Committee of Adjustment

1:50Good afternoon, Guelph. I'd like to call to order the November 9th, 2023 hearing of the

1:56Guelph Committee of Adjustment. This hearing is being held in a hybrid format with attendees

2:02appearing in person or remotely and is being live-streamed and recorded. Please be advised that

2:08public hearings form part of the public record and the words, names, and images of those participating

2:15shall be recorded and posted online. I have confirmed with the Secretary-Treasurer

2:20that we have quorum to proceed this afternoon. Before I outline the hearing format, if you

2:26wish to speak to an application that's listed on the agenda and have not yet submitted a request

2:32in advance of the hearing, please call the number displayed on the screen now, which is

2:37519-822-1260 extension 2524. That's 519-822-1260 extension 2524. And you'll receive instructions

2:53on how to participate. A final call for delegations will be made when each application is called.

3:00The agenda for this hearing has been posted online at

3:03guelph.ca forward slash c-o-f-a. I will remind committee members and staff participating in

3:13the hearing to please mute your microphones when not in use. Applications will be unmuted

3:19when their application is called. I'd also like to share the hearing format we will be

3:26using to navigate through each application today. Each application will be called by the

3:31Secretary-Treasurer and the call-in number for those wishing to speak to an application

3:36will be displayed on the screen. Afterwards, the applicant will be given an opportunity to add

3:42anything further to their application to a maximum of 10 minutes. You will hear a chime when there

3:48is 30 seconds left and another when the 10 minutes has elapsed. If you are an applicant

3:56and have nothing further to add, you can simply say so. The committee will then be able to ask

4:02questions of the applicant and or staff. After that, we'll hear from members of the public

4:08who wish to comment on the application. Please note that all comments should be addressed through

4:14myself the chair. Please avoid repeating concerns already stated by others and focus on adding new

4:20information through the discussion. Comments are limited to 10 minutes or less. You will hear a

4:26chime when there is 30 seconds left and another when 10 minutes have elapsed. Any member of the

4:36public who have submitted a request to speak prior to the hearing will be the first invited to provide

4:43comments. For those watching the hearing online, if you wish to speak to an application and have not

4:50submitted a request to the hearing, please call the number displayed on the screen now.

4:56For those attending the hearing in person, you will also be given a chance to come forward to the

5:00podium and address the committee. Once all comments from the public have been heard, the applicant or

5:07staff will be given the opportunity to respond to comments. Finally, as the chair, I will turn to

5:13the committee for a motion and deliberations as well as a vote on the application. When the committee

5:21is making our decision on an application, I shall be asking the secretary treasurer to conduct the

5:28vote by roll call. The secretary treasurer will call each of the members names and each member

5:34shall respond if they are in favor or opposed to the motion and the chair will announce the

5:40result of the vote. If you wish to receive a copy of the decision of an application, including

5:47information about the appeal process, you must submit a written request. A written request can be made

5:55by contacting staff using the contact information shown now on the screen. To receive a copy of

6:02the decision, please email cofa at gwealth.ca with your name and the file number you're interested in.

6:12Please note that owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

6:19At this point, I shall read the territorial acknowledgement. As we gather, let us take

6:28time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in gwealth, a city built over rich indigenous

6:34histories. We are guests here and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land,

6:41the people who live here today, and the generations to come. If our actions today can move us forward

6:48towards reconciliation, we should take a pause and make those decisions with intention and with

6:55gratitude. This place we call gwealth has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for

7:01many peoples over the time, but more specifically the Attawondrak and the Hanasag, whose land is

7:09held as treaty lands and the territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

7:15Gwealth lies directly adjacent to the Haldeman track and is part of the long established

7:20territory, pardon me, long established traditional hunting ground of the sixth nation of the Grand

7:27River. Many First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people have come from across Turtle Island to call

7:34gwealth home. At this point, I'd like to know if there are any members of committee who have

7:49need to express pecuniary interest. Seeing none, committee members, I need a move, a motion to

8:03accept the minutes of the last meeting. Members, sayers, and seconded by member Goodfellow,

8:10all in favor, and that has carried. I've confirmed with the Secretary of Treasure that we do have a

8:20deferral request, and I shall at this point turn over the meeting to our Secretary of Treasure,

8:26Madam Secretary of Treasure. Thank you, Chair. It was noted on the revised agenda that staff is

8:33recommending deferral of file B-21-23 for 601 Scottsdale Drive to allow time for staff to

8:41review the submitted pre-submission application and to allow the applicant to meet with staff and

8:46provide details on how the lands will be accessed and how they intend to satisfy parking requirements.

8:52I do understand that the agent is in attendance via video this evening, so I'll leave it to you,

8:59Mr. Chair, to ask if that applicant is present. Thank you, Madam Secretary of Treasure. Do we

9:07have the applicant online? Hello and welcome. Can you state your name and your relationship to the

9:14application, please? Yes, my name is Jenna Shapira, S-H-A-P-I-R-A, and I am legal counsel to the

9:22applicant. The applicant is Forum 601 Scottsdale L-P. Thank you, and can you tell me if the

9:30sign was posted as per the Planning Act? Yes, it was. And have you received and read staff's comments?

9:38Yes, I have. And I take it you're not in agreement with staff's comments, so you have

9:4510 minutes to address the committee. Please go ahead. Thank you, sir. One of the things,

9:52as a matter of process, is it possible for somebody to put up the consent to lease sketch that was

9:57attached to the application? Just one second. So it's the previous sketch. The title is Consent

10:20to Lease Sketch. I think it will be a little bit more informative. I believe it was the first

10:26attachment to the September 22nd letter. Yes, perfect. Thank you. That's it. So I think this

10:38will help to explain what I'm about to describe. So these lands, the entirety of these lands,

10:44are owned by the University of Guelph. At my client, Forum 601 Scottsdale has a ground lease

10:52that applies to the entirety of these lands. They have that ground lease today,

10:57and in fact, that ground lease allows them to develop these lands for student housing.

11:03So the purpose of this consent is to allow the University of Guelph to lease

11:15a portion of these lands, and specifically the western portion of these lands, to a separate

11:19corporate entity. So just to back up, my clients have a ground lease on these lands, and over on

11:27the eastern side, as many of you may know, there was a hotel. That hotel has now been developed

11:35for student residences, and it's complete, and it's operating, and it's there.

11:42My client now wants to develop the western side of these lands for an additional student residence.

11:53The additional student residence is going to operate as a campus. So once the second phase

11:57is developed, this entire site is going to operate together as one as one campus. So it's planned,

12:03being planned together, and in fact, my client has filed development applications for that campus,

12:10for those additional buildings to occur, and that includes shared parking and shared amenities.

12:16So it will be sort of like an extension of the existing campus. The reason my client

12:23needs a consent to lease just the western portion of these lands is because for internal

12:31organizational reasons, they need a separate corporation to actually

12:35do the development application process on the west. So it has nothing to do with the

12:41planning of the campus itself. It's a technical legal matter that my client is engaged in,

12:49and so for that reason, they need a consent to lease those western

12:53lands to a separate corporate entity because it's that separate corporate entity that is going to

12:58undertake the development process. Once the development process of those new buildings

13:03is complete, it will all come back into one ownership. So really, it's a temporary sort of

13:11situation that my client is managing and a very much a technical one. I do understand

13:20that staff have raised a concern about wanting more time, as I understand it, they're wanting more

13:26time to review the pre-submission application that my client has filed, and again, that's with

13:32relation to the development applications that they've filed to allow this extension of the

13:37campus to occur. But my position on that is that it has the zoning matters and the official plan

13:45matters, all of that is going to be dealt with for the development application process, and it

13:48actually has nothing to do with the consent for lease because the consent for lease doesn't affect

13:54the lot itself. So this isn't a consent for severance, which is what we'd often see, and

14:00obviously when there's a consent for severance, you end up having the lot get severed and that

14:05obviously gives rise to zoning issues, right, in terms of parking and lot frontages and densities.

14:12I think that's a very common thing that we see, but here it's a consent to lease, so it doesn't

14:16actually affect the underlying lauding of the site, and therefore it doesn't affect anything to do

14:23with zoning whatsoever. It's really, the consent to lease is really just a technical matter that

14:28allows my client to set up a development code to manage the development, and then at the end of

14:35the day, it's all going to come back together. So I do understand what, you know, the staff have

14:40raised this concern. I genuinely do not see it as a concern. This is not, you know, approving this

14:46consent is not going to have any impact whatsoever on the, you know, on the development application

14:51process. So that, you know, although I do hear their concerns, I think this is very much a

15:01technical matter. And so for that reason, we'd request that the consent be granted. My client

15:07is fine with the conditions that staff is proposing, but they do very much wish to move ahead so that

15:15they can get, you know, the structural, the corporate structure set up so they can get developing

15:20these lands. And again, it's all going to stay under the ownership of the University of Guelph.

15:25The two corporations that are in play here are related to one another. It's very much a technical,

15:34a technical consent. And I'm happy to answer any questions anyone has about that.

15:42Thank you very much. That's very informative. If you want to write right there.

15:49Committee members, do we have any questions of this applicant?

15:59Yes.

16:02Through the chair, I'm just curious, will both the leases be from the University of Guelph to the

16:07two different corporations? Yes, because the University, as I say, will still be the owner

16:14of the entire parcel. So the University of Guelph will effectively be in two separate leases with

16:18two separate entities that are controlled by the same, controlling line. Okay, so these aren't

16:24sub leases from your client? Okay. No, no. Okay, thank you. Are there any questions of city staff

16:36or excuse me, I'm jumping ahead. I'm wondering if there's anyone in the audience who would wish

16:42to speak to this application. I'm seeing none. Colleagues, do we have any other questions for

16:57this applicant? Seeing none, you've answered both of my questions. So at this point, I will

17:12entertain a motion just to confirm our motion can be either to defer this as per staff's request.

17:33And Madam Secretary Treasurer, do we have to address that initially or can we formulate our

17:40own motion if we wanted to approve this? To the chair, you are welcome to put whatever motion on

17:47the floor you feel. But I did also want to note just for a bit of transparency as well, too,

17:54I neglected to mention earlier that we did get correspondence after the comment deadline from

17:58the MTO, the Ministry of Transportation, in support of the application, as well as correspondence from

18:05the agent that just spoke in opposition to the deferral. And that correspondence has been circulated

18:12to the committee members and staff. So just wanted to note that as well. Thank you very much,

18:18Madam Secretary Treasurer. Colleagues, do we, member Goodfellow? To the chair, perhaps more

18:26of a question for city staff in the suggested conditions if we were to approve this application.

18:36In item number three, it talks about the, shall indicate the boundaries of the severed parcel.

18:44I just want to clarify whether it should read severed in this case or perhaps least parcel instead.

19:01To member Goodfellow through the chair, I believe the least portion would be appropriate.

19:11Okay, thank you. Any other discussion? Seeing none, I am still waiting and wondering about

19:26a motion before us. We don't have one yet. Member Sayers.

19:31I would like to move that we approve the request for consent of the two leases subject to the

19:43conditions provided by city staff. And member Sayers, does that include the

19:56notion that it would not be a severance, that it would be a lease?

20:00Yes, correct. With that change. Thank you. And do we have a seconder?

20:05Member Goodfellow, do we have any discussion on the motion before us? Seeing none, I'll turn it

20:17over to our Secretary Treasurer for a vote. Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please

20:26indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the

20:31application with the recommended conditions as outlined in the staff comments. Chair Smith.

20:38In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Hamilton. Member Pike.

20:46In favor. And member Sayer. In favor. That's carried, Chair.

20:53Your application has been approved. Is the applicant still online? Okay. Thank you very much.

21:14I'm back. You're welcome. Now you're free to leave the meeting. Thank you very much. You're very

21:19welcome. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant? The next application is file

21:35A-74 slash 23, variance to permit increased height for existing rear yard fence at 385B Starwood Drive.

21:46For those of you that are watching online that wish to speak to this application, you can do so

21:50by calling the number displayed on the screen. That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

21:58And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via

22:01phone. Is the applicant present? Can you state your name and your relationship to the application

22:14please for the record? Yes, it's Anthony and Dina Namus and we're the owners of the home.

22:21And was the sign posted as per the Planning Act? It has been posted since the date it was required

22:27and it is still on the property as we speak. Thank you. Well, you have 10 minutes to address

22:35the committee and please go ahead. So yeah, we've submitted everything to show what was done

22:43in the backyard. Basically, we have a privacy fence that I built over the pandemic, a bit of a

22:49project to keep myself from going bad. And if it shows with much detail in the drawings, it does

22:57go over that there was elevation issues. The properties in the rear of our property are actually

23:04significantly higher up. And what I say is that, I mean, their first floor is end where our second

23:09floors start. So privacy wasn't something easy to come by in that area. We did need to build a

23:15little bit higher with the fence so that people weren't looking directly into our backyard and home.

23:21And so we built the fence on top of the retaining wall that was there for drainage purposes

23:29to give us the privacy that we needed for our family and a little bit of shade as well.

23:37Well, thank you. That's very concise. Committee members, do we have any questions with this applicant?

23:49Seeing none, are there any members of the public either in the gallery or at home

23:55via the internet that would like to speak to this application?

24:01Chair Smith, I can confirm we've received no delegation requests.

24:06Thank you. Committee members, what is your pleasure? Do we have a motion for this?

24:12Member Goodfellow. I move approval of the application.

24:19And do we have a seconder? Member Pike. Is there any discussion on the motion?

24:31Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer, can you call the vote? Committee members,

24:38please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to

24:43approve the application. Chair Smith. In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor.

24:51Member Hamilton. In favor. Member Pike. In favor. And Member Sair. In favor. That's Kerry Chair.

25:01Your application has been approved. Thank you. As you can hear, our baby is very, very happy.

25:07Well, I'm glad we're able to spread a little joy to your family. Thank you for your application

25:16and your time. Thank you. Have a great day. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next

25:23applicant? The next application is file B-19-23, consent to create easement for access and parking

25:35in favor of 229 Paisley Street. I'll also note for those watching online, if you wish to speak

25:41to this application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen. That number is

25:46519-822-1260 extension 2524. And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you

25:54can delegate remotely. Thank you. Is the applicant present? Sorry about that. Yes, I'm here on behalf

26:06of the applicant. My name is Kerry Levitt. I'm legal counsel for the applicant. Thank you. And

26:12can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act? Yes, it was. Thank you very much.

26:20And have you read staff's comments and are you in agreement? I have. Well, thank you very much.

26:29And you have 10 minutes to address the committee. Great. Thank you very much, sir. I don't have much

26:36to add. We're here really just for an application for consent for an easement

26:43that is already registered on title and has been in use for some time, just to ensure that it

26:50is an application, an easement that runs with the land and perpetuity. I think it's pretty,

26:58it was a pretty straightforward application. I read through the comments of the staff and those

27:05conditions proposed. I have one minor question, comment on one of the comments, but I would be

27:13happy to first address any issues or concerns or questions that anyone had. Okay. If you want to

27:25rate with their committee members, any questions? I don't see any of my colleagues jumping in. So

27:34I'm going to have, is the neighbor in agreement with this? Yes, we have. Yes. Yes. That was my,

27:47my only question. You mentioned that you had a bit of a qualification. Oh, I just had one. If I look at

27:54the, the, the third condition that was provided by staff recommendation, it refers to a reference

28:06plan to be prepared and deposited on title. I just wanted to, to note or to confirm that that's

28:14already been done and registered on title together with the temporary easement that's on title.

28:22So I was just looking to make sure that I guess we're all on the same page in that regard that it

28:29was, it was already addressed. And I think that really that, that was really my only

28:38comment slash question as to whether it needs to be acknowledged that the, the third condition has

28:45already been satisfied. Thank you. Maybe we could have staff answer that question.

29:00Chair Smith, I can answer that question. The applicant has noted that that reference plan

29:06has been submitted. So essentially that conditions already been cleared. I think we could either,

29:13the committee can choose to leave that condition in and we can consider it cleared already or

29:18can remove it if they feel that it's necessary. Thank you. At this point, I should ask if there

29:25are members of the audience or people on the internet at home who would like to comment on this

29:33application. Chair Smith, I can confirm we've received no calls. Thank you. Committee members,

29:45what is your pleasure? Member Hamilton. I'll move for approval with the four conditions.

29:58And do we have a seconder? Member Goodfellow. Do we have any discussion on the motion in front of us?

30:14Seeing none. Madam Secretary Treasurer, can you call the vote please?

30:19Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor opposed to the

30:24motion, which is to approve the application with the four recommended conditions. Chair Smith.

30:29In favor. Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Hamilton. In favor. Member Pike. In favor.

30:37And members, chair. In favor. That's carried, chair.

30:41Thank you. Your application has been approved. You're free to leave it to me. Thank you very

30:45much. You're welcome. Thank you, everyone. Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

31:06The next application is file A-75-23, variances to permit reduced rear yard setback for proposed

31:14residential addition and reduced side yard setback for proposed balcony at 31 Margaret Street. I'll

31:21also note for those that are watching online that wish to speak to this application, you can do so

31:26by calling the number displayed on the screen. The number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524. And when

31:35you call in staff, we'll give you instructions on how you can delegate. Thank you. Is the applicant

31:42in the audience or at home? Is the applicant there? Okay. Can you state your name and relationship

31:54to the application for the record, please? Of course. Justin Kelly, last name, KELNY. I am the

32:01agent in regards to the owners for 31 Margaret Street. Thank you. And can you tell me if the

32:08sign was posted as for the Planning Act? It was. Thank you. Well, you have 10 minutes to address

32:15the committee. Well, thank you, Chair and committee. Not a lot for us to add here. Obviously, there's

32:21not any real outstanding comments from any of the staff members. But obviously,

32:28if you were to take a look at the site there, it's a very interesting unique site for the owner.

32:32And he's just trying to work with what he has there. Obviously, there's an existing

32:37addition that's within the setbacks already. So he's adding to that particular addition. And

32:42regardless really of what he could have done, he would have ended up in one of his setbacks there.

32:48So in this particular case, the addition is trying to meet the best of the abilities,

32:54trying to meet the setbacks that we can. And so the proposed addition there, although within

32:59the setbacks, hopefully is reasonable and can move forward. Okay. Thank you. Committee members,

33:11do we have any inquiries for this applicant? Member Goodfellas. I have questions for city staff,

33:24if now would be an appropriate time for that. Yes, indeed. Okay, great. So through the chair to

33:31city staff, I noted that the balcony setback in this case was about 1.3 meters versus the 2 meter

33:39zoning bylaw requirement. I also note that we have another application coming up later today

33:46with a similar distance. This application has been recommended for approval. I think the other

33:54one has not. So I guess I'm looking for some clarification, perhaps why 1.3 meters would be

34:02okay in this case, because I did look at the distances between the balcony and the house

34:09in both cases and felt that they were similar. So just trying to get some perspective, I guess,

34:15on why perhaps this application would be recommended for approval on that basis.

34:22Through the chair to minister Goodfellas, sorry, member Goodfellow, I can't necessarily speak for

35:07the other application, but I did review this one specifically. And for the proposed addition,

35:15the balcony does overlook or sorry, is oriented towards how it's street and more towards the

35:24neighbor's driveway and therefore isn't causing too much concern for, you know, distances and

35:33privacy because like I mentioned, it would be overlooking the pavement and the parking.

35:43Thank you for the clarification. I do have a question for and I'm not sure if it's the applicant

35:53or staff, but in taking a look at this property, both from the site plan and from a site visit,

36:02I wasn't entirely sure is it seems to me that the application refers to

36:11existing structure. Is that actually the case? That this is being the proposed new build is going

36:21to be on basically the footprint from the backyard of an existing structure. Is that the case?

36:33Through the chair, I'm not sure if I can answer that for you, but in regards to the addition,

36:40there is a previous what I would consider a summer kitchen on the rear of the home now.

36:46That existing structure is to be built on top of. So the existing rear, sorry, rear setback

36:54is actually an existing setback. We are just extending that setback upwards.

37:02Thank you. That clarifies. I wasn't able to get into the backyard. It seems there was some

37:08landscaping being done at the time. So I wasn't able to really get a clear understanding of that.

37:13And as I say from the site plan, I that wasn't entirely 100% clear to me. So perhaps it's my

37:21old eyes not focusing on everything. So thank you. Are there any other questions of the applicant?

37:32If not, are there any members of the audience or members of the public at home who wish to

37:38speak to this application? Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any calls.

37:47Thank you. Committee members, do we have a motion to proceed? Members, sayers.

37:56I'll move to approve the application. And a seconder.

38:05Member Hamilton. Is there any discussion on the motion in front of us? Seeing none,

38:14Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have a roll call please?

38:20Thank you, Chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or

38:24opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application. Chair Smith. In favor.

38:30Member Goodfellow. In favor. Member Hamilton. In favor. Member Pike. In favor.

38:37Member Sair. In favor. That's carried, Chair. Thank you. Is, oh yes, the applicant is still here.

38:46Your application has been approved. Thank you. I appreciate your time. You're welcome.

38:55Madam Secretary Treasurer, may we have the next applicant? The next application is file

39:05A-76-23, Variance to Permit Increased Height for Proposed Accessory Building Detached Garage

39:13at 45 Armstrong Avenue. Those of you that are watching online and wish to speak to this application,

39:20you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen. That number is 519-822-1260

39:28extension 2524. And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can

39:32delegate remotely via phone. I'll also make one other note that the variance from the 2023

39:41zoning bylaw is no longer needed and that note was placed on the comments that were circulated

39:47to the committee members as well as the comments that were posted online as the proposed height has

39:53been determined to be 3.99 meters. Thank you. Is the applicant

40:00present. Please come up to the podium. Sorry I didn't see your hand there. If you

40:21want to push the button on the microphone that's awesome. Thank you. Can you

40:24state your you're gonna need to do it again after I shut up and I think what

40:31you want to do is give us your name and your relationship to the application

40:34please. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Rob Taylor. I live at 45 Armstrong Avenue

40:42along with my wife. We are the owners of the property and we've applied for the

40:47variance. And can you tell me if the sign was posted as for the planning act?

40:56Just you're gonna need to push the button again I'm sorry. Yes today I received

41:01email this sign was on the lawn. And you've received comments from staff and

41:06are you an agreement? Yes I am. Thank you. Well you have ten minutes to address the

41:12committee. Please take as much time as you like. Well I don't know what further

41:16I can add. It was it was proposed that what I wanted to build was was okay it

41:23was just a matter of the height and my reasoning for the height was I knocked

41:31down two storage sheds in order to build this and I have a place to put my

41:36stuff. So I provided a cover letter when staff told me it would be a good idea

41:46and my reasoning was that if you if you go to around most neighborhoods and you

41:53look at garages with the doors open most of you couldn't put a car in them

41:59along with anything else they're full of everything but I didn't want to do that

42:03I wanted to have a garage that was free and clear on the main level and keep all

42:07my storage up above so I think that's all I have to add. Thank you if you want to

42:14wait right there and you we may have some questions from my colleagues committee

42:19members do you have any questions for this applicant? I don't see any questions.

42:25Madam Secretary Treasurer do we have any online or in the gallery? Chair Smith I

42:32can confirm that we've received no calls. Thank you at this point committee

42:39members I'll entertain a motion member Goodfellow. I move approval of this

42:49application with the condition as noted by city staff. Thank you and do we have a

42:54seconder member Pike is there any discussion on the motion before us?

43:02Seeing none Madam Secretary Treasurer may you call the vote? Committee members

43:12please indicate your vote by responding in favour or opposed to the motion which

43:16is to approve the application with the one recommended condition. Chair Smith

43:21in favour? Member Goodfellow in favour. Member Hamilton in favour. Member Pike in

43:29favour. Member Sair in favour. That's carried chair. Your application has been

43:36approved. Thank you very much. Thank you. Would you mind pushing the button to mute

43:42thank you again. Madam Secretary Treasurer may we have the next applicant?

43:52The next application is file B-20-23 consent to create new residential lot

44:05with one retained residential lot at 25 Alice Street. I'll also note for those

44:10watching online if you wish to speak to this application you can do so by

44:14calling the number displayed on the screen. That number is 519-822-1260

44:21extension 2524 and when you call in staff will give you instructions on how

44:25you can delegate remotely. Is the applicant present or online please come

44:32forward to the podium welcome can you state your name and your relation to

44:46the application for the record please. My name is Claudio Belbinow from the

44:53Goer Research Group we're land use planners and market analysts and we

44:57represent the registered owner of 25 Alice Street. Thank you and can you tell me

45:01if the sign was posted as yes it has been. Thank you you have 10 minutes to

45:08address the committee. Okay so the proposed severance is requested to

45:15facilitate the proposed semi-detached dwelling. The proposed severance will

45:19result in one retained residential lot and one severed residential lot. The

45:24proposed severed parcel of land with frontage along Alice Street of about 8.9

45:29meters and a depth of about 30.98 meters resulting in an area of about 275

45:35square meters. The same frontage and depth along with the area is proposed for

45:41the retained lot. The existing singles attached dwelling and grad will be

45:45demolished. Construction of the new semi-detached residential dwelling will

45:49be in conformity with the low density residential land use designation and with

45:54the zoning bylaw amendment approved by council on September 19th of this year.

45:58We have read the committee of adjustment comments from staff and agencies and

46:04acknowledged that staff have no objections to the approval of the

46:07consent. We further agree with the recommendations for approval of the

46:10consent to include all conditions outlined in the staff report. So thank you

46:15for your consideration I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank

46:19you if you'd like to wait right there committee members do we have any

46:22questions of the applicant? I don't see any at the present time. Are there any

46:30members of the public who wish to speak to this application who are in

46:35attendance or virtually? Chair Smith I can confirm we haven't received any

46:45delay or any phone calls. Thank you committee members do we have a motion

46:53member Hamilton I will move approval with the noted conditions in the staff

47:08report and we have a seconder member Sayer do we have a need discussion on the

47:21motion before us seeing none may I ask the secretary treasurer to call the vote

47:30committee members please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to

47:37the motion which is to approve the application with the recommended

47:42conditions chair Smith in favor member good fellow in favor member Hamilton in

47:49favor member Pike in favor and member Sayer in favor that's Kerry chair your

47:58application has been approved you're welcome Madam Secretary treasurer may

48:09have the next applicant the next application is file a-77 slash 23

48:25variances to permit increased front yard projection and reduced front yard

48:30setback for proposed porch addition and stairs 127 Glasgow Street north I'll

48:35also note for those attending online that was to speak to this application you

48:40can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen that number is 519-822 a

48:451-260 extension 2524 and when you call in staff will give you instructions on

48:50how you can delegate remotely I'll also note for the committee members as well

48:55as those in attendance that we did receive correspondence after the comment

48:59deadline from the owner with some documentation outlining the application

49:05history and drawings and those that correspondence has been circulated to

49:09the committee members as well as staff good afternoon welcome can you state

49:15your name and your relationship to the application for the record please my

49:19name is Kevin Stanton I am the applicant I live at 127 Glasgow and can you tell

49:25me if the sign was posted as per the planning act it was thank you at this

49:30point you have 10 minutes to address the committee I don't have much to say I

49:34appreciate your consideration as application we had positive and

49:40collaborative interaction with city staff planning zoning building and they

49:47resulted in staff approval we'd appreciate it approval from the committee

49:52because it'll be nice at our house for our grandchildren and I'm happy to try

49:58and answer any questions you might have well that was concise thank you

50:04committee members do we have any questions for this applicant seeing

50:11none are there any members of the audience who wish to address this or any

50:16on online chair Smith I can confirm we've received no calls thank you committee

50:26members do we have a motion on this application member good fellow I move

50:34approval of the application and do we have a seconder member Hamilton Madam

50:49secretary oh so we have a motion I wonder if there's any consideration or

50:55debate on this motion seeing none madam secretary treasurer may we have a vote

51:03committee members please indicate your vote by responding in favour or opposed

51:09to the motion which is to approve the application chair Smith in favour member

51:15good fellow in favour member Hamilton in favour member Pike in favour and member

51:23Sarah in favour that's carried chair your application has been approved you're

51:30free to leave the meeting if you wish appreciated Madam Secretary treasurer

51:40may we have the next application please the next application is file a dash 78

51:50slash 23 varying sister permit increased driveway with an increased front yard

51:55setback for proposed new residential dwelling at 27 bar in drive I'll note

52:00for those attending remotely if you wish to speak to this application you can

52:03do so by calling the number displayed on the screen 519 822 1260 extension 2524

52:11and when you call in staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate

52:14remotely good afternoon can you state your name for the record please Jeff

52:21Buseman from Van Hart and survey and your relationship to the application

52:26acting as agent for the applicant for the property owner and was the sign

52:31plus to does for the planning yes it was thank you Mr. Buseman you have 10

52:35minutes to address the committee if we could throw the sketch on perfect so

52:42this is on Varden Drive near the cutting club golf course it's kind of unique in

52:49that there's a street on the back called Simpson Way and the street on the front

52:52called Varden Drive the existing house that's been there for a long time you

52:57can see it in the light footprint there it's been there for a long time and it's

53:03being taken down and replaced with a new dwelling one of the variances that we're

53:08asking for is that the maximum front yard setback be 16.6 meters whereas the

53:16zoning bylaw asks for 10 the main reason we need to have it because of the

53:22topography of the land is quite steep rise coming in the front part and to make

53:28it work functionally the house should be set that far back that's why the old

53:33house was set that way and you can also see that the front of the house is sort

53:38of in line with the front yard of the house that you can see in the yellow

53:43shading on the drawing so that's the one request the second request because it's

53:51a relatively steep drive and it'll come in and come into the garage we'd like to

53:55have a we call hammerhead turnaround spot to make that turnaround spot possible

54:01the driveway will be 11.5 meters wide at the turnaround instead of 6.5 maximum

54:08so this is allow a car to turn around then go back down that relatively steep

54:12driveway to Varden Drive so it's a practical request for the driveway as

54:20well I'd be happy to answer any questions from the committee thank you

54:27committee members do we have any questions of the applicant no I do have

54:40one question and can we see the site plan up again please I think this is for

54:54city staff the 11 meter width I'm taking it that in or maybe it's the

55:04applicant I'm taking that the 11 meter width is from the on plan left that part

55:13of the hammerhead to plan right the other edge of the driveway is that what

55:18the 11 meters represents that's right the dark blue line yeah the arrowhead is

55:23kind of lost okay that I was just a little confused by by the 11 meters it

55:32didn't look like it was 11 meters wide at the garage but okay thank you that

55:37that's the extent of my questions committee members do we have any other

55:42questions seeing none are there any in the audience or at home on the internet

55:49who would like to speak to this chair Smith I can confirm we haven't received

55:56any phone calls thank you committee members do we have a motion member

56:05say I'd move to approve the application with the conditions noted by city staff

56:13thank you and do we have a seconder member pike we have a motion do we have

56:23any discussion on the motion before us seeing none madam secretary treasurer

56:30will you do the honors thank you chair committee members please indicate your

56:35vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion which is to approve the

56:39application with the two recommended conditions chair Smith in favor member

56:46good fellow in favor member Hamilton in favor member pike in favor and member

56:53sear in favor let's carry chair your application has been approved you're

57:00free to leave thank you madam secretary treasurer may we have the next

57:09application the next application is file b dash 22 slash 23 consent to create

57:20easement for parking and access in favor of 61 sx street for those attending

57:27online if you wish to speak to this application you can do so by calling the

57:31number displayed on the screen that numbers 519 822 1260 extension 2524

57:37and when you call in staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate

57:40remotely it's the applicant present yes good afternoon once again yes can you

57:51state your name and your relationship to the application for record plea I'm

57:55Jeff Buseman from van harten surveying I'm the agent for the for the applicant

58:01thank you and was the sign posted as per the planning act yes it was thank you

58:05have ten minutes to address the committee thank you this is we're applying for an

58:13easement so in this case there's a semi-detached dwelling in the older part

58:18of town on s6 street when this was split quite some time ago at that time there

58:24was a garage on the property and you can see that in that dashed line that says

58:31part 350 a 61 hour 57 37 that garage has been long since removed and a fence was

58:40constructed and the parking happens for these two units just in front of the

58:46fence so the parking for number 61 is to the right and then house 61 is to the

58:53left on the drawing there and then identified the parcel receiving the

58:58benefit of the easement and then the person that lives at 59 parks close to

59:06the house so is the parking spot on the left so in this case the request is for

59:11the parking easement on to benefit house number 61 you can see it in that box

59:18it's not that big three three meters wide two and a 2.4 meters deep it's just

59:25to add the property 59 s6 recently changed hands and part of the arrangement

59:31of the transfer was to clean this clean this matter up this is more of a

59:35technical thing administrative thing more than anything else thank you

59:42committee members do we have any questions of the applicant seeing none

59:49are there any members of the audience or at home who wish to speak to this

59:54application chair Smith we do have one registered delegate for this file on

1:00:05there are to be attending in person I'm not sure if they're in the audience the

1:00:09name is Brian shook oh please come forward good afternoon can you state

1:00:26your name for the record please Brian shook I was the vendor we sold 59 s6

1:00:33Street August 24th of this year that instigated this whole process and I'm

1:00:38the one paying for it so you have 10 minutes to address the committee if you'd

1:00:44like to take advantage of that just to mention historically this the garage

1:00:48that the original easement allowed for has been missing for or been removed from

1:00:53the property for about three decades the existing fence that instigated the

1:01:00easement did exist before my purchasing now but when I purchased I had a young

1:01:08dog that required a new fence be built so when I sold my purchasers been lawyer

1:01:15decided to bring this all up to date so other than that there's no comments

1:01:21me and looks like city staff understands the situation thank you thank you and

1:01:30wait right there and see if my colleagues have any questions committee

1:01:34members do we have any questions of this gentleman seeing none thank you very

1:01:42much for your qualifications thank you do we have any other people who would

1:01:51like to speak to this application chair Smith I can confirm we've received no

1:01:59other calls thank you at this point committee members I would entertain a

1:02:07motion member good fellow I move approval of the application with the

1:02:15conditions as noted and we have a seconder member Hamilton is there any

1:02:24discussion on the motion before us seeing none madam secretary treasurer may

1:02:32we have a vote please thank you chair committee members please indicate your

1:02:38vote by responding in favor opposed to the motion which is to approve the

1:02:42application with the four recommended conditions chair Smith in favor member

1:02:49good fellow in favor member Hamilton in favor member Pike in favor and member

1:02:56sear in favor that's carried chair your application has been approved thank you

1:03:02you're welcome madam secretary treasurer may we have the next applicant the next

1:03:17and final application is file a dash 79 slash 23 variances to permit increased

1:03:24height for proposed accessory building detached garage with second floor

1:03:27dwelling unit and reduced side yard setback for proposed balcony at 37

1:03:32manor crescent for those that are watching remotely if you wish to speak to

1:03:36this application you can do so by calling the number displayed on the

1:03:39screen the number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524 and when you call in staff

1:03:47will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone I'll also

1:03:51note for the committee members as well as those attending that correspondence

1:03:54was received after the comment deadline from the owner with some background and

1:03:58photos of neighboring properties and that correspondence has been circulated to

1:04:02the committee members and staff thank you welcome can you state your name for

1:04:09the record please and your app your relationship to the application my name

1:04:14is Jim Cochran coch R&E and my wife Kimberly and I are the home owners

1:04:20thank you and can you tell me if the sign was was displayed as per the planning

1:04:26act yes it was well thank you you have 10 minutes to address the committee if I

1:04:34may just put up the the letter to the committee of adjustments I appreciate

1:04:39that just to demonstrate manor park crescent in the neighborhood some of the

1:04:44structural design within the area so but so welcome to 37 manor park crescent

1:04:54and our old University neighborhood as many are seeing our neighborhood

1:04:58continues to grow and change many of the bungalows are either being demolished

1:05:02or renovated with large three thousand square foot homes being placed on them

1:05:07in the University area we've lived on manor park crescent since 1996 but my

1:05:15wife Kim grew up on manor park crescent and her parents still remain on manor

1:05:20park crescent at 34 manor park crescent for over 60 years as our parents age it's

1:05:25a high priority for us to continue to support another this document will show

1:05:30the diversity of homes on manor park crescent Edinburgh Road and Water Street

1:05:34the back my property so the first one is is my home photo number two is looking

1:05:41down from my driveway through my backyard up towards my neighbor on Water

1:05:47Street of note is it if note is that this house is approximately four feet

1:05:52higher than my bungalow and due to due to the slope of the property photos three

1:06:00and four show the side from my driveway view to my side neighbor at 35 manor

1:06:11park crescent and it demonstrates the view of the proposed balcony and the

1:06:16natural privacy screen from this large cedar tree that it will provide in

1:06:21discussion with our neighbors Raza and Ordon left steam they've stated they

1:06:25have no concerns with the variance requested photo five photo five is taken

1:06:34of is a mirror of the second photo I showed you looking up my driveway to the

1:06:41house behind this gives you a different representation of the house behind me

1:06:46and you'll see down through the house and their shed is the roof line of my

1:06:51property and their home their roof line is about four feet above mine photo six

1:06:58is a house next door to that which it has a two-story is two stories high and

1:07:06would also be four feet above mine based on grade and the next four photos are

1:07:15homes directly on Manapark Crescent demonstrating the diversity of design

1:07:19and structural heights on our street the first photo photo seven is my in-laws

1:07:26home Robert and Audrey Burns at 34 manapark crescent across the street photo

1:07:33eight photo eight is the manor estates at 25 manapark crescent that were built

1:07:4013 executive homes around a 9,000 square foot manner photo nine is 20 manapark

1:07:50crescent another two-story side split and photo 10 the last photo is at the

1:07:58corner of Edinburgh Road and manapark crescent this is 16 manapark crescent so

1:08:03hopefully this gives you a visual representation of the diversity of

1:08:08design and structural height on and around manapark crescent the old

1:08:12university area is changing each month as another house is having an addition or

1:08:16renovation done or being demolished for larger homes we're asking for your

1:08:21support to be able to build a separate two-car garage with a carriage house

1:08:25above as an in-law suite for my wife's parents Robert and Audrey Byrne who would

1:08:30be selling their home at 34 manapark crescent and moving into the carriage

1:08:34house thank you thank you if you want to wait right there we may have some

1:08:42questions for you committee members do we have any questions of this applicant

1:08:46member good fellow through chair I think to city staff in this case so I kind of

1:08:58gave a premonition earlier what my question here was going to be but it is

1:09:02about the balcony and the comments from city staff related to the distance from

1:09:07the property line I note that it would be 1.5 meters and trying to understand I

1:09:12guess in this case perhaps how is this should this be viewed in light of the

1:09:18previous application and I recognize that they are not related but yet they

1:09:22have some similarities and I'm just trying to understand the difference thank

1:09:25you to member good fellow through the chair in this particular case the

1:09:35location of the accessory dwelling unit and and garage is more towards the rear

1:09:42of the property and staff believe there would be more potential for overlook into

1:09:48the rear yard of the adjacent property also in addition staff have noted that

1:09:55there may be additional variances needed and were noted in the comments the

1:10:00gross floor area of the accessory building exceeds 80 square meters so

1:10:06that would be caught prior to building permit and may necessitate may necessitate

1:10:11necessitate sorry additional variances and also the height sorry of the building

1:10:26very clearly in the zoning bylaw says the height of the building may be a

1:10:31lower so that that would be something else that staff would be hoping to discuss

1:10:36with the applicant thank you to city staff and I guess a follow-up question

1:10:44back through the chair to city staff I did kind of take a look at the

1:10:50orientation of the balcony relative to the property line at both sites and

1:10:54noted that they were both perp and perpendicular where it would be the

1:10:58short end of the balcony that was towards facing the property line whereas

1:11:04the the balcony would move away across the site but perpendicular to the

1:11:10property line so I guess I'm just my interpretation and please correct me if

1:11:17I'm wrong is that even though it yes that it is actually the orientation is

1:11:24quite similar to the other one that we saw where the balcony would be facing the

1:11:28property rather than facing the the neighbor and I just wanted to confirm

1:11:33that I did understand that correctly to the members of the chair in the drawing

1:11:41it does show that the balcony is is sort of more to the neighbors or to sorry to

1:11:47the center of this property again I think the location of the overall

1:11:56location the accessory structure more in the rear of the site is what caused

1:12:01concern for staff okay thank you I okay I'll take a look at the drawing for the

1:12:12other one again because I my my interpretation is that it actually is

1:12:15quite similar in that depending on which way the others you look at the

1:12:20orientation at the other side you know that that balcony was also kind of

1:12:25tucked back into the corner so yes I'll consider that but thank you for that

1:12:30clarification I appreciate it do we have any other questions for this

1:12:37applicant or for city staff member Hamilton yeah it's a question that popped

1:12:47in for the applicant now based on the city staff's comment there that there

1:12:50may be a need for another variance can you provide any comment on that floor

1:12:55area whether you'll exceed it for member Hamilton through the chair yes the

1:13:04original variance application actually tried to address that and through the

1:13:08preliminary zoning review the additional residential dwelling unit was deemed to

1:13:13be seventy nine point seven square meters and therefore it complied and

1:13:17that's why you're not seeing one of the variances being based on that building

1:13:21size so that's one of the concerns for city staff that they brought forward but

1:13:27I think it was addressed or I hope it was addressed through the preliminary

1:13:31zoning review and that's why it's not coming to you today as for the the post

1:13:39on the balcony not meeting the setback we're proposing to put that at one point

1:13:45five meters in line with the building because the two-car garage door if I

1:13:50brought in that post by a half a meter it would run a risk of backing into it or

1:13:55striking it with a vehicle the post also on the balcony sits in line with my

1:14:02neighbor's home at 35 manor park crescent and they have no windows on that

1:14:07side and as you've seen where that balcony will reside the side of the

1:14:12balcony will be positioned where that large cedar tree is and we've already

1:14:17spoken with the neighbors about putting up privacy screening on that end of the

1:14:22balcony as well the the other variance which is the proposed height being above

1:14:28our dwelling is very difficult for us to comply with being a bungalow to have a

1:14:35two-car garage with a an additional residential dwelling above it we've

1:14:40done our very best to try and bring that down and city staff said that because it

1:14:46was above a garage we could be at 6.1 meters under one bylaw but under the

1:14:52carriage house rule it it it it didn't comply because it was you know this much

1:15:00higher than my primary residents so that's those are the two variants which

1:15:05we're requesting do we have any other questions I thought I saw members say

1:15:19no yeah I actually I have this I have a question through the chair likely to

1:15:33staff so if we were to approve this application just just to avoid the

1:15:42applicant potentially having to come back if the if the floor area is greater

1:15:49than 80 square meters could there be a condition added that that a GFA of up to

1:16:0085 square meters is permitted through the chair to member sayer I want to say

1:16:25that zoning staff is fairly confident that this was measured correctly when it

1:16:31was reviewed sounds like the owner had given the plans to Michelle and they

1:16:36would have been then measured by our berm building permit staff using the

1:16:43software that is used to measure such plans for building permit for their

1:16:50plans review so I would like to think it's I'm confident that Michelle did

1:16:56this correctly and that it meets the 80 square meters so so you're confident it

1:17:05meets the 80 square meters yes through the chair to members air I'll just add

1:17:10onto that yeah the total net for area for detached ARD use additional

1:17:19residential dwelling units there is a specific measurement for this that is

1:17:24taken it's for the net floor area it's taken from the interior of the walls the

1:17:29measurements on the plans were shown from the exterior it doesn't include any

1:17:34stairs garages landings so that's why the footprint does appear larger okay

1:17:45okay thank you do we have any other questions of the applicant or staff I

1:17:55do have a couple of questions if my colleagues will permit me I wonder if

1:18:01we could see the site plan so I'm having a little trouble deciphering this but I

1:18:25guess my question would be for the applicant given how far the proposed is

1:18:32set back from the existing house is there any reason why this accessory unit

1:18:41slash garage could not be brought forward and comply with all the conditions

1:18:47of zoning to the chair I guess there's if it were brought forward as it's brought

1:18:59forward it narrows the driveway space and not allow so much for a two car garage

1:19:06the also the the stairwell the foyer the lower four year in stairwell access from

1:19:17that garage space would then start be brought closer to our home and our back

1:19:24patio so we had placed it there to allow for privacy for the people that

1:19:31would live in the additional residential dwelling unit as well as for

1:19:35ourselves and our neighbors so you're saying that this is a privacy concern

1:19:45for the the homeowner or for the residents of the area I'm just suggesting

1:19:53that that could be one portion of it but as you see my driveway has a bit of a

1:19:58triangular

1:20:00Shape to it if I bring the building forward and with the 1.5 meter setback I

1:20:07start to lose

1:20:08Width for the driveway entering the garage

1:20:11I'm not sure that I see that but as I say I'm having a little difficulty with this site plan

1:20:21Okay, thank you very much

1:20:25Colleagues do we have any other questions of the applicant?

1:20:30Seeing none. I'm going to ask if there are any members of the gallery or at home who have any questions

1:20:36For or wish to address this application

1:20:44Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any delegation requests. Thank you very much

1:20:51Committee members, what is your pleasure? Members say or

1:21:14I'd move that we approve the application. Do you have any conditions on that motion?

1:21:25I'm just I'm looking to see

1:21:29It wasn't really clear to me from the comments if the staff had any conditions they would apply if we were to approve

1:21:39You know, there's a usual one out of building permit would be required that's

1:21:44I

1:21:46Don't see any I don't see any conditions

1:21:49That are really jumping out at me. Maybe staff could indicate if there if there are any or should be any

1:21:56Through the chair to the member through the chair

1:22:09Staff don't have any conditions to recommend

1:22:12we've had a little bit of a discussion about the

1:22:16the 80 square foot measurement so if building staff have reviewed that then I

1:22:22Think on the site plan it showed yeah the the outside walls rather the inside walls

1:22:26So if the the applicants confident and staff will work through it with them

1:22:32At the stage, okay. Thank you

1:22:36Yes, so mr. Chair, it doesn't it doesn't sound like when you do add any conditions to the to the approval

1:22:44Okay, do we have a seconder?

1:22:47Member Hamilton is there any discussion on the motion I

1:22:59Don't see any of my colleagues having any discussion, but I will not be supporting this. I can't support this

1:23:06I'm not getting a clear indication that there's been an effort to comply with zoning

1:23:13and

1:23:14given the

1:23:16the site plan and the way the

1:23:19The garage and ARD you have been designed

1:23:22From my professional experience. I believe that it could be designed in such a way as to comply with zoning

1:23:29So that's number one and number two. I can't find it minor in nature

1:23:34As it is taller than the existing structure. I recognize

1:23:40That the applicant has made reference to taller buildings a taller structures in the neighborhood

1:23:46However, that's not the point. It's

1:23:50in my understanding of our rules that this

1:23:55height is based on

1:23:57This being a secondary structure and not the primary structure and if it looms above the primary structure in my view

1:24:05This is not minor

1:24:07So I will not be supporting this application. Don't see any other additional comments. So madam secretary treasurer. Will you call the vote?

1:24:20Committee members, please indicate vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion which is to approve the application

1:24:27Chair Smith opposed

1:24:30Member good fellow in favor

1:24:33member Hamilton in favor

1:24:37Member Pike

1:24:38Opposed and member ser in favor

1:24:43That's Kerry chair

1:24:45Your application has been approved

1:24:47Thank you very much everyone. I believe that was our last

1:24:56Application man of the secretary treasurer. Do we have any announcements?

1:25:00Chair Smith, I do have one short announcement

1:25:04I wanted to give the committee a brief update on the process to fill the existing committee member vacancy

1:25:11Recruitment to fill the existing vacancy has been completed and subject to council appointment

1:25:16Hopefully the new member will be in place for the next hearing in December and that's the only announcement

1:25:22I have at this time. Mr. Chair

1:25:24That's awesome. It's good to have a new colleague and we'll have a full complement at the next meeting

1:25:30Fingers crossed as long as city council is not otherwise detained and

1:25:36My only announcement is I wish all a thoughtful remerence day this Saturday

1:25:42less we forget james yvonne and

1:25:46With that I will ask for a motion to adjourn

1:25:50member good fellow

1:25:51All those in favor

1:25:57We stand adjourned

1:25:59See you next month

1:26:01Thanks see you next month. I've just been noticed that we had not a second for that

1:26:17Can we have a second or member pike all those in favor? We stand adjourned