Committee of Adjustment

0:02I'm sure we can hear you fine.

0:04How are you?

0:44For some reason, I can't hear you though.

0:52I can hear you. I can see you.

0:56I think I better check too.

1:03It's member Allison. Can you hear me?

1:06I can hear both you and Steven and the council chambers.

1:10Okay. We can hear you or I can hear you.

1:14Good afternoon.

1:38I'd like to call to order the April 14th,

1:422022 hearing of the Guelph Committee of Adjustment.

1:45This hearing is being held remotely

1:47and is being live streamed and recorded.

1:50Please be advised that public hearings form part of the public record

1:54and the words, names, or images of those participating

1:57will be recorded and posted online.

2:00Before we proceed, I would like to ask the secretary,

2:02Treasurer, to confirm attendance of the committee members by roll call.

2:07Thank you, chair. Committee members.

2:10I'll be reading your names out loud.

2:12Chair Kendrick.

2:14Present.

2:15Member Allison.

2:17Present.

2:19Member Dykstra.

2:21Present.

2:23Member Hamilton.

2:25Present.

2:27Thank you. Member Meads.

2:29Present.

2:31Thank you. And member Smith.

2:32Present.

2:34Thank you. Chair, we have quorum.

2:37Thank you.

2:39Before I outline the hearing format,

2:42I wanted to make a note the agenda for this hearing

2:45has been posted online at guelph.ca forward slash seven slash COFA.

2:52If you want to follow along, please feel free to access it now.

2:57I will remind all committee members and staff participating in the hearing

3:01to please mute your microphones when not in use.

3:03Applicants will be on mute when their application is called by the secretary,

3:07Treasurer.

3:09I'd also like to share the hearing format

3:11we will be using to navigate through each application.

3:15Each application will be called by the secretary,

3:17Treasurer and the applicant will be given an opportunity

3:19to add anything further to their application to a maximum of 10 minutes.

3:25If you are an applicant and have nothing further to add,

3:27then you simply have to say so.

3:30The committee will then be able to ask questions to the applicant or staff.

3:34After that, we will hear from members of the public

3:36who wish to comment on the application.

3:39Please note that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

3:43Please avoid repeating concerns already stated by others

3:46and focus on adding new information.

3:49Comments are limited to 10 minutes or less.

3:53Any members of the public who have submitted a request to speak

3:56prior to the meeting will be first invited to provide comments via telephone.

4:02I've confirmed with the secretary,

4:03Treasurer that we have not received any delegation requests in advance

4:07of today's hearing.

4:09If you wish to speak to an application,

4:10have not submitted a request in advance of the hearing,

4:13you will be given an opportunity to speak by calling 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

4:24And you will receive instructions on how to participate.

4:28For each application, following the committee members' questions

4:31to the applicant or staff and any delegations that have requested in advance,

4:36we will take a three-minute break to display the call-in number

4:40for any residents wishing to call in.

4:43Once all comments from the public have been heard,

4:45the applicant or staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the comments.

4:50Finally, I'll turn the committee,

4:53I'll turn to the committee for a motion and deliberation,

4:55as well as a vote on the application.

4:58As this hearing is now being held remotely,

5:01there are some procedural changes regarding how the committee will vote.

5:05When the committee is making a decision on an application,

5:07I will be asking for the secretary treasurer to conduct the vote by roll call.

5:12The secretary treasurer will call each of the members' names

5:15and each member will respond if they are in favor or opposed to the motion,

5:19and I will announce the result of the vote.

5:23If you wish to receive a copy of the decision on an application,

5:27including information about the appeal procedure,

5:30you must submit a written request.

5:32A written request can be made by contacting staff

5:36during, I'm sorry, using the contact information showing on the screen.

5:41To receive a copy of the decision,

5:43please email cofa at goelf.ca with your name and a file number you are interested in.

5:51Please note that owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

5:57If there are technical issues during the hearing and a quorum is lost,

6:01the hearing will be recessed.

6:03If the technical issues cannot be resolved or quorum cannot be attained,

6:08applications will have to be heard by the committee

6:11will be deferred on a later hearing date.

6:16I ask member Deis to provide the First Nations acknowledgement.

6:30Thank you, I'm honored.

6:32As we gather, we're reminded that wealth is situated on treaty land of a steeped

6:37in rich indigenous history and home to many First Nations, Inuit and Métis people today.

6:43As a city, we have a responsibility for the stewardship of

6:51on which we live and work.

6:53Today, we acknowledge the Mississaugas of the credit First Nation of the

6:58Ashinaabeg peoples whose traditional territory we are meeting.

7:07Committee members, are there any disclosures of pecuniary interest?

7:10If so, please raise your hand.

7:19Being none, I would ask for a member to move and second approval of the minutes

7:25of the March 10th meeting.

7:28Member Mead moves.

7:30Seconder, member Allison.

7:36All those in favor, please raise their hands.

7:40Motion is carried.

7:47I've confirmed with the secretary of treasurer that we have not received any deferral requests.

7:58If there are no further questions, we can proceed with the first application.

8:13The first application is file A-55-21,

8:17variances related to existing accessory structures, gazebo and deck,

8:22and existing fence height and exterior side yard at 14 O'Connor Lane.

8:27I'll also note that correspondence was received after the comment deadline from B&C Butler,

8:33the owners of the property, outlining the reasons for the application,

8:38and that correspondence was circulated to committee members as well as staff.

8:48If the applicant is present, is the applicant present?

8:54Yes, I can see you now.

8:55Yes, sir.

8:56This is the area.

8:57Yep.

8:58Would you please state your name and relationship to the application please?

9:02Brent and Courtney Butler, and we're the homeowners.

9:05Thank you.

9:07Were the signs posted in accordance with the Planning Act requirements?

9:11Yes, they were.

9:13Have you received the staff comments, and are you in agreement with the recommended conditions?

9:20Yes, we are.

9:22Do you wish to address the committee for any further information that you may have that

9:26applies to the application?

9:28No, we don't.

9:31Okay.

9:34Committee members, do you have any questions for the applicant?

9:40We're flying right along here.

9:43Any questions for staff?

9:49Right, if there's no further questions, ask for the comments from the members of the public.

9:54And as noted at the starting, we've not received any requests,

9:57but we'll take a three-minute break so that members of the public,

10:00who are watching at home and wish to speak to the application, can call in.

10:05I'd ask that hearing participants ensure that their microphones are muted during the break.

13:05Chair Kendrick, I confirm that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

13:10Thank you. The committee will now begin to discuss the application

13:13and make a recommendation or reach a decision.

13:19Committee members, if you wish to make a motion, please raise your hand.

13:24Member Smith.

13:27Chair, I'd like to move acceptance with the listed conditions.

13:32Thank you. Do we have a seconder?

13:34Member Mead, seconded.

13:40Do you have any discussion on the motion? Any members of the committee?

13:45Any discussion? Okay, then I think we can call the roll call.

13:56Committee members, I'll be reading your names out loud.

13:58Please indicate if you're in favor or opposed to the motion to approve the application

14:03with the recommended condition.

14:06Chair Kendrick.

14:07In favor.

14:09Member Allison.

14:10In favor.

14:12Member Dykstra.

14:14In favor.

14:15Member Hamilton.

14:17In favor.

14:18Member Meads.

14:20In favor.

14:22And Member Smith.

14:23I'm in favor.

14:24That's carried, Chair.

14:30Thank you. The application has been approved and the applicant is now free to leave the hearing

14:41if they wish. Thank you.

14:43Thank you very much.

14:46Thank you. A reminder for those watching if you wish to receive a copy of the decision on an

14:52application including information about the appeal procedures, you must submit a written request

14:57by emailing COFA at gulf.ca with your name and the file number you are interested in.

15:04Please note that owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

15:20Next application. Thank you.

15:24The next application is file A-12 slash 22,

15:28variance to permit no interior access between existing additional residential dwelling unit

15:33and primary dwelling unit at 50 Dean Avenue.

15:42Is the applicant present? Please indicate.

15:49Yes, this is Andy Dunlop.

15:53Hello.

15:53Can you go ahead?

15:55Okay.

15:57Am I free to go ahead?

15:59I can see you now just a minute.

16:01Was the sign posted as per the Planning Act requirements?

16:05Yes.

16:07Did you receive staff comments and are you in agreement with the recommended

16:13yeah recommended commission conditions?

16:17I received the staff comments.

16:20I am not in agreement with the recommended with the recommendations.

16:25If you would like to address the committee, you can do so.

16:29You have up to 10 minutes to make your presentation.

16:32Okay. Thank you.

16:35So my name is Andy Dunlop.

16:38My wife and I own several properties in wealth and we own 50 and 52 Dean.

16:45It's a duplex type structures connected with the common law.

16:55We were applying for an apartment at the rear of 50 Dean Avenue.

17:03And this has been going on for some time.

17:07We originally had the property rezoned and starting in 2018 at a huge expense.

17:13We advised the city of an apartment on the property at that time.

17:18Somehow that didn't make it all the way through the process.

17:21And here we are still with no apartment approval.

17:25And as we're trying to get that, we're told that one of the requirements

17:28is to have an interconnecting door.

17:33During the process, we tried to find out the reasons for an interconnecting door.

17:39And hoping that we could at least understand why and if there was any possible mitigation

17:44of some of those reasons, maybe we could bring that to bear.

17:49And we were told that there were three reasons for the door.

17:52Number one being emergency services as requested by our prior safety.

17:58And then number two, to allow the conversion of the dwelling unit back to an individual dwelling

18:05without any accessory apartment.

18:07And then the third one was to ensure the accessory apartment

18:11was subordinate to the primary dwelling.

18:15And so I'd like to address these three issues.

18:18First, regarding the subordinate aspect, could you show the picture that I sent called 50 Front?

18:27Yeah, we're getting it just a minute.

18:37Okay, thank you.

18:44There you go.

18:45Okay, so this is the house at 50 and to the right you can see 52, just part of it.

18:53At the rear of the house is the apartment.

18:55So could you now show the picture 50 rear far?

19:14Okay, so this is a picture of the backyard from the very corner of the backyard.

19:19There's a carport there and just underneath the carport you can get a peek through to where

19:24the accessory apartment is.

19:26And now if you could show the picture 50 rear close.

19:39So this is a picture of the apartment at the back.

19:44You can see the white siding is the apartment.

19:47The red brick is the main house.

19:49So I believe it is very clear that the accessory apartment could never be considered as anything

19:56but subordinate to the main house.

19:58Both size and location make this very clear.

20:02Secondly, regarding conversion of the property back to a single dwelling,

20:10it certainly would be possible for interconnecting door to be installed.

20:14Could you please show the, I think it's a PDF, 50 Dean Avenue floor plan.

20:36So you can see the apartment sort of towards the top of the screen and then the main house

20:42towards the bottom of the screen.

20:44You can see the refrigerator there and I believe a door could be installed to the left of the

20:51refrigerator that would allow the apartment to be connected.

20:55So I guess my point is that in terms of returning it to or making it all one unit,

21:02one part of one building, that's possible too.

21:05So I think that addresses two of the three issues of the city.

21:09The final issue is the emergency services issue.

21:13Now I asked for the reasons for this from the city and was referred to Matt Valeria of

21:21fire services.

21:22I communicated with Matt about this issue and he advised that fire crews may have to

21:27enter adjacent units so they need to have an interconnecting door.

21:32Well, I guess that kind of confused me because duplex houses don't have interconnecting doors.

21:39They're not, you know, they share a common wall and I asked for clarification for Matt from that.

21:51You know, it seemed to me that the footprint of duplexes, two duplexes side by side,

22:00their footprints are entirely separate and it's the same with the accessory apartment.

22:04Its footprint is entirely separate from the main house.

22:09It doesn't share any ceilings or basements, anything like that.

22:13So I asked Matt for clarification and then Matt referred me back to the city saying that the city

22:20will adjudicate on this.

22:24Could you please put up the document titled, Matt the email deferring to the city?

22:40Yeah, so this is where I guess we're kind of confused.

22:49We asked the city, they deferred to the fire safety.

22:52When we started to fire safety, they deferred back to the city.

22:56You know, all of our apartments comply with the city's wealth requirements.

23:04We believe in safety.

23:06We want good places for our tenants, our neighbors, fire services, whoever, first responders,

23:13whoever have to come to the property.

23:16So, you know, we want to do this right.

23:19There's no question.

23:20But, you know, we feel that we should at least not be able to understand why

23:27a door would have to be installed.

23:34We talked about it would be possible to put a door just to the left of the refrigerator,

23:39but this is going to put the door right beside the sleeping area of the accessory apartment.

23:45And I believe that's going to be a problem.

23:48Doors do not provide 100% isolation.

23:51They have gaps, so all doors do, of course, and they're not good at reducing noise.

23:56Doors might be 50 millimeters thick, whereas, you know, a typical wall is 150 millimeters thick

24:02and full of insulation.

24:03So, you know, it seems to us that an interconnecting door will just make the back

24:10battery apartment subject to the noises of the kitchen in the main unit

24:14and to the odors coming from cooking.

24:17It could also be expected that the bachelor apartment would be less safe,

24:23considering that a doorway is quite unlikely to prevent smoke, fire, gas,

24:28bread in the same manner than solid wall.

24:31I'm concerned that the viability of the bachelor apartment will be diminished,

24:35and unless attractive, we have to install a door there.

24:41At some point, if the rental unit isn't practical,

24:44we'll have to return that area to just another room for the main house, like a family room.

24:51And that will eliminate another rental unit from the inventory for the city.

24:56I just don't think that's good for anyone.

24:58And I think that it's reasonable for us to have, you know, to address the issues,

25:05find out what the exact issues are and be able to deal with them.

25:08But right now, we can't even do that.

25:10Of the three issues that we've been presented, I believe we've addressed two of them well,

25:14but I can't address the one with fire services if nobody will give me any specifics.

25:19So, you know, we're trying to provide housing in a very tight housing market in Guelph and

25:27other places too, of course.

25:28And we understand that's no reason to relax safety requirements.

25:32So we get that.

25:34But it does emphasize the need to consider all possible alternatives to make places safe

25:42and ensure that good dwelling units are not being foregone for arbitrary reasons.

25:50In this case, there just doesn't seem to be any specific reason for the need for an interconnecting

25:55door.

25:56Fire services say it's required, but they don't say why.

26:00And they refer back to the city.

26:01We're frustrated with that.

26:04It seems vague and inconsistent.

26:07And, you know, we would, it's as possible, it could lead to the loss of this unit as an apartment,

26:15which will just exacerbate the problem and shortage of housing.

26:18And I don't think anyone wants that.

26:19So I was really hoping that we could find some solution for this, something to address the issues.

26:26So I'm hoping you'll give some consideration to our proposal to waive the requirement for the

26:32interconnecting door in this particular situation, where the footprint of the accessory apartment

26:38is completely outside the main unit.

26:41Similar concept precisely to duplex houses.

26:45No interconnecting door required there.

26:48Why do we need one in this case?

26:50We're also requesting a refund of our fees for this application.

26:54We've been at this apartment issue since 2018.

26:59And we've spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get this through.

27:03And we're still nowhere.

27:05I hope you can understand our frustration and help us deal with this.

27:12Again, we do understand the need for safety.

27:15We get that.

27:16Great, Guelph is a great city to live in.

27:18And the work that the city does is part of that.

27:25It didn't just happen.

27:27We all have to work together.

27:29And let's try and find a solution to this if there are issues that need to be addressed.

27:38That's all I have to say.

27:41Thank you.

27:42Members of the committee, do you have any questions for the applicant?

27:47Member Meads.

27:49Yeah, I think I'd just kind of like to hear from staff.

27:53I'm just looking at the staff comments and essentially it's saying

27:57it was from the direction of council, but if they could elaborate on that a little bit on the

28:02fire services requirement.

28:07Staff, which one would you like to take?

28:12Member Mr. Wilson?

28:15Yes.

28:16And through the chair to Member Meads, I can kind of break that down into two points.

28:19So in July 13th, 2020, a discussion paper was received by council regarding ARDUs,

28:30including that report was rationale for keeping that internal connection.

28:33And staff did a holistic review on why that internal connection was required.

28:39And a part of that is fire safety, especially when it comes to emergency access.

28:46So there's a few reasons for emergency access, but ARDUs typically aren't addressed per

28:54city addressing.

28:56It's only the bane dwelling.

28:57So having that internal connection, if they were to go through the primary dwelling and

29:01there was no internal connection, they'd have to double back and waste valuable time.

29:07Whereas a duplex, for an example, would have separate addressing.

29:11In terms of the other items, subordinate use as well as the changing back to a primary dwelling,

29:20you know, the ARDUs are really meant for that additional supplementary residential types

29:29within or outside of the existing dwelling.

29:32And then internally, keeping that subordinate to is critical for the ability for ARDUs to

29:39function as they are.

29:40Whereas a duplex, for an example, is different in terms of their use.

29:46Staff recognize that these changes will be coming through the Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw

29:52Amendment, where a lot of our low density residential dwelling units will get permissions

29:57to have duplexes as of right.

29:59So that internal connection may not be necessary in the future, but for properties such as this,

30:04where it's split on a vertical basis instead of a horizontal basis, that connection is important

30:12for fire safety as well as subordinate and the other item mentioned in that report.

30:19Through the chair.

30:20Thanks, staff.

30:22Thank you.

30:24Questions.

30:25Member Smith.

30:28Thank you, chair.

30:29I'd like to ask Mr. Donlon.

30:34Through you about the size of this particular additional unit.

30:42Yes, sir.

30:44About the size, you mean the dimensions?

30:47The area, is it, I'm just wondering about the area in terms of a percentage of the existing

30:55dwelling and what its actual area is.

30:59I didn't see that, but I may have missed.

31:01Yeah, it's about 20%.

31:10Can you tell me the area of the addition?

31:13Yes.

31:14Could I ask that the floor plan document be put back up on the screen?

31:19Thank you.

31:19Sorry about that.

31:20I don't have those numbers in my head.

31:27So the dimensions of the accessory apartment are 6.5 meters by 5.5 meters and that's about 36 square meters.

31:44I was about to say about 36 square meters.

31:46Thank you.

31:47Thank you.

31:47You're better than my calculator.

31:52Chair, I'd also like to ask staff a couple of questions if I may.

31:56Certainly go ahead.

31:58Thank you.

31:59Through you, Chair, to staff.

32:03First of all, regarding the fire access, our particular home when we moved in at some point in

32:10the past had been probably, I don't know if it was illegal or not or an illegal suite, but for

32:20some time we were getting mail that would say our address and lower.

32:31We don't get it anymore, but that happened quite frequently.

32:36I know from my experience many, many years ago being a university student living in a

32:42similar situation that we referred to our unit as rear.

32:51I know it's not an official address, but would that not address the address situation by

33:00calling out one in its front and one in its rear?

33:02It seems like a perfectly simple solution.

33:09Through the chair, to Member Smith, I actually previously did addressing at the city.

33:16And years ago, I do think that was the case where they would number A or B.

33:22In new circumstances, there has been back and forth with Canada Post where they want a formal

33:29letter from the city if an accessory apartment is wishing to be addressed.

33:36But from the addressing committee standpoint, that no longer is done because then there would

33:45be the tracking of new accessory apartments or ones that have been converted back to dwellings.

33:52So right now it is one address for one house and the owners are responsible for splitting up the

34:01mail or residence. Let me follow that up with a question about secondary dwelling units.

34:10Secondary dwelling units, I understand, are allowed in the city and how are they addressed?

34:22Again, they would just go to the main house and it would be divided up that way to the one-way

34:29mailbox. So I would assume that that would, that's something that could, I mean,

34:36it's just a question of how people resolve their mail. I don't see it as a

34:44deal-breaking issue, but that's an opinion, not a question, sorry. I do have a further question

34:52and that is, this is considered an additional dwelling unit, am I correct?

34:59Through the chair, to Member Smith, correct.

35:01So what's the difference between an additional dwelling unit and a secondary dwelling unit?

35:08Could this not be considered a secondary dwelling unit and then we shake hands and say,

35:15go ahead? I don't believe there's any regulation. I could be wrong. I don't have the zoning

35:32bylaw in front of me, but I think with the secondary dwelling unit there's no requirement for it to be

35:40X number of meters away from the main dwelling. Is that the correct case?

35:52Through the chair to Member Smith, we're just having a quick

35:57reference of that. Are you referencing when it comes to secondary dwelling unit as in the

36:03detached secondary, like the detached accessory dwelling unit?

36:07Yeah, I'm just thinking that if there's no requirement for a secondary dwelling unit to be

36:14like X number of meters away from the main dwelling unit, then this could be considered a

36:21secondary dwelling unit as opposed to an additional dwelling unit and the point would be moot.

36:40Mr. Wilson, sorry, was there a question through the chair?

36:47Yes, I'm just wondering, is there a requirement for a secondary dwelling unit

36:52to be spaced away from the main dwelling unit? In other words, does it have to be

36:59two meters, five meters, a percentage of the setback? My recollection is that it's more

37:08a question of setbacks from the property line. Through the chair to Member Smith, there actually

37:13is a requirement for secondary what you're calling, we'll call it the detached ARDU.

37:21They are required to be a minimum distance of three meters and shall be provided,

37:25sorry, a minimum distance of three meters shall be provided between the primary dwelling unit

37:31and an additional residential dwelling unit in a separate building on the same lot.

37:36Okay, thank you. So, were this to be conceived as a secondary dwelling unit and asking

37:50for a committee of adjustment approval would have to be based on that aspect that it wouldn't be

38:05attached. Okay, thank you. Through the chair to Member Smith, correct, yeah, you'd be looking at it

38:13as like a secondary unit with no setback requirement. Right, so that would take another

38:22kick the can coming back to committee. Right, yeah, we'd be here, same place, thank you.

38:32Member Ellison, question. Sorry, I just wanted to follow up with the, certainly, go ahead. If I may.

38:39I just wonder if you understood my ramblings about what I was saying.

38:44Who are you directing it to? Sorry, the proponent, Mr. Donlund. Turn your microphone on.

38:56Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Okay, thank you. Because I am having some connection difficulties,

39:05but I'm able to hear what's going on. And yes, I did understand what you're referring to in terms

39:14of the dimensions of the separation of the accessory unit from the main building in terms of,

39:21as I recall, 2.5 meters or 3 meters, whatever. Correct? Right, what I was getting to is perhaps

39:30a solution might be to come back to committee of adjustment with a proposal that your

39:37your apartment is essentially a secondary dwelling unit on an additional dwelling unit.

39:43I know it's semantics, but rules matter, and that you would apply for a variance based on it being

39:52attached as opposed to being a 2 meter. I've forgotten the dimension that staff provided, but

40:00So applying for an exception to the requirement for the spacing of that.

40:07That's correct.

40:12I guess I really liked to understand what the, you know, what, what the reason is for the white, why can't it go ahead. Why can't I have it today because nobody's explaining to me other than to say fire services.

40:28I have trouble with that because it is just vague and it seems like a.

40:35Right, just a barrier somehow to preventing having this unit.

40:46I have more questions chair.

40:48Thank you member Allison you've been waiting patiently.

40:52Thank you through the through the chair to staff. Can you confer and then possibly for the applicant after that?

41:02One of the main things is this a door.

41:07Which connects the AR to you with the main dwelling.

41:12And if I'm reading this right, it's because of the connection. It's that horizontal or vertical connection. Why this door is necessary.

41:25And as I'm looking further on into the assistant chief fire prevention officer who that quote where, you know, you need that sort of through space.

41:38Am I understanding this correctly stuff and then depending on your answer, I might have something for the applicant.

41:46Through the chair to member Allison. So the, from my understanding of this through the report from July 2020 is the intent is to have a quickest emergency access available.

42:01So if you have a property that has an AR to you that the fire or emergency needs access to and they don't have access to it from the main dwelling.

42:14Then that could create cause delays in response. So that is just one of the one of the reasons for the internal connection.

42:24Okay, thank you. And that that is how I understood that. Thank you for clarifying that. Then on through the chair to the applicant.

42:32That door seems to be a major issue and you're saying it could you could do this.

42:39But, um, but is it like, do you, you still feel it's not necessary.

42:52Microphone please.

42:54Mr. Donlan your microphone.

42:56Okay.

42:57Can you hear me now.

42:59Yes. Okay.

43:01Okay. So, there were two aspects to your questions. First, regarding, you seem to be referring to what it would take to put the door in.

43:11Well, there's a brick wall there that would have to be concrete have concrete saw or something that effect.

43:20We would have to be brought into cut that opening. It would be very expensive and very disruptive for everyone involved.

43:29Secondly, I guess I don't understand the need for that door anymore than I would understand the need for a door between two duplex houses that are side by side.

43:40So, again, this an address issue. That's kind of the first time that's been brought up to me so I don't know what to say about that in terms of emergency services.

43:52The people in the, in the accessory apartment, they know whether it an apartment at the back and when they order pizza or call 911, whatever they will say where they are.

44:06And the same with, you know, with the, with the main house, of course, is is unambiguous and in terms of where it's located. So, I just don't see that the address issue is all that important.

44:22I don't understand the need for the door. I don't think the door is necessary. I think the apartment is very safe. It has all the requirements.

44:30Otherwise needed. It's been inspected in every way.

44:35I, I don't think that door is necessary. Thank you.

44:39Thank you.

44:42Any other questions from members of the committee.

44:49If there are no further questions, I will ask for comments from members of the public, please.

45:13Yes, we're going to take a three minute break.

45:16Well, we get the input from the public.

45:20And then we will resume the discussion.

48:37Chair Kendrick, I can confirm that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

48:41Thank you. So the committee will now begin to discuss the application and make a decision.

48:47Committee members, if you wish to make a motion, please raise your hand.

48:52Member Smith.

48:55Chair, I would like to move approval of the application.

49:01Do I have a seconder? Member Hamilton.

49:08Discussion.

49:10Member Meads.

49:12I can't support this application. I am in agreement with fire services.

49:20I can file them a situation where in the event of an emergency in the middle of the night where maybe a third party calls 911, there's a fire in the residence or some sort of government oxide.

49:32Fire services clearly knows to clear both the sides of a duplex, but without some sort of pre notice to fire services or EMS or police.

49:45Finding that there's an extra residential area at the back of the building is a unique situation.

49:53And for that reason, I can't support it.

49:56To me, it is possible that it could cause a safety issue.

50:02Other member Smith.

50:05Thank you, chair. I've moved this and I'm supporting it.

50:10Essentially, in terms of fire safety masonry wall, as opposed to a door or a stud wall is, is going to have a greater fire resistance rating.

50:24So I, I think we're stuck in a bit of a valley between regulations here.

50:32The difference between this and as I mentioned, a secondary dwelling unit.

50:37Again, it's a semantic kind of thing. And I think we're the applicant to come back with a secondary dwelling.

50:46Unit proposal and look for relief from this, the committee of adjustment that that would pass under those conditions. So I believe that it meets the four tests.

50:57And I believe it's desirable, especially I think it's desirable and I think it's a reasonable request. So I will be supporting this.

51:07Member Hamilton.

51:09Thank you, chair. I just want to maybe echo some of what James is saying, but I'm also in favor.

51:16I think for the reasons that I think for one, this unit was built. It sounds like about 15 years ago. So I don't think that it was built knowingly against the bylaw.

51:25I do believe that the request for relief from the zoning by law is minor in nature. They're not changing the use here.

51:32So I think that ARU is clearly in support and in size, which I think is more important than the door to be honest.

51:39And that's falls in line with most municipal policies on this. I think a lot of me is policy policies on additional residential units across the board do not have this requirement.

51:48So I think that's kind of unique in that way. I haven't really seen it before.

51:52I think the putting in the interior connection with jeopardize the ability to use it as an apartment unit going forward.

51:58As the owner has said,

52:02and from my view from street view, there appears to be very clear access to this unit for the fire department. There are also windows.

52:09This is not a unique apartment. There are plenty of apartments out there duplexes standard apartments only have one access. So I don't believe this is unique.

52:16And those apartments are legal.

52:20I also don't believe that this position falls in line with provincial debt.

52:23The recent provincial direction on this other residential units, which is more, which has been less restrictive on this and allow for more these units to be created.

52:31So lastly, again, to remove this as a potential rental unit for in a city that desperately needs them. I don't think this is just cause so I do. And again, I do believe it meets the four tests and I do believe to be minor. Thank you.

52:45Thank you. Other comments from the committee.

52:50There being no more comments and I will ask the secretary treasurer to call the vote. Is everybody ready? Okay.

52:59The motion is to approve the application. The points been raised to that motion. Does staff have any.

53:14I think that's a good thing that they would like to add as a condition if the committee wants to approve this.

53:21Yes to the chair. I'm representing building services and I'm going to request that the owner applies for and is issued any required building permit and second unit registration for the ARDU.

53:35The mover and second are okay with that condition.

53:38I am chair.

53:42Mr. Donnellan, would you have any comment on that condition?

53:45I think that's already applied for the registration.

53:51So, I think that's already done.

53:56And whatever else is required, like an inspection or whatever, we're good with that.

54:02Thank you.

54:04Any other comments from the committee? We have a motion to approve.

54:10With an added condition as outlined by staff.

54:15I'm going to call the question.

54:20Thank you chair committee members. I'll be calling your names out loud. Please indicate if you're in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application with the one recommended condition additional recommended condition by staff chair.

54:34Kenrick.

54:35I am in favor.

54:36Thank you. Member Allison.

54:38In favor.

54:40Thank you. Member Dykstra.

54:45Opposed. Okay. Member Hamilton.

54:48In favor.

54:50Thank you.

54:52Member Meads.

54:54Opposed.

54:56And member Smith.

54:58In favor.

55:00That's carried chair.

55:15Motion is carried.

55:18Yeah, the application has been approved. I remind the applicants now that they are free to leave the hearing if they wish.

55:26If you receive a copy of the decision on an application, including the information about appeal procedures, you must submit a written request by emailing cofa at gulf.ca with your name and the file number that you are interested in.

55:41Please note that the owners and applicant applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

55:59I know that you mentioned that the applicant can leave.

56:02It is the applicant still going to leave even though item 3.2 is for a refund request.

56:08I'm sorry. I missed that. Give me a moment.

56:23The chair, maybe to the applicant, would the applicant be seeking that refund now that the applicant has received a favorable.

56:34I'm not sure if the is the applicant still with us.

56:41Can you hear me? Yes, I'm here.

56:44Okay, can you respond to member Deistra's question? Do you withdraw your application now for a fee refund now that you have approval?

56:56Yes.

56:58Okay. Thank you. You're okay. Member Deistra.

57:02That's satisfactory.

57:05I'm satisfied if you are.

57:07I'm fine with it.

57:09I'm happy with that.

57:13Thank you.

57:16Member Meads.

57:18Chair, I'll make the point that was also an issue with the previous application. They also have a refund request.

57:28The secretary head advised me that we generally do those at the end of the meeting.

57:35That's when they would come up. We did this one.

57:39Let's leave the other one to the end.

57:46You can go to the next one then.

57:47The next applicant, please.

57:56The next application is file A-14-22,

57:59variances for reduced side yard setback

58:02for proposed residential addition

58:04and reduced rear yard setback

58:05for existing accessory structure, shed,

58:09at 22 summit Crescent.

58:11I'll also note for the committee members

58:12as well as those attending,

58:16that the requested variances

58:18that were originally outlined

58:20on the public hearing notice have changed.

58:24The variance regarding the existing shed

58:26is no longer being requested

58:29and this information has been noted

58:30on the staff comments that was posted online.

58:34And as well, the applicant has revised

58:37the variance requests for the right yard setback

58:41for the addition from 0.5 meters to 0.6 meters.

58:46So they have increased that setback request.

58:50I'm just noting that for the committee members

58:51as well as those attending.

58:54And that was it for changes.

59:00Okay, so for 22 summit Crescent

59:03is the applicant present?

59:04If so, please state your name

59:06and relationship to the application.

59:12Microphone, please.

59:26We can't hear you, Christine.

59:43Hello.

59:44Now I can hear you.

59:45Oh, good, sorry about that.

59:49My name is Christine Ternich

59:50and I am the agent acting on behalf of the homeowners.

59:54I'm just their designer as well.

59:57I have a couple of questions for you before you proceed.

1:00:00Was the sign posted as per the planning act requirements?

1:00:03Yes.

1:00:06Did you receive staff comments?

1:00:08And if so, are you in agreement with the conditions?

1:00:11If there are any.

1:00:12I have received the comments.

1:00:14There is one by the building services

1:00:19with regards to the basement apartment.

1:00:23On my plans that I had submitted,

1:00:25I had shown two bedroom unit,

1:00:28but in fact, it is actually a one bedroom slash

1:00:32sowing room office space.

1:00:34So that was an error on my part.

1:00:36So there was a note by the services

1:00:39to update the registration,

1:00:42but I don't feel that there needs to

1:00:44when it is in fact a one bedroom apartment.

1:00:49Okay, you have 10 minutes to make a presentation

1:00:51with any additional information or comments

1:00:53you wish to share.

1:00:55Please proceed.

1:00:59I don't have any additional information.

1:01:01I had spoken with, I guess I had spoken

1:01:03with the building department and we had worked together

1:01:07to abide by the 0.6 meters side yard that they requested.

1:01:13And then again, the shed is actually within the

1:01:18requirements.

1:01:22Okay, now we also have with us the owner, Caitlin Kelly.

1:01:27Do you have anything that you wish to put before the committee?

1:01:33That for me.

1:01:36Okay.

1:01:38Committee members, do you have any questions

1:01:40for the application?

1:01:43Member Meads.

1:01:46Through the chair to staff.

1:01:49In regards to the applicant's comments,

1:01:52is condition four still required?

1:01:59Through the chair to member Meads.

1:02:00If in fact it's only a one bedroom apartment,

1:02:04then the permit would not require to be updated.

1:02:11So we would, in the event that we decide

1:02:13to approve this application,

1:02:15we would just do conditions one through three then.

1:02:18Correct.

1:02:20Thank you.

1:02:26Further questions?

1:02:29Member Smith.

1:02:32Thank you, chair.

1:02:34Through you to staff, I just want to have a feeling

1:02:43that you do agree with the 0.6 meter side yard setback

1:02:54that you consider that in your professional opinion,

1:02:57minor and nature.

1:03:01Thank you.

1:03:02Through the chair to member Smith.

1:03:03Yes.

1:03:05I wrote the recommendation report.

1:03:09It's my professional opinion that this is,

1:03:11meets the four tests of a minor variance,

1:03:13including desirable and minor in nature.

1:03:16Thank you.

1:03:17Thank you very much.

1:03:18I have no more questions.

1:03:21Any other questions?

1:03:26All right, no further questions.

1:03:27We'll allow and ask for comments from the public.

1:03:30As noted at the start of the hearing,

1:03:32we have not received any requests

1:03:34from the public to speak,

1:03:36but we will take a three minute break

1:03:37so that any members of the public watching from home

1:03:40who wish to speak to the application can call in.

1:03:43I'd ask the hearing participants

1:03:44to ensure your microphones are muted, please.

1:03:47Thank you.

1:06:53Chair Kendrick, I can confirm

1:06:55that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

1:06:59Thank you.

1:07:00The committee now begin to discuss the application

1:07:02and make a decision.

1:07:04Committee members, if you wish,

1:07:06can you make a motion member meets?

1:07:11Can you make a motion for approval

1:07:12with conditions one through three recommended by staff?

1:07:18And do we have a seconder?

1:07:20Member Allison.

1:07:21Yeah.

1:07:25Any discussion?

1:07:27Yeah, just a question on the motion there.

1:07:31For the third condition there,

1:07:35do we want to potentially reword that

1:07:38based off of the new information that came to light

1:07:42through the chair, I guess, to staff?

1:07:44If it's appropriate to potentially add

1:07:48some additional wording?

1:07:50Staff, through the chair to member Dykstra,

1:08:00we don't have comfort,

1:08:01well, we don't have photo evidence

1:08:03of the shed being relocated.

1:08:06So leaving this condition would simply allow them

1:08:09to take a photo of that or provide a revised imagery.

1:08:14I mean, they do show it on the sketch.

1:08:16So if you're satisfied that that's enough

1:08:18for your satisfaction, then yes, but we typically go,

1:08:23we typically ask for some confirmation with photos,

1:08:26which is why the second condition has been remained.

1:08:31Through the chair to staff, thank you very much.

1:08:33I just didn't want to end up making the decision

1:08:36that would cause due harm in the future

1:08:40to either the city or to the applicant.

1:08:42So thank you very much for clarifying that.

1:08:47Are there any further comments or questions?

1:08:53Member Smith?

1:08:56Chair to member Meads,

1:08:59would you consider putting condition two back

1:09:02into the motion?

1:09:05Condition two is still in the motion.

1:09:08It's condition one through three.

1:09:12Sorry, I meant about the shed setback.

1:09:18It is in the motion, one, two and three.

1:09:21So one through three.

1:09:25That's clear now.

1:09:26Sorry, I've got a little muddled there.

1:09:29That's okay.

1:09:30No problem.

1:09:33Any others questions, comments, ready to vote?

1:09:41Okay.

1:09:47Thank you, chair, committee members,

1:09:48please indicate your vote on the motion,

1:09:50which is to approve the application

1:09:53with conditions one, two and three.

1:09:56Chair Kendrick?

1:09:57In favor.

1:09:59Member Allison?

1:10:01In favor.

1:10:02Member Dykstra?

1:10:04In favor.

1:10:05Member Hamilton?

1:10:08In favor.

1:10:09Member Meads?

1:10:11In favor.

1:10:12And member Smith?

1:10:13In favor.

1:10:15That's carried, chair.

1:10:19The application has been approved.

1:10:21And the applicant, you are now free to leave the hearing

1:10:25if you wish.

1:10:27A reminder for those watching,

1:10:28if you wish to receive a copy of the decision

1:10:30on an application, including information

1:10:32about the appeal procedure,

1:10:34you must submit a written request by emailing

1:10:36COFA at Guelph.ca with your name

1:10:39and file number you are interested in.

1:10:41Please note that owners and applicants

1:10:44automatically receive a copy of the decision.

1:10:55The next application is file B-8-22,

1:10:59consent to create new law at 361 White Law Road.

1:11:06Thank you.

1:11:07Is the applicant present, please?

1:11:09I am, Mr. Chairman.

1:11:10Can you hear me okay?

1:11:11We can hear you fine.

1:11:12Thank you.

1:11:13Will you please state your name

1:11:14and relationship to the application?

1:11:17My name is Chris Karoski

1:11:19and I am the vice president of Hermel Corporation.

1:11:23And we've submitted an application to the committee

1:11:27to consider two sever parcel of land

1:11:31that we own on the west side of Guelph.

1:11:34Were the signs posted in keeping

1:11:36with the requirements of the planning act?

1:11:39Yes, they were.

1:11:40One sign was put up on Paisley Road

1:11:43and one sign was put up on White Law Road.

1:11:46Okay.

1:11:48Have you received staff comments?

1:11:50And are you in agreement with the recommended conditions?

1:11:54I did receive the comments, Mr. Chairman,

1:11:56and planning, engineering and building services

1:12:01have all commented that they have no concern

1:12:05with the application and have recommended approval.

1:12:09And I've reviewed the four conditions

1:12:12that would accompany that approval

1:12:15and I have no concerns with those.

1:12:18And I believe the application is fairly straightforward.

1:12:24I prepare to answer any questions if the committee has any.

1:12:28I think all we're trying to do here

1:12:30is have a new lot line, follow the municipal boundary

1:12:35on this lot to sever the portion that's in the city

1:12:38from the portion that's in the township.

1:12:42Thank you.

1:12:43Very good.

1:12:44Committee members, do you have any questions

1:12:47of the applicant or staff member Meads?

1:12:52Through the chair to staff,

1:12:54do we have jurisdiction to do stuff outside the city?

1:13:06Through the chair to member Meads,

1:13:08the severance is right along the municipal boundary.

1:13:13So we're not proving anything outside of the city.

1:13:16Okay, so we're only affecting the lot

1:13:22that's within the city,

1:13:24the part that's outside the city is,

1:13:27we're just blind to it.

1:13:30It's part of the application.

1:13:32The application is to sever the land

1:13:34so that the severed parcel is within the city boundary.

1:13:39So I believe we did accept the application

1:13:44and you do have the authority

1:13:45to approve this severance application

1:13:48based on what they're asking for.

1:13:50And I think the secretary-treasurer can also confirm

1:13:53that the application would have been circulated

1:13:55to the county as well.

1:14:03Through the chair, I can confirm

1:14:04that we did circulate this application to Guelph Aramosa

1:14:08and we have not received any comments from the township.

1:14:13Okay, thanks.

1:14:15Any further questions?

1:14:20None?

1:14:23Okay, so then we'll go into a three-minute recess

1:14:27members of the public wish to comment

1:14:31or they can contact us to the numbers

1:14:35that's being shown on the screen

1:14:37and we'll resume in three minutes.

1:18:39Chair Kendrick, I can confirm

1:18:40that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

1:18:45Okay, so the committee will now begin

1:18:48to discuss the application and make a decision.

1:18:51Committee members, if you wish to make a motion,

1:18:53please raise your hand.

1:18:55Member Meads.

1:18:57I'll move approval with the recommended conditions.

1:19:01May I have a seconder please?

1:19:03Member Hamilton second it.

1:19:06Comments, questions, discussion, nothing.

1:19:14I'll call the question.

1:19:21Thank you, Chair Kendrick.

1:19:22Committee members, I'll be reading your names out loud.

1:19:24The please indicate if you're in favor

1:19:27or opposed to the motion,

1:19:28which is to approve the application

1:19:30with the four recommended conditions.

1:19:33Chair Kendrick.

1:19:34In favor.

1:19:36Member Allison.

1:19:37In favor.

1:19:39Member Dykstra.

1:19:41In favor.

1:19:42Member Hamilton.

1:19:44In favor.

1:19:45Member Meads.

1:19:49In favor.

1:19:50And Member Smith.

1:19:52In favor.

1:19:54That's carried, Chair.

1:19:58Okay, the application has been approved.

1:20:00The applicant now you are free to leave the meeting if you wish. Thank you.

1:20:08Reminder to those watching, if you wish to receive a copy of the decision of an application,

1:20:13including information about the appeal procedure,

1:20:16you must submit a written request by emailing,

1:20:18COFA at Guelph.ca with your name and the file number you are interested in.

1:20:24Please note that owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

1:20:37The next application is file A-15-22,

1:20:42variance for maximum building height for proposed accessory building,

1:20:46detached garage at 14 Clarence Street.

1:20:49I'll also note for the committee members as well as those watching that we did receive

1:20:53comments after the comment deadline from S. Cornwell and J. Atenhoff in support of the application,

1:21:01as well as comments from G. Sheffield with concerns or questions regarding the application,

1:21:07and that correspondence has been circulated to the committee members.

1:21:13I would ask if the applicant is present to please state your name and the relationship to the application.

1:21:19My name is Kyle Marshall. I am the husband of the owner, Ashley.

1:21:25Thank you. Was the sign posted as per the Planning Act requirements?

1:21:29Yes, sir.

1:21:31Did you receive staff comments and if you are in agreement with any of the recommended conditions?

1:21:38I did and I do agree with the conditions.

1:21:41Okay, do you wish to address the committee?

1:21:44On terms of the comments of Graham Sheffield, I would speak to clarify a couple of things.

1:21:52Absolutely. Go ahead. You have 10 minutes.

1:21:54Thanks. A couple of his questions here were regarding the Sofit lighting on the garage.

1:22:02There will not be Sofit lighting on the property line,

1:22:07on the sorry, on the east side, which will be the property line side.

1:22:12There will not be security lighting on the front

1:22:17and the accommodation made to reduce bleed over of the lighting of adjacent properties was a third

1:22:23comment. We have 497 Woolwich is a large commercial building that is on the west side of my property.

1:22:34That is my west neighbor. He's got massive commercial lighting, lighting up the parking

1:22:40lot there that lights up our side and our backyard is open through 222.

1:22:47And I believe Graham is 23, Clarence, if I'm not mistaken, or maybe 25, but

1:22:53yeah, it bleeds over pretty bad. So with our new garage, it would actually make

1:22:58his our two east neighbors quite darker. It should block a lot of that commercial lighting.

1:23:05His other loose comments here about our security lighting from our current garage

1:23:13with no garage in our driveway. We have a pretty inviting front driveway, if you will. And

1:23:20the cameras were put up after several vehicle break ins and several visitors. We've had people

1:23:27sit on our deck prior to the addition. We've even found like burnt cigarettes burnt into our deck

1:23:34from guys coming up and stealing Kate like drinks from our back deck. So that was the reason that

1:23:39we had to put up some security lighting and security cameras. And with a new garage going in

1:23:44the back, it'll really give us some rear privacy. And I think that's probably going to alleviate a

1:23:50lot of the requirement from having the camera light that we do now. But I mean, in terms of his

1:23:59main concerns of Sofit lighting and light shining over, we're going to be putting a structure to

1:24:04block some adjacent lighting, and we aren't going to have any lighting on that side of the garage.

1:24:08So I don't believe that there would be any problem in that term.

1:24:18Yeah, another not open to any other questions.

1:24:22Committee members, you have any questions for the applicant? Member Smith.

1:24:30Thank you, Chair. Through you to staff. I know on the site plan that the existing dwelling

1:24:38is a single story. I don't know if it's a raised bungalow or not, but I'm just curious in your

1:24:44professional opinion, given that this is the the roof is called it at five meters to the midpoint.

1:24:54So the actual top of the roof is going to be, I think a meter and a half above that. So in your

1:25:00professional opinion, do you consider this minor that it's not it's not looming over the existing

1:25:06structure? Thank you. Through the chair to member Smith. Yes, it's my professional opinion that

1:25:15this can be considered minor in nature. We had confirmation from the applicant that the max or

1:25:22that the peak point of the accessory structure is still less than the primary dwelling as well as

1:25:28less than the neighboring dwellings. Thank you. And one question for the applicant through you,

1:25:37Chair. I note that the the agent is an excavation company and shares the same surname as the as

1:25:48one of the applicants. So I'm I'm just making sure that this isn't rezoning by another method

1:25:56that this will not be used to store or to engage in business for an excavation company.

1:26:05No, it's absolutely not to be anything related to the business. We have a commercially zoned property

1:26:11at 56 Clarence, which is the dead end of our street. That is where our main office and equipment

1:26:18and trailers are all stored. This is just my home, happily nice and close to work, but has

1:26:25absolutely no no use or plans for anything commercial moving forward. So no steam shovels in

1:26:33the garage. If only my wife would allow. That's all I have, Chair. Any other questions? Member Mead?

1:26:49Through the chair to staff, in regards to the late comments on security lighting,

1:26:55is there some sort of bylaw that prevents a lead over a flight to other properties that would ease

1:27:03the neighbors concerns? Yeah, through the chair to member Mead's. There is something in the bylaw,

1:27:11and I don't know the exact section or what it states specifically, but it does not permit

1:27:18any light to shine directly into a neighbor's residence, residence, sorry. So a bylaw complaint

1:27:28can be done by any homeowner who experiences this and zoning bylaw staff would actually go out

1:27:37to a property at night to investigate any intrusion, complaint. Thank you.

1:27:50Other questions? I think it was another hand. Was there not member Beistra?

1:27:56Yeah, through the chair to the applicant, I know that you've identified that it's not going to be

1:28:03used for commercial auto body, vehicle repair, or vehicle services, and that it's also not for

1:28:10an additional residential dwelling. Would you be opposed to if those were added to the conditions

1:28:20that so that if, you know, I'm not applying anything from you, but when my variance is

1:28:30like this is created, it moves on this property in perpetuity, right? So, you know, another person

1:28:40purchased the property from you 20, 50 years down the road, this variance still stands. So

1:28:47I'm asking you if you would be opposed to including that as a condition just so that,

1:28:53you know, 50 years in the future that it can't be converted or somebody says, well,

1:29:02I'm just going to put it in accessory unit here. Or would you be opposed to that?

1:29:10I'm not necessarily opposed to it. Maybe I just don't fully understand

1:29:15and, you know, what that necessarily changes to the structure being built down the road. I know that

1:29:21we are now talking about building secondary dwellings in the rear of properties. Again,

1:29:28zero future plans for anything like that. This is just straight and simple, a garage.

1:29:34I just mean like down the road, if somebody decides, you know, to go through the process

1:29:39to turn that into a secondary dwelling, you know, 20 years from now, like,

1:29:44I don't think that would affect me. So, I mean, it really doesn't mean much to me which way it goes.

1:29:51It's more for us to make a storage garage there. And that's just about the end of it. So

1:29:57staff has a comment on your question. Member Dijkstra, let's hear their comment first.

1:30:04Thank you. And through the chair to member Dijkstra. I think I would be hesitant to put

1:30:10the condition in regarding to the ARDU specifically because they would be meeting the minimum height

1:30:17requirement for an ARDU. So, if they did want to in the future, convert this. I haven't done a

1:30:23complete review to consider if that's appropriate right now, but it would be hampering that use.

1:30:29And I would also just remind committee members that that use is just not permitted as of right.

1:30:39So, if there were a complaint to bylaw, that would be shut down immediately. Obviously,

1:30:44if it's the discretion to have that in writing, obviously, but from staff's planning staff's

1:30:49perspective, we wouldn't, I wouldn't be asking for those conditions.

1:30:56Member Dijkstra, do you

1:31:03have any comment to that? Or you would draw the question?

1:31:12I'll withdraw my question then.

1:31:15Thank you. Any other questions? Okay.

1:31:24As noted, as noted at the start of the hearing, we've not received any requests from the public

1:31:30to speak, but we'll take three minute break now. So members of the public watching from home who

1:31:35wish to speak to this application can call in and ask that all hearing participants ensure that

1:31:40your microphones are muted during the break. Chair Kendrick, I can confirm that we didn't

1:35:24receive any delegation requests. Okay, then the committee will now begin to discuss the application

1:35:31and make a decision. Committee members, if you wish to make a motion, please raise your hand.

1:35:36Member Hamilton. I'll move to approve it with the conditions as they are.

1:35:43Member Smith. Questions or discussion on the resolution to approve? No discussion. I will ask

1:35:59for the secretary-treasurer to call the roll. Thank you, chair. Committee members, I'll be

1:36:08reading your names out loud. Please indicate if you're in favor or opposed to the motion,

1:36:13which is to approve the application with the three recommended conditions.

1:36:18Chair Kendrick. In favor. Member Allison. In favor. Member Dykstra. In favor. Member Hamilton.

1:36:29In favor. Member Meads. In favor. Member Smith. In favor. That's carried, chair. The application

1:36:42has been approved. The applicant is now free to leave the hearing if they wish.

1:36:48Chair Dugan. Thank you very much. Take care.

1:36:52A reminder for those watching, if you wish to receive a copy of the decision of an application,

1:36:56including information about the appeal procedure, you must submit a written request by emailing

1:37:03cofa at gulf.ca with your name and the file number you are interested in. Please note

1:37:10that the owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

1:37:19The next application is file a-16-22. Variance is related to proposed residential

1:37:26addition, existing driveways, and proposed additional residential dwelling unit at 148

1:37:31Cardigan Street. Is the applicant or the representative present? Yes, I'm here. There you go.

1:37:43Can you state your name and relationship to the application, please? Eric Durmity,

1:37:48and I'm the homeowner. Was the sign posted as per the Planning Act requirements?

1:38:02Did you receive staff comments and are you in agreement with the recommended conditions as they

1:38:08exist? Yes, I received the comments. I'm not in agreement. Okay, if you wish to address the

1:38:18committee on where we disagree, you've got 10 minutes to make your case. Okay, well, I mean,

1:38:25simply is basically that I'm really just applying for a change of use of the buildings.

1:38:32They're existing. I think the issue is probably the fact that the 15-meter setback for the railroad,

1:38:41but my existing house and that garage are already well within that. So no other comments. See,

1:38:59you are aware that the staff is, just a minute here now,

1:39:09yeah, the staff has got four conditions here. Okay, any questions for the

1:39:25delegate from the members of the committee? Member Deistre. Yeah, just through the chair to the

1:39:34applicant, you know, just to give you a fair voice, maybe you could walk us through the application

1:39:44a little bit more, not saying it, just so you can identify what you believe are the

1:39:53conditions and why you believe you should be able to meet it.

1:39:58Well, I shouldn't have to meet the requirements.

1:40:01I will basically just that the buildings are existing where they are, and I'm not

1:40:07planning on moving any walls. I'm just going to, I'm just trying to change the use of the existing

1:40:12buildings. Right now is, like, doesn't meet the 3.5-meter setback. It's like 2.11 meters away from

1:40:29the rear property line. And again, so, you know, that's well, it's a lot smaller than 15 meters,

1:40:41so I'm not really sure why I wouldn't be allowed to just renovate that existing building as is,

1:40:49and again, not move any walls or anything, just build up. And then as far as for the proposed

1:40:55coach house, it's similar in that the current offset from the rear, from the rear yard is

1:41:042.1 meters, which is a much smaller dimension than, like I said, 15 meters.

1:41:14So, and again, I'm not planning on moving any buildings. I'm just planning on

1:41:20changing the use of the existing building in that case, from a garage to a coach house.

1:41:25Further questions? Member Allison.

1:41:40Through the chair to the apple, can you say coach from a garage to a coach house? Do you mean

1:41:48right now it's a garage with vehicles stored in it? Are you talking about this being a unit to rent?

1:41:57That is correct.

1:41:57Coach house?

1:41:58Yes.

1:41:58Okay. Thank you.

1:42:07No other questions? Member Smith.

1:42:12Chair, I just want to be clear, and I guess it's a question for staff. If we go ahead and propose

1:42:23to accept the application with the conditions, that means only condition C would be approved. Am I

1:42:33correct?

1:42:36Through the chair to member Smith, so staff are recommending refusal of variances A, B, D,

1:42:44and E. The only variance that we are recommending approval of is variance C, which is related to

1:42:50the second driveway. The staff report outlines our reasons for not supporting the application.

1:42:58I can go through some of those if you like or or not, it's up to you.

1:43:04I'm more interested in process, so forgive me. I'm just wondering how to approach this.

1:43:11Does it make sense to break this into two pieces? Refusal of the

1:43:22applications A, B, C,

1:43:26pardon me, A, B, D, and E, and acceptance of the request C. Does that make sense? I'm just

1:43:37struggling a little bit about how we approach this.

1:43:41It's through the chair to member Smith. That's a good question, and I'm trying to recall of

1:43:45how we've done this in the past. Maybe this is something the secretary, treasurer, can confirm for us.

1:43:52Thank you.

1:43:53Through the chair, in response to member Smith's question, if the committee would like to

1:44:00entertain all in one motion, they can certainly do so. Approve variance C and refuse variances A, B,

1:44:07D, and E, or if the committee would like to split it up, they're certainly welcome to do so, but

1:44:13you can do it all in one motion if you'd like.

1:44:18So just to follow up, chair, would that mean that how would the motion be if we didn't want to split

1:44:27it up? Would we move rejection of the application with the exception of item C?

1:44:44Through the chair, in response to member Smith's question, if the committee wanted to

1:44:50entertain all in one, like I had indicated previously, you can mention that

1:44:59you're in favor of approving all the variances except for variance C, and then just providing

1:45:06reasons for the refusal or sorry, I think I have it backwards here. Refusal of variances A, B, D,

1:45:13and E, and approval of variance C, and then just providing some reasons in terms of the refusal

1:45:20for those four variances. So I think the committee can base it on the action instead of the application

1:45:26as a whole, just the requested variances there. As long as the committee's specific on which

1:45:33variances are approving, I think that's satisfactory.

1:45:37Thank you. I have a question to staff because the applicant has said that he's not making any

1:45:48changes to the physical site itself, that he's not changing any walls, and yet we're talking about

1:45:57setbacks that are outside of the parameters, but those I have to assume from his comments, those

1:46:08setbacks that are outside of the parameters are already there. They aren't being brought about

1:46:13by anything that he is doing. Yeah, to the chair, the proposed garage addition and the existing

1:46:23building at this time does cross the property line onto the rail lands. The proposed addition,

1:46:31and at the very back corner, there's a corner where the garage is, does cross the property line,

1:46:38and building services cannot issue a building permit for any portion of a building that crosses

1:46:45a property line. And the garage is an existing building, but it is a new use that is being

1:46:56proposed within that garage. Thank you. Thank you. So then my question is to the applicant,

1:47:04you are in fact changing the existing structures because you're doing additions. You said you're

1:47:11making no changes at all to the existing structures. You have additions. Or did I misunderstand you?

1:47:19Yeah, sir. I'm not planning on doing the addition to the house anymore. I'm changing my plans entirely

1:47:27based on just really what I'm looking for here is I want approval to do the coach house.

1:47:36The house is another story. This process has been ongoing for about two years now,

1:47:42and I'm just kind of changing my plans. But so I don't know if you guys want to just discuss

1:47:47the coach house and not discuss the house at all because I'm not like, I'm going to submit

1:47:54a new building permit after this meeting is done for the house. So.

1:48:00Well, it seemed to me that those changes are somewhat significant to what's before us tonight.

1:48:08And I would think if that's the case, then perhaps we should consider deferral and you go back and

1:48:18redetermine exactly what it is that you're applying for and we'll deal with that.

1:48:22But that's just my observation. I can't speak for the committee. Member Smith.

1:48:33Thank you, Chair. Deferral was rattling around in my head as well with the applicant's latest

1:48:41response. I think that perhaps is the best course of action. But I don't know. Does staff have a

1:48:51comment on them? Staff? Through the chair to Member Smith. I don't know if the applicant is

1:49:04aware that there is a deferral fee and even if they do come back, our staff position will most

1:49:08likely be the same. Like I can't confirm what additional variances would be required as a

1:49:15result of any proposed changes that would have to be done through a full review of new plans. However,

1:49:21I can confirm that staff still do not support the conversion of the existing detached accessory

1:49:27structure into an additional residential dwelling unit. That doesn't mean the four tests for

1:49:35variants under the Planning Act. There is a safety concern with regards to that.

1:49:38There is, yes, the structure is existing, but existing accessory structures and accessory

1:49:43structures in our bylaw do not allow for human habitation. And now in this case,

1:49:47you're adding an additional use. You're intensifying the property. It's a residential use. It's right

1:49:52against the spur line. There is a minimum of 15 meters required from the spur line for any new

1:50:00development and any residential development. It's for safety. And the applicant was also told this

1:50:08by the manager of the Guelph Junction Railway. And there's also some noise and vibration concerns

1:50:18as well when adding additional residential dwelling units. So just, I just want to make it clear that

1:50:23we still will come back with the same position that we do not support the additional residential

1:50:29dwelling unit with the reduced setbacks. And also if there's any other variances, we can't

1:50:34support them either. Thank you. Member Mead, did you have a question?

1:50:45Through the chair, I think we need to hear from the applicant, but he wants to do before I ask

1:50:52my question. Okay, that's fine. Thank you. Any other input from the committee? Sorry, that was

1:51:05supposed to be a question for the applicant, whether he wants to continue with this application

1:51:10or defer it. We may as well just continue and see what happens here. Okay, we can. Okay, that

1:51:21results my question. We can, are there any other questions before we

1:51:35seek input from the public? No other questions? Okay, so then we'll go into a

1:51:42three-minute session while we seek input from the public who anybody interested in this application

1:51:49can phone in and we will hear their comments and we'll be back in three minutes.

1:55:52Chair Kendrick, I can confirm that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

1:55:57Okay, then the committee will now begin to discuss the application to make a decision.

1:56:01Committee members, do you wish to make a motion? Please raise your hand. Member Mead.

1:56:11Thank you, Chair. I'm going to make a motion in accordance with the recommendations by staff,

1:56:17in particular, approval of variance C and refusal of variance A, B, D and E,

1:56:26as I do not believe they are appropriate developments of the lands, in particular on the

1:56:30accessory dwelling units, the concern of safety due to the adjacent rail corridor and the setback

1:56:39from it. And we have a seconder to the motion, please. Member Smith, second, so we have a motion

1:56:49to refuse everything except for condition D. Mr. Discussion on this.

1:56:56Chair, condition C is the one being approved. My mistake. I stand corrected. Thank you. Member

1:57:06Allison. I was just going to say they're not conditions, I believe. Say again.

1:57:16Just, it was just wording variances, I was going to say. Yeah, okay. That's okay. Thank you.

1:57:25Any comments or discussion on the resolution as moved and duly seconded?

1:57:36You ready for the question? Okay, here we go. Thank you, Chair. Committee members,

1:57:45please state if you are in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve variance C

1:57:51and refuse the other four variances, including variances A, B, D and E.

1:57:59Chair Kendrick. In favor. Member Allison. In favor. Member Dykstra.

1:58:06In favor. Member Hamilton. In favor. Member Meads. In favor. And Member Smith. In favor.

1:58:20That's carried, Chair. So the application has been rejected all but the one clause.

1:58:31If anybody wants to get copies of the resolution, I've got a script here that I've got to find.

1:58:48Just a minute. I lost my place. Anyway, I'll find it. There we go. If you wish to receive a copy

1:59:04of the decision of an application, including information about the appeal procedures,

1:59:09you must submit a written request by emailing cofa at gulf.ca with your name and the file number

1:59:15you are interested in. Please note that the owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the

1:59:20decision. The last application is file A-17-22, variance for proposed fence height and exterior

1:59:37side yard at 68 Suffolk Street West. Is the applicant or the representative present?

1:59:50Yes, I'm here.

1:59:54Would you please state your name and relationship to the application?

1:59:58Yes, Chris Golding. I'm the

2:00:00past chair and current board member at double street united church.

2:00:11Were the science posted and keeping with planning act requirements?

2:00:15Yes they were. Okay have you reviewed the comments and are you in agreement with

2:00:21the recommended conditions? Yes Mr. Chair yes.

2:00:25Okay you have 10 minutes if you wish to make a presentation of the committee

2:00:30further to your application. I don't think I have anything

2:00:35further to add to the application but available for

2:00:39questions through you if needed. Thank you very much for your brevity.

2:00:44Committee members do we have any questions for the

2:00:50committee? It's also going to be brief. No questions?

2:00:55Okay then we'll go into a three minute wait. Will we give the members of the

2:01:05public time to phone in if they wish to make a

2:01:10comment on the application?

2:01:14During that break I'd ask the members to please mute your microphones.

2:04:49Chair Kendrick I can confirm that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

2:04:54Thank you the committee will now begin to discuss the application and make a

2:04:57decision. Committee members do you wish to make

2:05:01a motion please raise your hand. Member Meads.

2:05:08Move approval with the recommended conditions. Do we have a seconder?

2:05:14Seconded by member Hamilton. Any discussion on the motion?

2:05:20No discussion on the motion. We will have the roll call please Madam

2:05:26Secretary. Thank you Chair Kendrick. Committee

2:05:31members please indicate if you're in favor or opposed to the motion which is to

2:05:35approve the application with the two recommended conditions.

2:05:40Chair Kendrick in favor. Member Allison in favor.

2:05:45Member Dykstra in favor. Member Hamilton in favor.

2:05:52Member Meads in favor and Member Smith in favor. That's carried chair.

2:06:02The application has been approved. The applicant now you are free to leave the

2:06:08hearing if you wish. A reminder to those watching if you

2:06:12wish to receive a copy of the decision on an application including

2:06:16information about the appeal process you must submit a written request by

2:06:19emailing cofa at gulf.ca with your name and the

2:06:23file number you are interested in. Please note that owners and

2:06:26applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

2:06:33We now have a request for a fee refund. We had two but one we've already

2:06:41dealt with so but we still have one that we have to deal with.

2:06:50Thank you chair and just wanted to know as you indicated the

2:06:54application fee refund request for file a

2:06:58dash 22 slash 22 for 50 Dean Avenue the applicant has withdrew that request so

2:07:04we don't need to deal with that item. So the remaining item is the deferral

2:07:10fee refund request for file a dash 55 slash 21 for 14 O'Connor Lane.

2:07:16This application was deferred at the December 10th 2021 hearing.

2:07:20We have received a request to refund the deferral fee

2:07:23and staff comments have been provided recommending that a partial refund in

2:07:27the amount of 50 percent of the deferral fee to ensure

2:07:31some costs are recovered for the time and materials required to recirculate

2:07:35and hold an additional hearing. I believe the

2:07:38applicants are in attendance if there is any questions from the committee

2:07:44members but I'll turn it over to the chair for

2:07:47our motion regarding this refund. I note that the butlers are present

2:07:56would you like to make an appeal to the committee?

2:08:02No you know it will keep it short and sweet I think the 50 percent is fair

2:08:06for everybody and we would we would be happy with that.

2:08:11Okay thank you committee members can we have a motion

2:08:16on the request member Hamilton. Oh yeah I moved for the refund as they

2:08:23supported by staff. And is there a seconder member Smith

2:08:32any discussion show a hands okay yeah show a hands all those in favor

2:08:39of the of the 50 percent carry unanimously there you go

2:08:47thank you we have additional information

2:08:55from the secretary treasurer

2:09:00a staff announcement. Thank you chair I just wanted to provide a quick

2:09:08update to the committee on the transition to hybrid committee of

2:09:11adjustment hearings. Today was our first phase of

2:09:14implementing this transition to a hybrid hearing format as committee

2:09:18members and staff were able to attend in person or remotely.

2:09:22The second and final phase will be transitioning to an

2:09:26transitioning to in-person attendance for applicants and members of the public

2:09:30starting at the next May hearing. Hearings will continue to be live streamed

2:09:34but members of the public will be able to watch the hearing in person or speak

2:09:38to an application in person at City Hall or speak remotely either via video or

2:09:43telephone. This will provide greater flexibility for

2:09:46participants to determine which method they wish to participate in hearings

2:09:51and any other administrative practices will remain as has been since the

2:09:55transition to remote hearings in May 2020.

2:09:58I will note that much of this wouldn't be possible without the assistance of

2:10:02staff behind the scenes making these hearings run very smoothly

2:10:06so a big thanks goes out to the city clerk's office staff for assisting with

2:10:10with these hearings and as we transition to a hybrid hearing method

2:10:14we'll endeavor to avoid any technical issues but we ask for your patience as

2:10:18we navigate through another new hearing format.

2:10:21I'm happy to answer any questions otherwise I'll turn it back to you Mr

2:10:26Chair for adjournment. Member Mead says a question. Go ahead.

2:10:34Thank you Chair. I will say great job to staff through the entire pandemic of

2:10:39setting up these remote hearings and person hearings and

2:10:42general chaos in general. I will note that as someone attending remotely

2:10:47today I do have difficulty seeing what is going on in council chambers.

2:10:53It's a quite a zoomed out view for me. I imagine it's the same case for everyone

2:10:57else and I know people's voices so I know who is

2:11:02talking but as someone as a member of the public I would

2:11:05find that difficult to know who is talking at each point during the hearing.

2:11:15Thank you Member Meads and thanks for the feedback. This is the same view for

2:11:19council chambers that we have for city council meetings and committee of the

2:11:22whole meeting. Similar views that we've had for live stream

2:11:27live streaming on the website. We'll definitely take that into consideration

2:11:30and see what we can do about that but the technology obviously is limited but

2:11:36we'll see what we can do. Thanks for your question.

2:11:42Thanks everybody. I think we went fairly smoothly

2:11:46through the meeting today and I think the transition

2:11:50back to live will go smoothly as well. Thank you very much. Good night.

2:11:57Well one more. We need a motion to adjourn.

2:12:06Moved by all members. Seconded by all of them. All in favor.

2:12:11We are adjourned. Thank you.