:37:5012 in a lot of detail so yes no I think that does cover it um perhaps then if I could be

1:37:58if I could add one edit to condition 12 um in accordance with the approved plans including

1:38:05the tip okay so um once we have a motion in front of this um that'll give you a few moments to word

1:38:14Smith that I I would hope yes thank you you're welcome um committee members do we or member

1:38:22good fellow did you have any other any points you'd like to cover no no I'm thank you thank you and

1:38:32yeah member stairs yeah um when I was reviewing this my I think my main concern was like

1:38:40member good fellows that you know the tip provided a lot of a lot of you know good ideas and and

1:38:51construction techniques that were referred to and and I was a bit concerned that the um

1:38:55condition recommended by planning staff only indicated that the the site plan in the tip would be

1:39:02um would be followed so yeah I I'd like to see and maybe you know maybe adding that

1:39:09addition to condition 12 is sufficient but I wonder in the second condition if we should also

1:39:16recognize there that you know construction will be generally in accordance with the technique set

1:39:21out in the tip um very good point yeah any other questions questions of the applicant okay uh at

1:39:37this point um I'm going to ask for a motion and we can word Smith this motion um uh based on the

1:39:46comments from member stairs and member good fellow so uh committee members do we have um a motion

1:39:53that we'd like to propose yes members may I ask one more question of the applicant please please

1:40:03sorry yeah I just I thought of this but it goes back to the discussion on on grading and um

1:40:12mr miller's concerns about um you know what water water flows and I just looking at the

1:40:19the driveway in its position um and I don't know if the applicant can answer this yet but

1:40:25do do we know what the construction of the driveway would be or is it possible that it

1:40:30could be permeable or semi permeable materials we'll take that that's a good comment we'll take

1:40:36that back uh we we have done a bit of preliminary grading look at this thing and we feel uh that

1:40:44be very little change of the grades in the area closest to the trees um but we could take that

1:40:51back in terms of making it impermeable or permeable I mean we can look at that you know

1:40:56look at the options there but we haven't designed that yeah I assume that'll be looked at during

1:41:02design though thank you thank you and I'm just uh I just want to follow up with staff on that point

1:41:09I I know we're getting into the weeds a little bit but I think it's important um

1:41:14um recommending permeable pavers as a condition is that outside the scope of a consent agenda

1:41:23like are are we getting into how to build the building uh through you mr chair um typically

1:41:36these aren't that isn't a type of condition that we would include in a consent application um

1:41:41theoretically if the committee wishes that that can be included but that isn't ordinarily a condition

1:41:46that's entertained okay well I I guess we can hash that out amongst ourselves once we have a motion

1:41:53thank you that's helpful um member ballin band did you have a comment well I mean the whole permeable

1:42:04driveway I mean you know using pavers is not not a bad idea and I doesn't sound like the

1:42:13applicant would be that adverse to it look he's doing this so he's not going to appeal us on it

1:42:19necessarily so maybe we should give it a shot okay so uh at this point I think uh we've oh yes

1:42:28please go ahead I'd just be careful on the wording of that we just want to make sure it's you know

1:42:34reasonable that's why I like the wording and condition too in general conformity it gives a

1:42:39touch of like gives some flexibility and I just it it always scares me to throw in a condition like

1:42:44oh is that going to be possible right and and I'm sure there's probably five half a dozen

1:42:50different options to make it that you can drain a bit into the end to the uh into the ground and

1:42:55we might find some experts say you know what that's not even a good idea so I we just don't know enough

1:43:01about it at this moment now and through you mr chair the the permeable pavers might if they're

1:43:06if those roots are that at the surface they may pop them up or who you know it's true okay I think

1:43:20we've um had a good discussion on this I've been interested and I've been interested in uh how respectful

1:43:29the public has been to this process so I want to thank the delegates as well as the

1:43:36applicant on on their decorum committee members do we have a motion member sears

1:43:50beers yes I I uh I move that we uh approve this application with the the conditions suggested

1:43:59by city staff with the here to the discussion the ongoing discussion about the maybe a minor

1:44:06change to to uh number 12 but I'd like to to get the motion put forward that we will approve this

1:44:12with the conditions largely yes they stand that's good and do I have a seconder member bellarmine

1:44:22okay I'm going to open it up for discussion within the committee and um member good fellow did you

1:44:29want to propose a friendly amendment to this um motion that we have before us

1:44:38yes so I think I would like to propose uh subject to word smithing by my colleagues

1:44:45that we change condition 12 to read that prior to the issuance of the certificate of official the

1:44:52owner shall enter into an agreement with the city registered on title agreeing to satisfy the above

1:44:57noted conditions and to develop the site in accordance with the approved plans including the tip

1:45:06I'm going to ask the mover the motion if they're if they find that acceptable that's completely

1:45:13acceptable to me thank you and I've provided the the applicant agrees that that's within the realm

1:45:19you anticipated you cut my grass I'm going to ask the applicant if they're in favor yes yes we are

1:45:26in favor thank you uh madam secretary treasurer do need a seconder for that amendment um Mr chair

1:45:35since you asked the mover and they were okay with that I think we're okay we've got that

1:45:40revised wording noted great thank you just want to make sure our parliamentary procedure

1:45:46and robots rules of order apply um is there any further discussion on the motion we have before us

1:45:54um I just want to make a a a couple of comments I am going to be supporting this motion I want to

1:46:06again thank the the public for being respectful and participating with the applicant and I want

1:46:16to thank the applicant for work and staff for working together on um saving this tree if this was

1:46:23a rig we've gone through a couple of others um consent agendas today that you know it's relatively

1:46:31generally a straightforward process and um I think staff and the applicant have gone over and above

1:46:40in order to save a very significant tree as the first uh delegate came in and said that as a

1:46:48landscape architect she had never seen such a magnificent example and anybody watching at home

1:46:55who hasn't seen this tree uh owes it to themselves to see this and I I want to thank the applicant for

1:47:04their patient in patients in taking a year to come back to us so thank you and I will be supporting

1:47:11this uh this proposal as amended. Madam Secretary Treasurer unless there are any other comments I'd

1:47:19like to call the vote. Thank you Chair, Committee Members please indicate your vote by responding

1:47:26in favor or opposed to the motion which is to approve the application with the conditions recommended

1:47:32by staff with that minor change um in warning to condition number 12. Chair Smith. In favor.

1:47:41Member Balaban. In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor.

1:47:48Member Membranio. In favor. Member Seyer. In favor. And Member Spears. In favor.

1:47:56That's carried Mr. Chair. Thank you Madam Secretary Treasurer your application has

1:48:01been approved and you're free to leave the meeting. Thank you Committee. Thank you.

1:48:08Madam Secretary Treasurer I think that has more or less wrapped up our our agenda for this evening.

1:48:17Do you have any announcements? Mr. Chair I do not. I do have a couple of announcements

1:48:25based on a meeting that I and Deputy Chair Seyer attended last week and it's it was sponsored by

1:48:38the city and it's about the makeup of Citizens Advisory Committees and the city is going through

1:48:46a process to to change the government's governance and framework of that and I wanted to alert

1:48:53um uh my colleagues not only did we attend this meeting and participate but that essentially what

1:49:01the city is looking at is um maybe expanding the scope of some committees and reducing the number

1:49:13of others from down from seven to ten uh committees uh Citizens Advisory Committees in 2025.

1:49:22Um I guess the um three important points that they've reminded me of is um how our committee might

1:49:33change and being a committee of adjustment we have um if we're constituted we have delegated authority

1:49:42from the city council and unless they want to pull that and take that back so we have um once we're

1:49:51constituted we have a number of rules that we have to follow and um our secretary of treasurer and staff

1:49:58keep us on those rules very well um but what we can do is we can either continue as we are

1:50:06or we can adapt the topic and combine with other a c o c's. For example the chair and vice

1:50:15chair the committee suggests they might work on property standards for this is something that

1:50:20we discussed um that wouldn't be at our normal committee of adjustment meeting it would be

1:50:27at one of the additional meetings that we often have but don't always take advantage of

1:50:34or given the uh given the scope of the meeting perhaps at the end um and then there is the

1:50:42shift to other forms of community engagement and um for example uh property and building

1:50:52commemorating they could shift to other other formats so um I will send out individually to

1:51:04my colleagues what I've been shared with with the advisory committee and I'd like to have you put

1:51:09your thinking caps on if there's something that you'd like to see wouldn't be confer confined to us

1:51:16it could be any of the other committees as well but uh that way you can share it with the clerk's

1:51:22office directly and uh we wouldn't necessarily have to have that conversation but uh I suppose we

1:51:30could if we had a workshop uh at a future date um Greg do you have anything you'd like to add?

1:51:36um no I think that's a good summary and the um the working group that's been on this has been

1:51:43doing a lot of a lot of good work on this and they've got a lot of good ideas and you know I

1:51:48think the I think their general um their general goal to you know kind of reduce reduce the number

1:51:57of committees that the city may have and streamline them I think that's that's a good thing and I do

1:52:02think there's some scope for other activities we could take on there's definitely some some committees

1:52:10where I don't think we we could take them on just because potential conflicts but um but no I think

1:52:15they're doing good work and I'm looking to see what their ultimate recommendations are yeah there

1:52:21was some comment about perhaps us being involved with planning but I think you raised the issue

1:52:27quite wisely that um there would be a conflict of interest if we engaged in that

1:52:34with that unless you have any questions for me um is the end of my agenda um Madam Secretary

1:52:41Treasurer um I guess I'm looking for a motion to adjourn all those in favor we stand adjourned thank

1:52:50you ladies and gentlemen