Transcript - Approves Developments Amid Concerns - Committee Of Adjustment Meeting March 12, 2026

Approves Developments Amid Concerns - Committee Of Adjustment Meeting March 12, 2026

Good evening everyone and welcome to the city of Richmond Hills committee of adjustment meeting on this Thursday March 12th 2026. It's 7 p.m. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Uh I will be the acting chair this evening. Chair Masters u unfortunately could not attend this evening. I will start off with the land acknowledgement statement. We are gathering on lands that have been home to First Nations people from time immemorial. We acknowledge that what we now call Richmond Hill is on the treaty lands and territory of the Missagas of the Credit First Nations and the Missaga and Chippoa nations of the Williams Treaty. We also recognize that we are on part of the traditional territories of the Hudino Shaunei and the Hiron Wendat. We would also like to acknowledge all First Nations, Inuit and Mate people from across North America, also known as Turtle Island, who now reside in the city of Richmond Hill. We are committed to rebuilding constructive and cooperative relationships. The reading of the preamble, please. Good evening. In the event of an emergency, please exit this room. Outside of the double doors are two stairwell exits. The one on the right exits to the south side of the building, and the one on the far side of the elevators exits to the main lobby. Do not use the elevators or return to the building until directed. We ask all committee members, city staff, and members of the audience to please silence your cell phones. The committee of adjustment for the city of Richmond Hill has been appointed by council to consider applications for minor varants and consent within the jurisdiction of the planning act. The chair will call the applicant to the podium to present their application and will allow members of the public to comment. When members of the public approach the podium, please do so one person at a time. Please note the public debutation form beside the podium. Please clearly write your name and address and email address and indicate on the form if you wish to be added to the notification list for the application you are speaking for. State your full name and address to the committee before speaking. When speaking, please address all comments through the chair. Once the committee makes a decision on an application, no further discussion is allowed inside council chambers. No one other than the applicant, the municipality, certain public bodies, and the minister will be allowed to appeal municipal decisions to the tribunal within 20 days of the making of the decision. All appeals and associated fees must be filed directly with the secretary treasur in accordance with the planning act. Thank you. Our secretary treasurer this evening is Miss Courtney Gallum. Assisting her is Lisa Pera. And from our planning department, we have Melissa Jardina Papa, do we have any conflicts of interest from our members? No conflicts. Okay. In uh I would like to call the first application to the floor. Please uh come and uh state your name. Thank you. I'd like to read this um statement. So I'm here this evening with the members of my family, my sisters Anna and Marie. We represent four Iradi households who live on Briggs Avenue. As background, my family arrived in Richmond Hill in 1958. Our dad helped build his brother's home on Elmwood Avenue, which became our home for a short time. Over the years, Briggs was our family compound where we enjoyed vast gardening, grape vines, which endure to this very day. In 1972, I spent the summer with my dad installing the post and wire fence along the perimeter, which remains to this very day. Life there was very memorable, celebrating family with many picnics, bonfires, gardening, and endless chores, which I'm told we really enjoyed. In the decades that followed, the family grew in the next generation are enjoying the property. Dad loved this land and that hoped that one day it would be a place where his three children would live. Sadly, dad passed away in 1992 and didn't get to see the fulfillment of his dream. We're here today to complete this vision with the creation of Anna's lot and the extension of ours. Our family is very tight-knit and despite the fact that we could easily have pivoted, cashed out, and gone a different, much easier route. We always viewed and continue to view the land linked to dad. And with that, we're able to keep his vision alive. Some of you might remember the early days. There were a handful of homes on Briggs, which then was a dead end, mostly dirt street. In fact, the only street up until 16th Avenue. Over the years, the neighborhood began to change with a creeping development, we knew that we had to inform ourselves. Of course, we had to also be pragmatic and out of an abundance of caution. We and at considerable expense, we took it upon ourselves to educate on all facets of development, which you can appreciate includes a myriad of other disciplines. uh as evidenced by the staff report as things evolved we engaged professionals such as MHPC Angelus Cabaris Dave Leighton Jim Kennedy and others to understand the best future use of the land the main consideration was always to include Anna's lot into the conversation with each discussion it became clear that there will be sufficient land access for future developer to maximize suitable project for the remaining lands hopefully when the economy changes and people start building Again, ultimately for the Euphrates family, the best used is to live side by side. This even truer today as our family is facing its own serious health challenges, which makes the strategy all the more practical and timely. To this end, two years ago, we met with Deborah Janetta, director of planning, and members of her team, as well as private consultants who were all very supportive, again, as evidenced by this glowing staff report. As for the fit, we have followed the existing road pattern while improving our properties and adding value to the overall neighborhood. We believe we struck a perfect balance between pragmatism and family legacy. Thank you. Is there anybody in our comments? I see none. Do we have any additional comments from staff? Through you, Mr. Chair. No comments through you, Mr. Chair. No, there wasn't. No concerns in that case. Uh, could I have a motion, please? Member Gossi. Three. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve items A, B, and C uh on today's docket, which consists of applications CN-25-022, CN-25-000023, and CN-25-0024. Subject to terms and conditions in the staff reports. Moved by member Gossi, seconded by member Calbas. All in favor? approved. Thank you. Our next item on the agenda is item D located at 599 Sunset Beach Road. That is file number CN-25-000025. And please state your name and address for the record. Uh I'm Raja. Um, I'm wrong. Uh, 599 Sunset Beach Road. Currently, I live in 87 Northwood Drive, North York. Thank you. Do we have any additional correspondence on this application to staff? Uh, through you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have received letters of opposition from the owner of 589 Sunset Beach Road, the owner of 569 Sunset Beach Road, and the owner of 582 Sunset Beach Road. Okay, thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh first uh first slide, please. Next page. This property located north of Richmond Hill. U just south of Wilcox Lake. Um next page, please. So it has a long history. Um in 2021 um my family wants to have a bigger place. Uh we have a three young kids and we wanted to build a nice beautiful home. Uh and also want to bring my parents and uh live together next to each other. So we purchased this property since 2021. Uh we've been working with the city and uh various staff council, TRCA and so on. Um as you can see um we submit application 2021 and in May 2022 we received a zoning comment and um January 2023 we spoke with TRCA and we submitted uh our first submission. Since 2023 to 2025, we're diligently working uh with the various city staff members as well as the TRCA to make sure we address um any concerns they may have. Um and um December 2025 we received a uh zoning uh change to R six zone which allows uh um 50T frontage and so on. And um in the last um you know countless number of month as I said we have a multiple uh um meetings in person as well as a video conference and uh zoom calls and we we had a meeting with the parks uh engineering and uh and they're all satisfied with uh whatever concerns they have we satisfy them and for this project we have done a significant amount of u consultant work which is more than any any uh residential project. As you can see, it takes a lot of time. Um, thanks to city uh planning staff, uh they said they don't have any concern on our application. If you go to the next page, um this is a zoning uh approval. Uh just want to show it to you. Uh recently we got approval. Next page, one of the city condition is we need to uh give a lands to we need to convey the lands to the city and we're also um completely okay with that. Um uh next phase please. Um just in conclusion um we have reviewed the staff report very thoroughly and we agree with uh its content and staff recommendation. Uh over the past several years as you said uh we've been working closely diligently and cooperatively with the city staff to facilitate the sight specific zoning bylaw amendment approved by city council which was intend to enable this severance application. Throughout the process we attended as you said the numerous meetings uh with the city staff engineering department and the TRCA whenever wherever they want us to we always be there. We were fully cooperative throughout the process willing to address all concerns raised as a part of the zoning application process. We also addressed the engineering department comments to their satisfaction and obtain the required environmental related approval from the TRCA and they're all happy with that. As reflected in the staff report, the TRC is satisfied with the proposal before the committee. We are here tonight strictly to implement a council's decision and uh respectfully request approval of the severance application. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone from our audience that would like to speak to this application? If so, yes, please come forward. And uh I think you need to write your name and address in the book there for the record. Hi, my name is Heather D'Angelus. Um, I am here to represent Daniela Stab, who's the next door neighbor of this slot. Um, she forwarded an email with photographs, I understand, um, to is it Courtney? I'm sorry I didn't catch your name. Um there are photographs attached regarding the um environmental impact that this might have. Um the the front of Daniela's property which is adjacent to this property is a lake basically. It's a one of the one of the um marine lakes. Um the property is wetland. The whole front of the property floods regularly. Every time it rains, there's flooding. Um the two houses to the to the west are also affected by the water um coming up. And we're very concerned about if this lot is severed, the future environmental impact um regarding the way the driveway is and the way the lake is on either side of the driveway plus the lake behind um which is called Catfish Lake, Catfish Pond. um the concern for the wildlife and for the salamanders that are in the neighborhood and also the there are several um there's at least one coyote den we know of on the property in question. Uh plus, um it's basically just the environmental impact this will have cuz it's not just about the housing. It's about the stuff that was here beforehand and even before the land the the statement you do at the beginning of the meeting about the the Indians and the land development. These animals were all here before that and we're concerned that they're not being accounted for in this. Uh I don't know if you want me to read out Daniela's letter. Yeah, they have. Okay, appreciate that. Um so yeah, we would just like to ask for consideration for the future um development of the land plus where's all that water going to go? It doesn't go anywhere. it goes where it's always been. Okay. Um and it is a huge issue on that lot. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Is there anyone else from our audience that would like to speak to this application? If so, please come forward. Nope. I see none. Do we have any additional comments from our planning department through you, Mr. Chair? No further comments. Thank you. Uh just before I go to the members, um question to staff. The lands that are being dedicated to the city, do you know if the city will be installing a chainlink fence separating those dedicated lands from the remaining portion of the property through the chair? I don't have that specific information in front of me, but staff can confirm um at the end of the meeting. Okay. Thank you. At this point, I'd like to open it up to our members if anybody has any comments, questions, concerns. Yes. Member Payne, please proceed. Uh through you, Mr. Chair. Um just in response to um Daniela Stab's uh letter. Um my question would be to uh planning staff. I note that a phase one environmental site assessment will be done prior to conveyance of this land. And I just wonder um who will look at where the drainage goes like you mentioned flood waters every time it rains and and in the springtime. Do those flood waters drain into Catfish Pond and how will that be mitigated? And perhaps this is all part of a later process, but I I just would like to find that out for you, Mr. Chair. Um, with respect to uh flooding, the existing flood plane for 559 Sunset Edge Beach Road was already evaluated through the previously approved zoning bylaw amendment which established the zoning permissions on the site. The severance itself will not create any negative impact to the neighboring properties and cybot applications have also been submitted where the detailed review of the proposed dwellings grading and drainage for the new lots will will continue to take place and the engineering department will continue to review them. Um in addition um engineering the engineering department has not um had any areas of concern with this application. I think I do. Um, please proceed. I I I just sort of look at this being natural core and among the responsibilities of this committee are the suitability of the land for the purposes uh to which it's being subdivided. And I think we owe protection to the natural features of our area which are rapidly disappearing. Um I can't support this application. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes. Member Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um a question to the uh lady representing uh Daniela. Um yeah, sorry I'm asking through you. I'm not sure if you know, but was Daniellea involved in any way in the TRCA review and a question uh for our secretary. Um is that something that is typical that residents would have that opportunity to express those environmental concerns in those forms? Do we know? I apologize. uh she has um written various letters to various members of whichever committee is dealing with this over the years. It's been um there have been various applications so she's addressed each one as she's become aware of it. So it the it has been raised with the committee before the concern especially for the drainage and for the pondage on the front of her property. Right. So so I apologize. I'm just speaking specifically to the TRCA as opposed to the city of Richmond Hill, you know. Um sorry, what does TRC uh it's the conservation authority? Um that would look at this from a cons a conservation perspective. I was just wondering a I guess my question is was there any degree of involvement or notice and then b do residents get involved in that degree or they communicated at all or does that not happen? Does that not happen? Okay. I don't I'm sorry. I don't think she's had enough notice. This notice was only mailed on the 28th sorry the 26th of February and she was away so she didn't get the we didn't actually get the message until the day before yesterday. So, we've only had two days to sort of be aware of this. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. You, Mr. Chair, sorry to interrupt. Um, I just wanted to confirm for the public that in response to member Gossi's question, u Member Kel shook her head. No, I just don't think that was visible on the camera. Yeah. Sorry. Yeah, I can respond verbally if you'd prefer. Yeah. My understanding is that the TRCA uh planning review process is not intended to include public comment. Um but that that's my understanding. I could be incorrect. Thanks for that. Do you have any other additional comments, questions, concerns? Uh just just a comment. Um you know the application in front of us is um for the severance of the lots and I I see that the part three is identified on the believe this is a site plan or a surveyor plan um to be conveyed to the city. My understanding is in approving this application those lands would be conveyed to the city. Perhaps as a question to the planning department through you, chair. Through you, Mr. Chair. Correct. Those lands will be conveyed to the city. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Um, so yes, so you know, we've received these letters of opposition and and we hear the the um the residents um and their comments at this point, the council has approved a zoning um for for this property to be two residential lots. And this is the uh consent application at this point. So the the zoning is already permitted on these lands and um you know from from my perspective the approval that lies in front of us um seems to to be um fairly straightforward. So I would be in support of the application. Thank you. Okay. Um, I would like to echo the uh sentiment of member Calbas and also um um reiterate that the zoning bylaw amendment uh city file application uh was submitted and approved. Um zoning bylaws to facilitate the proposed development were approved by council on December 10th, 2025. And these two lots that are created or being one additional lot being created, both lots will be subject to site plan approval. Not just site alteration permits, but site plan approval, which will be another vigorous process where all of the concerns regarding uh storm water management, grading, and drainage will be reviewed and assessed. And I can tell you that through that process, drainage from the subject land will be self-contained and any drainage from neighboring properties that enters those lands needs to be accommodated. So these lands the development will not impact negatively impact the neighboring properties. Um and and this was echoed by the engineering department as well as the conservation authority. Um, finally, I would like to note that these are um 53 foot lots frontage. They're fairly large lots and have they have a depth of approximately 249 ft. That's after the lands have been conveyed uh to the south. So, there is plenty of room to position a house well away from any environmental features that that uh might be observed. So, having said that, if there's no other questions or concerns from our members, um I would like to ask for a motion. Member Galbus. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to uh application number CN-25-0025, item D on today's agenda uh located at 599 Sunset Beach Road, uh for approval. Apologies. Uh subject to the terms and conditions in the city staff report. Thank you. Moved by member Calbus, seconded by member Gossi. All in favor? Opposed? One opposed. Member Payne. Thank you. Approved. The next applications on the agenda, items E and F. This is located at 187 and 193 Douglas Road. application file number CN-25-11 and MV-25-29. Please state your name and address for the record. Do we have any additional correspondence on this application through Mr. Chair? Yes. Uh various letters of support were submitted for these applications. Thank you. Good evening members of comm uh committee. My name is Pvina and I'm here to talk to you today about the minor variance and consent applications for 187 193 Douglas Road. Next slide. Uh, sorry, the one before this. Yeah. Um, yeah. So, I'm an urban designer and associate planner with Groundswell Urban Planners. I'm also here with my colleague Heath Patel Sharp who's also a senior planner with Groundswell. and uh we're here on behalf of the owners of the subject properties. Um I'm going to go through a few of a little bit about the planning context as well as the proposed consent and minor variance uh application submitted. Next slide. Right now each property contains a single detached dwelling. The surrounding area is ma mainly low uh lowdensity residential with similar single family homes throughout the neighborhood to the north, south, east, and west. Um, at a broader context, the Lake Wilcox is to the east. Next slide. The subject lands are designated neighborhoods under the Richmond Hill official plan. Uh, they are located within a priority infill area which is identified through OPA 129. OPA29 identified several areas within existing neighborhoods where residential infill could occur over time. And uh as policy 4.9.1.3.3 of the official plan states that development within these areas should follow the applicable council approved info study for our site specifically that study would be the Douglas Road Info study. Next slide. As part of OPA 129, the Douglas Road infill study was prepared to guide future residential infill development in this area. The study looks at how the ra the neighborhood could evolve over time and as shown here on the concept plan for the subject lands. The idea is that the lots would continue to front onto Douglas Road while the rear portions of those properties would eventually accommodate new residential lots fronting onto a future culde-sac to the south. Next slide. Moving on to the zoning context. The properties are currently zoned residential 3 under zoning bylaw 1703 which is the bylaw that is currently in force. We also recognize that the city has adopted a new corresp uh comprehensive zoning bylaw 93-25, but that bylaw is currently under appeal, not yet in force. That said, we've considered it here as it reflects the city's intended zoning framework moving forward. Um, and under that bylaw, the properties would be designated uh neighborhood one. And shown in the table here, you can see the zoning standards for both um zones respectively. Next slide. So moving on to the proposal itself, what we're proposing is a minor boundary adjustment between 187 and 193 Douglas Road. The adjustment transfers approximately 558 square meters from 187 Douglas Road to 193 Douglas Road as shown in yellow on the figure here. As a result, 187 Douglas Road will be left with a lot area of approximately 796 square meters, while 193 Douglas Road will be uh will have an approximate lot area of 2,000 m. Importantly, no new lots are being created. What are currently two lots will remain two lots. Both properties will continue to front onto Douglas Road, and no new development is being proposed as part of this application. The adjustment also includes a 3.05 05 meter road widening um along Douglas Road that the city has requested and uh we have included as part of this application and overall the intent of the adjustment is to maintain the vision of the Douglas Road in study. Next slide. As a result of the boundary adjustment, the resulting lot area for 187 Douglas Road is approximately 796 square meters, which is below the required minimum lot area of 929 square meters in the zoning bylaw. This is the only zoning relief that is being requested as part of this application. You may also notice that the table shows the reduced front yard setback for both properties as well, but this is due to the um 3.05 05 meter road widening requirement that we have require that we have provided as part of this application and under section 1D of zoning bylaw 109-11 when land is conveyed to a public authority the resulting reduction is cons is not considered a zoning deficiency and therefore a relief for front yard setback is not required. In addition to this, we've also reviewed the proposal against the comprehensive zoning bylaw 93-25 and the proposed lot configuration meets all of the applicable requirements under the N1 zone. And if this bylaw was in enforce today, uh no minor variance would be uh required. Next slide. Finally, the proposed adjustment is a minor reconfiguration. It does not introduce any new development and no new lots are being created. The adjustment maintains two residential lots fronting onto Douglas Road and preserves the existing residential character of the lot fabric um and the residential um character of the neighborhood. It also protects the long-term loting pattern as identified in the Douglas Road info study. With respect to the minor variance, the proposal meets all four tests under the planning act. First, the proposal maintains the intent of the official plan. It supports appropriate info and maintains the existing lowdensity residential character of the neighborhood. Second, the proposal maintains the general intent of the zoning bylaw. Third, the variance is desirable for the appropriate use of the land as the existing residential dwellings will remain and the proposal continues to support the intended residential use of the properties. And finally, the variance is minor in nature as it represents only a small reduction in lot area. For these reasons, we request the committee's approval of the consent and minor variance applications for both properties 187 and 193 Douglas Road. We've also reviewed the staff report and agree with the recommendations provided and have no concerns with the proposed conditions of approval. I'd also like to mention that we received 10 letters of support um that we had submitted earlier and um thank you and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Uh before I move on to our audience, um the lands to the south, uh there is a proposed plan of subdivision, no to the land, not not as part of this application, right? But the lands to the south, according to the staff report, uh will facilitate a plan of subdivision in the future. Do you have a copy of that by chance or does staff have a copy of that that we might be able to put on the screen for the benefit of our viewers and our members? This is south of our correct properties. No, we do not have that at this time. Thank you. That would be helpful. And it's just for information purposes. That's all. I think you can put it right down on that uh plate there over here. Yep. There we go. And that's where the two lots would be in the future in the back. Right. Correct. Okay. Good. Thank you for that. Is there anyone in our audience that would like to speak to this application? If so, please come forward. I see none. Do we have any additional comments from our planning department? Through you, Mr. Chair. Planning is no comments. Okay. Thank you. and our members. Any questions? Yes. Member Payne, please. Through you, Mr. Chair. Um, I would like to ask the applicant, um, why do you need to sever this property and create a great big property at 193 and a relatively small property at 187? I'm just curious. Um, and I think that's part of the application process is explaining why. Um, through you, Mr. Chair. The owners currently wish to sell uh property 187 Douglas Road. Um, and as a result, they wish to keep the rear lands available um to align with that future subdivision to the south. And they'd like to keep what available? the rear part of the of 187 to align with the future of that the subdivision to the south. I see. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions, comments, concerns from our members? I see none. In that case case, could I have a motion, please? Yes. Member Gossi. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve items E and F on today's agenda at 187 and 193 Douglas Road file numbers CN-25-11 and MV-25-29 subject the terms and conditions in the staff report. Moved by member Gazi, seconded by member Payne. All in favor unanimous approved. Thank you. Next on the agenda, item G located at 9961 Young Street, file number MV-26-00001. Do we have any additional correspondence on this application? Thank you, Mr. Chair. There's none. Thank you. Please. Thanks. Excellent. Uh I can run through a quick presentation. It's fairly straightforward. Um just really a conversion of an existing home occupation dental uh sorry hair salon into a dental clinic. The owner will occupy it. It's permitted in the the zoning bylaw as well as the official plan. Um no exterior work, no alterations to the parking area, just really some small interior alterations. Thank you. That's it. That's it. Got it. Fairly straightforward. Very good. Right. Is there anyone from our audience that would like to speak to this application? I see none. Any additional comments from our planning department? Through you, Mr. Chair. No comment. And our members, any comments, questions, concerns? None. Oh, thank you. Um, no, none. Okay. In that case, I would ask for a motion. Member Calas. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve application number MV-26-00001 located at 9961 Young Street, subject to the terms and conditions in the city staff report. Moved by member Calvis, seconded by member Payne. All in favor? Thank you. You're approved. Thank you. Have a good night. You too. Next on the agenda, item H located at 9700 Young Street, file number MV-26-00002. And there are some related applications to this or past applications. Do we have any additional correspondence on this file through your Mr. Chair? There is none. Okay. Thank you. Please proceed. Yeah, we have her name and address on the record, I imagine. Okay. My name is Mona Alari and I'm an associate at Bassfields Incorporated. We're located at 3 Ch Street in the city of Toronto. Okay. Thank you. Perfect. Uh good evening everyone. Just to provide some background on this application, there was an OPA and resoning applications that were approved back in May 2024 by city council to facilitate the development of the subject site with a mixeduse development that's comprised of two buildings. One fronting along Young Street that is 28 stories in height and another one to the rear of it that's uh 20 stories in height. What you see on the screen here on the aerial um is the portion of the subject set that's going to be redeveloped with that mixeduse development is identified as a development area. To the rear of it, uh there's going to be a new public park and an Addison Road extension. So, as you see, the site's located on the west side of Young Street. It's between May Avenue and Young Hurst Avenue, and it's relatively large to accommodate for this development. Next slide, please. As I've mentioned, there was an approval by city council back in 2024 for the redevelopment of the subject site with a mixeduse development. This redesated the portion of the lands that is fronting on Young Street to regional mixed use corridor and then the portion that you see in yellow um is neighborhoods which will be the future public park. Similarly, there was uh a resoning that was approved that reszone the site to residential multiple 10 and then the portion which will remain as park as open space. Um and just to note that you can go to the next slide please actually. So, this is sort of an overview of the site plan of the proposed development. And maybe just to make a note here that what we're proposing today um is are no changes to what was approved with in May of 2024 by city council. We're just making minor amendments to uh the application and they're more or less technical in nature um which I'll describe later on. But the proposal itself remains relatively the same. You could see along Young Street its building be there. it will remain to be 28 stories in height and building A to the rear will remain to be uh 20 stories in height. There's still room for the Addison Street extension that's being contemplated as well as a public park to in the western portion of the site. Next slide, please. Just some quick renderings here uh to go through. You'll see that the building heights have remained the same as well. Uh the metric heights are outlined on the screen here today. uh we're not really contemplating any built form changes except for the mechanical pen and house stepbacks but I'll describe that uh later on in greater detail. Next slide please. I won't spend too much time on this slide but just wanted to provide the committee here an idea of what was approved by uh city council versus what we're proposing today. We're still within the parameters of the approval um and we're still providing for the Addison Street extension and public park as I've noted back happy to refer it refer to the slide again if we have any question with respect to the stats. Next slide please. What we're asking the committee today is to approve a total of five variances. Some relate to the sight specific uh zoning by amendment that was approved and then are some that are related to the parent bylaw. So if you could just go to the next slide, please. The first variance that we're seeking is for the definition of a story within the sight specific bylaw. As part of our site plan application and as we've gone through the detailed design of the building, we've introduced that management office which you can see on the right hand screen. Um it's the red area that's outlined and that management office is going to go above the garbage room and that's in building B only. Um so what we're proposing here is to amend the definition of the story to allow for this mezzanine and then if you go to the next slide please this I won't read the entire definition of story but this is how it's defined in the sight specific bylaw and what we're asking the committee to do is to just add the text that's highlighted in red on the screen here today um which would allow for the partial level which would be the mezzanine we've identified that it can only exist within the first story and then there's a maximum GFA assigned which is 135 m to that mezzanine level and we've also been explicit that it cannot include any residential units. Next slide please. The next variance that we're asking for is for the driveway width. Um this is amending the parent bylaw which actually has a maximum driveway width of 7.6 m and we were asking it to be increased to 9 mters. And the reason for that is that through the detailed design, we've identified the the median that is going to be located in the middle of the driveway. And that allows for better safety for pedestrians as well vehicular entry in and out of the site. And this is along Young Street. And just noting that transportation have of course reviewed this through the site plan process, which we're at right now, and have no issue with the um driveway here. Next slide, please. Just to provide some background on uh this variance, as you know, uh there's the comprehensive bylaw that was approved by city council earlier this year for the city of Richmond Hill. As part of this bylaw, they've introduced some permissions for standard compact A and compact B by uh vehicular parking spaces to be provided. And what we're looking to do here is to align um the old bylaw which applies to our site because we're not subject to the new bylaw and it's under appeal just with the new city standard. So uh you have on the table here comparison that we're just following exactly the city standards. Perfect. Next slide please. And then the next variance that we're asking for is quite technical in nature. Uh, as we've gone through the reszoning, we had window washing equipment projections up to 7 mters only. As we've gone through the detailed design and we've been coordinating with several consultants, we've identified the need for the window washing equipment to be projecting up to 9 m. So, uh, we're just asking committee to allow for this for the functional and operation of the building. Next slide, please. So this is the last variance that we're seeking. Um during the resoning process, the mechanical penthouse of the building, which is what you see in yellow on the screen here, stepped back from the tower below. Um as we've gone through the detailed design, we have a mechanical consultant that's been brought on as well. We've realized that the mechanical area just needs to be larger. And then the architect has also worked to integrate that mechanical penthouse into the design of the building. Um so it will not have any stepbacks as you can see on the screen there's a red line that sort of shows it will be built flush with the tower below and if you go to the next slide please if you could see that is also illustrated on the uh north elevations as well and that is for both buildings. And next slide please. That was the last variance. And just noting that it is my opinion that the requested variances do satisfy the forecast set out in the planning act. And I note that we've seen staff's report and their support of the variances that we're seeking today. And you know we're in the last stages of the site plan application which is how we've identified these more or less technical uh variances that we're seeking today. Okay. Thank you. I I have a very quick question for you on the fixed variance. Um, by nature of the fact that it's a mezzanine, I'm assuming it's accessible from the space below. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Um, is there anyone in our audience that would like to speak to this application? Questions, concerns? No, I see none. Any additional comments from our planning department? Through you, Mr. Chair. No comments. Thank you. And our members, any comments? Yes. Member Gossi, please proceed. Through you, Mr. Chair. I just have one quick question in regards to the parking spots. You said they're being produced down to or one of your variants is 5.7 m from six. So um is that space going to then impinge or reduce the space from parking spots across from each other? So if you think about the construction of a parking lot where you have, you know, a set of spots, another set of spots, and then the spacing between the spots for the cars to drive and traverse through the lot, is that what is the distance between those spots? Because if you're reducing the size, that tends to suggest that any larger cars, the noses might be sticking out further into the actual parking lot. I'm not sure what the actual term is, but the road portion inside the parking lot. Laneway. The laneway. Thank you. Through the chair, this will not reduce the drive aisle leading into the parking spaces. It's just simply uh the length and width of the parking space itself. So, um it's to accommodate more complex spaces and we're there's a ratio of what we're providing in terms of like how many are compact spaces in the underground, but it will lead to more functional design. But not just the I'm sorry I thought they were for the normal cars. It was for the compacts. I thought it was for the normal ones. If you just go to the previous slide, there's like the standard parking spaces that were have here. I think you had also suggested that it's consistent with the city's new Yeah. which tries to accommodate smaller compact. Yeah, that's right. Okay. Can you go up to the table that you had? It's in the next slides. No, if you go down. Sorry. There we go. Yeah. could scroll down a little bit. A little bit down. Oh, the other way. Yeah. So, you can see proposed parking sizes versus the the new bylaw 9325, which aligns with it. Yeah. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions? Yes. Member Galvas. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair. Uh Lisa, if you could please scroll down to the mechanical penthouse uh elevations. Um yeah, so just just the top one, the the one that uh would be facing onto Young Street. Is that correct? The That's right. This one. Is this the east elevation? This is from Young Street. Yes. Yeah, that's correct. It will be facing Young Street. Um, so I I understood your comment to be that through a conversation with the HVAC consultants that the mechanical penthouse just requires to be larger. Is there no way to set it back at all from the from the massing of the building? because otherwise you know it's already a really tall tower and I recognize that there's a setback from the podium but is there anything you could do to move it back from the front of the building especially on tower B which would be fronting onto Young Street through the chair the design of the mechanical penthouse as well has been sort integrated into the building which the architect has spent some time in order to like make sure that it doesn't have individual impacts on the public realm. um it's sort of been designed with materiality to integrate into the building. Uh that one meter step back won't necessarily provide for that break and visual break and as a pedestrian it would more or less be imperceivable for them um what happens at the top level of the mechanical penthouse. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions, comments, concerns? No. Okay. In that case, I would ask for a motion. Somebody member Gins. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve application number MB-26-00002 located at 9700 Young Street. Uh, subject to the terms and conditions in the city staff report. Thank you. Moved by member Calba, seconded by member Payne. All in favor? Unanimous. Approved. Thank you. That concludes our meeting. Do we have any other business? You, Mr. Chair, there's no other business. Okay. No other business. We can uh adopt the minutes. Are there any comments, questions? Uh speaker, Mr. Chair, I just want to note um that uh member Payne did submit an edit and it was just a missed motion carried for item B. So that's been added and that's what we would be adopting this evening. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to accept the um minutes of the February 19th meeting. Okay. Moved by member, seconded by member Calbus. All in favor. Minutes are adopted with revisions. We can move to a motion to adjurnn. Okay. Motion to adjurnn by member Calves. Ready to leave. And everybody else seconded it. Meeting adjourned.

Full Transcript