Committee of Adjustment

1:04Good afternoon, Guelph. I'd like to call to order the April 13th hearing of the Guelph Committee of Adjustment.

1:11A few rules before I get started. This hearing is being held in the hybrid format with attendees appearing in person or remotely and is being live streamed and recorded.

1:23Please be advised that public hearings form part of the public record and the words, names, images of those participating will be recorded and posted online.

1:34I have confirmed with the secretary treasure that we have quorum to proceed today.

1:40Before I outline the hearing format, I wish to speak to an application that's listed on the agenda and have not submitted a request in advance of hearing.

1:49Please call the number displayed on the screen, which is 519-822-1260. That's 519-822-1260 and the extension is 2524.

2:04You will receive instructions on how to participate. A final call for delegations will be made when each application is called.

2:12The agenda for the hearing for this hearing has been posted online at guelph.ca forward slash c o f a.

2:22I'll remind all committee members and staff and those participating in the hearing to please mute your microphone when not in use.

2:34Applicants will be unmuted when their application is called.

2:38I'd also like to share the hearing format that we'll be using to navigate through each application.

2:43Each applicant will be called by the secretary treasure and the call in number for those wishing to speak to an application will be displayed on the screen.

2:54Afterwards, the applicant will be given an opportunity to add anything further to their application to a maximum of 10 minutes.

3:03I might add at this point that we have a very full agenda today and that I am going to be quite strict on the 10 minute rule.

3:09So please keep that in mind in your comments.

3:12If you're an applicant and have nothing further to add, then you can simply say so.

3:17The committee will then be asked to ask questions.

3:21We'll be able to ask questions of the applicant or of staff.

3:26After that, we'll hear from members of the public who wish to comment on the application.

3:30Please note that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

3:34Please avoid repeating comments concerns already stated by others and focus on adding new information.

3:40Comments again are limited to 10 minutes or less.

3:45Any members of the public who have submitted a request to speak prior to the hearing will be the first invited to provide comments for those wishing watching the hearing online.

3:56If you wish to speak to an application and have not yet submitted a request in advance of the hearing, please call the number displayed on the screen now.

4:06For those attending the hearing in person, you will also be given a chance to come forward to the podium and address the committee.

4:14Once all applicants from the public have been heard, the applicant or staff will be given the opportunity to respond to comments.

4:22The committee, as the chair, I'll turn to the committee for motion and deliberation as well as a vote on the application.

4:31When the committee is making a decision on an application, I shall be asking the secretary treasurer to conduct the vote by roll call.

4:40The committee treasurer will call each of the members name and each member will respond if they are in favor or opposed to the motion and the chair will announce the results of a vote on the screen.

4:53If you wish to receive a copy of the decision of an applicant application, including information about the appeal procedure, you must submit a written request.

5:04A written request can be made by contacting staff using the contact information shown on the screen.

5:11To receive a copy of the decision, please email cofa at gwellf.ca with your name, the file number you're interested in, and please note that owners and applicants automatically receive a copy of the decision.

5:33I'm going to ask for our First Nations acknowledgement and I'll ask Member Sayer to provide that.

5:43Thank you, Mr. Chair.

5:45As we gather, we are reminded that Gwalf is situated on treaty land that has steeped in rich indigenous history and home to many First Nations, Inuit and Métis people today.

5:57As a city, we have a responsibility for the stewardship of the land on which we live and work.

6:03Today we acknowledge the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation of the Anishinaabek peoples on whose traditional territory we are meeting.

6:14Thank you, Member Sayer.

6:17Members, are there any disclosures of a pecuniary interest and if so please raise your hand.

6:26Seeing none, I'll ask a member of the committee to move and we'll look to approve and second the minutes of the last meeting.

6:42Moved by Member Goodfellow, seconded by Member Hamilton.

6:47Any discussion?

6:49Seeing none, all those in favor.

6:54Thank you.

6:56Thank you.

6:58I'll now turn it over to the Secretary of the Treasury to be carried if you concur, Secretary Treasurer.

7:04That's carried, Chair.

7:06Thank you.

7:08I've confirmed with the Secretary Treasurer that we have one deferral request and I shall now turn it over to the Secretary Treasurer to address this issue.

7:20Thank you, Chair.

7:22I'll now available to the staff prior to staff meeting and again.

7:29I call it a'-18'-23' for 12 Terry Boulevard.

7:35Staff is requesting deferral to allow time for the applicant to revise their application to include a variance for the total ground floor area of all accessory buildings and structures prior to staff making a recommendation on this accessory

7:50building.

7:51application you can do so by calling 519-822-1260 extension 2524 and we will

8:01give you instructions on how to delegate. I believe the agent for the

8:05application John Vander Ward is present should the committee have any questions.

8:10Is the applicant present? Hello please come forward and address the committee.

8:17Can I get your name for the record please? And your relation to the

8:31application can I ask that you turn your mic on? Is that how I do it? There we go.

8:41Thank you. All right sorry so I'm John Vander Ward and architectural

8:47technologist so we did the drawings for it so he asked me to apply for variants.

8:52And was the sign posted as per the planning act? Yes I believe it was.

8:57And did you receive comments from staff regarding the deferral and do you have

9:04anything to comment on that or are you in agreement with the deferral? We're in

9:07agreement with the deferral for now. Yeah that's great. Do you have anything you

9:13wish to add to? No that's fine. Okay thank you. Committee members do you have any

9:19questions for the applicant? Seeing none and nothing for staff I assume then I

9:29think at this point I'll turn it over to the secretary-treasurer to conduct the

9:33vote. Chair Smith we do have some registered delegates if you'd like to

9:39hear them now. By all means. Patrick and Jason Robertson believe they're here in

9:45person? Are they? Why don't you come forward to the microphone so we can hear

9:55you thank you. I'm representing my dad Jim Robertson. What was your name sir? Paul

10:07Robertson. Thank you Paul. Yeah Andrew Sander I spoke with Andrew Sander and

10:12suggested I was okay come and talk. I'm okay then? Yes you have ten minutes if you

10:20wish. What is okay what I wanted to know what exactly does a deferment mean or

10:30deferral? The application is basically suspended until it's either withdrawn or

10:39comes back to the committee. Okay is this like a month from now or a year from

10:44now? That's really up to the applicant and their particip as this was

10:51requested by city staff I assume that city staff would be meeting with the

10:58applicant to likely revise their application. Okay so this is basically a

11:06technical issue rather than a human issue. I'm not sure I understand your

11:13question. All right well my dad just turned 96 and right now he's under an

11:18enormous amount of stress with this application because it abuts his backyard

11:24his fence and it's an overpowering sort of structure if we look at the plans. My

11:30dad has recently gone through two major operations since December

11:36influenza pardon me. I had heart issues he had to be resuscitated. A few about a

11:50month later he suffered from COVID and organ failure. He's here. His mind is

11:57pretty good but his body won't cooperate with him so we were hoping as he has over

12:03the last 60 years living at this location to be able to enjoy quiet

12:08enjoyment of his backyard because he really needs to rebuild his immunity

12:14system. Working in a backyard certainly is great therapy. He has like these

12:24demically sores hanging over his head he cannot get another cold flu influenza or

12:32even heart issues because if he's got to go back into the hospital and they've

12:36all signed the agreements he's not coming out. What my dad needs is a period of

12:43time a breather where he can regenerate and regain his strength mind and body.

12:49He won't be able to do this if we've got this great big garage being constructed

12:55cars the noise the pollution. My other concern also we have a neighbor who also

13:01has a workshop garage and they had the sense to build it back of the house. This

13:10is a budding the back fence it's overpowering if we can visualize the

13:16height there's not going to be any peace for my dad if this is going to go on so

13:22we're very concerned about his health and his regaining his strength for the

13:29winter months that are coming. My other concern is the safety issue of having

13:35such a size garage in its location. The pollution of the the fumes the exhaust

13:42from the cars the engines that are being hoisted up where is it going to be

13:47vented in our backyard. The fuel concerns and excelling torch could just set the

13:54whole thing on fire I mean yes it's very dramatic but still you still have to

13:58take those into consideration being so close to standing structures. The owner

14:09of the house next door with their garage they do not have any standing

14:13structures around so if they did have a fire or the thing blew up then it would

14:17just be that building. So there's our safety concerns for pollution and

14:22possibility of fire. We have an overhanging tree that if it catches fire

14:28and there's the garage it's just going to come over and it's going to just all

14:33kind of get all over onto our roof so these are issues that we need to be

14:37addressed or looked into. There's the light pollution with there's motion

14:42centers, dad's bedrooms right there, you can see this construction. It's just it

14:49just doesn't look good for a peaceful, innervating, life-affirming summer for dad

14:57and we really appreciate if you would take all of the human side of it other

15:05than just the technical side of it into consideration. Thank you. Thank you for

15:12your concern. Do you want to wait for a second and see if any of the committee

15:15have any questions for you? Yes of course yes. Committee do you have any questions

15:19of the delegate? Just a comment and I'll ask staff for this in helping and I

15:31appreciate you coming and representing your father as you have. I'd like to

15:36turn to staff and ask about the timeline for deferral and I'm speculating

15:46but we're an application at a later date to go forward. What would the how long

15:53would the appeal process last and how long would it be before a building permit

15:59would be issued if I could have staff comment on that? To the chair it depends

16:10on when the application is going to come back the applicant still has to add an

16:16additional variance pay the deferral fee and update their plans so depending on

16:22when they do come back and if they can meet the next there was recently a

16:27filing deadline for the May hearing I don't know if they were able to get

16:30their information in before that date but if not there is a 20 day appeal

16:34period once they do come back and if the decision is made at the committee

16:40whether to approve or refuse that there is a 20 day appeal period before

16:46technically the building permit could be issued if the permit was already in

16:51and that's and I guess that's really more of a time timing question for the

16:56applicant depending on like how quickly they can get their building permitted

16:59and everything else. I don't know if that helps you with some of the timing

17:06but it sounds like we're just to come back at the next committee of

17:09adjustment meeting which would be in May that there is a 20 day appeal period

17:15which would take us into June and construction couldn't start before

17:21logically before June so I suspect that the answer is the soonest

17:28were this to be approved in at a future committee meeting that the soonest

17:33the construction could start is sometime in the summer I don't know if that

17:37helps you with some of your concerns or not. To be honest and I thank everyone

17:47for their commentary. I mean he needs a full summer. I'm just a goodness.

17:56And even if the architect and the owner were willing to let's say even move

18:03the construction away from dad's fence even a variance further to the other

18:09side of their property that may be it's probably impossible but that may be

18:15something that at least it gives us distance from the noise and the

18:20possibility of you know fire or whatever but yeah that's the June

18:26unfortunately that is is still a living stress for dad if he knows that oh my

18:33gosh in June it's gonna all gonna happen you know and you know I know my dad at

18:3796 he's he's just gonna go crazed so it's not gonna be a happy healing process

18:46for my dad so guess we just leave it into the fates and then into your hands

18:53so do take into consideration 96 he's had a terrible winter he almost died twice

19:04he's back on his feet he's determined to live and it would certainly help if this

19:13committee would also help us in that regard inevitably this garage will be

19:19built that's just the way of fate and that's just a way of life but right now

19:27please please please hear us thank you thank you and I'll I'll call on the

19:36applicant if he'd like to respond to some of the comments that have been made I

19:43can't speak for the homeowner but I will talk to the homeowner and see I'm not

19:49sure which where this gentleman's property is but if we can move it to the

19:55other side I you know I'll suggest that I did meet with staff and staff asked to

20:02move it further from the property line and we will do that as well but that's

20:10part of our revision so I don't know if that helps I I hope it helps these

20:16people I I have a heart so anyways okay at this point thank you very much for

20:27your reply and at this point I'd like to call on the committee for a motion oh

20:34yes if there's anyone else in the audience before I do that has any

20:41comments or on the issue is there anyone online no sorry I jumped the gun there a

20:50little bit but I'll turn to committee now and I'll entertain a motion for deferral

20:57member Sayer seconder member good fellow and I don't believe we are allowed to

21:09debate on a motion of deferral so I'll call the question I'll turn the voting

21:14over to the secretary treasurer thank you chair committee members please

21:21indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion which is to

21:25defer the application chair Smith in favor member Klein in favor member good

21:34fellow in favor member Hamilton in favor and member Sayer in favor that's

21:42carried chair your motion to defer has been accepted moving along I'd like to

21:53ask the secretary treasurer for the next request please the next application is

22:13about a dash 12 slash 23 multiple variances for proposed new detached

22:18dwelling at 21 Dublin Street South also note for the committee members as well

22:23as those attending that we did receive comments after the comment deadline from

22:28Brian shook as well as Kathy and Anthony Dodd with concerns about the

22:32application and that correspondence has been circulated to the committee

22:36members and staff also note for those watching and who wish to speak to this

22:42application you can do so by calling the number shown on the screen the number

22:47is 519 822 1260 extension 2524 when you call in staff will give you

22:56instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone I will ask if the

23:04applicant is in attendance either in person or yeah please brush the

23:09microphone you state your name for the record please send your relationship to

23:22the application my name is Charlotte Ballack I'm a planner at GSP group and

23:27I am speaking on behalf of the property owners on the application thank you and

23:33was the sign posted as per the planning act yes it was thank you you have ten

23:40minutes to address the committee thank you the application was originally heard

23:47at the March meeting the meeting was or the application was deferred at that

23:52meeting due to some engineering comments those comments have been addressed

23:57and now I believe engineering is aligned with planning to recommend approval

24:03with a condition to refresh the committee's memory on the application the

24:10property owners are requesting several minor variances to essentially replace

24:16an existing single detached home with a new single detached home at the existing

24:22house does have some non-compliant regulations within the zoning bylaw as

24:27it sits currently and the property owners wish to maintain some of those

24:35conditions for the new build as well as a couple new requests there are no

24:43changes to the location of the driveway and the setback on the driveway side of

24:48the property this is the side of the property that is right next to another

24:53home also the wall the building wall on that side of the property will be

25:01replaced in the exact same place the front wall of the house will also be

25:06replaced in the same place as the existing building with the exception of

25:11the front porch which is one of the additional requests the new house will

25:16extend 0.3 meters further into the exterior side yard than the existing

25:22property or the existing house and the new house will extend 1.15 meters further

25:29into the rear yard than the existing house another thing I wanted to point

25:35out as you consider the application is that on this property and a couple

25:44other properties in the neighborhood the property lines are actually set back

25:49quite far from the street line and this is in contrast to some newer properties

25:54that you might see in the city where the property line is right up against the

25:58sidewalk so although we are requesting the these minor variances the house

26:06itself is still set quite far back from the street so these wouldn't have an

26:10impact on the overall streetscape and it won't have an impact on the visibility

26:16on that corner as well. Finally I did take note of the condition that's

26:24proposed by the engineering department and we would request that that condition

26:31be considered to be removed just because the existing hedge there

26:38the people who live on the property enjoy the privacy that comes with the hedge

26:43and so we're not proposing to change that with the application so maintaining

26:48that existing condition is something that we would like for you to consider

26:54so if there's any questions or comments on that. Thank you very much.

27:00Do we have anyone in the audience who would like to respond or anyone who is calling in?

27:13Chair Smith we do have some registered delegates for this file. The first delegate is Brian

27:21Schuch I believe they are appearing in person. Is the delegate, oh there you are, please come forward.

27:40Okay good afternoon can you state your name for the record please?

27:43It's I'm Brian Schuch and I live at 59 SX Street and that is the property directly attached

27:51what would be considered the rear yard of Dublin Street 21 Dublin Street.

27:57Well welcome you have 10 minutes if you'd like to take advantage of that.

28:01Yes thank you very much. Since I'm first one attending or speaking to the application I'll

28:07go through all my points. First of all specifically I don't have a problem with the redevelopment of

28:14the property in itself. I think it's the building is derelict it needs to be either

28:23you know extremely renovated or removed. I think you have my comments and writing

28:29specifically I didn't have an objection to A, B, and E on their request or their application rather.

28:38I do have an issue with the rear yard requested variance with their

28:48delegate did not address at all and that is the reduction of the rear yard from 3.6 meters to 2.45

28:56meters with the addition of a exterior uncovered entrance extending to within 1.2 meters of the

29:05rear property line that I share with this new property. Also the proposed driveway extends

29:13beyond the rear of the proposed building to within one meter of the property line as well.

29:19I'm concerned about this for a number of reasons. I have a number of large cedar trees and a beach

29:26tree that are just within my side of the property line that are not shown on this sketch but you

29:34do have photos that were sent along with my application. Excuse me I'm concerned about the

29:41survival of these trees during excavation and general construction of the new house.

29:48There are significant trees I would say over almost 30 feet high and provide quite a nice

29:57feature to my property. I'm concerned about drainage along the common property line. I'm also

30:07concerned about the deck I've mentioned proposed driveway. I'm concerned about light and noise of

30:17the entranceway into the rear of the house. Again my bedroom windows are in the second

30:23or story in the half part of my home facing the rear yard of the new property or the current

30:29property. Any light noise motion detection IP cameras can easily see into my rear yard.

30:39So I'm concerned about privacy, waste light and noise and pollution from any part of the car.

30:47Finally I submitted this rather late. I noticed during this last winter we had some late snow

30:55storms and the new owners like to use a small front end loader to plow the driveway although

31:05it's gravel now will be paved I imagine in some way and they were piling the snow in the rear yard.

31:10Well there won't be much rear yard for them to pile snow if they have a porch back there

31:16extending four feet from the rear of the house. I'm concerned about snow removable and how they're

31:21going to manage that since there's limited space on the property it's a small lot and it sounds like

31:28from the applicants delegate they are looking at the 4.2 meter side yard as to be the backyard for

31:37the new tenants owners of this property. I'm assuming it's going to be a rental that's what I've heard

31:45through the grapevine in the neighborhood. There's not much space there that hedge is probably

31:54two feet wide or more and that's going to limit them having a good time on that side yard.

32:01There was one other thing that escapes my mind right now how am I doing for time?

32:06A little bit about my house 59S Street was built in the early 1850s it's a heritage stone building

32:14it's quite a small property in 900 square feet. I have a really nice I'm lucky I have a really

32:20nice side yard that I use as my sort of recreation area dog walk hang out with a patio and a barbecue

32:31so I'm out there a lot my dog's out there a lot bringing the house within two and a half meters

32:392.45 meters would uh could cost them in pat for both of us because Joel does bark.

32:48That's it any questions for me? Thank you very much. Do we have any questions for this

32:59delegate? Seeing none thank you very much for attending. Thank you and I wonder if we have

33:07any other delegates? I see a hand. Yep Chair Smith we do have another registered delegate

33:15Kathy Dodd. Welcome. Good afternoon. Can you see your name for the record? My name is Kathy Dodd

33:31and I reside at 19 Dublin Street South. Beautiful day a horrible public speaker so just bear with me.

33:38Well welcome we'll try not to bite. Thanks so much I'm not going to reiterate everything that I've

33:43put pen to paper in the last few weeks with regards to the demolition and new build next door to

33:48me so I'd like you to close your eyes and picture two structures. One structure on the right is my

33:53stone house that was built in 1847 stone house rubble foundation the house to the left which is

34:0021 Dublin Street was built in 1880. Those two properties have lived side by side for 130 years

34:09let's say so now I'm not opposed to the demolition and the reconstruction at all what I'm opposed to

34:17is the enormity of the new build so from what I'm understanding and correct me if I'm wrong

34:23the total square footage of the current house is 1200 square feet the new build is going to be over

34:292500 square feet the scary part is the enormity the height but also a fully finished basement

34:39that current house does not have it has a crawl space I believe but not an entire

34:45finished basement so my concerns are construction what it's going to do to the integrity of my

34:51stone house my rubble foundation I would like to recommend that a feasibility study done

35:00an engineering firm to see what the impact of construction digging blasting is going to do to

35:06my property so that's one of my requests am I getting read and starting to vibrate in my

35:14verbiage so that's what I'd like to see I'd like to ideally in the future I don't want to have to

35:23come back and have to sue these owners over issues that happened during construction I'd like to make

35:29sure that it's a safe and sound construction site second point is a major concern as well is soil

35:37contamination so for the past five years I've lived in this little stone bungalow and the past owner

35:44Ray had a big Harley Davidson and he would take his oil from his motorcycle and dump it in the

35:50backyard and every time he did this I'd go out and say Ray you can't do this it's environmentally

35:56unsound and he'd tell me where to go it was a constant battle so I know that there is soil

36:02contamination in the backyard that's another big concern I would like to see the current owners do

36:06an environmental study one two or three whatever it takes to determine whether or not it's clean or

36:13polluted and if it's polluted we'd all they grind the rest of us around would like it cleaned up

36:20so for me I have to those two big concerns not opposed at all to demolition and rebuild

36:25just opposed to the enormity of what's going on that property that's it how'd I do well you're

36:34under 10 minutes so congratulations if you can wait there I'll ask committee if did you have

36:41something else I do actually another small point is the variance right now number D I believe is

36:48currently 0.5 meters from the driveway to the nearest lot line to allow shrubbery or drainage

36:55runoff from the existing house they're requiring zero absolutely zero meters between

37:01their lot line and my lot line so you can probably see that the water drainage is not going to have

37:07anything to drip into but my basement so I would like to I would like it to stay the way it is

37:15so that the water can seep into the drainage and not into my basement so those are three major points

37:20and I hope that you consider them do you have any questions for me

37:26thank you and I'll turn to the committee to see if anyone has any questions for you

37:31yes remember good fellow yes to the chair I have several questions but I think they're more

37:36directed to staff so would this be the appropriate time I think this is this is sure appropriate yeah

37:46um I I have heard the concerns about the two through the chair sorry to staff but I've heard

37:52the concerns from neighbors about the the construction that's going to be happening on the

37:58property in the depth of the basement and new foundations versus older foundations and it may

38:06be the case that this is not the appropriate time to be kind of going through all of the details of

38:12that but I am curious about what point in the process would a concern like that be handled if

38:17it's not as part of the committee of adjustment um through the chair my understanding is those

38:29concerns would be dealt with during the building permit phase um I'm not sure if chiffon who's on

38:35the line from engineering can speak further to that but my understanding is that it would be dealt

38:39with during the building permit phase yes yeah um I I would say that all those concerns are usually

38:52looked at the building permit stage okay thank you I appreciate that can I ask a question though

38:59but would the concerns are going to be looked at like from what respect like structural integrity

39:06to the neighboring buildings to the depth of the basement like what I'm just going to interrupt oh

39:10sorry this isn't really a to and fro at this point you have major presentation and we do

39:17very much appreciate it but it's up to the committee to ask questions now or another delegate to come

39:22forward if there's another delegate so I'm are there any further questions member good fellow

39:30yes thank you um I I also through the chair to staff I've heard the comments about stormwater

39:37concerns and it was a concern of mine when I was reviewing the application just the amount of space

39:42that remains on the site is quite limited um I guess is there a comment or feedback from staff

39:48why perhaps a stormwater uh condition a review of the stormwater drainage plan for a site like this

39:54might um might make sense or might not make sense so through you chair we did look

40:00got into our database and we haven't received any drainage complaints in the area.

40:06So that provides us a good indication that everything is draining well and there hasn't

40:10been any storm water related issues.

40:14With that said, as part of the building permit application, the applicant will be required

40:20to provide a grading and drainage plan, which will again be reviewed at the building permit

40:24stage.

40:27And that will ensure that there is no, you know, storm water getting directed towards

40:31neighboring property.

40:34And it will probably be designed in such a way where everything is graded towards either

40:38Essex or Dublin Street.

40:40Yes, thanks.

40:43I appreciate that clarification.

40:45Thank you.

40:46I guess a follow up question then through the chair.

40:50In some cases we have included a condition in an application or an approval for a storm

40:57water review.

40:59And I guess is maybe this is a question then through the chair to the applicant, but would

41:04the applicant be willing to include a storm water drainage review as part of the process?

41:17Through you, chair.

41:18Since we know these things are going to be reviewed in the building permit phase, we

41:23prefer to keep it condition free and keep everything to the building permit phase.

41:33Thank you.

41:34I'm sorry, I have one final question.

41:36I've got lots of questions today.

41:38The floor is yours.

41:39Thank you.

41:40Through the chair to city staff, I think the concern about impacted soil on the property

41:47does raise my interest and concern as well.

41:51And it seems like this is relatively new information that is coming forward.

41:56I guess is there perhaps a place here where an additional condition could be added to

42:02start an environmental site assessment process just to make sure that we have that on the

42:08books and that the site is appropriately cleaned up.

42:16So is that a question for engineering?

42:20With apologies, I believe so.

42:22Yes, to the city staff.

42:25Through you, chair, we can add that condition, but the magnitude of this development is fairly

42:33small, right?

42:35I don't think a size of this site warrants a phase one.

42:40Maybe what we can do is add a condition of a site screening questionnaire, which is smaller.

42:47And it's that that would be more appropriate rather than a full environmental site assessment

42:52at this stage.

42:56Through the chair, thank you.

42:57That's very helpful.

42:59And I think that does make sense to have at least some step included, even if it is it's

43:04smaller in magnitude.

43:05I think where I'm concerned is that if this was in the area that would be excavated for

43:11a basement, it would be taken care of.

43:13But in an area like a driveway, it may not be addressed.

43:15So I think that makes sense.

43:17And thank you.

43:18And that's the end of my questions.

43:20Thanks.

43:21Sure.

43:22Through you, chair, then we'll just add the condition then.

43:25If that's okay.

43:27The condition will state that prior decisions of building permit, the owner shall agree

43:30to provide a site screening questionnaire in accordance with the city's environmental guidelines.

43:41That's, I think the end of your questions.

43:47Member Goodfellow, thank you for those.

43:51Are there any other delegate or before we move on, anyone else on the committee who's

43:57interested in speaking to the delegate?

44:04Are there any other additional delegates on this issue either here in the chamber?

44:10Yes, please come forward.

44:25Good afternoon.

44:26Please state your name for the record.

44:32Hello.

44:34My name is Geraldine Howett, and I reside at Twenty Waterloo Avenue, which is Kitty Corner

44:40to the property under discussion.

44:43Welcome.

44:43You have 10 minutes if you wish to take advantage of that.

44:46Thank you.

44:47This is the first time in my life I've ever come to a hearing like this.

44:52And because I don't live directly adjacent to this property, I can't speak to technical concerns.

45:02But as someone who has lived in this neighborhood for almost seven decades and has witnessed a lot of history here,

45:09I have very mixed emotions about this proposal development.

45:18The overall dimensions will make it a larger structure than what is there already.

45:24And it's the disproportionate size to the actual space that's going into that quite concerns me.

45:36And its height.

45:38I feel it could very well end up being a sort of a looming presence over the adjacent properties.

45:48And I just wish that the end result could be a little more sympathetic to its situation on this corner.

46:03Over the past few years, we've all witnessed it become more and more derelict.

46:07And my memory goes back to when it was truly a lovely single family home with children.

46:14So I'm just profoundly disappointed that this might be a missed opportunity to truly enhance that corner and give it a little gem.

46:29And I would just respectfully ask a little bit of consideration given to maybe just reducing the dimensions a little bit to make it more proportionate to this space available.

46:44So that's my view of the matter.

46:49And I do thank you for your time.

46:53Thank you.

46:54If you want to wait there for a moment and see if any of the committee have any questions for you.

46:58Committee members, do we have any questions of this delegate seeing none?

47:04Thank you very much for coming by and appreciate your comments.

47:10I will entertain any other delegations either here in the chamber or online.

47:20I see a hand.

47:31Sorry, I'm going to rule you out of order.

47:33You've had an opportunity to make your points and I do appreciate it.

47:38But the rule is that you have a chance to make comments and we will hear from other delegates or go into committee for debate and consideration of the motion.

47:53At this point, are there any other delegations?

47:56I'm asking the second and the third time any other delegations seeing none.

48:02I think at this point we need a resolution or a motion rather.

48:09Before I do that, the secretary has asked me to consider the applicant and whether or not the condition as outlined by city staff would be an additional condition that you'd be supportive of.

48:33Through you, Mr. Chair, we are open to doing the site screening question as a condition of approval.

48:41Awesome. So we will add that condition to any motion that comes forward. So at this point, we I'm looking to my colleagues for a motion.

48:52Member Hamilton, I will move for approval with that added condition.

48:59Thank you and a seconder member Klein.

49:05Committee members, do we have any discussion on the motion? Member Goodfellow.

49:16Yes, through the chair. I guess my question is one of order at this point. If I have a follow up question for city staff, am I able to ask that at this stage? Or are we now talking amongst ourselves to debate the motion?

49:31I'll entertain questions of staff at this point. If you have additional questions for staff.

49:37Thank you. And so through the chair to city staff, we've been talking a bit about the review process through the building permit review.

49:46I am less familiar with that process admittedly and wondering if there is an opportunity for input from the public or neighbors in that process or in that review process if they have concerns that, you know, about building foundations in particular.

50:03Through the chair, the building permit phase is not a public process. That would just be dealt with between the applicant and building staff.

50:17Thank you.

50:21I have one question of staff and it concerns the driveway. The proposed driveway, it was a little unclear on the on the sketch. So forgive my ignorance, but on the on the proposal, the new driveway and the public.

50:39And the old driveway, are we talking about basically the same footprint vis-a-vis the setbacks through you, Mr. Chair, that is correct. The existing setback of the gravel driveway is zero meters to the lot line and the proposed would also be zero meters.

50:57I've got one other question for staff and that is in terms of by right right now, were the applicant to simply remove the the roof and wish to install a second story. Would that come back to committee or would they be able to do that by right given the constrained nature of the of the yard.

51:25Through you, Mr. Chair, there are certain portions of the existing footprint that are legal non-compliant. So a second story could be added without any variance, but it couldn't match the exact dimensions of the existing footprint.

51:39Thank you. That's insightful.

51:43Any other comments from committee?

51:47Yes, member Sear.

51:49Yeah, through the chair to staff.

51:53On the sketch, it just wasn't clear to me where you wanted the or where you proposed to have the vegetation removed. So is it is it the bush at the corner of the lot or would part of that hedge have to come out to.

52:09Yep.

52:10Through the chair. It's everything within the site line triangle, because that would be considered as an obstruction during the spring summer months where, you know, it is fully vegetated. So it's considered as an obstruction. So anything within the site line triangle is to be removed.

52:28If I may. This is Kelly Patzer in the zoning department.

52:37Vegetation is permitted to be within the site line triangle, but it needs to be maintained at a height of 0.8 meters from the grade of the road.

52:49So if that could just be clarified if engineering agrees with that.

52:53Yeah.

52:57Through the chair. Yes, we agree.

52:59Okay. So just to clarify then the condition could be.

53:08Adjusted so rather than remove vegetation, it would be just.

53:12Maintain at a height of less than 0.8 meters.

53:15Yes, that could be a condition that the vegetation.

53:23Be maintained at a height of 0.8 meters. Okay. Thank you.

53:28Did you were you interested in adding an additional condition?

53:34Well, I, there's a, there's an existing condition has been recommended about the owner shall remove.

53:40Vegetation from within the site triangle, but I think I just asked that that condition be amended to state that.

53:46You know, vegetation.

53:48Will be maintained, you know, at a height of 0.8 meters is required.

53:53Can we.

53:54I'll entertain that if the mover sees that as a friendly amendment.

53:57Remember Hamilton, I believe was the more.

54:04Yeah, I'm okay with that.

54:06And then I'll ask the.

54:09The proponent if they are in agreement with that.

54:15Mr. Chair. Yes, we are in agreement with that.

54:19Okay.

54:20Then I'm happy to allow that as a, as another amendment to this motion.

54:26At this point, is there any further discussion on this motion?

54:30Seeing none. I'll turn it over to the secretary treasure for a vote.

54:35Thank you, chair committee members.

54:40Please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

54:44which is to approve the application with the two conditions.

54:50The one about the site screening questionnaire and also about.

54:54Maintaining the vegetation at a height less than 0.8 meters.

54:58Chair Smith.

55:00In favor.

55:01Member Klein.

55:02In favor.

55:03Member good fellow.

55:04In favor.

55:05Number Hamilton.

55:06In favor.

55:07And members there.

55:08In favor.

55:09That's carried chair.

55:11Your application has been approved. Thank you.

55:13I'll call the secretary treasure to.

55:15Ask for the next applicant to come forward.

55:18The next application is file a dash 17 slash 23.

55:29Variants to permit reduced side yard setback for proposed third story residential

55:33addition to existing dwelling.

55:43At 77 foster avenue.

55:45I'll note for those.

55:46Attending or watching online.

55:48If you wish to speak to this application,

55:50you can contact us at the end of the session.

55:52If you wish to speak to this application,

55:54you can contact us at the end of the session.

55:56If you are looking for you application.

55:59Then please be sure to contact us if you are any.

56:02You can contact us at the end of this session.

56:04If you are looking for you app.

56:05If you are attending or watching online,

56:07if you wish to speak to this application,

56:09you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

56:11The number is 509 822.

56:16One two 6 0.

56:18Extension 2524.

56:19And when you call in stacked,

56:20will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely.

56:22Can you state your name for the record, please?

56:25And your relationship to the application.

56:26Bobby Rindawa.

56:27And friend.

56:28I'm sorry.

56:29And was the sign posted as per the planning act? Yes. Okay. And as with the other delegates, you have 10 minutes to make your presentation. So please go ahead.

56:40Thank you. You guys approval. So we have no.

56:48Further comments at this time.

56:53That's brief to the point.

56:57I'm going to ask if any of the.

57:01The committee have any or pardon me, ask if any, uh, one in the audience or at home has any comments or wishes to delegate on this application.

57:11No phone calls.

57:16Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any phone calls.

57:19Thank you.

57:20Um, at that point, I will ask for committee and they have any questions of the applicant.

57:27Seeing none, I am then going to turn to my colleagues to ask for a motion.

57:36Member, member say or.

57:43I'd like to move that the application be approved.

57:48I'm recommended by staff.

57:50Do I have a seconder member good fellow.

57:55Any discussion at this point.

57:58Seeing none, I will turn it back to the secretary treasure.

58:06Thank you chair committee members. Please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application.

58:15Chair Smith in favor member Klein.

58:21In favor.

58:23Member good fellow in favor member Hamilton in favor.

58:28And members there.

58:30In favor.

58:31That's carried chair.

58:33Your application has been approved. Thank you. Thank you.

58:40Thank you.

58:42I will now ask the secretary treasure to ask for our next applicant.

58:54The next application is file a dash 19 slash 23 variances to permit increased angular plane and very definition of finished grade for proposed apartment building.

59:04I'll also note for the committee members as well as those attending that comments were received after the comment deadline from the agent Trevor Hawkins and Megan Lippert from MHBC planning.

59:15Providing some additional clarification on the building height and that correspondence has been circulated to the committee members and staff.

59:22And as well, if you are watching online and wish to speak to this application, you can do so by calling the number shown on the screen. That number is 519821260 extension 2524.

59:34And when you call in, we'll give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

59:38Thank you and welcome. Can you state your name please for the record.

59:43Trevor Hawkins from MHBC planning and with me is Andrew Bousfield from ABA architects.

59:49Thank you and welcome and was the sign posted as per the planning act. Yes, it was. Thank you.

59:55This point you have 10 minutes to address the committee. If you wish to take advantage of it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll try to use our time efficiently.

1:00:07First, it may be helpful for the committee to understand a bit of the context of the site.

1:00:13It's a large parcel over 6 hectares. It's been through several approval processes to date that have resulted in 3 approved apartment buildings, which I will label apartment A, B and C.

1:00:28Those buildings are located along paisley at the corner of white law and then along Elmira Road south. So the property actually has frontage on 3 streets.

1:00:38White law road being the 3rd street building a is nearing completion. So there's the site plan that's actually quite helpful. So building a on the corner is nearing completion.

1:00:47Building B, which is the 1st building on Elmira Road south is also under construction.

1:00:53And approval of a site plan application for building C, which is the 2nd building on Elmira Road south.

1:01:01And the parking structure, which faces white law road at the bottom of the image has also been granted.

1:01:08As part of the site plan approval application and discussions with staff for the parking structure on white law.

1:01:16There was a general agreement that locating a residential apartment building on top of that parking structure was desirable.

1:01:25So we then undertook an analysis to look at where we could place the building.

1:01:32And Andrew, of course, can speak to it in greater detail, but essentially for reasons related to the location of the parking structure, which was already approved.

1:01:41The building had to be situated at the front of the structure closest to white law road just because of structural components related to the actual complete structure, including the parking structure.

1:01:54The zoning on the site today allows an eight story building and the other three buildings are all eight story buildings.

1:02:00So we approached the construction or the design of building D, which is the building on top of the structure.

1:02:06Also from the perspective of another eight story building to be consistent with with the sort of the frontage established and the height of the building established through building a at the corner of Haysley and white law and the other two buildings on the site.

1:02:21However, because of the sloped nature of both white law road, which slopes to tire at the south end of this site than it is at the north end of the site at the intersection with paisley.

1:02:30And then there's a secondary component of the slope. If you're standing on white law road, the property slopes down towards Elmira Road.

1:02:37So if you're you're nodding as though you know exactly what I'm talking about.

1:02:41So the parking structure itself is actually built into the hill as you go into the site.

1:02:47So even though it's a multi level parking structure, only the first level of the structure is visible from white law road.

1:02:54So our intent was to use the massing of building D to hide the parking structure to the greatest extent possible.

1:03:01Build an eight story residential building, which is permitted in the current zoning bylaw.

1:03:06But because of the slopes in both those directions and the way that they buy law, the bylaw determines what your average grade is your average finished grade, which is the bottom of the building.

1:03:16It actually means that in this case, the bottom of the building you can't you wouldn't be able to see the bottom of the building as the bylaw defines it would be four and a half or point six meters below white law road as you were standing on white law road.

1:03:31So we structured our submission and we're seeking a variance to the definition such that the finished grade for the purposes of measuring this building would actually be if you were standing on white law road.

1:03:44Sort of halfway along the face of that building at the entrance to the building.

1:03:48So standing there, it would be an eight story building or the zoning bylaw, but we needed a variance from the way the bylaw determines your average finished grade in order to do that.

1:03:58So in initial discussions with staff.

1:04:02They expressed.

1:04:04I believe a concern about the manner of the variance and sort of varying a definition.

1:04:09So the subsequent submission that we made clarified that if you measured the building per the per the definition zoning bylaw and you measured the building as we have located it, it would be a four point six meter difference.

1:04:23So that speaks to sinking the building into the hill per the per the definition versus situating the building on the parking structure, which is the way it's designed.

1:04:35So that that sort of encapsulates the first variance, the second variance.

1:04:40And I'll just briefly highlight the image and Andrew can and can jump in.

1:04:44But we've shown you a couple of different angles here just again the bylaw doesn't say exactly where you would measure angular plane on a frontage of this size.

1:04:52And because of the slope nature of the site.

1:04:54If you measured angular plane.

1:04:56You know, at one point on the building, it would sort of.

1:05:00I'm sure about the upper floor of the building.

1:05:03But if you measured it at the lowest point of the building, it would be different.

1:05:07So we just wanted to articulate for the committee that there are other considerations.

1:05:11When it comes to how you're measuring angular plane on a site like this, which has a number of great challenges.

1:05:18And in in in sort of the overall context, the intent was to create a building that's similar in size and scale to the other buildings that are already either under construction or approved on the site.

1:05:29And that are approved for the lands on the opposite side of white law, which, which went through its own process and as buildings of heights that are somewhere seven to nine stories essentially in height in this area of white lot road.

1:05:43Thank you, Trevor.

1:05:50Through you, Mr chair, the top drawing sorry before you get started. It's, I know you're introduced introduced at the beginning, but could you just state your name for the record.

1:05:59Yes, my name is Andrew Bousfield. I'm the project architect for the applicant and for the development.

1:06:08I'll just, I don't know how much time I have left, but for the purposes of my description, the drawing before you shows two two drawings really the top drawing is an elevation as if you were looking at the building in question, which is the left most or the right most

1:06:25building, excuse me, as if you were standing on white law looking sort of northwest back towards.

1:06:35Or through into the site to the left is the approved building a which is, as Trevor mentioned, nearing completion. I draw your attention to the upper left corner of building a and you'll see how the the built form terraces.

1:06:51You'll notice that the left hand left half of the building is one story lower than the right half. And that was specifically to address the angular plane off Elmira.

1:07:05If we go to go to the site plan you'll see that the parking structure that's been approved and the building D that's in question.

1:07:14And so, for the committee currently, it is, it's aligned with building a they form a line angular plane wasn't considered by staff in their approval of building a and so it's part of the reason I think that we presumed that this would be appropriate.

1:07:36The, the angular plane off white law, its impact on building a is virtually identical to the way it is on building D, simply because they're the same height in terms of stories.

1:07:50And so, those are things that I would like to if someone would be able to bring up the site plan, just to sort of understand why the built form is located where it is I think Trevor touched on the idea of built form being put up on white law in the vicinity and over top of the parking structure.

1:08:11And staff commentary and staff have been consistent and we would agree that built form and active built form on Elmira is a desirable outcome.

1:08:20The, we had two scenarios to consider as a design team you'll notice a what's in this is a temporary parking lot you'll see it just to the northwest of the wood lot.

1:08:34And so, we have put building D down in that location at eight stories. We felt it was in too close proximity to the existing low rise single family residential.

1:08:47So, our intent was the outcome was that locating the density back up onto white law made more sense. And that's really from an architectural standpoint, why we arrived at the solution we did.

1:09:03And so, I think we'll have to go one minute warning.

1:09:05I think I've probably said my piece for now chair. Thank you.

1:09:10Well, thank you on a complicated issue that that's very concise. Thank you.

1:09:15At this point, I will entertain any delegations who would like to speak to this matter from either the audience or the folks at home.

1:09:26I see none in the chambers. Are there any online or on the telephone.

1:09:32Chair Smith, we haven't received any delegation requests. Thank you. At this point, I'll turn to committee and see if there are any questions of the applicant.

1:09:46Member say it.

1:09:48Yeah.

1:09:49Thank you through the chair.

1:09:52So the, the angular plane for building D as you, like, as you mentioned, like white law road is quite slope there. So does the angular plane change as you go up or down the road. So are there some points in the building that meet 45 and somewhere higher.

1:10:12Through you, Mr. Chair.

1:10:16The angular plane itself never changes. It's always 45 degrees. But yes, the relationship of where that angle pierces the building does change.

1:10:26Okay. We have a horizontal datum. And of course, on the low side of the site, it will impact lower. I think on our diagram, you'll see that there are two lines.

1:10:34Okay.

1:10:35One is established at the midpoint, the average along white law. And the other shows where that 45 degree angle would pierce the building at the highest point on the site. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And I had a related question.

1:10:51I had wondered why the, you know, building D wasn't further back, but I understand just for structural reasons, it needs to be where it is on that parking structure.

1:11:04I think it's also important. There's a structural component to it, but there's also a desire to hide the structure itself. Right. So situating the apartment building further from the street would expose more parking spaces.

1:11:18Right. Okay. Thank you.

1:11:19I think that's the questions I have for now.

1:11:25Member good fellow.

1:11:27Yes, through the chair, I believe to city staff.

1:11:31I was reading through the comments and I appreciated the detail that you provided for us to review.

1:11:38One of the questions I have though is about the zoning bylaw and understanding whether eight stories or six stories are approved for this zone. Thank you.

1:11:52Through the chair to member good fellow. The property is currently zoned R for a, which is a general residential apartment zone. So,

1:12:01and it's a situation where the zoning bylaw was for the site was approved, I think back in like the 80s. So it was carried forward in the 1995 bylaw does allow the eight stories.

1:12:12And if they were to submit a site plan and be in full compliance with our existing bylaw, they could do the eight stories. However, because there is a planning act application involved, meaning a minor variance request, we have to look at it in terms of

1:12:27meeting the four tests and one of them is meeting the general intent and purpose of the official plan. So this is a situation where you have the zoning that predates the current official plan, which in the official plan permits a maximum

1:12:39building height of six stories. So essentially

1:12:44allowing these variances would essentially permit a building that's in that exceeds the permissions under the medium density residential land use designation.

1:12:54But if they were to just come in with a site plan and could meet all of the regulations in the zoning bylaw height and density and they didn't need the official plan conformity review, then they could do the eight story building.

1:13:07Thank you.

1:13:12I think I got most of that I appreciate the detail though.

1:13:16No more questions.

1:13:22Still digesting that one back in a minute.

1:13:28Members Hamilton or Klein do I have any questions there I thought I saw some movement while I was, I was looking elsewhere, and it appears not.

1:13:37I understand that we have a call in delegate.

1:13:46And so I would like to welcome you on the phone. Please state your name for the record.

1:14:00I can can you state your name for the record please. Oh yeah, it's Edward Partito.

1:14:08Welcome and you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:14:12Thanks. I don't necessarily need 10 minutes. I'm here for another application, but I'm sitting in and listening to all these as we go along and this one in particular speaks to me as I'm, I'm kind of in that age group where, you know, it's, it's hard to break into the housing market and, you know, it seems like there's a bit of a housing crisis that's going on right now.

1:14:32Specifically in our province and, you know, developments like these are what's going to help alleviate the situation and, you know, I think we need to build housing and and things like that.

1:14:44And for the application or development to be hampered over, you know, a 10 degree or whatever it is, sight line, you know, variation, you know, to me, it's, it's.

1:14:58A little bit ridiculous in my opinion for this visibility sight line. So I'm in support of this application. I think we need to get housing built.

1:15:08And yeah, I speak from a personal opinion, not a professional opinion.

1:15:14And, you know, I'd love to see more of these developments happen and, you know, and for housing to get built. So I'm all I'm all for applications like this. And that's my 2 cents on the matter.

1:15:27Do we have any questions of this?

1:15:32Delegate seeing none. Thank you very much for your comments.

1:15:40All right. Thank you very much.

1:15:47Member good fellow.

1:15:48Yes, to the through the chair.

1:15:51I've had some time to digest the information and I have a follow up question back to staff.

1:15:57So through the chair to staff.

1:15:59So if I'm understanding correctly, it sounds like there is a an order, a process order question here about chickens and eggs, which comes first chicken and egg.

1:16:10And if we approve this application.

1:16:15Are there follow on consequences to that for future applications or future developments of this magnitude and scope.

1:16:22Through the chair to member good fellow.

1:16:28Each application is looked at on a site specific basis.

1:16:33They don't set precedence. However, staff can't support the application for the reasons we've outlined in our staff report.

1:16:42And we don't feel it's appropriate to be varying a definition and the purpose of the definition is so it's essentially a level level playing field for all developments and all property owners.

1:16:54And I don't understand what the definition how building since the definition of finished grade is directly tied to building height. It's essentially how all sites across the city are measured.

1:17:08I, and I can't remember a time where we have varied a definition, but we don't think it's appropriate to do that.

1:17:16Thank you. That's helpful.

1:17:20Any other of my colleagues have any questions member Hamilton.

1:17:26Yes, it is a question for town staff and I understand you can't answer, but I'm just reading through again the of the four tests the one that refers to the information provided about the official plan.

1:17:36And not meeting the general intent and purpose can you provide a comment as to whether you think this is something that is better evaluated through an official plan amendment process. I'm just, this one's a little strange to me that is, you know, one of those ones where the zoning permits, but the, I understand that the, you know, medium density

1:17:52is a little bit different. So, I just wondered if you could comment on that through the chair to member Hamilton.

1:18:03Since it doesn't conform to the official plan we technically can't recommend approval through a minor variance so it would need an official plan amendment if wanting to do what they're proposing.

1:18:17I would like to read the first test of conforming to the general intent and purpose of the official plan because the variances would essentially be facilitating a building, the construction of a building that exceeds the permissions and the medium density residential land use designation.

1:18:31Thank you.

1:18:34I understand that we have another caller caller do you want to identify yourself and welcome or is the additional comment on this present.

1:18:55We're just getting the delegate into the meeting and the name is Lori.

1:19:00Can you hear me.

1:19:17Thank you.

1:19:18I understand that we have another call.

1:19:20You sound it sounds like you have something on in the background if you can turn that down and identify yourself and you have 10 minutes to make your comments.

1:19:29Thank you.

1:19:30My name is Lori Pollack.

1:19:34Can you hear me.

1:19:35Yes, Lori welcome.

1:19:37You have 10 minutes to make any your delegation make any comments you wish.

1:19:43Thank you.

1:19:44My comments on this proposed variance.

1:19:50If the parking structure is one story.

1:19:53And they're proposing an eight story building. Are we not up to nine stories on this.

1:20:00Um, is, is that your comment?

1:20:13Uh, that's my comment.

1:20:14If you were able to hear that, I'll take that as a question to city staff.

1:20:22City staff, can you, uh, comment on, uh, Murray's inquiry through the chair?

1:20:32Um, I believe that's essentially what we have, we have commented on in our, um, staff report as well that the variances.

1:20:39It's because of the, the varying definition of finish grade will is directly tied to building height. So they're asking that, um.

1:20:48Finish grade be looked at from front of white law where the entrances were essentially finished grade is about one story lower. So, um, and if you're putting an eight story building on top of that, it essentially is a nine story.

1:21:03Sure, thank you.

1:21:07Right. Well,

1:21:08in my opinion, looking at the, the footprint of this proposed underground parking in the footprint of this 227 unit apartment buildings.

1:21:23And the, the architects and designers of this, of this building, looking, looking to keep it the same kind of size as the existing or the buildings on Elmira B and C.

1:21:39This, this footprint is huge.

1:21:42If I, I, in my opinion, don't think it's consistent in size.

1:21:47I think it's going to be huge.

1:21:50Um, I, yeah, I'm not a fan.

1:21:58I believe in, in housing, but I think that, um, that this proposal is quite high for the area and the residents around the area.

1:22:14That's all.

1:22:15Thank you.

1:22:16If you want to stand by and see if committee have any questions for you, colleagues, do you have any questions for the caller?

1:22:24Seeing none, I want to thank you very much for your attention and your opinion today.

1:22:31Thank you. I appreciate it.

1:22:37Committee, do we have any further questions before we go into a motion? I do have a couple of questions.

1:22:47A couple for staff and a couple for the proponents.

1:22:51First of all, for staff, um, given the late comments and the, um, the, the presentation that we had earlier, does that impact or have any impact on, um.

1:23:05On your proposal to reject this application.

1:23:12Um, to the chair know our staff comments remain. We are still recommending refusal.

1:23:19Okay, thank you. And I guess the, the question for the applicant is whether or not.

1:23:28I think you did answer the question about setting the building back towards the back of the parking structure.

1:23:36And that that wouldn't work for structural reasons. However, my question.

1:23:43Is more process question and whether or not, rather than reject this.

1:23:49As staff is recommending, if you would entertain a deferral so that you could work with city staff a little more to come to some conclusion that would benefit both.

1:24:00Yourselves and, uh, and.

1:24:05The official plan, I don't know if you can comment on that.

1:24:16Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think one of the considerations that the property owner has made in advancing this application at this time is an awareness.

1:24:26That city council is intending to at least consider a new zoning bylaw next week.

1:24:33And the new zoning by law will lower the building height of properties like this with similar similar proposed zoning.

1:24:42And so the, the goal was to advance an application, including a site plan application under the current zoning.

1:24:51I think if there was to be a deferral, it would need to be under the understanding.

1:24:58That there was general agreement that an eight story building was what we had proposed it. And if, if, if.

1:25:06As I understand staff's comments, the staff's preference is that it be sort of effectively lowered by 1 and a half ish or 1 and a 3rd stories.

1:25:15Resulting in a 6 story building. So if the deferral is intended to advance discussions for a 6 story building.

1:25:25Our, uh, our client is not interested in a 6 story building.

1:25:32Okay, thanks. That's answered the question quite succinctly. I appreciate it.

1:25:38At this point, um, I believe we're going to entertain a motion.

1:25:45As we've, uh, existed comments and, uh, so I'd like to, um, hear from my colleagues what that motion would be.

1:26:03Don't I'll talk at once. Okay.

1:26:09I, you know, I open this up for debate, obviously, but I, my motion right now would be to support staffs for our recommendation for refusal.

1:26:16Um, my reasoning for that is we talked a little bit about rezoning by another method. This appears to be designating by another method.

1:26:25Um, bringing the height down does not reduce the units by that much. And I think, um,

1:26:31If they want the 8 story building, my opinion is they have to go through the official plan amendment process.

1:26:36And open it up to that evaluation. So I will.

1:26:40Up for debate, but that's my motion.

1:26:43Do we have a seconder?

1:26:46Member good fellow at this point, um, I'd entertain any comments from my colleagues on the motion.

1:26:53Um, I do have a comment and I will be supporting, um, the staff recommendation and the motion on the floor.

1:27:02Um, I do not believe that this meets all of the four tests based on the fact that it's not, um, in keeping with the, uh, the general intent of the official plan.

1:27:13So, um, I will be voting, um, for this motion to, to, um, refuse this application.

1:27:22At this point, I'll turn, um, unless there's any more comments, I'd like to turn this over to secretary treasurer for a vote.

1:27:32Member say, or yeah, I'll just quickly comment that, um,

1:27:36I, I'll, I'll vote in favor of this motion, but my comments are the same as yours. And, uh,

1:27:44it's just, it's, it's, it's more than a minor variance. And I, you know, I

1:27:52heard and agree with the comments of the first delegate that,

1:27:56you know, we need housing built and, and this looks like a good development, but, uh,

1:28:02I don't think we've got quite the right process here.

1:28:06Thank you. Any other comments? Uh, member good fellow.

1:28:09Yeah, and I'll just add, I, I agree with all the comments that have been made already.

1:28:13I will be, um, voting to, uh, in favor of this motion. Um, and my concern is really around process and making sure that we are following the appropriate process for an application or a, a development of this nature.

1:28:30Thank you. At this point, I'll turn it over, unless, uh, there are any other comments.

1:28:35Uh, seeing none, I'll turn this over to our secretary treasurer, madam secretary treasurer.

1:28:40Thank you, chair. Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion, which is to refuse the application as per the staff comments that were provided.

1:28:51Chair Smith.

1:28:51In favor.

1:28:52Member Klein.

1:28:54Member good fellow.

1:28:57In favor.

1:28:58Member Hamilton.

1:29:00In favor.

1:29:01And member Seher.

1:29:03In favor.

1:29:04That's carried, chair.

1:29:06Uh, the motion has been accepted and the application has been declined.

1:29:11Thank you very much for your presentation and your time.

1:29:17Madam secretary treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

1:29:27The next application is file a dash 20 slash 23.

1:29:31Variance is related to proposed third story addition to the existing building, including reduced front and exterior side yard setbacks, increased projection and reduced exterior side yard setback for exterior stairs.

1:29:42And location of building within sightline triangle for 423 Woolwich street.

1:29:47I'll also note for those watching online that if you wish to speak to this application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

1:29:55That number is 5198221260 extension 2524.

1:30:00And when you call in staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

1:30:07Is the applicant present?

1:30:09Welcome back.

1:30:16Would you like to state your name and your relationship to the applicant, please?

1:30:22My name is Charlotte Ballack.

1:30:23I'm a planner at GSP group and I'm speaking on behalf of the property owner for the application.

1:30:30And was the sign posted as per the planning act?

1:30:33Yes, it was.

1:30:34Thank you.

1:30:34You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:30:36Please proceed.

1:30:39Good afternoon again.

1:30:42Um, to introduce the application, I can give you a little bit of background.

1:30:47Uh, so the application is designated office residential in the official plan.

1:30:52This permits a number of uses, including offices and residential uses.

1:30:57Right now there is a building on the site.

1:30:59It's a two story building that is.

1:31:02Used strictly for offices.

1:31:05The proposal is to build a third story on the existing two story building.

1:31:11And to renovate the interior to add residential units in place of some of the offices.

1:31:19And have residential units on the third floor as well.

1:31:23So the end result would have 1 office unit on the ground floor and 10 residential units

1:31:30split between the ground floor, 2nd floor and 3rd floor.

1:31:35Some minor improvements are also happening with the parking lot area.

1:31:40Everything is in conformity with the zoning by-law as far as parking ratio goes.

1:31:44In fact, we are, we have a surplus in parking.

1:31:48Um, but some minor improvements include some line painting from the entrances out to the

1:31:54sidewalks and screening the garbage storage area on the outside of the site.

1:32:03Um, the existing building, which is proposed not to be changed, the existing floor plate

1:32:09of the two story building, uh, does encroach on the front yard and exterior side yards and

1:32:15uh, visibility triangle.

1:32:17And the purpose of this minor variance application is to recognize that that encroachment exists

1:32:24and, um, have approval so that we can build that third story for the residential units.

1:32:30Uh, this application is also in circulation through the site plan approval process at the city.

1:32:36And right now we have conditional site plan approval, one of the conditions being, uh,

1:32:43approval of the minor variances here today.

1:32:46That's all I have.

1:32:47If there's any questions.

1:32:49Thank you.

1:32:49If you'd like to wait there, um, do we have any delegations either in the chamber or online?

1:32:58Nothing on the telephone?

1:33:03Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any delegation requests.

1:33:08Okay.

1:33:08I'll turn it to my colleagues and see if you have any, they have any questions for you.

1:33:13Seeing none, I will ask, uh, for a motion.

1:33:21Member Goodfellow.

1:33:26I motion to approve this application.

1:33:30A seconder, member Sayer.

1:33:36Uh, any comments or discussion on the motion in front of us?

1:33:43Seeing none, I'll turn it back to Madam Secretary Treasurer.

1:33:50Thank you, Chair.

1:33:50Committee members, please indicate your vote by voting.

1:33:54In favor or opposed to the motion, which is to approve the application.

1:33:58Chair Smith.

1:33:59In favor.

1:34:00Member Klein.

1:34:01In favor.

1:34:03Member Goodfellow.

1:34:04In favor.

1:34:05Member Hamilton.

1:34:07In favor.

1:34:08And member Sayer.

1:34:09In favor.

1:34:10That's carried, Chair.

1:34:12Your application has been approved.

1:34:14Thank you.

1:34:14Thank you.

1:34:15Madam Secretary Treasurer, can I ask you to, uh, call the next applicant?

1:34:24The next application is for the next application.

1:34:35The next application is file A-21-23,

1:34:38variants to permit animal care establishment as additional permitted use at 51 Woodlawn Road West.

1:34:45I'll also note for those watching online, if you wish to speak to this application,

1:34:48you can do so by calling the number on the screen.

1:34:51That number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

1:34:56And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

1:35:02Thank you.

1:35:03Welcome.

1:35:04Can you state your name and your relationship to the application?

1:35:09Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of committee.

1:35:11My name is Scott Patterson, Patterson Planning Consultants,

1:35:14here acting on behalf of the property owner.

1:35:18And Mr. Patterson, can you tell me if the sign was, uh, present as per the planning act?

1:35:24Yes, it was.

1:35:26You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:35:28Please proceed.

1:35:30Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1:35:31I have reviewed the staff report.

1:35:33I'm here in full support of the staff report and recommendation

1:35:36and happy to answer any questions from the committee.

1:35:40Thank you very much.

1:35:41If you can just wait there.

1:35:42Do we have any delegations inside the chamber?

1:35:48Seeing none, do we have anyone calling in or online?

1:35:53Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

1:35:57Thank you.

1:35:58At this point, I'll turn to my colleagues and ask for a motion.

1:36:07Member Hamilton.

1:36:10I'll move approval on some.

1:36:15And a seconder, member Klein.

1:36:18Do we have any discussion on the motion?

1:36:23Seeing none, I'll turn it back to the secretary treasurer.

1:36:28Thank you, chair.

1:36:29Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

1:36:34which is to approve the application.

1:36:36Chair Smith.

1:36:37In favor.

1:36:38Member Klein.

1:36:39In favor.

1:36:41Member Goodfellow.

1:36:42In favor.

1:36:43Member Hamilton.

1:36:45In favor.

1:36:46And member Seher.

1:36:47In favor.

1:36:48That's carried, chair.

1:36:50Your application has been approved.

1:36:53Thank you very much.

1:36:53You're welcome.

1:36:59Madam secretary treasurer, may we have the next applicant?

1:37:11The next application is file a dash 22 slash 23 variants to permit reduced rear yard setback

1:37:19for proposed residential addition to existing dwelling at 88 McCann street.

1:37:24I'll also note for the committee members as well as those attending that comments

1:37:27were received after the comment deadline from Patrick Kelly with concerns about the application

1:37:33as well.

1:37:34The agent has also circulated a revised site plan drawing noting a revised retaining wall design

1:37:40and that revised site plan has been circulated to the committee members as well as staff.

1:37:48And I'll also note finally that if you're watching online and wish to speak to this

1:37:52application, you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

1:37:56That number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

1:38:02And when you call in staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

1:38:10Is the applicant here or are they online?

1:38:15Online, Mr. Chairman.

1:38:17Thank you.

1:38:18Can you state your name for the record and your relationship to the application?

1:38:24Yes.

1:38:25Mike Stryker and I am the authorized agent and we'll be speaking on behalf of the homeowners

1:38:31here today who are also on the call.

1:38:34That's great.

1:38:35Can I ask you if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

1:38:40Yes, it was.

1:38:41Thank you.

1:38:43You have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:38:45So please do so.

1:38:49Thank you.

1:38:49I will be brief.

1:38:51I just had one question, I guess, through you, Mr. Chairman, if it's appropriate right now

1:38:56through to engineering staff.

1:38:58And that is based on the revised site plan that was submitted.

1:39:04We made efforts to acknowledge the comment made in the requirement within the report to

1:39:15or the condition rather to have a grading and drainage plan provided.

1:39:21Given the proximity of the previously located armrest stone retaining wall

1:39:27abutting on the side yard, we've made efforts to reduce that thickness of a retaining wall

1:39:34going to a cast in place retaining wall allowing for more space between the property line and the

1:39:42outside face of the retaining wall to maintain existing drainage.

1:39:47Thank you for pulling that up.

1:39:50My question to city staff through you, Mr. Chairman, is that condition still required

1:39:56given that the existing drainage to the rear yard and the existing grading surrounding the

1:40:03addition and retaining wall would be unaffected?

1:40:09Thank you.

1:40:10I'll put your question to city staff if they have comment.

1:40:16City staff?

1:40:18That condition would still be required.

1:40:22If the retaining wall was two feet away from the property line,

1:40:26which is our normal practice, we would have waived that condition.

1:40:30But in this case, we do need to see what's happening along that side yard to ensure that

1:40:37everything's in a function accordingly.

1:40:41Okay.

1:40:42Thank you.

1:40:46If you can stand by on the line, do we have additional comments?

1:40:52More delegates, excuse me.

1:40:55I don't see any in the chamber.

1:40:57Any online?

1:40:59Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

1:41:02Okay.

1:41:03Thank you very much.

1:41:04And at this point, I'll entertain a motion or questions first.

1:41:10Are there any questions of this delegate from my colleagues?

1:41:17Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion.

1:41:23Member Goodfellow.

1:41:25I move to approve with conditions as stated in the application or as recommended by staff.

1:41:33And do I have a seconder?

1:41:35Member Klein, do we have any comment or questions?

1:41:44Discussion on the motion?

1:41:48Seeing none, I'll turn it back to Madam Secretary Treasurer.

1:41:54Thank you, Chair.

1:41:55Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

1:41:59which is to approve the application with the two recommended conditions from staff.

1:42:05Chair Smith.

1:42:06In favor.

1:42:08Member Klein.

1:42:09In favor.

1:42:11Member Goodfellow.

1:42:12In favor.

1:42:13Member Hamilton.

1:42:17And Member Sair.

1:42:18In favor.

1:42:19Let's carry, Chair.

1:42:21Your application has been approved.

1:42:27Thank you.

1:42:28You're welcome.

1:42:34Madam Secretary Treasurer, do we have another applicant?

1:42:41The next application is file A-23 slash 23, variance to permit reduced side yard setback

1:42:50for residential addition to existing dwelling at 139 Victoria Road South.

1:42:56I'll also note for those watching online, if you wish to speak to this application,

1:43:01you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

1:43:04That number is 519-821-260-Extension 2524.

1:43:09And when you call in, instructions will be provided on how you can delegate remotely.

1:43:17Is the applicant present in the chamber?

1:43:21Or are they online?

1:43:23Over the phone.

1:43:25Welcome caller.

1:43:27Can you state your name for the record, please?

1:43:32Hello, this is a cloudy good point.

1:43:35And can you tell me your relationship to the application?

1:43:39I own the property there.

1:43:45Thank you.

1:43:46Can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

1:43:52Yes, it was.

1:43:54Thank you.

1:43:55You have 10 minutes if you'd like to take advantage of that to address the committee.

1:44:04We own this property for perhaps eight years or so, over eight years.

1:44:12And the last few years, we were able to do some improvement aesthetically

1:44:22from the house inside outside.

1:44:24And that's what we did lately.

1:44:28And well, we never had problems with the neighbors.

1:44:33Actually, the next door neighbor, knowing the present situation with the city hall,

1:44:41provided the letters saying that they don't have a problem with houses located.

1:44:49Okay, thank you.

1:45:09And if you want to stay on the line, I'm going to ask if there are any people who would like

1:45:15to comment on this, either in the chamber or over the phone or online.

1:45:23I see none in the chamber.

1:45:26Anything online?

1:45:28Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

1:45:32Thank you.

1:45:34Committee members, do you have questions of the applicant?

1:45:40Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion from my colleagues.

1:45:46Member Sayer.

1:45:47Yeah, I'll move for approval of the application with the conditions recommended by City staff.

1:45:54Thank you.

1:45:55And seconded by Member Goodfellow.

1:45:58Do we have any discussion on the motion before us?

1:46:02Seeing none, I'll turn it over to Secretary Treasurer to call the question.

1:46:08Thank you, Chair Smith.

1:46:10Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the

1:46:13motion, which is to approve the application with the four recommended conditions from staff.

1:46:20Chair Smith.

1:46:21In favor.

1:46:22Member Klein.

1:46:24In favor.

1:46:25Member Goodfellow.

1:46:27In favor.

1:46:28Member Hamilton.

1:46:29In favor.

1:46:31And Member Sayer.

1:46:32In favor.

1:46:33That's carried, Chair.

1:46:35Your application has been approved.

1:46:38If you would like to leave the call, you are free to do so.

1:46:48Are you there?

1:46:52Okay.

1:46:54Thank you.

1:46:55Hello.

1:46:56Hi.

1:46:57Your application has been approved.

1:46:59Yes, your application has been approved.

1:47:02Thank you very much.

1:47:04You're welcome.

1:47:05You're free to leave the meeting.

1:47:14Madam Secretary Treasurer, if you can call the next applicant, please.

1:47:20The next application is file A-24-23,

1:47:23variances related to proposed accessory structure,

1:47:26gas canopy, including location in front yard,

1:47:29increased front yard coverage, and increased height at 390 York Road.

1:47:34I'll also note for those watching online,

1:47:36if you wish to speak to this application,

1:47:37you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen.

1:47:41That number is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

1:47:48And when you call in, staff will give you instructions

1:47:50on how you can delegate remotely via phone.

1:47:54Is the applicant present or are they on video?

1:48:00Hi there, Eddie Partito from Zolton Engineering here.

1:48:03Hi, and Thomas Lucas, the applicant from Zolton Engineering as well.

1:48:08Thank you.

1:48:09Can you tell me if the sign was posted as per the Planning Act?

1:48:13Yes, I can confirm the sign was posted.

1:48:17Thank you.

1:48:18And you have 10 minutes to address the committee.

1:48:23Thank you very much.

1:48:25We have received the comments.

1:48:26We acknowledge the approval with the condition.

1:48:31So no comments from us.

1:48:32Okay.

1:48:33If you'd like to stand by and see if there are any

1:48:39comments from the general public, is there anyone in the gallery

1:48:44who wished to comment or on the phone or over the internet?

1:48:49Chair Smith, I can confirm we haven't received any delegation requests.

1:48:57Thank you.

1:48:58At this point, I'll turn to my colleagues.

1:49:01Are there any questions of the applicant?

1:49:03Seeing none, it's appropriate at this time to have an app to have a motion on this application.

1:49:13Member Klein.

1:49:17I move approval with the recommended condition.

1:49:22Thank you.

1:49:23Seconded by Member Goodfellow.

1:49:26Any discussion on the motion we see before us?

1:49:31Seeing none, I will put it back in the Secretary Treasurer's Court.

1:49:38Thank you, Chair.

1:49:38Committee members, please indicate your vote by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

1:49:43which is to approve the application with the one condition recommended by staff.

1:49:47Chair Smith.

1:49:49In favor.

1:49:50Member Klein.

1:49:51In favor.

1:49:53Member Goodfellow.

1:49:54In favor.

1:49:55Member Hamilton.

1:49:58And Member Sayer.

1:49:59In favor.

1:50:00That's carried, Chair.

1:50:03Well, thank you very much.

1:50:04Your application has been approved.

1:50:07You're free to leave the meeting if you wish.

1:50:10Thank you very much for your help and your assistance.

1:50:13We appreciate the decision.

1:50:16You're welcome.

1:50:22Madam Secretary Treasurer, I look forward to the next application.

1:50:29The next applications are file B-5-23 and A-25-23 consent to create one new residential lot with

1:50:38one retained residential lot and related variants for reduced rear yard setback for proposed retained

1:50:44lot at 8 Linwood Avenue.

1:50:47I'll also note for those watching online, if you wish to speak to this application,

1:50:51you can do so by calling in.

1:50:53The phone number to call is 519-822-1260, extension 2524.

1:50:59And when you call in, staff will give you instructions on how you can delegate remotely.

1:51:06Welcome.

1:51:06Can you state your name and your relationship to the application?

1:51:10Jeff Pusman of Van Hart and Surveying, authorized agent for the application.

1:51:16And the sign was posted at the property and I did receive staff comments.

1:51:22Thank you, Mr. Pusman.

1:51:23And at this point, you have 10 minutes.

1:51:27If kindly present the sketch, thank you.

1:51:31Always love a picture.

1:51:33This property is at the corner of Linwood in Edinburgh.

1:51:37It's a large lot and the proposal is to remove the existing garage of the existing house

1:51:46to be able to create a 15-meter wide lot that's about 30 meters deep.

1:51:51So it will have an area of 468 square meters.

1:51:54This new lot will meet all the zoning requirements for the R1B zoning.

1:52:02The retained lot because of the uniqueness of zoning bylaws and that on a corner lot,

1:52:09when you have two streets, the technical definition of the frontage is along Edinburgh Road.

1:52:16So if that's the front, that means the rear is, I'm going to say the west side or the left.

1:52:25As we look at it from the picture and you can see an A written there on the sketch.

1:52:30So that becomes the rear yard and the minor variance request is for two meters for that rear yard

1:52:36instead of 7.5.

1:52:40It's more of a, it's the technical definition that we're working with,

1:52:45the functional usage of the property is such that it's fronting on Linwood.

1:52:51It's faced that way, that's the way it was built.

1:52:55And this property was never envisioned to be oriented with the house fronting on Edinburgh,

1:53:01which is what the zoning bylaw is kind of set up for for using this definition.

1:53:07Planning staff have provided positive comments and evaluated these applications,

1:53:16both the severance and the minor variance and support and recommend approval.

1:53:21I'd also like to note, especially the old University Neighborhood Association,

1:53:25who are quite actively involved in every planning application in this area.

1:53:30They are also recognizing and supporting.

1:53:33And supporting, there's also supporting this application.

1:53:39I'd like to, I really appreciate the comments from the staff and there's

1:53:46one line in the staff report.

1:53:48I'd like to highlight the staff review a number of general policies affecting this application,

1:54:05particularly items in the official plan.

1:54:07And, and they provide a great summary to say the above policies, criteria and objectives,

1:54:13together with the policies regarding development within the built up area and intensification,

1:54:19encourage the creation of new low density residential lots within the older established

1:54:25areas of the city, provided that the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding

1:54:32residential development. Official plan defines compatible as being development or redevelopment,

1:54:39which may not necessarily be the same as or similar to the existing development,

1:54:44but can coexist with the surrounding area without an unacceptable adverse impact.

1:54:51I think that's a great summary of what we have, as will, as submitted by one of the neighbors,

1:54:59a planning report by a planning consultant. There's highlights, the fact that this is quite

1:55:07a bit different than the existing houses and properties in the area in terms of the size.

1:55:12These are very large lots and that's recognized. This will certainly be the smallest

1:55:19lot in terms of frontage and area in the, in the, in this little cul-de-sac street.

1:55:25And that's recognized, but then when I look at the, you know, the comment to go back to is,

1:55:31is in the sense that the official plan defines compatible as being development or redevelopment,

1:55:36which may not necessarily exist, which may not necessarily be the same as or similar to the

1:55:44existing development, but can coexist with the surrounding area without an unacceptable adverse

1:55:50impact. And I would say that this does meet that test. I've been before the committee a number of

1:55:57times with other applications and I'm going to call the old university neighborhood where we have

1:56:01larger lots and we've done many infill projects like this and, and they have been supported by

1:56:08city staff and supported by this committee in many ways and they have worked out to be

1:56:14interesting projects and provide a great variety of housing in the old university neighborhood area.

1:56:23So I'm just saying yet the planning, the planning staff support this application

1:56:28and provide the comment that all, that the, and they provide a planning opinion that the

1:56:34relevant policies are met. This is, if we think about, we're all familiar with the provincial

1:56:44mandate for planning and the things that they're doing for intensification. We're all aware of

1:56:49that. We're all aware of the need for housing. We're all in the, we're in need of all these things.

1:56:53The planning direction that's very clear is that the province and the objectives want this kind of

1:56:59thing where if we've got an opportunity to put in a house that fits, meets zoning and

1:57:05can coexist, please make it happen. And that, that's, and so when I think about the comments

1:57:12that I made earlier, that this type of thing is encouraged. So I'm asking for committee support

1:57:19and I'd be happy to answer any questions or comments from the committee. Thank you.

1:57:27Thank you. If you can wait there while we see if there are any people who would like to express

1:57:34an opinion and Secretary Treasurer, do we have any that were queued up?

1:57:42Chair Smith, yes, we have received some delegation requests. The first, both are in person. The first

1:57:48is Alex Somos. Is Alex present? Please come on down to the microphone. Welcome. Welcome. Could

1:58:07you state your name for the record? My name is Alex Somos and I live at 12 Linwood Avenue, the

1:58:14property that is adjacent to 8 Linwood Avenue. Welcome. You have 10 minutes for your comments.

1:58:22Thank you so much. I moved from downtown Guelph 11 years ago, partly because I wanted more space.

1:58:31I purchased 12 Linwood Avenue, which was a similar size house as to the one that is beside me.

1:58:38I renovated it. I put an addition. I added a legal apartment because we have housing issues.

1:58:49I do not have an issue with that property being redeveloped. I have an issue with what they

1:58:54are trying to do, which is so out of character with the neighborhood. I happen to suffer from sad,

1:59:01which means I need light. I'm retired. I work in my garage. There's no cars in my garage,

1:59:09only tools, woodworking tools. And I specifically placed my fence far enough away from the windows

1:59:17in my garage to make sure that I get the light that I need to function well.

1:59:25When I heard about this development, I made an effort to contact the developers. I offered to

1:59:30purchase a slice of the lot. I offered to purchase a lot. I have done everything I can in my power

1:59:39to minimize the effect, the personal effect it's going to have on me, to the point that I've hired

1:59:44a planner to identify what I consider to be substantive issues that were missed

1:59:53by others who have offered opinions without regard to the larger picture. So I find my

2:00:00myself having to step up and say I really don't think this is a good development for

2:00:07our community, for my street. It personally will affect my well-being and I'm completely

2:00:15opposed to it. I haven't raised any issues around security, parking, on all four corners

2:00:21of our street, Edinburgh and a budding. It's all student housing. Can you imagine adding

2:00:28another two-story, 2,000 square foot home on a postage-sized lot? We're going to have

2:00:35more student housing. I don't mind student housing in proportion, in proportion to the

2:00:42neighbourhoods. So I'm asking for this committee to say no to this application and reject it

2:00:52outright and send them back to the drawing board. Frankly, I'm surprised that this actually

2:00:57got here. Thank you very much for your time.

2:01:02Thank you. If you want to wait there, see if committee has any questions for you?

2:01:06Absolutely.

2:01:07Colleagues?

2:01:11May I just address one other thing?

2:01:13By all means.

2:01:14You haven't used up your ten minutes yet, so go ahead.

2:01:18Jeff Buisman identified the fact that old university neighbourhood association finds

2:01:23no objection with this development. I would like to bring to the attention of this committee

2:01:29that I sent an email to them and heard no response back. Over Easter, I found their

2:01:36letter supporting this application. I subsequently contacted the gentleman in charge and asked

2:01:44him to withdraw his support. He did hate no one from that association spoke to any of

2:01:51the directly affected neighbours, nor to their old vice president or the same association

2:01:57who lives one house beside me. So there was no consultation, there was no community connection.

2:02:04To me, that letter is a rubber stamp that has no value because it does not reflect any

2:02:11of the constituents on that street. I would encourage anybody that questions me to walk

2:02:16and ask every single neighbour on our street what they think of this development. Thank

2:02:23you.

2:02:24Questions?

2:02:25I don't see any questions. Thank you very much for coming and expressing your opinion.

2:02:32It's most welcome. Secretary Treasurer, do we have another one?

2:02:39Yes, we have another delegate chair. The name is Alan Ramsey and I believe he's attending

2:02:45in person here.

2:02:47Thank you. Welcome. Can you state your name for the record, please? There you go.

2:03:01Yes, hi there. My name is Alan Ramsey. I'm a planner with the firm of Alan Ramsey Planning

2:03:07Associates. I've been retained by the property owner at 12. Then who was just speaking to

2:03:18you, he's asked me to provide him with an end to you with an opinion as to whether this

2:03:26consent application in variance was appropriate or not. I have for you a fairly detailed brief

2:03:41that offers my opinion going through the policies of the official plan, the details of the zoning

2:03:49by-law, the criteria in section 5124, the planning act for the consent as well as section

2:03:56451 of the planning act for the variance. I want to attend tonight to tell you that these

2:04:04matters deal principally with the concern of how does the proposal fit with the character

2:04:11of the area. It's my opinion that this small little 23 lot subdivision that was built in

2:04:25the 1960s is best described as large lots with large setbacks and has a feel of being

2:04:41wide open spaces. I've provided in my report a summary of what I consider to be the lot

2:04:56characteristics and as the applicant has mentioned, these are large lots. The average

2:05:10lot size in this area is approximately 1900 square meters and in comparison the zoning

2:05:16by-law permits lots of 460 square meters. The smallest lot in this area is two and a half

2:05:26times the lot size requirement of the zoning by-law. With respect to the lot frontages,

2:05:36again that same character exists, these are large lots with large lot frontages. The average

2:05:44lot frontage in the area is 24.3 meters and with the smallest lot frontage being 19.4 meters.

2:05:56When you have large lots and you have large lot frontages, you end up with

2:06:03generous setbacks and certainly what you find here is there is lots of green space,

2:06:12lots of mature vegetation that is reflective of this little or of the unique character of

2:06:22this particular area. I've gone through the policies in the official plan and certainly

2:06:28section 3.7 of the official plan permits intensification throughout the built-up area and this would

2:06:38represent section 9.3 of the plans that's out objectives for residential areas and I just

2:06:47like to point out three of them. D is to, sorry, I'll jump to F. F is to promote the general

2:06:55character of built form in existing residential neighborhoods while accommodating compatible

2:07:01residential infill and intensification and I is to encourage new development or to ensure

2:07:11new development is compatible with the surrounding land uses and general character

2:07:15of the neighborhoods. It's my opinion that this is a small enclave that has a very unique character

2:07:23with lots that are quite large and that all substantially exceed the requirements of the

2:07:29zoning by-law. It's my opinion that the proposal does not conform with these objectives of the

2:07:38official plan. Section 9.311 of the official plan establishes criteria for intensification within

2:07:48existing residential neighborhoods. One of those factors is that building forms, scale,

2:07:55height, setbacks, massing appearance and siting are compatible with the design, character,

2:08:03and orientation with buildings in the vicinity and what you will get with this

2:08:17proposal is a change in the character of the area and one of those things that's quite obvious is

2:08:27that there isn't sufficient property or space behind the building or beside the building to have

2:08:37a proper rear yard, a mended area and what's being forced here is that placing the outdoor area

2:08:47between the house and the street and I sort of challenge you to find an example in the vicinity

2:08:57where such a character exists. Certainly it doesn't. The second criteria is that proposals for

2:09:09residential lot infill will be compatible with the general frontage of lots in the

2:09:15immediate vicinity and as I've said this proposal in terms of lot frontage will not be close to

2:09:24what you find in the existing area. Since I'll try to be brief, the official plan also contains

2:09:34policies that set out criteria for consents and it's my opinion that the proposal doesn't

2:09:44conform with these objectives that require intensification within established neighborhoods

2:09:50to be compatible with the surrounding character and then with respect to the criteria under section

2:09:595124, the planning act which is a requirement that you have to have regard for the matters

2:10:07for the subdivision criteria in the planning act. It's my opinion that the proposal

2:10:15that the proposal doesn't bring sufficient regard to the criteria, one of which is

2:10:255124B which is whether the proposed subdivision is premature in the public interest and it's my

2:10:32opinion when you're changing the character of the area as you are, it's certainly not in the

2:10:38public interest. Section 5124C requires you to have regard that the plan conforms with the official

2:10:48plan and it's my opinion that the extent doesn't and then finally 5124F deals with the team

2:11:00interest in shapes of the proposed lot and it's my opinion that the lot is undersized compared to the

2:11:11general lots in the surrounding area and then finally with respect to the variance,

2:11:17with respect to section 451 of the planning act, the variance is to seek a reduction in the

2:11:25rear yard which as I pointed out is the yard opposite the front yard and

2:11:36so with respect to the four tests, first test being does it maintain the general purpose and intent

2:11:45of the official plan. It's my opinion that the intent of the official plan with respect to rear yard

2:11:52setbacks is to ensure that new development fits in with the established character of the area

2:12:01certainly and there is another situation like this in terms of

2:12:09having a outdoor yard area between the street and the home. The second test is whether you

2:12:20maintain the general purpose and intent of the zoning by-law and it's my opinion that the intent

2:12:28of the rear yard setback regulation is to ensure that you have a proper rear yard area for outdoor

2:12:36purposes. The proposed reduction to two meters does not achieve that and third test is...

2:12:47I'm going to just give you a one-minute warning here.

2:12:49Great. I've got two more points which is that the test of being minor and it's my view that the

2:12:57proposal for the rear yard setback forces the area to be located between the building and the

2:13:04street and that's an unacceptable impact in terms of the streetscape and finally whether it's

2:13:11desirable for the development of the area and it's my opinion that it's not that it

2:13:19this essentially represents an ad hoc change to the character of

2:13:25area and I would urge you to not approve the applications.

2:13:32Thank you. That's a lot to unpack and you did it in 10 minutes almost spot on so

2:13:37congratulations. At this point are there any questions from my colleagues if you want to

2:13:44stay there right there? Member Goodfellow please go ahead. Yes thank you and through the chair

2:13:54to city staff I think this one's for you. We've been talking tonight about how

2:13:59elevations are measured and I've got another one another question for you. One of the conditions

2:14:05that was added had to do with the construction of the building such that the lowest level can

2:14:10be serviced with a gravity connection to the city sewer so my question is if that sets the

2:14:16elevation for the basement is it possible that in the situation we could end up with more than

2:14:23two stories above grade and perhaps that's a bit too technical for tonight but I'm interested in

2:14:29in a response on that. Through the chair I believe that was an engineering condition so I was just

2:14:45waiting for engineering to comment on that. It's been a little a little messy here can you please

2:14:55repeat your question? Certainly and probably a little more clearly this time. I was looking at

2:15:02the condition number eight that was included about the lowest level being serviced with a gravity

2:15:07connection to the city's sanitary sewer and then kind of reconciling that with the building

2:15:15being proposed as being two stories and then trying to think about how that fits into the

2:15:20neighborhood. I guess my part one of my question for engineering is you know where does that put

2:15:27the basement in this neighborhood? Condition number eight being that the lowest level has to be serviced

2:15:33with gravity connection. So if they plan on having a basement or any type of basement apartment or

2:15:42anything like that we do ask that the applicant or the owners try to construct their lowest level

2:15:49in such a way where they can have a gravity connection to the city's main sewer but in terms

2:15:55of elevations of that of that building or underside of footing we don't have the information at this

2:16:03stage right? Okay thank you I appreciate that so I think I have a follow-up question then probably

2:16:11for the applicant and it has to do with if is it two stories and have you taken a look at where

2:16:19that basement elevation is going to land relative to gravity sewer which then gets to how many

2:16:26stories are we going to see above grade? We uh it could be a one or two story that has not been

2:16:32decided yet uh depends on that has not that hasn't been decided. In terms of gravity elevation we

2:16:39got a unique situation we got two different sewer lines on the street none of which are so when I say

2:16:46that um there's a sewer that comes from Edinburgh and it's just a short branch and it doesn't come

2:16:53in front of the severance okay so then there's another sewer that is in front of 12 Maplewood

2:17:00and the manhole is roughly in front of the driveway of 12 manhole of 12 Linnwood sorry and so uh there

2:17:08is the possibility it looks like one or the other will have to be extended to go in front of this house

2:17:15at that time the details of it will be evaluated for elevation um if I'm not mistaken we also have

2:17:22the opportunity to have a sewer ejection pump if need be uh the purpose of that is to um

2:17:31prevent what exactly you were worried about of of it be much better to keep the house elevation

2:17:36at a reasonable height uh rather than have gravity feed from the basement so in that case what

2:17:42would sometimes happens if the shells uh if the sewers are very shallow is that the the the sewer

2:17:49exits out of the house that say I'm gonna say feet I like meters but we'll say six feet below

2:17:54grade and not eight feet underneath the foundation then any plumbing within the basement would come

2:18:01to an eschewed ejection pump to that spot all the rest of the house will be gravity fed and and

2:18:06like everything will be gravity fed to the street so the the benefit of having that sewage ejection

2:18:12pump is to prevent a really high house with nine steps or something to uh for for the exact

2:18:20concern that you're thinking about yes and through the chair I appreciate that response and that's

2:18:24exactly where I was headed um because I think it does get to the massing um the size of the the

2:18:30development that could be um built within this neighborhood and trying to be respectful of the

2:18:36neighbor's concerns um so I guess maybe my question then goes back to city staff about what about

2:18:43condition number eight if we get to a situation or the city gets to a situation where it perhaps

2:18:49might be better to have a sewerage ejection pump is that still possible if condition number eight

2:18:55is included sorry through your chair uh just that will be also assessed through the building

2:19:04permit stage right so if their elevations are a lot lower then the new proposed um sanitary sewer

2:19:11that the applicant will need to install then we can look at that option um at the building permit

2:19:17stage um on to your building code does allow that um so it would it would they would automatically

2:19:24get it if the need is there right uh and great and I'm just wondering about then the contradiction

2:19:32potentially with condition number eight if that is uh how things evolve right so it wouldn't be a

2:19:38contradiction because if the lowest part of the building is not gravity fed then we understand

2:19:44that Ontario building code does allow for the for pumping like a grinder pump um so then they would

2:19:51just be allowed to install that and thank you and so back through the chair uh could we

2:19:59revise that condition then to say that an elevation that the buildings elevation that the

2:20:04buildings lowest level can be serviced with a gravity connection to the city's sanitary sewer

2:20:09or uh in accordance with the OBC uh yeah that's fine through a grinder pump yes I would stipulate

2:20:19that for sure though okay that's it thank you thank you member good fellow I wonder if there's

2:20:28any other questions of the delegate seeing none oh uh mr. abuseman you'll get your opportunity if

2:20:36there may be other delegates so um I'm going to excuse this delegate thank you very much for you

2:20:41oh before I let you go there is one question um and that is the lot size um as a planner

2:20:49you do recognize that the uh the proposed severed and retained lots do comply with

2:20:56the zoning bylaw correct correct sir I can give you a boatload of cases for the Ontario land

2:21:04for you know just like this where uh the severed and retaining lots both met the minimum

2:21:11a lot furniture and lot and lot size requirements but they didn't fit with the character of

2:21:18the area I was recently involved in one um in for this working on behalf of the city of mississauga

2:21:26as well as the town of Oakville it is quite common that compliance with the zoning bylaw

2:21:35doesn't necessarily mean it's good planning that that yeah it it it it pauses the plan talk about

2:21:45fitting with the character it's still have to fit the character even though you can

2:21:49the basic requirements of the zoning bylaw thank you I I do appreciate that comment thank you very much

2:22:00do we have any other or we can ask schedule chair smith we don't have any other delegation requests

2:22:08I will ask if in the chamber there are any uh would like to address this issue

2:22:15um I do see a hand so please approach the microphone good afternoon good afternoon can you state your name for the record please

2:22:28samuel solmos welcome and uh you have 10 minutes to address the issue and I may remember just

2:22:37this has been a long meeting and um we may have more uh delegates so I'm going to be strict again

2:22:44with the 10 minutes and please um confine your comments to new information thank you thank you very

2:22:51much I did only want to say something in regards to what uh city staff said earlier where they view

2:22:58each uh each case on an independent basis so I did just want to point out when the delegates said

2:23:04there are other successful instances of infill in the old university area that those involved in

2:23:10the decision consider this on a case by case basis and consider the information in this case

2:23:16for this case only that is it thank you thank you and uh that's a good comment and one that

2:23:24we should all take to heart so thank you for reminding us of our duty I appreciate it was there

2:23:28anything else no sir thank you um just before you go I wonder if there's any questions that our

2:23:38delegates or pardon me our my colleagues would like to ask you seeing none thank you very much

2:23:46thank you are there any other members of our audience today that would like to comment on

2:23:54this application seeing none I'm going to invite mr. buseman back to see if he would like to comment

2:24:01on some of the issues that have been raised by the other delegates there are two little things if

2:24:09you could kind of put up the severance sketch because there's one thing I forgot to highlight

2:24:20this property has existed list like this for a long time and you see that wood deck area um

2:24:28when I went through this by this property quite a while ago already it's it was very clear that

2:24:33the amenity area being used by that homeowner was what we're gonna what we're proposing to be

2:24:40the amenity area it's that wood deck and everything between the house and edinburgh road

2:24:46there's a very solid fence in there it's a quite a private area the homeowner has used that as the

2:24:51amenity area for years so that uh that it's going to just could be continued as such the backyard

2:25:01the existing sliding or I forget what kind of door but door out the back by the back deck

2:25:05is is all oriented to that as the amenity area so um really that house isn't going to function

2:25:12any differently um in uh in terms of amenity space than it is today the second thing I forgot

2:25:21to highlight was that I've been talking with the the um the home builder that's looking at the that's

2:25:29that's for the homeowner sorry the property owner of this property is that they they're

2:25:34committed to having a two meter side yard on the side facing 12 linwood um so that'd be the west

2:25:42side so the minimum zoning requirement is 1.5 meters but we're we're committed to making it two meters

2:25:50to um help provide a little more space in that in that area and be happy to have that as a condition

2:26:00sorry I just want to be clear uh you're saying you would be happy to add a condition that there'd

2:26:06be a two meter side yard set back to the um severed portion to the west like two meter side yard

2:26:13only on the west side on the west side yes yes are there any questions of mr. Buseman

2:26:27I don't see any at this point um I think at this point it might be uh efficacious if

2:26:38we had questions staff that they could be made at this point if you have any

2:26:44I do have a couple if uh through you retain them sorry through each year I just have just

2:26:53wanted to clarify the condition um for that uh gravity sewer so I just want to read that out loud

2:27:02for the committee members everybody is aware of what that new condition is going to be um it will

2:27:07be that the owner agrees to design and construct the new dwelling at such an elevation that the

2:27:11building's lowest level can be serviced with a gravity connection to the city sanitary sewer

2:27:17if the owner's satisfactory demonstrates to the general manager slash city engineer that the below

2:27:22great gravity connection is not achievable the buildings below great level may be allowed to

2:27:27pump sewage in accordance with the Ontario building code to the property line and have a gravity

2:27:32connection from the property line to the city sanitary sewer member good fellow does that represent

2:27:40your intent it does and thank you to city staff I do appreciate that no problem so um so if you

2:27:49will indulge me I do have a few questions for staff um first of all I I do note that the planning

2:27:56consultant hired by one of the uh the um sorry I was going to say applicant but one of the delegates

2:28:05um has pointed out many uh several issues uh raised uh under the official plan um the one that

2:28:14pops out at me is the intent of the official official plan re-sideyard setbacks pardon me rear

2:28:22yard setbacks uh I know this is a corner lot so that makes it a special condition um I'd like a

2:28:31little bit of comment and context from city staff um on that issue that was raised I'm sure so to

2:28:39the chair um I believe you're referring to the the zoning bylaw in terms of um rear the rear yard

2:28:45setback requirement um since this is a corner lot um the technical the technical front yard as

2:28:52per the zoning bylaw definition is at a railroad um but the functional um front yard and the way

2:28:59the house is oriented is actually on Linwood Avenue so it's always existed um the way it's

2:29:06oriented in the the front door and the entrance and the rear yard is really um the outdoor amenity

2:29:13area has really always been in the technical front yard um as per the zoning bylaw and the

2:29:22technical um rear yard as per the zoning bylaw definition really functions more as a side yard

2:29:28um setback so we have looked at um the application in terms of the foretest and we feel that it does

2:29:35meet the um foretest of a minor variance given the the functional um layout of the house and how

2:29:43the the yard has always been um how the property owners use their their their property thank you

2:29:53that's clear and I do have a question um the issue in front of us is is one of severance but

2:30:02given some of the issues that have been raised I'm curious um were this not a um a severance

2:30:09application but was a side yard application um that the existing residence was uh suggested to be

2:30:19expanded and moved let's say to the west and impacted the side yard um

2:30:27but respected the side yard setbacks um would a two-story dwelling be able to be built as right

2:30:39so to the chair um the property is zoned R1B and as with all of the other lots um in the neighborhood

2:30:46which technically yes as they do exist now maybe have larger setbacks and larger um you know one

2:30:53story houses but the zoning bylaw under the R1B does permit up to three stories um in this case the

2:31:00current owner of this property could um build an addition onto their existing house um but it would

2:31:07have to meet the rear yard setback um requirements which would be uh 7.5 meters or 20 percent of

2:31:13the lot so they technically could do a large addition and bring it bring the house make a

2:31:19bigger house add a second story and bring it much closer to the neighboring property as of right

2:31:24and that's with any other property um in the immediate neighborhood if they can meet the

2:31:29zoning by the requirements of the zoning bylaw they could do an addition um add a story anything

2:31:36like that within the regulations of the existing zoning thank you so just to be clear that uh three

2:31:43story addition could be um added to the existing dwelling and be much closer maybe not as close as a

2:31:53as the proposed um no home but it could be quite a bit closer to the neighbor

2:32:01yes that's correct they technically could do up to three stories they would just have to meet the

2:32:04the setback requirements for the rear yard okay thanks very much that concludes my questions um

2:32:11um I don't see any additional questions um so I will entertain a motion I know that we have

2:32:20a couple of additional conditions and I um neglected to ask the applicant if he was in

2:32:27agreement with those uh stated additional conditions we are in agreement thank you very much um at

2:32:34this point I will uh ask for a motion member good I move to approve with the conditions

2:32:55as recommended by city staff and then the amendments that have been discussed here

2:33:03thank you is there any uh conversation or pardon me we need a seconder seconded by member Hamilton

2:33:13is there any conversation or discussion on the motion in front of us while we

2:33:34before we take a vote I just want to I have a note of clarification that um one of the conditions

2:33:42as proposed by Mr. Buseman is that the west side yard setback would have a minimum of two meters

2:33:52on that side yard is that what I'm understanding I'm seeing him not in agreement

2:33:59yes yes okay thank you at this point I will turn the meeting over to our secretary treasurer

2:34:08madam secretary treasurer thank you chair committee members please indicate your vote by

2:34:15responding in favor or opposed to the motion which is to approve the consent and minor variance

2:34:20applications with the recommended conditions from staff as well as the amended condition for

2:34:28number uh condition number eight and a new condition regarding the two meters set uh side

2:34:34yard setback chair smith in favor member Klein in favor member good fellow in favor

2:34:46member Hamilton in favor and member seyer um I'm gonna oppose this one that's carried chair

2:34:55your application has been approved thank you you're free to leave the chamber you're welcome

2:35:03madam secretary treasurer I believe we have another application the next application is file a

2:35:20dash 26 slash 23 permission to enlarge extend a legal non-conforming use for proposed two-story

2:35:27residential addition to the existing semi-detached dwelling unit at 192 arthur street north I'll also

2:35:34note for those watching online if you wish to speak to this application you can do so by calling

2:35:38the number displayed on the screen which is 519-822-1260 extension 2524 and staff will give you

2:35:45instructions on how you can delegate remotely I see someone on the video can you identify yourself

2:35:54to the committee please and state your relationship to the application yes my name is Philip Buchle

2:36:02and I'm the agent for the owner of the property welcome mr. Buchle and may I ask under the planning

2:36:10act have you uh it was the sign posted yes yes it has been thank you and you have 10 minutes

2:36:18to address the committee with your application um just very simple um I noticed the staff

2:36:25recommendation is to approve with a condition and that condition is to um make arrangements with

2:36:34the uh electric utilities for the relocation of the existing hydro service I just want to note

2:36:42that I've been in touch with someone at Electra and I'm meeting them on site next Wednesday afternoon

2:36:50to discuss the existing hydro and how it's going to be relocated to service um each

2:37:00semi-detached unit separately and that's all I have to say about the application at this point

2:37:11thank you very much if you want to stand by to see if my colleagues have any questions

2:37:17uh we have any questions of the applicant seeing none I will entertain a motion remember good fellow

2:37:34I actually have a question for city staff oh okay I've jumped the gun so please go ahead uh yeah

2:37:41hopefully this is a quick one but um I did notice that when uh this application came up before this

2:37:47property came up before for application um when it was approved there was a condition added

2:37:52are included that the addition and new deck shall be located in general

2:37:56accordance with the public notice sketch and I'm wondering if a similar condition would be

2:38:01appropriate here um through the chair um we can add that condition um I did not include that condition

2:38:12this time um last time it was added um and then the owners changed their their their um plans

2:38:19which is why they're back in front of the committee because they wanted to do the second

2:38:23story so um I didn't add the condition this time but I we can't we can add the same condition if

2:38:29it's like if you feel it's appropriate yes thank you and I yes I do think that it would be appropriate

2:38:38in this case just because of where it's located in uh proxy proximity to the natural heritage system

2:38:43and etc so I'd like to go ahead and add that if that's okay uh can I ask the uh delegate if

2:38:50you sin agreement with that I have no objections thank you if we can add that as a condition that

2:38:58would be awesome and I'm wondering not Grand Canyon awesome but positive um at this point I'm

2:39:05going to now entertain a motion member say or yeah I move for approval with the uh conditions as

2:39:16noted by staff okay and do I have a seconder member Klein and is there any discussion on the motion

2:39:31yes member good so just a question through the chair to member say or so is the motion um as

2:39:39put forward does that include the additional condition or is it just city staff's conditions

2:39:43yeah it should add I should have added the additional condition right yeah thank you thank

2:39:48you appreciate thanks for checking thanks for the clarification good catch at this point um we

2:39:57have a motion it's been approved pardon me

2:40:00It's been seconded and so we have a motion on the floor.

2:40:04There's no discussion further from what I can tell.

2:40:07So I'm going to turn it over to our secretary treasurer

2:40:10for a roll call vote.

2:40:13Thank you, chair.

2:40:14And just a note of a clarification

2:40:16that we didn't receive any delegation requests.

2:40:19Thank you for that.

2:40:19Just make note of that.

2:40:21Committee members, please indicate your vote

2:40:23by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

2:40:26which is to approve the application with the one,

2:40:30with it both conditions that were discussed,

2:40:33the one from Electra,

2:40:34as well as other condition recommended

2:40:37by a member, good fellow.

2:40:40Chair Smith.

2:40:41In favor.

2:40:43Member Klein.

2:40:44In favor.

2:40:46Member Goodfellow.

2:40:48In favor.

2:40:49Member Hamilton.

2:40:50In favor.

2:40:52And member Sayer.

2:40:53In favor.

2:40:54That's Kerry chair.

2:40:56Thank you.

2:40:57Your application has been approved.

2:40:59And you're free to leave the meeting

2:41:01or stay tuned for more excitement.

2:41:04Thank you very much.

2:41:06Welcome.

2:41:10Madam secretary treasurer,

2:41:11do we have another application?

2:41:16The last application is file a dash 27 slash 23

2:41:20variances to permit reduced side yard and rear yard setbacks

2:41:24for proposed second story residential addition

2:41:27to the existing dwelling

2:41:28and variances for parking space location

2:41:31and reduced number of parking spaces

2:41:33at 85 cork street west.

2:41:35I'll note for those watching online,

2:41:36if you wish to speak to this application,

2:41:38you can do so by calling the number displayed on the screen

2:41:41that that number is 519-822-1260 extension 2524.

2:41:47And when you call in staff will give you instructions

2:41:49on how you can delegate remotely.

2:41:54Thank you.

2:41:54And is the app, I see the applicant.

2:41:57Can you hear me?

2:41:58And if you can, please state your name

2:42:01and your relationship to the application.

2:42:04I am the owner of 85 cork street west

2:42:07and the sign has been placed up front.

2:42:10Thank you.

2:42:11Doing half my job for me.

2:42:13And at this point,

2:42:14I would like to extend 10 minutes to you

2:42:18to address the committee.

2:42:21I just want to say thank you.

2:42:23The process so far has been incredibly smooth

2:42:26and the feedback from the county or the city staff

2:42:30has been very articulate and to the point.

2:42:34I have nothing I wish to add to it.

2:42:39Thank you.

2:42:40Committee members, do we have any questions of the applicant?

2:42:45Seeing none, are there any in the gallery

2:42:50who would like to speak to this?

2:42:53There are shaking heads, but no hands raised.

2:42:56Are there any on the telephone or on video conference?

2:43:02Chair Smith, I can confirm no delegation requests.

2:43:06Thank you.

2:43:09I do have a question for staff

2:43:12unless anyone else has any questions.

2:43:15And it's regarding the parking.

2:43:19I just want to be clear that city staff

2:43:22in their professional opinion believe that this is,

2:43:25that this meets the four tests.

2:43:31To the chair, yes.

2:43:33Staff are in support of all of the variances,

2:43:36including the two off street parking spaces

2:43:39instead of the three, as we've noted in the staff report.

2:43:44This is a house that is close to the downtown

2:43:50and we feel it meets the four tests of the variance.

2:43:54Thank you very much.

2:43:55I appreciate that.

2:43:56And at this point, unless there are any more questions,

2:44:00I'll entertain a motion.

2:44:08Member Goodfellow.

2:44:10I move to approve with conditions.

2:44:14Thank you.

2:44:14And do we have a seconder?

2:44:16Member Hamilton.

2:44:19Any discussion on the motion before us?

2:44:24Seeing none.

2:44:25And I do appreciate that we've had no other delegates.

2:44:29So I'm going to turn it over to our secretary treasure

2:44:32for a vote.

2:44:34Thank you, chair.

2:44:35Committee members, please indicate your vote

2:44:37by responding in favor or opposed to the motion,

2:44:40which is to approve the application

2:44:42with the two conditions recommended by staff.

2:44:45Chair Smith.

2:44:46In favor.

2:44:48Member Klein.

2:44:49In favor.

2:44:51Member Goodfellow.

2:44:52In favor.

2:44:54Member Hamilton.

2:44:55In favor.

2:44:57And member Sair.

2:44:58In favor.

2:44:59That's carried, chair.

2:45:01Thank you.

2:45:01Your application has been approved.

2:45:03You're free to leave the meeting.

2:45:05Thank you very much.

2:45:23I believe secretary treasure,

2:45:25this comes to the conclusion of our delegates.

2:45:28Is that correct?

2:45:29There are no more applications.

2:45:31There are no more applications, chair.

2:45:34There's just a couple of items I have under staff announcements.

2:45:37Thank you.

2:45:38If you could proceed.

2:45:40Through the chair, I just wanted to note,

2:45:41the first item is an administrative item.

2:45:45In order to more efficiently conduct the work

2:45:47of the secretary treasure position,

2:45:50we do need to have a deputy secretary treasure

2:45:53appointed and in place.

2:45:54The last appointment was in October, 2019.

2:45:57And to reflect current staffing,

2:46:00my colleague Andrew here will be taking on that role.

2:46:03So we're asking the committee to simply pass

2:46:06pretty straightforward administrative motion

2:46:08and that motion is as follows, I'll read it out.

2:46:12That the appointment of any previous deputy secretary

2:46:15treasure appointments are hereby rescinded

2:46:17and that Andrew Sandor be appointed

2:46:19as deputy secretary treasure pursuant

2:46:21to section 44 subsection eight of the planning act

2:46:24until such time as a successor is appointed.

2:46:27So I'll turn it over to the chair for a motion on that item.

2:46:31Okay, I'll entertain that motion.

2:46:35Of member Sayer, a seconder.

2:46:39Member Klein.

2:46:42Don't think we need any discussion on that.

2:46:44All those, it is a roll call voted required

2:46:48just to show of hands.

2:46:50We can have a show of hands in favor.

2:46:54And the two delegates, pardon me, members online

2:46:58have both indicated positive as generally,

2:47:04it's your job to do that, not mine.

2:47:09Well, may I add my congratulations.

2:47:12Well deserved, thank you for your work.

2:47:17And through the chair, just one other staff announcement

2:47:20that we had is lastly is the recognition

2:47:23of the recent resignation of member Meads.

2:47:26Member Meads's last hearing as part of the committee

2:47:29was March 9th and this is an opportunity for us

2:47:31to take a moment to recognize her for her dedication

2:47:34to the committee over the last four years,

2:47:36including her time as vice chair.

2:47:39We will be sending a token of our appreciation

2:47:41for her service to member Meads

2:47:43and are sending her best wishes for her future endeavors.

2:47:48And lastly, that resignation has created

2:47:51an additional vacancy on the committee.

2:47:53So it's anticipated that both vacancies will be filled

2:47:56as part of the spring recruitment process

2:47:59pending council's approval on April 25th.

2:48:03Thank you.

2:48:04And I'd like to add personally my thanks to member Meads

2:48:07who filled in quite at the last minute for me last week,

2:48:13due to my absence.

2:48:14And she's been a remarkable colleague

2:48:19in the four years I've known her

2:48:21and want to echo our best wishes for her future endeavors.

2:48:31At this point, are there any other staff announcements

2:48:36Secretary Treasurer?

2:48:38Chair Smith, that's it.

2:48:40Well, I will entertain at long last emotion to adjourn.

2:48:47Member Goodfellow, seconded by member Seir,

2:48:50all in favor, carried.

2:48:55We'll see you in one month.

2:48:57Thank you all for your patience and your attention.