Committee of Adjustment

2:47Good afternoon, Guelph.

2:48I'd like to call to order the June 12, 2025 hearing

2:52of the Guelph Committee of Adjustment.

2:55This hearing is being held in a hybrid format

2:57with attendees appearing in person and or remotely,

3:00and is being live streamed and recorded.

3:03Please be advised that public hearings form

3:06part of the public record, and the words, names,

3:08and images of those participating

3:11shall be recorded and posted online.

3:13Member Siegel has sent her regrets

3:16and will not be attending this hearing.

3:18Before I outline the hearing format,

3:20if you're watching online and wish to speak to an application

3:24that's been listed on the agenda

3:26and have not yet submitted a request

3:28in advance of the hearing,

3:29please call the number displayed on the screen now,

3:33which is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

3:39That number again is 519-822-1260, extension 2524,

3:50and you will receive instructions on how to participate.

3:54For those attending the hearing in person,

3:56you'll also be given an opportunity to,

4:00pardon me, to address the Committee of Adjustment.

4:02A final call for delegations will be made

4:05when each application is called.

4:07The agenda for this hearing has been posted online

4:10at gulf.ca forward slash cofa.

4:16I'll remind committee members and staff participating

4:18in the hearing to please unmute your microphones

4:21when not in use.

4:23Applicants will be unmuted

4:25when their application is called.

4:27I'd also like to share the hearing format

4:29we'll be using to navigate through each application.

4:33Each application will be called by the Secretary of Treasury

4:36and the call-in number shall be displayed on the screen.

4:40For those wishing to speak to an application,

4:44afterwards the applicant will be given an opportunity

4:46to add anything further to their application

4:49to a maximum of 10 minutes.

4:51You will hear a chime when there are 30 seconds remaining

4:54and another when the 10 minutes have elapsed.

4:57If you're the applicant and have nothing further to add,

5:00you can just simply say so.

5:02Following this, for some files,

5:04staff may provide a brief presentation.

5:07Our committee will then be able to ask questions

5:10of the applicant or staff.

5:12After that, we'll hear from members of the public

5:15who wish to comment on an application.

5:17Please note that all comments should be addressed

5:20through myself, the chair.

5:22Please avoid repeating concerns already stated by others

5:25and focus on adding new information.

5:28Comments are limited to 10 minutes or less.

5:31You'll hear a chime when 30 seconds are left

5:34and another when the 10 minutes have elapsed.

5:37For delegates that have advised staff in advance

5:41of the hearing that they wish to display a presentation,

5:45your presentation will be displayed on the screen

5:48and a remote is available at the podium for delegates

5:51in person to advance their slides.

5:54Any members of the public who have submitted a request

5:57speak prior to the hearing will be the first invited

6:00to provide comments.

6:02For those watching the hearing online,

6:03if you wish to speak to an application

6:05and have not yet submitted a request

6:07in advance of the hearing,

6:09please call the number displayed on the screen now.

6:14For those attending the hearing in person,

6:15you'll also be given a chance to come forward

6:18to the podium and address the committee.

6:21Once we've received all comments from the public

6:24and all comments have been heard,

6:26the applicant or staff will be given the opportunity

6:29to respond to the committee.

6:31Finally, as chair, I will turn to my committee members

6:34for a motion and deliberation

6:36as well as a vote on the application.

6:38When the committee is making a decision on an application,

6:41the chair will be asking the secretary-treasurer

6:45to conduct the vote by roll call.

6:48Our secretary-treasurer will call each of the members' names

6:51and each member will respond

6:53if they are in favor or opposed to the motion.

6:55And as chair, I will announce the decision of the vote.

7:01If you wish to receive a copy of the decision

7:04on an application, you must submit a written request.

7:09A written request may be made by contacting staff

7:13using the contact information shown on the screen.

7:16To receive a copy of the decision,

7:19please email cofaatgualf.ca with your name,

7:25the file number that you're interested in.

7:29Please note that owners and applicants

7:31automatically receive a copy of each decision.

7:39And at this point, I wish to read

7:42our territorial acknowledgement.

7:50As we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege

7:53to live and work in Guelph,

7:56a city built over rich indigenous history.

7:59We are guests here, and we should reflect upon

8:01the responsibility to care for this land

8:04and the people who live here today

8:07and the generations to come.

8:09If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation,

8:13we should take pause and make those decisions

8:17with intention and with gratitude.

8:21This place that we call Guelph has served

8:23its traditional lands and place of refuge

8:28for many people over time,

8:30but more specifically, the Attawanderung

8:33and the Honoshone.

8:35This land is held as treaty lands and territory

8:38of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

8:42Guelph lies directly adjacent to the Haldeman track

8:46and is part of a long established hunting ground

8:48of the six nations of the Grand River.

8:52Many First Nations, Inuit and Metis people

8:56who have come across Turtle Island call Guelph home today.

9:10Committee members, at this point,

9:11I must ask you if we have any pecuniary interest

9:15in any of the motions we're about to review.

9:20Seeing none, I'd like to ask members to move

9:24and second our minutes from the last meeting.

9:30Members, Spears is moving.

9:32Do we have a seconder?

9:33Member Balaban, all those in favor?

9:37I believe that carries, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

9:41I've confirmed with the Secretary Treasurer

9:42we do not have a referral request.

9:45So at this point, I'll turn over to our Secretary Treasurer

9:53to ask for the first applicant.

9:58Thank you, Chair.

9:59I'll just note that there are a variety of applications

10:01on the agenda tonight that staff are recommending deferral.

10:05First is file A-64 slash 25 for one Chadwick Avenue

10:10was originally recommended for deferral by staff.

10:13However, the applicant has worked with staff

10:15to revise their application and remove five of the variances

10:19and bring the proposal more in compliance

10:20with the zoning bylaw requirements.

10:22And staff's now in a position to support the application.

10:25As a result, this application will be heard

10:27as listed under the current application section

10:30of the agenda for files B-40 slash 25

10:34and A-62 slash 25 for AD St. Ornode Street.

10:38As staff is recommending deferral of the minor variance file

10:41and refusal of the consent file

10:43and the applicant is not in support of that deferral request,

10:47those applications will be heard

10:48under the current application section of the agenda.

10:51And finally, there are three other applications

10:53on the agenda that are recommended for deferral.

10:56Staff is recommending deferral of files B-41 slash 25,

11:00B-42 slash 25 and B-43 slash 25 for 108 Fleming Road.

11:06So the applicant can address staff comments and concerns.

11:09The agent has agreed to this deferral request

11:12and is in attendance.

11:12Should the committee have any questions,

11:14but I'll turn it over to the chair

11:15for a deferral motion on 108 Fleming Road.

11:19Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

11:22And I misspoke when I said there were no deferrals.

11:28Is the applicant in attendance for 108 Fleming Road?

11:40Good afternoon.

11:41Can you see your name for the record, please?

11:42Jeff Beasman, Van Harten serving.

11:44And can you tell us your association with this application?

11:48The agent for the property.

11:51Thank you.

11:52And was the sign posted as per the Planning Act?

11:54Yes.

11:55And have you read staff's comments

11:57and are you in agreement with this deferral?

12:00In agreement with the deferral.

12:02Thank you.

12:03Committee members, what is your wish?

12:08Member Goodfell.

12:09I motion we defer the application

12:11following the city's recommendations.

12:14And do we have a seconder?

12:16Member Balaban.

12:20There is no debate on a deferral motion,

12:23so I will turn it over to the secretary,

12:25Treasurer, to call the roll, please.

12:28Thank you, chair.

12:29Committee members, please indicate your vote

12:31on the application, which is to defer the applications.

12:35Chair Smith.

12:36In favor.

12:37Member Balaban.

12:38In favor.

12:39Member Goodfellow.

12:40In favor.

12:41Member Mambrenio.

12:42In favor.

12:42And member Spears.

12:43In favor.

12:44That's carried, Mr. Chair.

12:46Thank you.

12:47Your application has been deferred.

12:50Thank you.

12:51Thank you.

12:53Madam Secretary Treasurer, maybe we have the...

12:55Oh, before we move on to the next application,

13:08regarding that application, it will become,

13:11as it's deferred, it will be coming back to the committee

13:16for our consideration at a later date.

13:19So if there is anyone here who is interested

13:22in speaking to this application,

13:25that's why you didn't have an opportunity to speak to it,

13:28as there is no debate on a deferral motion.

13:33At this point, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

13:34may I ask you to call the vote?

13:36Or pardon me, call the next applicant.

13:41The next application, our files, B-1-25,

13:45B-47-25, A-2-25, and A-3-25.

13:51Consent to create one new residential lot

13:54with one retained residential lot

13:55and multiple related variances for proposed severed

13:58and retained lots.

13:59Eastmans are proposed over a portion of the severed

14:02and retained lands to permit the shared driveway

14:04between the two properties at 68 to 76 Windham Street South.

14:08If you wish to speak to this application,

14:10you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

14:13That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

14:19When your call is received,

14:21staff will provide you with instructions

14:23on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

14:25This is the final opportunity to call in

14:27regarding this application.

14:29Also make note for the committee members,

14:32as well as those attending,

14:33is that there was a clerical error

14:36with one of the conditions.

14:38The second engineering condition for file B-47-25

14:43should reference the retained parcel,

14:45and this condition has been updated

14:48and the applicant has been notified about that.

14:51As well, there was an administrative condition

14:54for the minor variance files

14:55that was missing with the original staff comments document.

14:59That condition is that the consent application

15:01receive the consent applications,

15:03receive final certification of the secretary treasure

15:06and be registered on title.

15:08So the committee does decide to approve these applications.

15:12We recommend that these additional conditions

15:15for the minor variance files be included.

15:17That's all the updates that I have.

15:20Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasure.

15:23Is the applicant, yes, come forward please.

15:36Good afternoon and welcome to the committee of adjustment.

15:39Could you say your name

15:40in your relationship to the application please?

15:42Yes, Robert Turner from Fryett Turner Architects,

15:46and I'm the authorized agent for the applicant.

15:49Thank you, and can you tell me

15:50if the sign was posted as per the planning act?

15:52It was.

15:54And have you read staff's comments?

15:59And before I ask you if you agree on that,

16:02I should also ask, as our secretary treasure

16:05has presented additional comments

16:10if you were in agreement with those as well.

16:14Yes, we are.

16:15We've been in conversation over the last couple of weeks.

16:19That's awesome.

16:20So at this point, as you know,

16:22you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

16:26Thank you, through you, Mr Chair.

16:28This is a scheme that we've presented

16:31a couple of times before.

16:33We have revised the program somewhat

16:37since the last time it appeared.

16:39The project is now two fourplexes.

16:42The buildings are roughly the same size

16:45and in the same position as the previous applications,

16:47but it provides more appropriate unit sizes

16:51for the development.

16:53Really, the rest of this presentation

16:56is to do with housekeeping.

16:58There were some issues where our previous set of drawings

17:01were slightly in variance with the exact site lines

17:06and so forth.

17:08So we're now asking for a revised number of minor variances

17:14on the retained portion.

17:15There are three minor variances on the severed portion.

17:18There are two.

17:19And we've resolved a couple of the issues

17:21from the previous application,

17:24whereby for the retained portion,

17:27the front yard is now in compliance with the bylaw.

17:30And on the severed portion,

17:32the rear yard is now in compliance with the bylaw

17:36after the road widening.

17:40So this is the revised site plan.

17:42As you can see, it is roughly the same as previously.

17:46The setbacks can be seen on the left

17:51and at the top of the drawing

17:52and a slightly revised driveway has been drawn.

17:56The parking numbers are slightly different

17:58because the application is for two fourplexes

18:02which have a different parking requirement.

18:06The clarifications that staff were looking for,

18:10this is the severed portion

18:11and the proposed front yard is shown now as 1.5 meters

18:16after the road allowance has been taken.

18:18You can see it right there.

18:20And number two, the minimum setback

18:25between a driveway and a lot line.

18:28If you're familiar with this and remember it,

18:29the lot line actually is pretty much halfway

18:33down the driveway.

18:35So the minor variance is to allow these two lots

18:38to act as one so that the parking between the two buildings

18:42can be shared and management of the parking

18:45will be shared between the two.

18:47So this means that the setback lines between the driveway

18:51and the lot lines for both lots

18:53will require minor variance to make this work.

19:00Minor variance three again is this.

19:02This is to indicate that the exterior yard setback

19:07on the retained lot is now in compliance

19:11or sorry is 1.5 meters after the road widening is taken off.

19:17And this is the corresponding portion of the rear

19:23of the retained lot where we have rear yard setback

19:28which can't be achieved because of the presence of driveway.

19:33So the proposed rear yard is 5.064 rather than 7.5.

19:41Minimum setbacks for exterior stairs.

19:44Now that the road allowance is being taken off this,

19:47the stairs do pretty much touch the lot line at the front.

19:51So the minor variance number five is asked for

19:55to provide permission to put this stair right on the lot line

20:01against Windham Street.

20:07And that concludes the presentation.

20:11Thank you very much.

20:12And if you wait right there,

20:15my colleagues may have some questions.

20:17Community members, do we have any questions

20:18of this applicant?

20:22Member Palabin.

20:24Through you, Mr. Chair, the area on that last slide

20:29shown where the stairs are right up against the property line

20:32and then it shows an area of land up until the sidewalk

20:36or whatever the, who maintains that?

20:38Will that be your maintenance up until the sidewalk?

20:43I'm just curious as to how that's gonna be managed

20:46because you know, it's.

20:48Through you, Mr. Chair,

20:50one of the conditions of this application

20:53is that this land is conveyed to the city of Guelph.

20:58Thank you.

21:01Any other questions for the applicant or for staff?

21:05Seeing none.

21:07If you want to wait right there,

21:08we'll see if there are any members of the public

21:10who wish to speak to this application.

21:13Are there any members in the chamber of the public

21:15who would like to speak to this application?

21:19I don't see anyone rushing to the microphone,

21:22Madam Secretary Treasurer.

21:24Do you have anyone online?

21:26Mr. Chair, I can confirm no delegation requests

21:28have been received.

21:30Thank you.

21:32At this point, to committee members,

21:34I'm looking for a motion.

21:36Do we have a motion before us?

21:42Members, we are.

21:43I move that we accept this application

21:46with the conditions noted by city staff

21:48and the newer additional conditions also from staff.

21:55Thank you.

21:56And do we have a seconder?

21:58Member Membrano, is there any discussion

22:01on the motion before us?

22:04Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

22:07would you mind calling the roll please?

22:10Thank you, Chair.

22:11Committee members, please indicate your vote

22:12by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

22:15which is to approve the applications

22:17with the recommended conditions

22:20as well as those other ones that were noted

22:22at the start by staff.

22:24Chair Smith?

22:25In favor.

22:26Member Balavan?

22:27In favor.

22:28Member Goodfellow?

22:29In favor.

22:30Member Membrano?

22:31In favor.

22:32And Member Spears?

22:33In favor.

22:34That's carried, Mr. Chair.

22:36Thank you.

22:36Your application has been approved.

22:38Thank you, sir.

22:39Thank you.

22:46Madam Secretary Treasurer,

22:47may we have the next applicant, please?

22:53The next applications are files B-14-25 and A-28-25,

22:59consent to create one new residential lot

23:01with one retained residential lot

23:03and multiple related variances for proposed severed lot

23:06at 10 Ontario Street.

23:09If you wish to speak to these applications,

23:11you can call the number displayed on the screen.

23:13The number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

23:19When you call in, when your call is received,

23:21staff will provide you with instructions

23:23on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

23:25Also note for the committee members,

23:27as well as those attending,

23:29a couple of housekeeping items,

23:31there was an administrative condition

23:32for the minor variance file

23:34that was missing with the staff comments.

23:36So staff is recommending that the consent application

23:39receive final certification of the Secretary Treasurer

23:42and be registered on title.

23:43So that's an additional condition for file A-28-25,

23:48which is a typical administrative condition we would have.

23:53Also of note is that the Grand River Conservation Authority,

23:57the GRCA has advised now that they have no concerns

24:00with the application.

24:01They had previously provided comments

24:03when this application came to the March 13th hearing

24:06that they had concerns, they no longer have those concerns.

24:11And that's all the updates that I have for this application.

24:15Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

24:17Is the applicant here in the chamber?

24:20Yes, please come forward.

24:27Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

24:29Welcome.

24:30Can you state your name and your relationship

24:32to the application please?

24:33Certainly, I'm Michael Littmer.

24:34I'm a planner with GSP Group and Kitchener,

24:37and I'm here on behalf of the property owners as their agent.

24:41Thank you very much, Mr. Littmer.

24:43And can you tell me if the sign was posted

24:46as per the planning act?

24:48Yes, it was.

24:49Thank you.

24:50And have you read staff's comments

24:51and are you in agreement?

24:52I have and we are in agreement with staff's comments.

24:55Awesome.

24:56Well, in that case, you have 10 minutes

24:58to address the committee.

24:59Please make as much use of that time as you'd like.

25:02Thank you, Mr. Chair.

25:03I won't take up too much of the committee's time

25:05just to give some brief background on this application.

25:08As the Secretary Treasurer indicated,

25:10it was previously before the committee in March of 2025

25:14where it was deferred and we accepted

25:16the deferral recommendation to make some minor revisions.

25:20One of those, as was just indicated,

25:21was with regards to the Grand River Conservation Authority

25:24and their comments because the site is located

25:27within the special policy area.

25:29So to address the floodplain and providing safe access

25:33and building the proposed addition

25:35into a semi-detached below the regulatory flood elevation,

25:39the Topographic Survey has been completed

25:41and included with this application

25:43and to which the GRCA has indicated that they agree

25:46with those findings.

25:48Secondly, the other reason for deferral

25:50was with regards to the side yard elevation

25:53on the right hand side of the severed portion

25:57that was previously proposed at a setback of 0.6 meters.

26:00And upon reviewing staff's comments,

26:02we have doubled that side yard setback to 1.2 meters,

26:06which now meets that regulation in the zoning bylaw.

26:09So that variance that was previously on our application

26:12has now been withdrawn.

26:14Other than that, the other two variances in consent,

26:16we reviewed staff's conditions and agree with them.

26:20And we recommend, agree with staff's recommendation

26:23that the committee approve this application conditionally.

26:27Thank you, very concise.

26:29Appreciate that.

26:30If you want to wait right there,

26:32my colleagues may have some questions.

26:34Committee members, do we have any questions of this delegate?

26:38Seeing none, if you want,

26:43I should ask if staff have any questions they'd like to,

26:48or presentation, no, that's fine.

26:51And at this point, if you want to wait right there,

26:54we'll see if there are any members of the community

26:57who would like to address this application.

27:01Is there anyone in the gallery

27:02who would like to speak to this application?

27:06Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

27:09are there any delegates online?

27:12Mr. Chair, I can confirm no other delegation requests.

27:15Thank you.

27:16Committee members, what is your wish?

27:23Member Mourin?

27:26I move to approve the application

27:28as per conditions recommended by staff

27:32and the additional condition as per Madam Secretary.

27:36Thank you, Member Mourin.

27:37Do we have a seconder?

27:40Member Balaban, is there any conversation

27:43or discussion on the motion before us?

27:48Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

27:52may we have the vote taken please?

27:55Thank you, Chair.

27:56Committee members, please indicate your vote

27:58by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

28:00which is to approve the application

28:02with the recommended conditions

28:03as well as that additional condition

28:05for the minor variance file.

28:07Chair Smith?

28:09In favor.

28:10Member Balaban?

28:11In favor.

28:12Member Goodfellow?

28:13In favor.

28:14Member Mourinio?

28:15In favor.

28:15Member Spears?

28:16In favor.

28:17That's carried, Mr. Chair.

28:19Thank you.

28:19Your application has been approved, Mr. Littmer.

28:23Good to see you back in a different role.

28:25Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

28:31Madam Secretary Treasurer,

28:32may we have the next applicant please?

28:38The next file is file B-38-25,

28:41consent to create one new residential lot

28:43with one retained residential lot

28:45at 127 City View Drive North.

28:49All note for those watching online,

28:51if you wish to speak to this application,

28:53you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

28:56The number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

29:02When your call is received,

29:03staff will provide you with instructions

29:05on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

29:08Is the applicant in the chamber?

29:11Yes, please come forward.

29:21Good afternoon.

29:22Can you state your name and your relationship

29:24to the application please?

29:26Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee.

29:28My name is Nancy Shoemaker.

29:31I'm the planning consultant representing the owner

29:34on the application.

29:36Thank you, Mr. Shoemaker.

29:37And can you tell me if the sign was posted

29:40as for the Planning Act?

29:41Yes, it was.

29:43Thank you.

29:44As you know, you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

29:50Mr. Chairman, committee members,

29:52this application commenced back in 2019

29:56when the property was rezoned to permit these two lots,

30:02but the owner at that time chose not to proceed

30:04with the consent application.

30:06So we're back here now ready to move forward.

30:11We received the conditions recommended by staff

30:16and I've had a fairly fulsome discussion

30:19with staff regarding conditions one through six.

30:23And the reason for the discussion revolved around

30:29the requirement that these be satisfied

30:32prior to the issuance of the certificate

30:34of the official of official.

30:39And the concern is that there aren't houses

30:42right now proposed.

30:44So we were working with a footprint

30:47that could potentially go on these lots.

30:50And through discussions with staff,

30:53I understand that conditions two through six

30:57potentially if not satisfied could mean

31:00that nothing could be built on these lots.

31:02So I understand the requirement that these conditions

31:07be satisfied prior to the issuance

31:09of the certificate of official.

31:12The other condition being condition one,

31:16the tree preservation plan, I think is premature

31:21and should be deferred to building permit

31:23until we actually know what's going on this property.

31:27It's not really relevant to do a tree preservation plan.

31:33The other piece to this is that there is only one tree

31:37on the property and it's at the,

31:40what I'm going to call the southerly property line

31:44right on the corner with the street line

31:48and the adjacent property.

31:50So that tree ultimately will be preserved

31:54because it is a shared tree with the adjacent property owner.

32:00So the appropriate time to do a tree preservation plan

32:06is at the time that we know exactly what's going

32:10to be built on that property.

32:11And the recommendations of the tree preservation plan

32:15will set out precisely requirements

32:20to protect that tree in conjunction

32:22with what is actually being built on the property.

32:26I have reviewed this with staff and they're in agreement

32:29that this condition one can be moved to building permit.

32:35And that's my presentation.

32:37Thank you very much.

32:38And if you want to wait right there,

32:41my colleagues may have some questions for you.

32:43Committee members, do we have any questions of this applicant?

32:48Yes, member Goodfellow.

32:50So through the chair to city staff, just want to check,

32:53I guess that you are also in agreement

32:55with the summary provided by the applicant

32:58regarding condition one.

32:59And if there are suggestions on how we might possibly

33:03look at moving conditions two to six

33:05to another timeframe and whether that is possible.

33:12Through the chair to member Goodfellow,

33:14staff agree with what the applicant has said.

33:18We are okay changing condition one to be prior

33:20to the issuance of a building permit

33:21rather than prior to the issuance

33:23of the certificate of official.

33:28And to member Goodfellow through you, chair.

33:32My understanding was there wasn't a request

33:34to change the timing for the other conditions two through six.

33:38Okay, thank you.

33:39I appreciate that clarification here.

33:44Thank you.

33:45Any other questions for the applicant or for staff?

33:50Seeing none, if you want to wait right there,

33:52we'll see if members of the public would like

33:55to speak to your application.

33:57Are there any members of the chamber

33:59who would like to come forward

34:01and address this application?

34:05Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

34:07are there any delegates online?

34:11Mr. Chair, I confirm no other delegates.

34:15Thank you.

34:16Committee members, what is your wish?

34:20Yes, member Ballibat.

34:23I move that we approve the application

34:26with the recommendations of staff,

34:31except for recommendation one,

34:34which be reworded to prior to the issuance

34:42of a building permit and prior to taking on, et cetera,

34:52what's written here with respect to the three,

35:03what do they call it?

35:05All the other wording except for prior to issuance

35:08of certificate approval.

35:10So we say prior to issuance of a building permit.

35:19Thank you.

35:19And do we have a seconder for that?

35:21Member Spears has seconded that.

35:24Is there any discussion, committee members, on this?

35:29Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

35:33would you mind calling the vote, please?

35:36Thank you, Chair.

35:36Committee members, please indicate your vote

35:38by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

35:41which is to approve the application

35:43with the recommended conditions,

35:46with the one timing change to condition one

35:48to make it prior to building permit.

35:51Chair Smith.

35:51In favor.

35:53Member Balliband.

35:54In favor.

35:54Member Goodfellow.

35:55In favor.

35:56Member Mambrenio.

35:57In favor.

35:58And member Spears.

35:59In favor.

36:00That's carried, Mr. Chair.

36:01Your application has been approved.

36:04Thank you.

36:05Thank you.

36:09Madam Secretary Treasurer,

36:10may we have the next applicant, please?

36:16The next application is file A-63-25,

36:19variants to permit reduced landscaped open space

36:22for proposed addition to existing industrial building

36:24at 41 Massey Road.

36:26I'll note for those attending remotely,

36:29if you wish to speak to this application,

36:31you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen,

36:34that number's 519-822-1260, extension 2524,

36:40when your call is received,

36:41staff will provide you with instructions

36:43on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

36:47Is the applicant present?

36:50Yes, please come forward.

36:58Good afternoon, can you state your name

37:00and your relationship to this application?

37:02Hey everybody, I'm Cooper Jones.

37:04I'm an agent and an employee of the owner.

37:09And can you tell me if the sign was posted

37:11as for the planning act?

37:13Yes, indeed.

37:14Thank you.

37:15And have you read staff's comments

37:18and are you in agreement?

37:20I, yes, I am in agreement.

37:24Okay, well, as the other applicants have before you,

37:30you have 10 minutes,

37:31you can make as much use of that time as you wish.

37:35Sure, thank you very much.

37:37So essentially this expansion is just the first phase

37:40of a multi-phase redevelopment

37:43of our existing steel fabrication facilities

37:46on the property.

37:47Upgrading our facilities on the existing property

37:50will allow us to continue our advanced manufacturing methods

37:53for construction in a tightly knit and efficient manner.

37:57Our intent is to maximize our strategic location

38:01to the spur line on the property

38:03and deliver affordable housing and industrial

38:06and commercial properties across the country.

38:09So with your consideration,

38:11we look forward to continue being an example

38:13of an efficient land use,

38:16an example of efficient land use

38:18even in an industrial setting.

38:21But yeah, no further comments from me

38:23unless there's concerns from the public or the committee.

38:28Okay, thank you.

38:31Committee members, do we have any questions for the applicant?

38:35Seeing none.

38:38Are there any comments from staff

38:41who wish to speak to this application?

38:44I see shaking heads.

38:47At this point, I'm going to turn to the gallery

38:49and see if there's anyone here

38:50who would like to speak to this application.

38:54I don't see anyone coming forward.

38:57Madam Secretary Treasurer, do we have anyone online?

39:01Mr. Chair, I can confirm no other delegation requests

39:04have been received.

39:05Thank you. Committee members,

39:07how do we wish to proceed?

39:09Member Malibu.

39:10I move that we approve this application as submitted.

39:14Thank you. And do we have a seconder member?

39:16Good fellow.

39:18Is there any conversation or debate on this application?

39:22Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

39:25would you do the honors, please?

39:28Thank you, Chair. Committee members,

39:29please indicate your vote by responding in favor

39:31or opposed to the motion,

39:32which is to approve the application.

39:34Chair Smith.

39:36In favor. Member Balaban.

39:38In favor. Member Goodfellow.

39:40In favor. Member Mbrenio.

39:42In favor. And Member Spears.

39:44In favor. That's carried, Mr. Chair.

39:46Your application has been approved.

39:49Thank you so much.

39:51You're welcome.

39:53Madam Secretary Treasurer,

39:54may we have the next application, please?

40:00The next application is file B-39-25,

40:03consent to create new servicing easement

40:06for sanitary and water laterals

40:08in favor of one Simpson Way at 17 Bargain Drive.

40:12I'll also note that if you wish to speak

40:14to this application,

40:15you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen,

40:18the numbers 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

40:24And when your call is received,

40:25staff will provide you with instructions

40:26on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

40:31Welcome back.

40:32Can you state your name for the record, please?

40:34Jeff Buseman, Van Hartens-Fervin,

40:36agent for the property owner.

40:39Thank you, Mr. Buseman.

40:40And can you tell me if you read staff's comments

40:43and if you were in agreement?

40:44I read staff's comments and I am in agreement.

40:47Thank you.

40:48And was the sign posted as per the Planning Act?

40:50Yes, it was.

40:51Thank you.

40:52As you know, do you have 10 minutes?

40:54Okay, so this property on Vardin Drive

40:58was a configuration, there was a lot line adjustment.

41:01Now I can't point to anything or can I?

41:03It doesn't matter.

41:04There was a lot line adjustment.

41:06Prior to the lot line adjustment,

41:07this particular easement was at the side of the property.

41:12On Vardin facing the property,

41:14the easement was on the left side.

41:16So it was a lot line adjustment where a piece of the house

41:19that shows a lot 24 was added to this particular property.

41:24That easement is provide water and sanitary connection

41:28to the house on Gordon Street.

41:32The owner would like to have those lines moved

41:34to the edge of the property.

41:36So that's what we're asking for,

41:37is that these lines be moved to the edge of the property.

41:40Otherwise, if it is fundamentally stays the same.

41:45Thank you.

41:46And community members,

41:47do we have any questions of this application?

41:50Seeing none, are there any members of the public

41:53who would like to speak to this?

41:55Yes, please come forward to the microphone.

42:14Good afternoon.

42:15Can you say your name for the record, please?

42:17Janice, Catherine Janice-Boodle.

42:21And...

42:23And I'm the owner of One Simpson Way in Guelph.

42:27You have 10 minutes to address the committee

42:29and you can make as much time,

42:30use of that time as you'd like.

42:32So please go ahead.

42:34I'm in agreement with this proposal.

42:38The only thing that I want to ensure

42:41is that the lines are buried as deep as they are now.

42:46Just because of all the frost things and everything.

42:49And I've never had any problem there.

42:52So that would be my only request that that be ensured

42:55that they're as deep as they are now.

42:59And that's it.

43:03That's concise.

43:05To the point, thank you.

43:07Community members, do we have any questions of the delegate?

43:15I will ask on your behalf to staff,

43:19if engineering has any comment on that delegate.

43:29To the chair, it is something that would be done

43:32at building permit.

43:33I do not have the expertise to know the required depth,

43:37but there would be something.

43:39I'm certain of it under the building code.

43:43Okay, thank you.

43:45Certainly below frost, I would think it.

43:49Okay, thank you.

43:52Thank you.

43:54Are there any other members of the public

43:55who would like to speak to this application?

43:59I don't see anyone else in the chamber.

44:03Madam Secretary Treasurer, is there anyone online?

44:07Mr. Chair, I can confirm no other delegation requests

44:09have been received.

44:11Thank you.

44:13Committee members, what is your,

44:15well, I should ask Mr. Buseman first

44:18if he has any comment on the delegates presentation.

44:21It will be, the services will be built according

44:24to building code and building permit will be required for it.

44:28It'll meet standards.

44:29Thank you.

44:31Thank you.

44:32Committee members, what is your wish?

44:36Member Goodfellow.

44:37I move we approve the application

44:39with the conditions recommended by city staff.

44:43Thank you.

44:44And a seconder, Member Spears.

44:47Is there any debate or conversation on this motion?

44:53Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

44:56I'll turn it over to you, please.

44:59Thanks, Chair.

45:00Committee members, please indicate your vote

45:02by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

45:04which is to approve the application

45:06with the recommended conditions.

45:08Chair Smith.

45:09In favor.

45:10Member Balavan.

45:11In favor.

45:12Member Goodfellow.

45:13In favor.

45:14Member Membranio.

45:15In favor.

45:15And Member Spears.

45:16In favor.

45:17That's carried, Mr. Chair.

45:19Your application has been approved.

45:21Thank you.

45:22You're welcome.

45:25Madam Secretary Treasurer,

45:26may we have the next application, please.

45:33The next application is file A-64-25,

45:37variances for proposed attached garage,

45:40interior setback, front yard setback,

45:41and gross floor area,

45:43variants to permit two existing driveways

45:45and multiple variances related to parking

45:47at one Chadwick Avenue.

45:50For those attending remotely,

45:51if you wish to speak to this application,

45:53you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

45:56That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

46:01When your call is received,

46:03staff will provide you with instructions

46:04on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

46:07This is the final opportunity to call in

46:09regarding this application.

46:11I'll also note for the committee members,

46:13as well as those attending,

46:16as the applicant has significantly revised the application

46:20and staff are now in a position

46:24to recommend approval of the application.

46:27There was a note in the staff comments

46:29about a potential condition from building services

46:32about an access and maintenance agreement,

46:34and that's no longer needed

46:35due to the changes to the application.

46:37But planning services is recommending a condition

46:40that the addition maintain the general size

46:43and location as noted on the sketch.

46:45I'll also note that staff does have a brief presentation

46:48for this file after the applicant provides their remarks.

46:52Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

46:54Is the applicant present?

46:57Yes, please come forward.

47:07Good afternoon.

47:08Can you state your name

47:09and your relationship to the application, please?

47:11Good afternoon.

47:12My name is Lynn McKinnon, and I'm the homeowner.

47:16And can you tell me if the sign was posted

47:18as per the planning act?

47:19Yes, I did.

47:21And I know there's been some conversation

47:25between you and staff and that staff

47:27are going to have a presentation after yours,

47:31but at this point,

47:33are you in general agreement with staff's comments?

47:36Yes.

47:37Thank you.

47:39You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

47:41Please make as much use of that as you'd like.

47:45Well, I agree with everything

47:46that city staff has worked with me

47:49and to get the application to this point.

47:54I really don't have anything else to add to that.

47:57I look forward to getting started.

47:59And I'm very thankful for the guidance of city staff.

48:03Thank you.

48:05If you want to wait right there,

48:06my colleagues may have some questions.

48:08Committee members, do we have any questions of the applicant?

48:13Seeing none, I'm going to call on staff

48:18if they have their presentation ready,

48:21if they'd like to go ahead.

48:22Yes, Mr. Lut.

48:23Please.

48:25Through you, Mr. Chair and committee.

48:27So we've worked with the applicant

48:29to revise the proposal to something closer

48:31and conformity of the zoning bylaw.

48:33So the plan before you now,

48:35the side yard distance for the garage space addition

48:37was increased and the existing driveway from St. Erno Street

48:41was extended, resulting in five variances

48:43no longer being required,

48:45being variances C, D, E, F and G.

48:50So the proposal now only requires two variances, A and B,

48:55both of which staff can support.

48:58Only one condition from planning is now recommended

49:00to ensure the proposal will match

49:02what is shown on the submitted site plan.

49:06The condition proposed by building

49:08for an access and maintenance agreement

49:09is no longer required

49:11as they've met the minimum setback distance

49:13of 0.6 meters for the side yard.

49:16And engineering staff have no remaining concerns

49:18of the application.

49:21Staff are available for any questions

49:22regarding this approval recommendation.

49:25Thank you.

49:27Thank you.

49:28Committee members, do we have questions of staff

49:31and their presentation?

49:34Seeing none.

49:37Oh, yes, Member Goodfellow.

49:39Yes, thanks.

49:40Through the chair to city staff,

49:41I think I was trying to follow along.

49:45I think I've got it,

49:46but could you just go through one more time

49:49which of the conditions city staff agrees with

49:52and which ones are no longer in front of us for review?

50:01Through you, Mr. Chair to Member Goodfellow.

50:04So if you have the list of variances before you

50:08listed from A to G,

50:10we're keeping A as originally proposed.

50:12So that's requesting a front yard distance of 5.17 meters.

50:18And then for variance B,

50:20we're keeping that variance,

50:21but requesting 0.6 meters instead of zero.

50:25Conditions.

50:30Sorry, you were asking about the conditions, right?

50:32Oh, okay, my apologies.

50:34We are keeping the conditions,

50:37the condition for planning staff,

50:39which is that whatever they're showing

50:43unsubmitted drawing is going to match whatever they build.

50:48The condition from building staff is no longer required.

50:52Okay.

50:53Thank you.

50:54You actually answered the other question I was going to ask

50:57about the 0.6 meters, so I appreciate that.

50:59Thanks.

51:01Thank you.

51:02Committee members, any other questions?

51:04Seeing none, are there any members of the public present

51:10who would like to speak to this application?

51:15I don't see anyone coming to the microphone.

51:18Madam Secretary Treasurer, do we have anyone remotely?

51:22Mr. Chair, I can confirm no other delegation requests.

51:26Thank you.

51:27Committee members, what is your wish?

51:33Member Bellaman.

51:36Before I make this motion,

51:41make this motion.

51:42So do I just make the motion for A and B, and that's it?

51:50Well, A and A being 5.17,

51:53like should I read it out specifically?

51:56Maybe I should be asking

52:00and change the minimum side yard to 0.6

52:05because our report says something different

52:07and I'm not really sure what needs to be said

52:11to make it clear because our report

52:15has something completely different.

52:18Valid point, and we also have an updated drawing.

52:22We do.

52:23So I can add that to the motion as well,

52:26in accordance with the updated drawing saying.

52:30And the updated conditions recommended by staff

52:34at this meeting.

52:35Yes.

52:37Would that satisfy the wordsmithing,

52:40Madam Secretary Treasurer?

52:43To the chair, that's perfectly acceptable.

52:45I can also read out, so variance A was for a minimum

52:49front yard setback of 5.17 meters, that's still remaining.

52:53And then the other variance is variance B,

52:55a minimum left side setback of 0.6 meters.

52:59Previously it was zero meters

53:01and the other variances C through G are no longer needed.

53:07That's what I should include.

53:08Okay.

53:09So I move that the minor variance A

53:21with a minimum front yard setback of 5.7 meters

53:25and variance B have a minimum left side yard setback

53:30of 0.6 meters.

53:35And that the drawing to match those new requirements

53:43be approved and that as a condition that the drawing

53:48submitted in reference to those changes

53:52be included in the approval.

53:59I think you've summed it up very well.

54:01Thank you.

54:03Committee members, we need a seconder member.

54:06Good fellow.

54:08Do we have any conversation or debate on this update?

54:14Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

54:18thanks for helping us to handle this.

54:20And can you call the vote please?

54:24Thank you, chair, committee members,

54:25please indicate your vote by responding in favor

54:27or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application

54:30with the condition recommended by planning services staff,

54:35also noting that there's revised drawings

54:37that have been submitted.

54:39Chair Smith.

54:40In favor.

54:41Member Balaban.

54:42In favor.

54:43Member Goodfellow.

54:44In favor.

54:44Member Mavrano.

54:45In favor.

54:46And member Spears.

54:47In favor.

54:48That's carried, Mr. Chair.

54:50Your application has been approved.

54:51You're free to leave the meeting.

54:58Madam Secretary Treasurer,

54:59may we have the next application please?

55:05The next applications are files B-40-25A-65-25

55:12consent to create one new residential lot

55:15with one retained residential lot

55:16and variances to permit reduced exterior

55:19side yard setback and parking

55:21located within site line triangle

55:22for proposed semi-detached dwelling on Severed Parcel

55:25at 80 St. Arnaud Street.

55:28I'll note for those attending remotely,

55:31if you wish to speak to this application,

55:32you can do so by calling the number

55:34that's displayed on the screen,

55:36that number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

55:42When your call is received,

55:43staff will provide you with instructions

55:45on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

55:47This is the final opportunity to call in

55:49regarding this application.

55:51I'll also note that staff does have a brief presentation

55:54for this file after the applicant provides their remarks.

55:59Thank you.

55:59Welcome back, Mr. Buseman.

56:01Can you state your name for the record please?

56:03Jeff Buseman, Van Hart and surveying agent for the property.

56:06Yes, the signs were posted.

56:09Thank you.

56:10You're doing half my job for me here.

56:12Yeah.

56:15At this point, as you know,

56:17you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

56:19Thank you.

56:20This is about 80 St. Arnaud.

56:22The plan is to replace this small house

56:25with a pair of new semi-detached units.

56:30The staff basically supports the idea

56:33of two semi-detached units

56:35and that it fits in the street and would all make sense,

56:37except for the issue of the exterior side yard variance

56:41to the lane on the left.

56:43Other than that,

56:44all the other zoning requirements are met.

56:46So the primary issue on this whole thing

56:48is the side yard abutting the lane

56:51and that's where I'm gonna focus this presentation on.

56:55Exterior side yard.

56:56When our client purchases property,

56:58we are client as planning staff

57:00and receive the feedback that the side yard

57:02is an interior side yard,

57:04meaning 1.2 would rule for a semi

57:07and not an exterior side yard.

57:10When we put in the application,

57:11we asked for an interpretation when we're told

57:14the opposite that it was an exterior side yard

57:17and this is the email that we received on it.

57:19I'm confirming that one beside lane,

57:20it's an exterior side yard and not an interior side yard.

57:24There were text changes to streets and lanes

57:26in the new zoning bond law,

57:27which inadvertently left out the lane.

57:30And I mean, the phrase is the word lane

57:32in some of the text.

57:33Lanes are public right of ways

57:35and traffic engineering has also confirmed

57:36that they're considered right of ways.

57:38This text will be updated in the zoning bond law,

57:42but zoning has been consistent with continued

57:45to consider lanes as streets,

57:47which then create exterior side yards.

57:52In the definition, we took a look at the definitions.

57:55A public street means a road, right away,

57:57a roadway that is used by vehicles

57:59and maintained by the city of Guelph,

58:01but does not include a public lane.

58:03Very clearly it says does not include a public lane.

58:07Lane means a right of way,

58:08not intended for general traffic circulation

58:11that provides motor vehicle access to an abutting lot,

58:14but does not include a street,

58:15either it's private or public street.

58:18Exterior sideline, that definition really just refers

58:21to street on the two sides,

58:23same with exterior side yard and it's definition.

58:28Corner lot means a lot situated at the intersection of

58:31and abutting two or more streets or parts of the same street.

58:35In my opinion, the definitions are clear.

58:39The references to exterior side yard

58:41and corner lot are two streets,

58:43and that in the definition section, the lane is different.

58:48In this case, it is a public lane, that's clear,

58:50because it's owned and operated by the city of Guelph.

58:53We're suggesting that words were missing in the bylaw.

58:56In our opinion, we have to work with the bylaw as it's written.

59:02The first interpretation we received

59:04fits the definitions discussed.

59:06A subsequent explanation that there was an omission,

59:09I don't think should be admitted, but that's an opinion.

59:13But I wanna talk about the characteristics

59:14of the lane for a minute.

59:16This is the lane on the left, as you see it from the road.

59:19Maybe I've zoomed in a little bit too much,

59:21but if you drove by, you'd think it's a driveway.

59:23And you can see how close the house is on the left.

59:26You see that on the house on the left, that door there,

59:28that's about a meter from the road limit,

59:31and our property, subject property's on the right.

59:33That curb on the right, it becomes more of a retaining wall

59:36as you go further back,

59:38because the land drops on the back and the right.

59:41Come on.

59:42This is the same lane, but looking from Allen Street,

59:45which is the street to the north.

59:46Again, it looks like a driveway,

59:48and you can see how close the house on the right

59:50is to that lane.

59:52That's just typical of the area.

59:54I thought I'd show the whole block for a minute.

59:56You can see the block, the subject property's in red.

1:00:00The laneway is 5.7 meters wide at the back there,

1:00:03but it's 4.3 meters wide beside our subject property.

1:00:09The characteristics of this lane is about 3 meters wide,

1:00:11the asphalt, so it's one way in terms of no two cars

1:00:15can't really pass each other.

1:00:16It was created in 1905.

1:00:18I've talked about the width.

1:00:20I figured out there's about seven properties on St. Turnot,

1:00:23two on Allen and four or five on Meadowview

1:00:25that used for parking in the back.

1:00:27There's about 20 parking spots.

1:00:30And as I showed on the pictures,

1:00:32it looks like a driveway from both roads.

1:00:36There's no posted sign,

1:00:37no signs about it being one way or not,

1:00:39no signs of do not enter.

1:00:41The only one sign says no parking on laneway.

1:00:44So I noticed the word laneway.

1:00:47It's used by those that park in the back,

1:00:49general traffic, as we looked in the one definition,

1:00:53that general traffic doesn't go there very clearly.

1:00:55I didn't know it was there, that lane,

1:00:56until I came across this project.

1:00:59It looks like there's an etiquette amongst the users

1:01:02to use this lane.

1:01:03I'm guessing they all come from Allen, come down,

1:01:05and then come out to St. Turnot.

1:01:06When I was there Wednesday morning,

1:01:08I saw two cars come out that way.

1:01:10There is a notable grade on the long section

1:01:12behind the houses, but as you go between these two houses,

1:01:15it somewhat flattens out.

1:01:17Definitely, traffic goes slowly.

1:01:19You have no choice.

1:01:21Some more on the characteristics of the lane.

1:01:23You can see on the right, I have a cloud there right now.

1:01:26Our existing house is 0.8 of a meter from the lane,

1:01:29about 1.4 meters from the St. Turnot.

1:01:34The house on the left with the red cloud there,

1:01:36the memory show in that photo, there is a door there.

1:01:40They walk right out onto this lane,

1:01:42and it's about one meter at the back corner of that house

1:01:46in 76.

1:01:48This lane, this house also on 76 on the left has a garage,

1:01:52and they park off that lane.

1:01:56I thought I'd take a look at some other lanes and guelphs.

1:01:58This got my interest.

1:01:59This is Florence Lane near Victoria and York.

1:02:05You can see some of these houses,

1:02:08and so on of driveways and sidewalks

1:02:10coming right to that lane.

1:02:11That one's much more labeled, signs, clear,

1:02:14traveled by public, much more.

1:02:17This one I want to spend some attention on.

1:02:19This is behind our old office.

1:02:21There's a lane that's between Woolwich and Dufferin,

1:02:25parallel with it.

1:02:26It goes through several blocks.

1:02:28You can see that it has a no-through traffic.

1:02:30They're trying to prevent that.

1:02:32What's similar to the one we're talking about

1:02:34is about one lane of traffic could drive through.

1:02:37Also notice on this one, they put a guardrail there,

1:02:40probably because of the grade change from the lane down.

1:02:45That particular house was built in 1988,

1:02:50and I actually took advantage in taking a look

1:02:52at the Severance and Minor Variance Applications

1:02:54from 1988, it's quite a while ago.

1:02:59We also did a survey on that thing,

1:03:00and that house is 1.5 meters from the edge of the lane.

1:03:03So it's very similar to what we're looking at.

1:03:08I'm just going quickly.

1:03:09I can't say, our most recent bylaw was,

1:03:14the one we have now is 2023 before, that was 1995.

1:03:17I don't know the bylaw prior to that,

1:03:19but at this time this documentation tells me

1:03:23they did not ask for an exemption to the exterior side yard.

1:03:28I don't know if it was an issue,

1:03:30but they certainly talked about it

1:03:31in the comments that I saw.

1:03:35My main point here is that 1.5 meter works well,

1:03:38it has a slope as well, and they put a guardrail in.

1:03:41I want to talk about that guardrail in a minute.

1:03:44Our proposal, we figure we can do a little more wiggling.

1:03:47We can move it over to the right a little bit

1:03:48to make it 1.2 meters instead of a 1.3,

1:03:52but right now that house is only 0.8 of a meter

1:03:55from the laneway.

1:03:56Not only that, we're going to make the house

1:03:5811 meters back from St. Turno, right now it's 1.45.

1:04:02As you can tell, we're making a much better visibility.

1:04:04It's a much better improvement.

1:04:08So we're going to shift, we're trying to shift

1:04:10the property line as tight as we can to the right

1:04:13so that we can keep the 7.5 on the right,

1:04:16we can make a little more room on the left,

1:04:17so we're looking at 1.3, 1.4 for the exterior,

1:04:22well, I'm calling it the side yard to the lane.

1:04:30There are some comments made that we're proposing,

1:04:33what's, we're proposing a guardrail.

1:04:36Also what's there today is a retaining wall

1:04:38and any side door or access coming out of that house

1:04:43will be protected by the guardrail

1:04:45and that existing retaining wall.

1:04:48And that's a big thing, we're proposing a guardrail

1:04:50which I think will address all safety concerns.

1:04:55Staff acknowledge that new houses further back

1:04:57and back from the lane of St. Turno,

1:05:00but the house will be longer and bigger

1:05:02than the existing one.

1:05:03You saw the picture on the first one,

1:05:05that existing house is tiny.

1:05:08So to suggest that there's a new safety concern,

1:05:11we're challenging that and we're addressing it

1:05:14by having a slightly larger setback

1:05:16that's really not the big thing,

1:05:18but the big thing is that we're proposing a guardrail

1:05:20and we really don't think that safety is an issue

1:05:23because we know it's only the locals use it,

1:05:25they have an etiquette and I'm sure they have a neighborhood

1:05:28group that catches anybody, goes quick down that lane.

1:05:33It says it's not in keeping with the character

1:05:35and orientation of similar buildings

1:05:36to adjacent laneways, I'd say no, it's very clear,

1:05:39this is the character, the character of the ones

1:05:42that we've seen in other houses, these houses,

1:05:45this lane operates more like an interior side yard

1:05:48and you can see that on this photo here as well.

1:05:57The staff say six meters is excessive

1:05:59and a reduction is possible, they don't say by how much.

1:06:03A significant reduction will challenge

1:06:06the opportunity for a semi and we propose some challenges

1:06:09and the windows and doors won't go into the lane.

1:06:15We don't agree with the definition, necessarily,

1:06:18but we don't, I'm gonna make clear,

1:06:21I gotta finish this thoughts, Mr. Chair, if you don't mind.

1:06:24I'll allow another 15 seconds.

1:06:26Thank you, we're not asking the committee

1:06:28to make a ruling on the definition,

1:06:31is it exterior side yard?

1:06:33We're just asking the committee to consider the situation,

1:06:36realize what we're working with here

1:06:39and I'm saying that the results of 21 Clarence,

1:06:42for example, shows that it can work well,

1:06:44we're asking the committee issue a condition of a guardrail

1:06:48and I think things are addressed

1:06:50and I'd be happy to answer questions

1:06:52that I couldn't get to in this year's meeting.

1:06:53Thank you.

1:06:55Committee members, do we have any questions

1:06:59of this applicant?

1:07:01Member Speer.

1:07:02Through you, Mr. Chair, to the applicant.

1:07:04How does snow get dealt with on this laneway?

1:07:06Oh man, I did not think about that.

1:07:09I was in the back, in the back, the parking spots,

1:07:14it's not all parking.

1:07:16So in the back, there's grass and so on

1:07:19to throw the snow on, I would say.

1:07:21I really don't know what they do between,

1:07:24like for this last little stretch,

1:07:26I never did not think about that at all.

1:07:30But does the city do it?

1:07:32Oh yeah, city.

1:07:32The city plow.

1:07:33Well, I'm making that assumption

1:07:35because it is a public right away,

1:07:37so that means it's owned and operated by the city,

1:07:40knowing that there's 20 parking spots there,

1:07:43for sure it's not a joint arrangement

1:07:46with all the neighbors or anything.

1:07:47It's definitely a public thing.

1:07:49It's maintained by the city, so the city does the plowing.

1:07:51So I'm assuming there's a lot of snow,

1:07:54they get a good machine and just load it

1:07:56in a dump truck and go.

1:07:57That's my assumption.

1:07:59Okay, thank you for that.

1:08:03Thank you, Member Speer.

1:08:04Is there any other questions of this delegate?

1:08:10Seeing none, I'm going to ask staff.

1:08:13I understand there's a presentation.

1:08:16So please go ahead and stop.

1:08:20Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1:08:22So the applicant is proposing,

1:08:23as Mr. Buesner mentioned,

1:08:24to sever the existing single detached lot

1:08:27to facilitate the creation of two semi-detached

1:08:29residential lots.

1:08:31Each of the lots would front onto St. Arno Street

1:08:33and would meet the minimum required lot frontage

1:08:35and lot size for semi-detached lots.

1:08:39And the severed parcel would also have 36.4 meters

1:08:42of frontage along the existing lane.

1:08:45So the proposed development conforms

1:08:46with all the zoning requirements

1:08:47of the 2023 zoning bylaw,

1:08:49with the exception of the required exterior

1:08:51side yard setback for the severed lands

1:08:53adjacent to the lane, as you've already heard much about.

1:08:57So as outlined in staff's comments,

1:08:59staff do have concerns that the proposed

1:09:01exterior side yard setback of 1.2 meters

1:09:04to the lane would pose significant safety concerns,

1:09:07especially for a new build,

1:09:08and would not adhere to the criteria

1:09:10for intensification outlined in section 9.3.1.1

1:09:14of the official plan,

1:09:15which is addressed in more detail in staff's comments.

1:09:20So on a typical municipal right of way,

1:09:21there are usually at least a couple of meters

1:09:23of landscape buffer in between the lot line

1:09:26and the curb of the street.

1:09:27However, in this particular case for this lane,

1:09:30the curb is right on the lot line,

1:09:31I believe in the drawing provided by the applicant

1:09:34at one point it even goes slightly

1:09:35into the subject property.

1:09:38For this reason, staff feel that an exterior side yard setback

1:09:41of at least three meters would be more appropriate

1:09:43for the site to ensure more separation

1:09:46between the roadway and the proposed dwelling.

1:09:49Given the narrow frontage of the proposed lots,

1:09:52it would be functionally impossible

1:09:53to provide a three meter setback

1:09:55while also maintaining a reasonable dwelling width

1:09:57if we proceed with the proposed severances.

1:10:01For this reason, staff are unable to support

1:10:03the proposed severance application.

1:10:05For the same reason, staff are unable to support

1:10:08the exterior side yard setback variance as proposed.

1:10:12Staff would be willing to work with the applicant

1:10:14to come up with an alternative proposal

1:10:15that would achieve intensification on the site

1:10:19while addressing the concerns

1:10:20regarding the exterior side yard setback.

1:10:23In particular, the subject lands could be a good candidate

1:10:25for a foreplex, which would be permitted

1:10:27as a right on the property.

1:10:31Additionally, staff note that proposed variance B

1:10:33is not necessary to facilitate the proposed development.

1:10:37There's no required parking spaces

1:10:38that would be within that site line triangle.

1:10:40So for that reason, staff are not supportive

1:10:42of the requested encroachment into the site line triangle

1:10:45because we don't think that's a necessary variance.

1:10:48So staff recommend refusal of consent application

1:10:50B40-24 and deferral of minor variance application A65-24

1:10:56to allow for lesser exterior side yard setback variance

1:10:59to be brought forward in the near future.

1:11:02Thank you.

1:11:05Thank you.

1:11:07Committee members, do we have any questions for staff?

1:11:13Through you, Mr. Chair, to Mr. Rampel.

1:11:16I just want to make sure that,

1:11:20a little confused, I must admit.

1:11:22So if we refuse the consent application,

1:11:26it's because they couldn't functionally build

1:11:29what they want to build

1:11:30because the variance wouldn't be supported.

1:11:34I mean, I'm trying to figure out

1:11:36which is the cart and which is the horse here.

1:11:39If it's the variance that we can adjust those distances

1:11:45to make it more reasonable, why would we prevent the consent?

1:11:52Through the Chair and Member Spears,

1:11:53the reason is staff don't feel comfortable

1:11:56supporting any exterior side yard setback

1:11:58less than three meters.

1:12:00If they were to provide

1:12:00a three meter exterior side yard setback,

1:12:03there wouldn't be enough space on the lot.

1:12:07To have a dwelling in between that exterior side yard setback

1:12:10and the lot line.

1:12:11So that's the reason why staff have recommended refusal

1:12:13of that, we don't think it's possible

1:12:15to functionally fit a dwelling on that lot

1:12:19if our recommended exterior side yard setback is

1:12:23proceeded with.

1:12:24That being said, staff would be okay with the deferral.

1:12:27That's the route that the committee wishes to go.

1:12:31Thank you.

1:12:35Member Goodfellow.

1:12:36Yes, through the Chair to City staff,

1:12:39I appreciated the overview and the additional detail.

1:12:43You answered a number of my questions.

1:12:45But the one I would like some input on

1:12:48is or perhaps a bit more detail,

1:12:52is the discussion about the changes

1:12:55that are potentially coming to the zoning bylaw

1:12:58to address a gap or an admission of the word lane?

1:13:02Can you just go through that a little bit in detail,

1:13:05and help me understand kind of what the story is there?

1:13:09Thank you.

1:13:15Yeah, through the Chair to Member Goodfellow.

1:13:21So the word lane and street is found in many definitions

1:13:26that are all intertwined with yards and such.

1:13:34So this has been identified definitely as a whole

1:13:40and is on a priority list to get this updated

1:13:44through an amendment to the bylaw.

1:13:48I don't have the timing for that right now,

1:13:52but it will be clarified that a public lane

1:13:58is included as a street.

1:14:02I believe originally that the lane

1:14:07was separated out for the benefit

1:14:12of accessory dwelling units and access to them

1:14:16to have a second driveway when you're abutting a lane

1:14:19in the rear yard.

1:14:22And inadvertently, there's been some now issues

1:14:26caused with that.

1:14:30Okay, thank you.

1:14:30And if I may, just with a follow-up question.

1:14:34So through the Chair to City staff again,

1:14:37that's very helpful.

1:14:38Can you comment on what was in the 95 zoning bylaw?

1:14:44Yes, through the Chair.

1:14:48A lane was actually never included

1:14:50in the definition of street under the 95 bylaw.

1:14:54It was left silent because it's a public right of way.

1:14:58Zoning staff always and owned the city.

1:15:02Zoning staff always included it as a street.

1:15:07So in that case, street was the catch-all phrase

1:15:11and lane and other public right of ways

1:15:14were included under that umbrella.

1:15:16Am I understanding that correctly?

1:15:17Yes, that's correct.

1:15:19Okay, thank you, appreciate it.

1:15:22Thank you.

1:15:24Any other questions, committee members?

1:15:27I do have one for staff.

1:15:28And in reading through this, I just wanna be clear.

1:15:34It seems to me that this building is not designated

1:15:39but is listed, am I correct?

1:15:45To the Chair, that is correct.

1:15:48It is a listed heritage property but not designated.

1:15:51So there would have to be a heritage permit issued

1:15:53for that removal of that building, I believe, yes.

1:15:56So maybe this is a catch-22 situation.

1:16:02Do you go forward with a demolition request

1:16:05before you have a variance application approved

1:16:13or vice versa?

1:16:16So I'm wondering if you could help me out a little on that.

1:16:25To the Chair, I think heritage planning staff

1:16:27have recommended a condition for that consent.

1:16:31Let me double check that.

1:16:51Sorry, so there wasn't a condition recommended

1:16:53because refusal is recommended by staff

1:16:55but heritage planning staff have noted

1:16:57that a heritage permit would need to be approved

1:17:01prior to the demolition taking place.

1:17:03I think it would be preferable to,

1:17:05if staff wishes to approve this application,

1:17:08approve it and then have it go to council

1:17:10to get that demolition permit.

1:17:12We certainly don't wanna see the building demolished

1:17:15and then see nothing proceed with the property, right?

1:17:18I guess that's sort of my sense as well

1:17:21is I don't want to speak for city council.

1:17:23Like it's, and were we to acquiesce to this,

1:17:31then we might be forcing their hand a little bit.

1:17:35So I appreciate that.

1:17:37Yes, please.

1:17:39Yeah, so I think if staff or if the committee does wish

1:17:42to approve this application,

1:17:43I would recommend a condition

1:17:45that the appropriate heritage approvals be received prior

1:17:49to the issuance of the certificate of official.

1:17:51That way you won't be speaking on council's behalf.

1:17:56But this, I guess the severance is the issue really

1:18:00because if we sever this,

1:18:03unless the existing building becomes some kind of a duplex

1:18:08that essentially says it's being demolished.

1:18:13Not entirely because it would be approved conditionally, right?

1:18:15So if they weren't able to satisfy the conditions,

1:18:17then the severance would lapse

1:18:19and it would go back to the way that it was prior.

1:18:24Okay, thank you very much for that qualification.

1:18:28Committee members, any other questions?

1:18:29Member Bellamant.

1:18:32The other thing with the lane discussion

1:18:38is that in many other places,

1:18:41and I'm assuming in wealth as well,

1:18:44laneway dwellings and laneway development

1:18:47is part of the urban fabric

1:18:52and trying to up your,

1:18:58the urban development of your city.

1:19:01And I guess not allowing development

1:19:05to come up to a laneway house.

1:19:08I mean, that's all part of the,

1:19:12that would include some sort of a definition in lane.

1:19:16And I see this as an issue.

1:19:20Like we're not, if we don't allow a close setback to a lane,

1:19:25then you're not gonna have any,

1:19:28that kind of urban development in these,

1:19:30cause there's so many lanes in wealth.

1:19:32I mean, we, you know,

1:19:34I don't know what we're doing

1:19:36if we don't allow this kind of development close to a lane.

1:19:40It's already-

1:19:41Do you have a question for staff member Bellamant?

1:19:44Well, I just, I wonder if that's been a thought

1:19:47and why there hasn't been more discussion about lanes

1:19:51and more, you know, looking at lanes in previous,

1:19:55in the current new bylaw that's before the board.

1:19:58Like, you know, I'm confused about it really.

1:20:01I, it wasn't something that when I drove by it,

1:20:04I didn't think anything of it.

1:20:06I didn't think that it was an issue really.

1:20:09So I'm concerned as to why we're not,

1:20:13we wouldn't allow this kind of development.

1:20:19Yes, member, or part of me, Ms. Banser.

1:20:23Yeah, just through the chair to the committee.

1:20:27There is a definition of through lot

1:20:30and we do permit the development on a lane.

1:20:34I'm just gonna note that first.

1:20:36And a through lot is,

1:20:39and you're gonna see now where the lane comes in

1:20:42to question again.

1:20:45It means a lot that's bounded on two opposite sides

1:20:49or a street and a lane.

1:20:53And now it goes on.

1:20:55So on a through lot, when you have a street on one side

1:20:59and a lane on the other side,

1:21:02both yards, there isn't a rear yard.

1:21:05Both yards are considered front yards.

1:21:08Therefore, the front yard setbacks do apply.

1:21:13And to get a reduced front yard,

1:21:15which would be six meters generally,

1:21:21a minor variance then to reduce that front yard setback

1:21:24on the lane.

1:21:26So.

1:21:29Does that enter your question, member Bellamon?

1:21:35Yes, it does.

1:21:38You're welcome.

1:21:39Any other questions for city staff?

1:21:42We do have some delegates.

1:21:43I'd like to move on to our delegations.

1:21:46If that's the case, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

1:21:49I think we have three registered delegates.

1:21:53That's correct, Mr. Chair.

1:21:54The first delegate we have is Tanya McKenzie,

1:21:58and I believe that individual is here in person.

1:22:09Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1:22:10Good afternoon.

1:22:11Can you state your name for the record, please?

1:22:12My name is Tanya McKenzie,

1:22:14and I live in the house next to the proposed development.

1:22:18Welcome.

1:22:18You have 10 minutes that you can address our committee.

1:22:21Thank you.

1:22:23A minor variance does not mean that the variance,

1:22:27has a minor impact.

1:22:28In this case, a small house is being demolished,

1:22:31a lot being severed,

1:22:32and it's being proposed to be replaced by six units.

1:22:35To do this, the development needs a variance

1:22:37that essentially removes the side yards

1:22:39and permits multiple parking spots in front of the house,

1:22:42obscuring the sightline triangle,

1:22:44which impacts neighborhood safety.

1:22:46The following comments and questions about the variances

1:22:49are not about infill housing

1:22:50or about adding four units to a single lot.

1:22:52My comments address the real ask of adding six units

1:22:56with 18 bedrooms,

1:22:57which require that the variances be sought.

1:23:00Permission to build four dwellings on one residential lot,

1:23:03what Guelph refers to as gentle development,

1:23:06is a new bylaw amendment intended to,

1:23:08and I quote,

1:23:09Christa Wachee,

1:23:10general manager of planning and building services,

1:23:13to improve housing supply and affordability

1:23:15to help more residents find a place called home.

1:23:19Before giving variances that permit the addition of six units

1:23:22in what was previously a one dwelling lot,

1:23:24is it not in the best interest of the city,

1:23:26to evaluate how its gentle development strategy is working?

1:23:30Has Guelph evaluated the impact of bylaw amendments

1:23:33that permit four to six dwellings per lot?

1:23:35Has Guelph evaluated the impact of severing lots

1:23:38and giving variances to permit development

1:23:40that maximize rental housing and parking?

1:23:44This is important information to have

1:23:45before approving an application like this.

1:23:48Have they considered how a lot

1:23:49that comfortably housed a family of three

1:23:51will now be potentially housing up to 18 people

1:23:55that will be required to afford the estimated rent?

1:23:58Have they considered that reducing the side yard

1:24:00from the required six meters to 1.2 meters

1:24:03could become a safety risk in an emergency situation?

1:24:08In this application, the lot is on a hill

1:24:10with several houses downhill,

1:24:11including my home right beside it

1:24:13that my family has lived in for 24 years.

1:24:16What will the impact be of stormwater runoff

1:24:19once all the trees and natural landscape are removed

1:24:21and the grass and soil is replaced

1:24:23by driveways and housing after increasing the footprint

1:24:26from a small bungalow to a much larger multi-story building?

1:24:30Have they considered that this new building

1:24:32will tower over the properties of the backyards

1:24:35of multiple long-time family homes surrounding the lot?

1:24:38Has the city considered that St. Arnode

1:24:40has no overnight winter parking

1:24:42and the lot will not be able to support parking

1:24:44for six or more cars safely?

1:24:46And our street is already full of parked cars

1:24:49during a normal day.

1:24:50Do they understand that the site triangle

1:24:52on the laneway corner is critical to main safety

1:24:55for families and children in our neighborhood

1:24:56and for the many residents whose only parking

1:24:59is behind their property via the laneway?

1:25:03Well, spy law exists for a reason.

1:25:04Presumably those reasons make sense

1:25:06as to maintain the character of neighborhoods

1:25:08classified as low density to ensure public safety,

1:25:11to increase housing density

1:25:13and to provide more affordable housing.

1:25:15According to the city's affordable housing strategy,

1:25:18the aim is to have 30% of new residential units

1:25:21be affordable.

1:25:22However, we know that investors make up more than 25%

1:25:25of Ontario home buyers,

1:25:27which instead of creating more affordable housing

1:25:29has resulted in less affordable housing.

1:25:32This means that developers buying properties

1:25:34has actually led to an increase in property values

1:25:37to such an extent that many individuals and families

1:25:39have been pushed out of the housing market,

1:25:42cannot afford to rent and are forced to leave the city

1:25:44they have called home.

1:25:46This is at odds with Christo Wachie's quote

1:25:48about gentle density,

1:25:50helping more residents find a place called home.

1:25:53In the interest of the residents

1:25:54who are struggling to afford a place to live

1:25:56or have failed to do so,

1:25:57I trust that the city is not in favor of variances

1:26:00that further increase the cost

1:26:01for people who call Guelph home.

1:26:04In this particular case,

1:26:05there will be six units that are unlikely

1:26:07to meet the criteria for affordable housing

1:26:09and require variances to do so.

1:26:12As an example, the specific developer currently

1:26:14is renting out a 750 square foot accessory dwelling unit

1:26:18for $3,300 per month.

1:26:21According to Guelph's affordable housing strategy,

1:26:23this is almost double what is considered affordable housing.

1:26:27The proposed idea is an opportunity for intensification

1:26:30as the developer refers to their work.

1:26:32It is nothing more than a calculated formula

1:26:35to maximize rental profits.

1:26:37This building has an estimated monthly revenue of $19,000

1:26:41with their average rental price for comparable size units.

1:26:44If the city gives variances to developers

1:26:46to maximize unaffordable housing,

1:26:48there is no incentive for anyone to develop affordable housing

1:26:52which becomes less accessible to more residents.

1:26:55The point is Guelph needs housing, but not at all costs.

1:26:58Guelph needs responsible development,

1:26:59gentle development and development

1:27:01that meets the needs of all members of our community.

1:27:04Does the city feel developments that require variances

1:27:07to maximize for-profit housing

1:27:09to be either responsible or gentle?

1:27:13Thank you very much for your presentation.

1:27:15If you want to wait right there,

1:27:16my colleagues may have some questions.

1:27:19Committee members, do we have any questions of this delegate?

1:27:24I do have one that you have raised

1:27:28and it's tangential to Member Spears.

1:27:31You're a neighbor of the African

1:27:34and you might be a little more familiar

1:27:38with the laneway and the snow removal.

1:27:41Can you speak to that a little?

1:27:42The city removes the snow as far as I'm aware.

1:27:46Our streets are plowed by the city

1:27:48because we are on Waterloo Ave

1:27:49and I'm on the corner of Waterloo and St. Arnone.

1:27:52And I also wanted to speak to that Jeff spoke

1:27:54about the neighbor on the other side of the property

1:27:56saying his door opened to the laneway.

1:27:58That is his side door that goes to his backyard.

1:28:01He does not have access to the laneway from his side door.

1:28:04It goes directly to his yard.

1:28:07Okay, thank you very much.

1:28:09I do appreciate that perspective

1:28:11because that will help us in our decision making.

1:28:15Thank you once again for your presentation.

1:28:17We do appreciate it.

1:28:18Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak.

1:28:21Madam Secretary Treasurer, you have another delegate

1:28:24or we have another delegate please.

1:28:26Yes, thank you, Chair.

1:28:27The next delegate is Megan Gruner.

1:28:29I believe that individual is joining us via phone.

1:28:39Can you hear me?

1:28:40We can indeed.

1:28:41Hi.

1:28:42Hello, can you state your name for the record please?

1:28:47Okay, thank you for having me.

1:28:48My name is Megan Gruner and I own a 27...

1:28:53Before you go on, I just want to let you know

1:28:55that you have 10 minutes to address the committee

1:28:58and so you can make as much use of that time as you'd like.

1:29:02So please go ahead.

1:29:05Okay, so my name is Megan Gruner

1:29:08and I own the house 273 on Waterloo Ave.

1:29:11This tutor is down from Kenya there.

1:29:15I didn't really prepare official speech,

1:29:17change of speech was very well put together

1:29:19and echoes a lot of how I feel about this situation.

1:29:23I have a problem, I have no problem with infill housing.

1:29:26I think that's important in Guelph,

1:29:28but I think not at all costs or any costs.

1:29:31And this is not affordable housing.

1:29:35So I have a huge problem with allowing these developers

1:29:38coming in, developing a tiny piece of property

1:29:41in the grand scheme too narrow

1:29:43to really build anything properly on this trip.

1:29:47I don't mean to interrupt, but I'm going to.

1:29:51It's just the role of our committee

1:29:54is not to assess

1:30:02who is putting a unit together

1:30:05and whether or not it's affordable or not.

1:30:07The role of the committee,

1:30:09we have rules that were bound by legislation.

1:30:14So I just, I'm sorry to interrupt you,

1:30:17but I just wanted to make that point.

1:30:19So you're clear on that as you go forward

1:30:22with your presentation.

1:30:24Thank you.

1:30:25Okay, so I have a problem with the variants

1:30:32of changing the side yard from seven meters,

1:30:36six meters to 1.2.

1:30:38That is basically you're going to have

1:30:42like this map of building,

1:30:44looming over the adjacent properties.

1:30:49This is a community,

1:30:50people have lived here for many, many years.

1:30:52They create this community

1:30:55and it really does affect property value

1:30:59and the experience and the safety as Tanya brought up

1:31:02of some of these houses

1:31:03and some of the residents that live there.

1:31:05And I just, I don't see,

1:31:06I don't understand why if we have these bylaws,

1:31:10why we then are able to come and change them

1:31:13when it's convenient or when it doesn't,

1:31:15I guess it is inconvenient to build a huge,

1:31:19six flex on a piece of property.

1:31:21If we have these rules,

1:31:22surely we have them for a reason.

1:31:24And I just don't think it's right just to come in

1:31:28and just decide that,

1:31:29oh, it doesn't work for our profit

1:31:31and our business model.

1:31:33We want more building,

1:31:35more apartments or houses on that piece of property.

1:31:40So now we want to change it.

1:31:41And it really does,

1:31:42it will really affect that area

1:31:44and it really will affect to the residents

1:31:46that have made that area their home.

1:31:48And I think that should be taken into consideration.

1:31:53I also think that,

1:31:55I mean, I know it's not about,

1:31:57whether you don't have to say in like,

1:31:58who buys this up and who's profiting,

1:32:01but it is a for profit housing unit.

1:32:04And we need affordable housing.

1:32:06This is not affordable housing.

1:32:08This is for business to make money to come into the community

1:32:12and make money out of a relatively small piece of property.

1:32:16And it doesn't work for that.

1:32:18So watching it, they just work,

1:32:19make something that actually works

1:32:20for the piece of property that they bought,

1:32:23work with what they have,

1:32:24without having to like detract from other people's experience.

1:32:28Another people's bottom line, essentially,

1:32:31because those properties will be reduced in value,

1:32:34which is have a home, a six flexor,

1:32:37looming over your backyard,

1:32:38which is what will happen.

1:32:40This goes through and it's not right.

1:32:42And I would hope that the people of City of Guelph

1:32:44undersea that is not right.

1:32:46That that's impringing on a community and it's not okay.

1:32:52So thank you for listening.

1:32:54And that's all I really have to say.

1:32:55I hope you consider this.

1:32:57You can just consider everything that has been presented here.

1:33:01And I think what Chanium-Kensie said

1:33:03was really well put together

1:33:05and really should be considered really, very seriously.

1:33:07So thank you very much.

1:33:10Thank you for your comments.

1:33:12Committee, if you want to weigh right there,

1:33:14my colleagues may have some questions for you.

1:33:16Committee members, do we have any questions for this delegate?

1:33:20I see none.

1:33:21I may point out to city staff.

1:33:26If we weren't talking about a severance in this case,

1:33:32my understanding is that on one lot,

1:33:35one can develop a foreplex.

1:33:37Is that not correct?

1:33:40To the chair, that is correct.

1:33:42Okay, thank you.

1:33:42I just wanted to make that clear to both the delegate

1:33:46and anyone watching this procedure.

1:33:51Thank you again for your comments.

1:33:53Can I just ask so you are permitted under the current bylaw

1:33:57to build a foreplex but not a six-plex?

1:34:00That's correct.

1:34:01That's correct.

1:34:02Thank you for your comments.

1:34:05And are you under the current bylaw?

1:34:08You like to have something in your mind.

1:34:09I'm sorry, I'm going to stop you there.

1:34:10This isn't a discussion.

1:34:12So I want to thank you sincerely for your presentation.

1:34:17Madam Secretary Treasurer,

1:34:19do we have another delegate to speak to this application?

1:34:24Mr. Chair, we do have another delegate.

1:34:27The name is Brittany and Paul Hushka

1:34:29and I believe they're here in person.

1:34:32Thank you.

1:34:44Welcome, can you state your name for the record please?

1:34:47Yeah, I'm Brittany Hushka.

1:34:49And I'm Paul McDonald.

1:34:51Welcome.

1:34:52As you may have surmised from sitting there patiently,

1:34:56you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:34:58Thank you.

1:34:59So we live directly behind the property.

1:35:02We aren't super clear at this point

1:35:04if the 1.2 meter variance is for both sides of the property,

1:35:08but if it is for both sides of the property,

1:35:10it would be quite close to our backyard.

1:35:12So two points, there is a retaining wall there today

1:35:16and the retaining wall is collapsing into our backyard.

1:35:20So we would want to know that that's going to be fixed.

1:35:23And if the 1.2 meter variance is approved,

1:35:26the house would be very close to our backyard.

1:35:30And we would want to know that there's no windows

1:35:32that would be in a tall building

1:35:35looking directly into our addition and our kitchen on our home.

1:35:41Yeah, I don't want to get too much into repeating

1:35:43what Tonya and Megan have said.

1:35:45I think that they made their points very well

1:35:48and I agree with most of what they're saying.

1:35:50I think at the end of the day,

1:35:52we're basically the variances are being requested

1:35:56because they're trying to fit a very, very large building

1:35:59onto a very small piece of property,

1:36:01which I don't think really ties into the rest

1:36:05of the neighborhood.

1:36:07And the variance that was requested on the site line

1:36:10is of big concern to me.

1:36:13There's a lot of elementary school children

1:36:14that use St. Arnaud sidewalk to talk to school every morning.

1:36:19And that coincides with the same timeline of traffic

1:36:22coming out of that laneway.

1:36:25And I would hate to see that variance being approved

1:36:29and having an accident.

1:36:30Those bylaws are in place for a reason.

1:36:33They provide line of sight for drivers

1:36:36for kids on bikes, scooters, my daughter who's seven,

1:36:40who walks to school every day and back,

1:36:42along with dozens of other children.

1:36:43So that's my main point of concern.

1:36:48But I would like to ensure that we adhere to bylaws

1:36:54in order to keep the planned construction

1:36:59at a reasonable level that's in accordance

1:37:00with what Guelph would typically experience

1:37:03in a neighborhood such as our own.

1:37:06And I'll bring up one more point

1:37:07just because it was brought up earlier

1:37:08about tree preservation.

1:37:10There is a large tree on that property

1:37:11that would be cut down to accommodate, I believe.

1:37:15I don't think there's a way to build it around that tree.

1:37:19Thank you.

1:37:20Very much for your comments.

1:37:22If you want to wait right there,

1:37:24my colleagues may have some questions

1:37:25for you committee members.

1:37:27Do we have any questions for these delegates?

1:37:30If you want to wait there for a moment,

1:37:33let me ask city staff about the tree.

1:37:37Is there a tree protection plan

1:37:40involved in this presentation?

1:37:44Pardon me, perpope.

1:37:46Through you, Mr. Chair, there is a requirement

1:37:49or a recommended condition should the committee choose

1:37:52to approve the application

1:37:54that a tree inventory and preservation plan

1:37:55would be required, I guess.

1:37:58And to follow up another point that they made

1:38:01about the crumbling condition of the retaining wall,

1:38:08is that a condition or I suppose it's something

1:38:12that we could consider where we to entertain

1:38:17a approval of this?

1:38:21Through you, Mr. Chair,

1:38:22I don't think that's something that we can comment on.

1:38:23I'm not sure where exactly the retaining wall is located.

1:38:26I think that's something that would be a matter

1:38:28between the property owner and their neighbors.

1:38:31Let me ask the delegates,

1:38:33where boats is that retaining wall that's crumbling?

1:38:35So the retaining wall is as you face the house

1:38:39from the street along the right side of the property.

1:38:43It's directly on their driveway today.

1:38:45So it's part of their driveway.

1:38:46Their driveway is elevated.

1:38:48So our house is actually on a lower level.

1:38:50Their driveway is elevated.

1:38:51The retaining wall is their driveway

1:38:53and it's completely collapsing into our backyard.

1:38:55It's something we've been trying to address for some time.

1:38:58And as the property's been purchased,

1:39:00we would like to make sure that it gets addressed.

1:39:02And I think it also ties into the point

1:39:04that Tanya brought up earlier about the water runoff

1:39:07and the effects that severing the property

1:39:11and creating a large property with lesser allowances

1:39:15on the property line would come with different challenges

1:39:20with regards to water runoff, snow melting in the spring,

1:39:25et cetera.

1:39:25So like that retaining wall and driveway

1:39:27kind of ties into all that as well.

1:39:30Okay, that's very helpful.

1:39:32Thank you very much for your comments

1:39:34and you're free to stay and enjoy the rest of the proceedings.

1:39:39Thank you, I appreciate it.

1:39:42Madam Secretary Treasurer,

1:39:43do we have any other registered delegates?

1:39:46Mr. Chair, I can confirm

1:39:47we don't have any other registered delegates,

1:39:48but there may be some in the audience.

1:39:53To that, are there any members of the chamber

1:39:56that would like to come forward

1:39:58and speak to this application?

1:40:02I do see a hand waving, please come forward, sir.

1:40:17Good afternoon, can you state your name for the record?

1:40:20Yes, sir, my name is Chris Kuroski.

1:40:25And do you have 10 minutes to address the committee?

1:40:28Okay, I am a land use planner

1:40:30and working with Van Harten

1:40:33on really a specific aspect of this application,

1:40:38which has already been discussed.

1:40:41Can I just interrupt for a second

1:40:43and we'll put the time back on your 10 minutes,

1:40:45if you'd like.

1:40:46But generally we would turn to the application

1:40:53to answer any of the questions that may have been raised.

1:40:56So if you have items that you'd like to,

1:41:00that are new that you'd like to raise,

1:41:01I'm happy to hear those.

1:41:03Otherwise, if you'd like to join Mr. Buzeman

1:41:07in answering some of the questions,

1:41:10then we could look at it that way.

1:41:11So I'm gonna leave it up to you.

1:41:12Okay, well, I guess that's fair.

1:41:15And I will mention a couple of points

1:41:20that haven't been raised so far.

1:41:25What I looked at specifically here was the side yard

1:41:28that isn't an exterior side yard or not.

1:41:32And we've kind of got two responses from staff

1:41:41on that particular point.

1:41:46What is certain is that what's being proposed

1:41:50will set the building back further

1:41:52from the laneway than it is today.

1:41:55The building today is set back 0.8 meters.

1:41:58It will be set back 1.3 meters

1:42:00if this application moves forward.

1:42:04So that's an improvement.

1:42:06There is no issue with sight lines.

1:42:11So it really comes down to the variance

1:42:14and is it really a variance

1:42:16because is it really an exterior side yard?

1:42:23I think based on the letter of the bylaw,

1:42:25my opinion is that it can't be called an exterior side yard.

1:42:30There are a number of definitions in the bylaw.

1:42:34I've made photocopies of what those say

1:42:38and they do talk about lanes, they talk about streets

1:42:41and the two are mutually exclusive.

1:42:44And what's also clear in the bylaw

1:42:46is that exterior side yard setbacks only kick in

1:42:52if you're adjacent to a street

1:42:54and a lane is not a street.

1:42:56So that's just one point I'd like to reinforce.

1:43:00And secondly, if we were to assume it was

1:43:04an exterior side yard,

1:43:06you know, what would be an appropriate setback

1:43:10assuming that it was.

1:43:12Laneways we know intuitively are less traveled

1:43:15more for local use.

1:43:17There's something lesser than a road.

1:43:19So if generally the requirements in the city are for 4.5

1:43:24or six meters for an exterior side yard

1:43:26in the older part of Guelph,

1:43:28then you probably wouldn't require such a,

1:43:35or the same as much of a setback for a laneway

1:43:37because there's less traffic on a laneway.

1:43:43And then I took some time to look through the bylaw

1:43:46to see have any other variants has been approved

1:43:52in cases where there is sort of a bonafide

1:43:55or exterior side yard.

1:43:58And these would have been, I guess, under the old bylaw.

1:44:02There are three that I'll mention

1:44:05would have been approved under the old zoning bylaw

1:44:07and they're actually carried forward

1:44:08as special regulations in the new zoning bylaw.

1:44:15And they're all in the south end.

1:44:17And I found two instances where exterior side yards

1:44:21of 1.2 meters have been approved.

1:44:25And that's down on, in the south end on Lovering Lane,

1:44:31which is a laneway that goes from lands down

1:44:34back to this new street at Emnity, I think it's called.

1:44:39Anyways, two instances where 1.2 meters

1:44:42have already been approved for this same situation.

1:44:49And another instance where a 1.2 meter

1:44:53exterior side yard has been approved.

1:44:56So there is precedent for it.

1:44:58And if the committee was to consider approving

1:45:03this application, it wouldn't be the first time it's happened.

1:45:06And I think for all the other reasons,

1:45:08Jeff mentioned this application is reasonable,

1:45:12does fit with the bylaw and the official plan.

1:45:15And in my opinion, should be approved.

1:45:19Thank you very much.

1:45:20If you want to wait right there.

1:45:22Many members, yes, member Goodfell.

1:45:24Yeah, so through the chair to the delegate,

1:45:27I just pulled up a map of Lovering Lane.

1:45:30It was not an area of the city I knew.

1:45:33And the image I'm seeing does look like

1:45:36it's quite a wide lane.

1:45:38Can you just comment on that?

1:45:39Like what is your understanding of the width of that lane

1:45:42relative to the width that we're talking about here?

1:45:45I'm not sure what the exact width of it is,

1:45:47but given that it's a newer subdivision,

1:45:51I assume it would be, maybe staff can respond to that,

1:45:54but I assume it'll probably be a little wider

1:45:57than the lane we're talking about.

1:46:00So, you know, that being the case,

1:46:02one of the things about the lane we're talking about

1:46:04is because it is narrow.

1:46:06It's almost like built in traffic calming.

1:46:09It's narrow.

1:46:10There's, you know, an elbow curve going up to Allen Street

1:46:14and only used by people that live on it.

1:46:16So I'm sure they're quite respectful

1:46:18of the condition of the road and their neighbors.

1:46:23Yes, thank you.

1:46:24So maybe through the chair to city staff, if I may,

1:46:28can you comment on the width of Lovering Lane

1:46:30relative to the width of the lane way

1:46:32we're talking about here?

1:46:34To member Goodfellow, through the chair,

1:46:36I can't comment on the specific width.

1:46:38And unfortunately, this is the first we're hearing

1:46:41of Lovering Lane, so we don't have a lot of time to research,

1:46:43but at first glance on the map,

1:46:46I understood Lovering Lane to be a condominium road.

1:46:51I'm not sure if that can be,

1:46:55if the agent who brought it up can clarify that,

1:46:58but when I see it on the map,

1:46:59that immediately comes to mind

1:47:00as believing it to be a condominium road.

1:47:03I don't know the details of the application

1:47:06that was referred to.

1:47:14Yeah, certainly I'm not sure based on the images

1:47:17I'm looking at, because yeah,

1:47:18I haven't had a chance to take a closer look either,

1:47:22but yes, I guess through the chair to the delegate,

1:47:25is there, do you have a comment on

1:47:27whether it's a condominium road?

1:47:29Maybe falls in the back road?

1:47:29Well, whether or not it's a condominium road

1:47:31or a public road, I think it's public, I believe,

1:47:36but fact is that there's development on that road,

1:47:40like along that section of Lovering

1:47:42that goes back from Lansdowne to MNINI road,

1:47:46and quite a few houses on MNINI

1:47:51and a number of houses also on Lovering.

1:47:54So carrying a fair bit of traffic,

1:47:56maybe more than would be carried on this lane.

1:48:02Thank you.

1:48:04Thank you.

1:48:05Any other questions of this delegate?

1:48:08Seeing none, thank you very much.

1:48:10I appreciate the information.

1:48:12Oh, yeah, sorry, Mr. Ram.

1:48:15Sorry, just we're doing some real time work here,

1:48:18and it does appear to be a condominium road,

1:48:20if that matters with respect to some of the information.

1:48:27Yes, go ahead.

1:48:28Yes, thank you through the chair to staff.

1:48:31That's great to understand,

1:48:32is there, as you're digging, are you finding a width?

1:48:38And I'm asking because the image I'm looking at,

1:48:41it does look to be about double the width,

1:48:42it looks like it could actually take two vehicles,

1:48:45just based on the way the images are,

1:48:48and the lines, the road lines are drawn,

1:48:51but I guess I wouldn't want to presume my understanding

1:48:55from a Google image if you have better information available.

1:49:00To member Goodfellow through the chair,

1:49:02I'm not sure how quickly I can pull that up.

1:49:04If you'll bear with me for about five or 10 seconds,

1:49:07I can confirm if I can quickly pull it up.

1:49:09If it was a city street, I could confidently say,

1:49:11yes, I can pull that engineering plan up real quick.

1:49:14I may not be able to,

1:49:15given that it could be stored in a different place.

1:49:18Just bear with me for one second, please.

1:49:30If it helps, the third example of what I'm talking about

1:49:36is at 28 Lansdowne Drive,

1:49:39so sort of at, I guess at the southerly end of that,

1:49:43and that exterior side yard is 0.9 meters to a public street,

1:49:52or sorry, to a private street.

1:49:59So we know that one's a condominium.

1:50:06Yes, Mr. Rumpel.

1:50:08Through you, Mr. Chair,

1:50:09I was able to pull up the condominium plan

1:50:11for a lovering lane, so I don't have the engineering details,

1:50:13but it looks like the common elements condominium road

1:50:16appears to be nine meters in width.

1:50:18What the actual width of the roadway is,

1:50:20I'm not entirely certain.

1:50:21It appears to be between seven and eight meters wide,

1:50:25the actual roadway.

1:50:29If I may just interject to an apologies for,

1:50:32with the real time we're trying to learn.

1:50:35Looking at Google imagery and pulling a distance off of Google

1:50:39from edge of pavement to edge of pavement,

1:50:41it appears to be approximately somewhere

1:50:44in the neighborhood of six meters,

1:50:46asphalt width approximately.

1:50:48It could be maybe a half a meter either side of that.

1:50:52Okay, thank you.

1:50:53And just looking at the image that we have

1:50:55from the survey, I don't see a width,

1:50:59but over there it is 4.2 meters wide.

1:51:02Okay, that satisfies my questions.

1:51:04I really appreciate everyone's patience and willingness

1:51:07to dig for information in real time.

1:51:10Thank you, Member Goodfellow.

1:51:12And are there any other questions for the delegate?

1:51:16Seeing none, let me thank you for the additional information.

1:51:21At this point, I'd like to ask the applicant to come back

1:51:26and if he has any comments or answers for what's been

1:51:32spoken of by staff and or the delegates.

1:51:40If I could, there's one photo of that lane,

1:51:44if I could ask on that slide presentation.

1:51:47I think the first picture of the laneway of this particular one,

1:51:54if we could, is that possible to bring up?

1:51:56Because I think that helps to explain

1:51:58what I want to talk about.

1:51:59Yeah, you see on the right hand side of that lane,

1:52:02that curb and then we see a board fence there.

1:52:06On the other side of the board fence,

1:52:08the grade drops a fair bit.

1:52:10City staff mentioned a few minutes ago,

1:52:13we would consider maybe three meters.

1:52:16In my mind, whether that's three meters

1:52:18or four and a half meters, there's a big grade change there,

1:52:22up to about a half a meter to a meter.

1:52:26I feel that regardless of how big that separation is,

1:52:32the end result is going to be looking like this,

1:52:35in the sense that there's that retaining wall.

1:52:39And the best thing to do there is put a guardrail

1:52:43in front of that fence.

1:52:45And it's almost like behind the fence,

1:52:48it's just a new world, if you will.

1:52:50It's not like the plow is going to come

1:52:53and push the snow over that curb.

1:52:56That just doesn't make sense.

1:52:59And whether it's 1.2 or three meters,

1:53:02this is the result it's going to be.

1:53:04Like I was at that back lane and I thought,

1:53:07if you're worried about safety,

1:53:09I can see coming down that lane, turning right.

1:53:13The only thing that could happen is a car going 20 kilometers

1:53:16an hour, hitting that guardrail.

1:53:18There's no way anybody's going any faster in that.

1:53:21And so I don't see the, in this case,

1:53:25and I know we looked at this example,

1:53:27some ones on the south end, everyone is different.

1:53:30And I think we have to look at this one by itself.

1:53:34And in my mind, by itself, we've got a situation

1:53:38where everything fits except for the side yard

1:53:41if we follow that technical definition

1:53:43that there's disagreement on.

1:53:45So in my opinion, this fits.

1:53:48And the idea of a safety concern,

1:53:50I don't think there's a safety concern.

1:53:52That's my opinion.

1:53:53I'm not the traffic guy, but I was there

1:53:55and safety is important in my world.

1:53:57So I don't really think there's a safety concern

1:54:00and it can be addressed with this guardrail.

1:54:02If I look at 21 Clarence, it's not any different.

1:54:06It's been there for 40-ish years.

1:54:09I don't know the history if there's been any accidents

1:54:12in there, that guardrail didn't look like dent.

1:54:13And I'm sure there's no issue there either.

1:54:16It works.

1:54:17That's 1.5 meters.

1:54:181.3, 1.5 isn't going to make a difference here.

1:54:22And in my mind, 1.3 or three as suggested by the city staff

1:54:26isn't going to make a difference on the safety.

1:54:30So if the concern is the safety,

1:54:31I think the safety is addressed.

1:54:34If the concern is planning,

1:54:36in terms of planning perspective,

1:54:38look, I feel like we meet everything

1:54:40and this should be treated like an interior side yard.

1:54:44And if this was just a normal property,

1:54:49this thing would be approved because it meets everything.

1:54:52So yeah, I'm a little bit sorry about that.

1:54:57In terms of a small detail,

1:54:59the retaining wall that the one family spoke of,

1:55:02it is on the right side.

1:55:05So to be clear, they asked with the variance

1:55:07for the right side and I don't think they got that answer,

1:55:09but there is no variance for the right side of this property.

1:55:12It is going to be, we're requesting

1:55:15what the zoning calls for is 1.2 meters.

1:55:19And that retaining wall, that is a matter

1:55:21that can be settled between the two parties.

1:55:24And we did do a survey that retaining walls technically

1:55:27a little bit over the property line on that side,

1:55:29but that's for another day and another discussion.

1:55:36I think this is a good application

1:55:38and I think the concern of safety is properly addressed

1:55:42and it meets what we're trying to accomplish.

1:55:50Thank you, Mr. Buseman.

1:55:54At this point, I'm going to,

1:55:59oh, are you looking to delegate?

1:56:04And please come forward.

1:56:18This is a little bit irregular, but I'm going to allow it.

1:56:22So if you would please state your name for the record.

1:56:26Hi, I'm Francis Jack.

1:56:28And you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:56:30Okay, I just wanna say that the laneway

1:56:33that they're talking about,

1:56:34a car has come down the laneway,

1:56:37gone through the fence into the backyard before I lived there.

1:56:44And the snow goes over the back,

1:56:46or the curb into the fence,

1:56:50which has caused the fence to buckle and fall down

1:56:53because I have fixed that fence,

1:56:55because I lived at that house.

1:56:58And that's all I have to say.

1:57:00Well, thank you very much.

1:57:01Just wait right there.

1:57:02And my colleagues may have questions for you.

1:57:06Committee members, do we have questions of this delegate?

1:57:09No, thank you very much for giving us that information.

1:57:14I do see your hand, madam,

1:57:16but do you have addressed the committee

1:57:18and you've had your opportunity?

1:57:21At this point, I'm going to turn to my colleagues

1:57:27for their direction on what we would like to see.

1:57:31Oh, Mr. Buseman, did you have a comment you wanted to make

1:57:35based on that?

1:57:37Okay.

1:57:39At this point, I'm going to turn to my colleagues

1:57:42for a motion.

1:57:47Member Maliband.

1:57:49I move that we approve the severance

1:57:55and the variance for 1.2 meter exterior side yard

1:58:02and that there be conditions,

1:58:05including a, what's it called, a guardrail

1:58:14along the north side of the property flanking the lane

1:58:17all the way down the one side,

1:58:19right to the end of the property line.

1:58:24And that there be a tree preservation plan

1:58:27in accordance with other recommendations listed

1:58:31in the staff report that other end of the year.

1:58:37Other, the other typical staff conditions apply.

1:58:47Do we have a seconder?

1:58:52I don't see a seconder.

1:58:58So do we have another motion

1:59:00that someone would like to bring forward?

1:59:06Member Speer.

1:59:07I move that we following the recommendation of staff,

1:59:12refuse B-40 slash 25 and defer A-65.

1:59:18Slash 25.

1:59:20Do we have a seconder for that?

1:59:22Member Goodfellow.

1:59:25I'm going to turn to our learned secretary treasurer.

1:59:30We have both a refusal and a deferral

1:59:35included in this motion.

1:59:38Should they be pressed apart?

1:59:41To the chair, I'll leave that up to the committee.

1:59:43If the committee would like to consider those together,

1:59:48that's perfectly fine.

1:59:49The reason I ask is with the deferral,

1:59:51there is generally no debate.

1:59:53So as one motion, I suppose we could debate the refusal.

2:00:00Correct.

2:00:00Okay.

2:00:02So we do have a motion in front of us.

2:00:04We do have a seconder.

2:00:06Do we have any conversation or discussion on that?

2:00:13I'm going to support this.

2:00:15That's the only comment I have.

2:00:18Anyone else?

2:00:20Member Goodfellow.

2:00:21Yeah, I think I'll just add that I did,

2:00:24I was reminded of other laneway applications

2:00:26we have reviewed.

2:00:27There was one that came up in February.

2:00:29I did look back at the drawings and at our decisions

2:00:32and my notes for that.

2:00:33I understand that these are,

2:00:35applications are all reviewed on their own merits,

2:00:39but I was thoughtful about the differences in the site

2:00:44and it was helpful for me to go back and take a look

2:00:46at the changes that the applicant made

2:00:49so that it could be approved by this committee.

2:00:52So consistent with that,

2:00:55but also recognizing that this is a different site.

2:00:58I will also be supporting the motion that is on the table.

2:01:02And in refusing this, I would be remiss in saying,

2:01:06in the refusal part of this,

2:01:11to ask the mover under the four tests,

2:01:15how would you validate that?

2:01:19I would have to go back to the staff comment.

2:01:21I can't tell you off the top of my head.

2:01:23I would read it, I would simply read what is mentioned there.

2:01:28That it's not feasible to build,

2:01:33it's not feasible to build on that,

2:01:35on the property that would be the result of the consent,

2:01:40because if the variance was not allowed.

2:01:44So it's just, it's not feasible.

2:01:47So it wouldn't be minor in nature, I'm taking from that.

2:01:51That's what I, yes, would not be minor.

2:01:53Okay.

2:01:54Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:01:55unless we have any more comments,

2:01:58I don't believe we do may ask you to call the vote please.

2:02:05Thank you, Chair.

2:02:07Committee members, please indicate your vote

2:02:08by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

2:02:11which is to refuse the consent file,

2:02:15B-40 slash 25 and defer the minor variance,

2:02:19L-A-65 slash 25, as per the reasons

2:02:22as member Spears has outlined as per the staff comments.

2:02:28Chair Smith.

2:02:29In favor.

2:02:30Member Balaban.

2:02:31Opposed.

2:02:32Member Goodfellow.

2:02:33In favor.

2:02:35Member Mambrenio.

2:02:36In favor.

2:02:37And member Spears.

2:02:38In favor.

2:02:39That's carried, Mr. Chair.

2:02:41Thank you, your application has been deferred.

2:02:43Thank you.

2:02:50Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:02:53could we have the next applicant please?

2:02:56The next application is file A-66 slash 25,

2:03:01variance to permit increased gross floor area

2:03:03for new addition to the existing residential dwelling

2:03:06at 10 Kilkenny Place.

2:03:08I'll note for those attending remotely,

2:03:10if you wish to speak to this application,

2:03:11you can do so by calling the number

2:03:14that will be displayed on the screen.

2:03:16That number is 519-822-1260,

2:03:20extension 2524.

2:03:22When your call is received,

2:03:23staff will provide you with instructions

2:03:25on how you can delegate remotely by phone.

2:03:28Thank you.

2:03:29As I see an image on the screen,

2:03:32so I'm assuming the applicant is here by the internet.

2:03:35Can you state your name

2:03:37and your relationship to the application please?

2:03:40Yes, my name is Thurunpreet Kaur

2:03:43and I'm the authorized agent for this application.

2:03:47Thank you.

2:03:47And can have you read staff's comments

2:03:50and are you in agreement?

2:03:52Yes, we are in agreement.

2:03:54Thank you.

2:03:55And was the sign posted as per the Planning Act?

2:03:58Yes.

2:04:00As you have patiently waited

2:04:04through the other applications,

2:04:06you will know you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

2:04:09So please make as much use of that as you would like.

2:04:12Yes, I would like to introduce the project.

2:04:14So it's an addition.

2:04:15It's an 800 square foot of addition to the existing house.

2:04:19The existing house is 27 square feet

2:04:21across existing gross floor area.

2:04:2425% of the existing gross floor is allowed as an addition.

2:04:29However, the proposed addition is 31%,

2:04:326% higher than what is allowed.

2:04:35And we have read all the conditions and we agree to that.

2:04:40And the condition set out under tree inventory

2:04:43and preservation plan.

2:04:45So we agree to that.

2:04:50Thank you.

2:04:51That was concise and to the point.

2:04:53I appreciate that.

2:04:54And if you want to wait right there,

2:04:57my colleagues may have some questions for you.

2:04:59Committee members, do we have any questions for this applicant?

2:05:06Seeing none.

2:05:10I'm going to turn to the gallery.

2:05:12Is there anyone who would like to speak to this application?

2:05:18I don't see anyone rushing forward.

2:05:22Madam Secretary, treasure, do we have anyone online?

2:05:26Mr. Chair, I can confirm we haven't received

2:05:28any delegation requests.

2:05:30Thank you.

2:05:31Committee members, what is your wish on this application?

2:05:35Member Goodfell.

2:05:37I move we approve the application

2:05:39with the conditions recommended by city staff.

2:05:42Thank you.

2:05:43And do we have a seconder?

2:05:44Member Membrano.

2:05:46And is there any discussion on this?

2:05:51Seeing none.

2:05:52Madam Secretary, treasure, would you call the vote please?

2:05:56Thank you, Chair.

2:05:57Committee members, please indicate your vote

2:05:58by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

2:06:00which is to approve the application

2:06:02with the recommended conditions.

2:06:04Chair Smith.

2:06:05In favor.

2:06:06Member Balaban.

2:06:07In favor.

2:06:07Member Goodfellow.

2:06:08In favor.

2:06:09Member Membrano.

2:06:10In favor.

2:06:11And Member Spears.

2:06:12In favor.

2:06:13That's carried, Mr. Chair.

2:06:15Your application has been approved

2:06:17and you're free to leave the meeting.

2:06:20Thank you.

2:06:21Thank you.

2:06:25Madam Secretary, treasure,

2:06:27may we have the next application, please?

2:06:31Thank you, Chair.

2:06:32As 108 Fleming Road's been deferred,

2:06:34we'll go to the next application,

2:06:36which is files B-45 slash 25 and B-46 slash 25,

2:06:42consent to create two new residential lots

2:06:44with one retained residential lot at 27 Forbes Avenue.

2:06:49I'll note for those attending remotely,

2:06:50if you wish to speak to this application,

2:06:53you can do so by calling 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

2:07:00When your call is received,

2:07:01staff will provide you with instructions

2:07:03on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

2:07:07Is the applicant present?

2:07:09Yes, please come forward.

2:07:19Good afternoon.

2:07:20Can you state your name for the record, please?

2:07:23Oh, just a second, technical difficulties.

2:07:26There we go.

2:07:29Can you state your name for the record?

2:07:31My name is Phil McFadden

2:07:32from Build Consulting Services on the agent of the owner.

2:07:35And can you tell me if the sign was posted

2:07:37as per the planning act?

2:07:38Yes, it was.

2:07:39And have you read staff's comments

2:07:42and are you in agreement?

2:07:43We have and we are.

2:07:46You may have noticed that you have 10 minutes

2:07:48to address the committee.

2:07:50Please make as much use of that time as you'd like.

2:07:54Try and use as little as possible and keep things moving.

2:07:57But like I mentioned, we are in favor

2:08:00and in agreement with staff comments largely

2:08:04in whole actually, this property is a beautiful large piece

2:08:09between Forbes and James Street

2:08:11and the old university neighborhood.

2:08:13Also a part of the Brooklyn College Hill

2:08:16Heritage Conservation District.

2:08:18And the idea here is to utilize

2:08:23what is a beautiful piece of property

2:08:26without doing too much damage to the overall lay of the land.

2:08:31This here shows that we are gonna create two new lots

2:08:35on the James Street access from the James Street side,

2:08:39where currently would look like almost a large park

2:08:45from James Street.

2:08:46There is actually a beautiful wooden arbor

2:08:49that looks up towards what is now

2:08:52the rear of the house that is accessed from Forbes Street.

2:08:57This was the Victoria School House,

2:09:00which Heritage has made.

2:09:03There's likely some comments to come here,

2:09:06but it's a beautiful piece of property

2:09:10that has been renovated.

2:09:12The original school house was originally renovated

2:09:15and access changed from James Street to Forbes

2:09:19or the primary access.

2:09:20Anyways, the school was primarily access from James Street

2:09:23and there is an alley of trees as well as a sidewalk

2:09:26that runs through the middle

2:09:28that can be seen from that arbor on James.

2:09:32So when we looked at the development of this land,

2:09:36the chance to create these two lots,

2:09:39the focus was really how to develop

2:09:42while being sensitive to the overall intention of the HCD

2:09:47that exists over this area.

2:09:51Originally, we considered how we could place the houses

2:09:56with minimal removal of trees

2:09:59that make up this alley of sugar maples.

2:10:01And eventually we came up with a layout

2:10:04where we're really not actually gonna remove any trees.

2:10:07There is a cedar hedgerow along the front of James Street

2:10:12where the new laneways would be built.

2:10:16There will be removal of some of those cedar hedgerow

2:10:19to create these lanes, but again,

2:10:22we're not getting into the removal of the sugar maples

2:10:24that make up the alley of trees.

2:10:29This is a view again through the arbor up towards

2:10:34the rear of the home where you can see this row

2:10:38of sugar maples on the left and right hand side

2:10:41of the walkway.

2:10:42The walkway is intended to be kept as is the row of maples

2:10:47as you could see on the previous slide

2:10:50showing the layout of the proposed houses.

2:10:53The left and right photos here are basically looking

2:10:55at what the area would be of the created new lane

2:10:59on the left or the parcel two,

2:11:01as well as parcel one on the right hand side.

2:11:04So really what we wanted to talk about just briefly is

2:11:09this piece of property as large as it is

2:11:13has there's been approaches to the owner

2:11:15made previously for a larger scale development,

2:11:19which really would have involved removing everything

2:11:22from this lot.

2:11:24There was an offer in place to the owner

2:11:28to essentially buy with the intent to tear down

2:11:31and clear cut and build a number of apartment buildings

2:11:35through I'm guessing OLT and a large process

2:11:38to make some very substantial changes,

2:11:41which would not be suitable for the neighborhood.

2:11:44The owner has taken on, I think, significant risk.

2:11:50Well, financial downturn from what was offered

2:11:55to make this happen,

2:11:56but it really is in keeping with the neighborhood

2:12:00and we've taken a lot of time to really see

2:12:02what would make the best use of this space

2:12:05while not having a super negative impact

2:12:09to the fabric of the neighborhood.

2:12:11Again, this whole area is protected

2:12:14by the Brooklyn College Hill Heritage Conservation District

2:12:19guidelines, which is outlined here as well.

2:12:23So the comments that we see from Heritage

2:12:27inside of the staff comments speak to the preservation

2:12:32of this alley of trees.

2:12:34And what I wanted to call out,

2:12:36although it is completely our intention that these remain,

2:12:40again, as you can see from the lot plans

2:12:42that we've created,

2:12:43these two parcels completely maintain that alley of trees.

2:12:47I did want to point out that inside of the guidelines

2:12:50of the HCD, it is written that heritage permit

2:12:57would be required where inside,

2:13:00where we at the front yard or exterior side yard

2:13:04contributes to the heritage value of visual character

2:13:08of the Heritage Conservation District.

2:13:11IE trees where the canopy overreaches public realm.

2:13:15So this entire area is to the rear of the sidewalk,

2:13:19it's on the private side of the property.

2:13:23And again, anything that needs to be done

2:13:27to this property does require a heritage permit,

2:13:29which we are completely in line with

2:13:31and would require a tree inventory protection plan,

2:13:35excuse me, which we've already had completed.

2:13:38So an assessment of all of the trees on the property

2:13:41as well as vegetation has been completed

2:13:44as well as a risk assessment plan.

2:13:47Again, I want to keep stating that we have no intention

2:13:51of removal of these trees as part of the development

2:13:55of these two parcels.

2:13:58And then wanted to just call out, this is the one sheet,

2:14:01the tree inventory protection plan, some 34 pages long,

2:14:07and is a requirement as part of the

2:14:11certificate of official, but not as part

2:14:13of this application right now,

2:14:14but we have gone ahead and had this completed.

2:14:16So this shows areas that have been highlighted

2:14:20by the arborist as protection areas during construction

2:14:25to make sure that we're not damaging the root zone

2:14:28of these trees through alternative excavation techniques,

2:14:33like air spading and hydrovaching,

2:14:36which we will be employing,

2:14:38or the intention will be to employ during construction.

2:14:41This also shows that there is one tree

2:14:43in that alley of sugar maples

2:14:46that is already nearly deceased,

2:14:50or a section has come down

2:14:53and realistically has been either,

2:14:58the section that's dropped has been removed,

2:15:01but this is being identified to be removal for risk sake

2:15:05and has already been partially removed.

2:15:08So again, there's only one other tree shown here,

2:15:12which is up for potential removal,

2:15:15and that's on the boulevard closest to where the lane

2:15:18is proposed for the second parcel.

2:15:22But again, this is gonna be dependent on

2:15:26when site plan submitted grading plans,

2:15:30as well as the final foundation locations

2:15:34and build form of these two houses,

2:15:36which we are intending to keep in keeping

2:15:39with the Heritage Conservation District as well,

2:15:41which is all a requirement of the permit application.

2:15:45So I just wanted to state repeatedly

2:15:48that the intentions are to keep

2:15:52this Heritage Conservation District's guidelines.

2:15:59We're following these guidelines

2:16:00in the overall development of these parcels,

2:16:04and we've gotten the great lengths to make sure

2:16:06that we can do this safely

2:16:08without damaging those trees as they exist.

2:16:12With that, if there's any questions, I'm happy to answer.

2:16:16Thank you very much for your presentation.

2:16:18If you want to wait right there,

2:16:20my colleagues may have some questions for you.

2:16:22Committee members, do we have questions of this applicant?

2:16:27Not at this time.

2:16:28So if you want to hang tough for a second,

2:16:32I'll see if there are any members of the public

2:16:34who wish to delegate on this.

2:16:37Any members of the public present

2:16:40who would like to delegate on this?

2:16:43I don't see anyone rushing forward.

2:16:46Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:16:48do we have anybody who has phoned in?

2:16:54Mr. Chair, I can confirm no delegation requests

2:16:56have been received.

2:17:00Okay, thank you.

2:17:05I guess at this point then it's a question of what do we do?

2:17:13Pardon me, city staff, is there any presentation

2:17:20that you would like to make or add to this?

2:17:24Seeing none, committee members, what would you like to do?

2:17:32Member or memberant?

2:17:34I move to approve the application

2:17:36as per the conditions recommended by staff.

2:17:40Thank you.

2:17:41And that's seconded by a member good fellow.

2:17:45And is there any discussion on this?

2:17:49Yes, Member Speakers.

2:17:50I'm going to support this to a large extent

2:17:54because I think it makes for a nice future for this property

2:17:58and makes it very much more difficult

2:18:00for somebody in the future to come in and do it

2:18:03was suggested, which is clear cut,

2:18:05knock down the buildings and build apartment buildings.

2:18:07I think this is a great idea and I'm strongly in support of it.

2:18:13I agree with you and I want to commend the applicant

2:18:17for being as thorough and looking after this property.

2:18:22So I'll be supporting it as well.

2:18:26With that, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:18:28would you like to call the roll please?

2:18:30Thank you, Chair, committee members,

2:18:32please indicate your vote by responding in favor

2:18:34opposed to the motion which is to approve the applications

2:18:37with the recommended conditions.

2:18:39Chair Smith.

2:18:40In favor.

2:18:41Member Balaban.

2:18:42In favor.

2:18:43Member Goodfellow.

2:18:44In favor.

2:18:44Member Mambrainio.

2:18:45In favor.

2:18:46Member Spears.

2:18:47In favor.

2:18:48That's carried, Mr. Chair.

2:18:49Your application has been approved.

2:18:51Thank you.

2:18:52Thank you.

2:18:56Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:18:57I think we have another application.

2:19:01The final application is file B-44 slash 25,

2:19:06consent to create new residential lot

2:19:08with one retained residential lot at 258 Water Street.

2:19:12Oh, nope, for those attending remotely,

2:19:15if you wish to speak to this application,

2:19:17you can call the number displayed on the screen,

2:19:19that number's 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

2:19:24And when you call in,

2:19:25staff will give you instructions

2:19:26on how you can delegate remotely.

2:19:30Welcome.

2:19:31If you want to come forward,

2:19:32then state your name for the record, please.

2:19:36My name is Farhan Mehmood.

2:19:38And your relationship to this application?

2:19:41It's our ceremonial home, my wife owns it.

2:19:49I'm also the agent of my wife, in this case.

2:19:52Okay.

2:19:53And can you tell me if the sign was posted

2:19:58as for the planning act?

2:19:59Yes, it was.

2:20:01And have you read staff's comments

2:20:03and are you in agreement?

2:20:05Yes, we have and we are in agreement.

2:20:07Thank you.

2:20:08And I also want to thank you for your patience

2:20:12wading through a number of applications.

2:20:14So you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

2:20:17I'll keep it very short.

2:20:19We are looking to sever 258 Water Street into two lots.

2:20:24Currently an old bungalow sits on the property,

2:20:26which requires a lot of maintenance.

2:20:29So we are looking to demolish it

2:20:30and bear two semi-detached homes on it.

2:20:34Proposal is in line with municipal

2:20:36and provincial guidelines.

2:20:37It's also consistent with current zoning bylaw.

2:20:40We have worked with planning staff for almost a year

2:20:44to come up with a proposal which was acceptable to them

2:20:47as well to us and we are in agreement with them.

2:20:51Our proposal does not require any minor variances

2:20:55and it is in line with what's happening

2:20:58with our neighborhood.

2:21:00With that, we would request an approval.

2:21:04Thank you.

2:21:05I appreciate the brevity at this hour.

2:21:08Committee members, do we have any questions of this applicant?

2:21:12Member Goodfellow.

2:21:14Yes, through the chair to the applicant,

2:21:15I just wanted to make sure that the stormwater considerations

2:21:20which are highlighted by city staff in their comments

2:21:23that you have no concerns about that

2:21:25and the distances, the setback distances

2:21:28that they referred to.

2:21:30Yes, I have a had a chance to review that with my engineer

2:21:33and we are okay with that.

2:21:34It's a bit of a stretch, but we have to do what we have to do

2:21:37in order to get this done.

2:21:38Okay, thank you.

2:21:41Any other questions?

2:21:42Yes, members.

2:21:43Through you to the applicant.

2:21:46In terms of the new buildings,

2:21:48how do you plan to break them up?

2:21:51So we are planning to do two semi-detach.

2:21:54They would be very regular single-family semi-detach.

2:21:58At future plan, we do wanna do basement apartments in them,

2:22:01but as of right now, we just wanna keep them single-family

2:22:04semi-detach home.

2:22:05The goal is for us to occupy one and rent out one

2:22:08of the units.

2:22:09Thank you very much.

2:22:12Any other questions?

2:22:15Seeing none, if you wanna wait right there,

2:22:17I will ask the public if they have any comments.

2:22:21It seems like your friends have all deserted you.

2:22:25There is no one behind you.

2:22:27So I'm going to ask the secretary,

2:22:29Treasurer, if we have anyone online.

2:22:33Mr. Chair, I can confirm no other delegation requests.

2:22:36Okay.

2:22:38Committee members, what do you wish to do?

2:22:45Member Malamant.

2:22:49I recommend that we approve the,

2:22:54what is this, the severance?

2:22:56The severance with the conditions recommended by staff.

2:23:02Thank you.

2:23:02And I think member Goodfellow wants to,

2:23:05she was really jumping at the pit to get in there.

2:23:11So I'm going to say that member Goodfellow has seconded that.

2:23:15Do we have any discussion on this application?

2:23:19Seeing none, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:23:21will you do the honors, please?

2:23:24Thank you, Chair.

2:23:25Committee members, please indicate your vote

2:23:27by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

2:23:30which is to approve the application

2:23:31with the recommended conditions.

2:23:33Chair Smith.

2:23:34In favor.

2:23:35Member Balaban.

2:23:36In favor.

2:23:37Member Goodfellow.

2:23:38In favor.

2:23:39Member Mbrenio.

2:23:39In favor.

2:23:40And member Spears.

2:23:41In favor.

2:23:42That's carried, Mr. Chair.

2:23:44Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

2:23:46Your application has been approved.

2:23:48And again, thank you for your patience.

2:23:58I think that's the end of our delegations,

2:24:02our applications, is it not, Madam Secretary Treasurer?

2:24:06Mr. Chair, yeah, that's correct.

2:24:07I do have a couple of items under staff announcements.

2:24:10Yes, please.

2:24:11Please go ahead.

2:24:12I did want to advise that this is member Balaban's

2:24:16and member Siegel's last hearing

2:24:18with the Committee of Adjustment.

2:24:19So this is an opportunity for us all to take a moment

2:24:22to recognize them for their dedication to the committee.

2:24:25Member Balaban has been a committee member

2:24:27since November, 2023.

2:24:29And member Siegel has been a committee member

2:24:31since February, 2024.

2:24:33We have prepared recognition certificates

2:24:35as a token of our appreciation for their service

2:24:38and are sending them both our best wishes.

2:24:49I did have one other item, Mr. Chair.

2:24:52Lastly, I'm pleased to announce that City Council

2:24:54on May 27th appointed Member Smith,

2:24:57Members Beers, Member Goodfellow,

2:24:59and Member Mambrenio to the newly combined

2:25:02Committee of Adjustment and Property Standards Committee.

2:25:04New members Mir, Member Ross, and Member Fitzpatrick

2:25:07will also be joining the committee

2:25:09at the next hearing in July.

2:25:10So congratulations to all on their appointments.

2:25:13And that's all the staff announcements ahead.

2:25:15Thank you, Madam Secretary Treasurer.

2:25:17And I do want to echo your comments

2:25:21about the contributions that Member Balaban

2:25:26and Member Spears have, pardon me, Member Siegel, thank you.

2:25:38I'm afraid I don't believe I've met Member Siegel in person.

2:25:45I think she's always called in remotely

2:25:47and the times that she has been here,

2:25:50I've been out of the chair.

2:25:53So I want to thank both of them for their contribution

2:25:58and you'll be missed in the new iteration.

2:26:00I'm glad we were able to take some photographs this afternoon.

2:26:04So thank you again.

2:26:07And with that, Madam Secretary Treasurer,

2:26:10I think we're going to look for a motion to adjourn.

2:26:16Member Spears.

2:26:17I move we adjourn.

2:26:19And Member Balaban, pardon me,

2:26:21yes, Member Balaban has seconded it, all in favor.

2:26:26We stand adjourned.

2:26:28Thank you, Committer Members and thank you staff for staying.