Good evening everyone and welcome to the city of Richmond Hills committee of adjustment meeting on this 17th day of September 2026 at 7 p.m. I would like to call the meeting to order and I shall begin with the reading of our land acknowledgement. We are gathering on the 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 and 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 tra traditional territories of the Hudeno Shaunei and the Hiron Wendad. 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. Could I get 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 variance 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 deputation form beside the podium. Please clearly write your name 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. >> Thank you. You just heard from our secretary treasurer, uh, Courtney Colum. Uh, assisting her is Aaliyah Timothy. And from our planning department, we have Melissa Charardina Papa. To our members, is are there any conflicts of interest for disclosure? No. Thank you. Do we have any requests for adjournments or withdrawals >> through you the chair? There are none. >> Thank you. Tonight's application is located at 100 Westwood Lane. That is CN application numbers CN-26-000016 MV-26-000027 and MV-26-0029. Tonight's request is for approval. If the applicant could please come forward and present the application, that would be wonderful. Please state your name and address from the record. For the record. Good evening, chair, members of committee. Uh my name is Mono Massudi. I'm a registered professional planner with Kalin Planning Partners, and I'm here tonight uh on behalf of our client, Seagull Homes, to provide a short presentation that's meant to supplement the very thorough staff report that's already been prepared tonight. If we could please go to the next slide and maybe the one after. Thank you. So, I do want to provide you with some background context uh for what brings us here tonight. Uh our client Seagull Homes uh is a luxury home builder that's been in the industry for more than 30 years. The intention behind uh this consent application is to create two new lots that are intended to be developed with a single detached home on each. And each of these homes are then part are intended to be part of the Princess Margaret lottery and be given as a prize giveaway. And um for those who are uh familiar with the Princess Margaret lottery, it's a lottery that's meant to raise money for cancer research and care uh that's done by the Princess Margaret Hospital. Uh if we could please go to the next slide. So this is a very rough sketch of uh the uh severance and uh variances that we're seeking. So, as you can see from this drawing, uh we're asking to sever the lot into two. Um the retained lot is meant to have a frontage of 31.3 m with a lot area of 1319 m. The severed lot is uh intended to have a frontage of 60.8 m and a lot area of 1315 m. Next slide, please. So I understand from the letters that uh have been shared with us from members of the public that there is concern regarding the uh what appears to be the magnitude of the variance that we're asking for. And this is where I believe that providing some context about uh the previous zoning bylaw that was in place might help uh uh provide more clarity. So on July 2nd, the Ontario Land Tribunal issued partial approval of the new zoning bylaw that's in effect uh by law 9325. Before July 2nd, the bylaw that would have applied to our client's property uh would have been bylaw uh 6479, which was enacted in 1979 and established the lot fabric for this neighborhood. And based off of that bylaw, the minimum lot frontage would have been 30.4 meters and the minimum lot area would have been 1393 square meters. So when you compare what we are proposing with what the previous bylaw which established the character of the neighborhood permitted, we would actually have complied with the law frontage and the lot area uh that we're asking for would have uh just been a 5% reduction of what the previous bylaw uh required. Uh next slide, please. So this is where things uh get a little tricky. The current bylaw uh bylaw 9325 that came into effect uh as of July 2nd doesn't actually assign a specific minimum lot lot frontage or area. Instead, it has a special provision that uh essentially says that the minimum lot area and frontage has to be as was existing before the day the bylaw passed. So there's no minimum standard in there that would actually reflect uh what currently exists in the neighborhood. Uh next slide please. And this is why the the variance that we are requesting appears so large. Um, so when you compare the existing lot frontage and lot area um to what was previously required before July 2nd, you can very clearly see that our client's uh property has a lot frontage and area that was close to twice as big as what the previous bylaw required. And that's why right now the variance that we're asking for appears so large. But in reality, when you compare it to the previous bylaw that established the lot fabric, it's really not that different. Uh, next slide, please. Uh, one more. Thank you. And, uh, the staff report already speaks uh, to this the it talks about the immediate uh, lot in context, but we thought it would be helpful to provide a visual as well. And as you can see from this slide, the there are a number of lots uh around the the property that have a lot frontage that varies from about 24 m to 30.4 m 31 m and what we are asking for uh is fully aligned with what exists. So the 3 uh1 uh 3 meters I believe. Sorry I can't see the number clearly here. Um and the 60.8 8 m that we are asking for is uh actually exceeds uh what you find uh through the uh immediate neighborhood. Next slide please. And similarly when you take a look look at some of the different lot fronted sorry lot areas that are found throughout the neighborhood you can see that there are a number of lots that have areas that are actually lower than what we are asking for. Uh when you look at the two properties on Pebble Lane, which are the closest to our client's property, they've got uh lot area that is uh lower than 1300 square meters. And I believe uh the staff report already covers this uh quite a bit, but there uh are also lots on Westwood that similarly have lot areas that are uh lower than what we are asking for. Next slide, please. And so to wrap things up, I just want to uh uh mention uh that we do intend to comply with all of the other zoning provisions. Um we're not asking a variance for any of of the other zoning provisions. It's just for the lot minimum lot frontage and minimum lot area. And if we had submitted this application before July 2nd, we would have complied with the lot frontage and it would have been easier to demonstrate why the lot uh area that we're asking for is uh minor. Uh that is all. Thank you. >> Uh before you you step down, if you don't mind, uh there is a a detail uh not the scale was on page 22 of the staff report. Would you be able to put that up uh chance? and that I know you mentioned that you're not asking for any other variances, but there appears to be some building envelopes that you've shown just for the benefit of our audience. Perhaps you can identify that. >> The chair, sorry, what page are you referring to in the staff report or the presentation? >> Um, it's in the staff report. It's uh page 22 of the staff report. >> Okay, one second. We'll get it up. >> Yes, please. Thank you. There we go. That's it. If you mind just speaking to that very briefly if that's a uh >> uh sort of a a good representation of what is being proposed in terms of building envelope. You mentioned that you don't need any other variances for sideyards, rear yard, front yard, that sort of thing. Thank you. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um so what you see there uh is just a preliminary concept plan and the intention behind uh including that there is just to demonstrate that that lot can accommodate a detached dwelling um before uh creating detailed design. Our client would want to make sure that the lots can be established and then they intend to uh work uh with city staff to uh develop a design that fits with the neighborhood and fulfills all their requirements that the city might have. So that is just uh conceptual that is not uh the house that is envisioned to ultimately end up there. That's that's work that's still underway. >> Okay. as was mentioned in some of the letters and some of the concerns about uh about that. I I know that this application did come before this committee some time ago and I recall at that time there was an issue with um uh sort of an easement over a parcel of land to accommodate the driveway on the existing dwelling that's on the retained lot. and uh you're going to be demolishing that home on the retained lot and be cleaning up sort of the scenario that deals with the driveway apron and the issue and the easements that were between the two neighbors. So, so that's actually a good thing. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Is there anyone from our audience that would like to speak to this application? If so, please come forward. >> Yes, sir. Please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Okay. I'm the owner of 100 Westwood Lane. This is just something of interest uh regarding the uh minimums and the desire to um have a the ability to have a change. Um that is where there's not a complete um agreement with the laws. Um a few years ago, the town of Richmond Hill wanted to um renovate my street, Westwood Lane, with Mville and a new street called Pebble Lane Court. And the reason they wanted to my to do that was because it was inconvenience the way my property came to a V point right out into the road. And so they asked me if I would sell some of my property for that purpose. I sold them 4 or 500 square ft. And so um in the consideration of what is being asked for here, I think it would be important to consider what I had done for the town that I sold them a piece of property which then took away some of the area that you could have added to the uh size of my lot and the frontages. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in our audience that would like to speak to this application? >> I see none. Do we have any additional comments from our planning department >> through the chair? I have no comments. >> Thank you. And our members? Yes, member Gossi. >> For you, Mr. Chair. [clears throat] I had a question for the agent. Um, thank you. So you said in your presentation that this house is being considered to be given away in the princess market lottery. Can you talk to me a little bit more about what that means considered? Does it mean that you have an agreement that if you meet these dates that the house will be select delve into that a little bit more so I understand it please? >> Through the chair I'm happy to invite the owner so that they can provide you with the context that you require. Good evening everybody. My name is Roy Seagull. I'm the owner of Seagull Custom Builders. And uh if you have any questions, I can answer deeper if your question about the Princess Margaret. We've been working with them for quite a few years. We are committed to them. We actually building for them uh starting in late December, September. We're going to build for them one house now at number 19 Clarage that it's around the corner. And then with the next one for next year is going to be at number 31 Orland Crescent. And the two following ones are going to be 100 Westwood. We hope the reason we approached 100 Westwood. The whole mission about Princess Margaret Home. Every year we're raising hundreds of millions of dollars to give back to the cancer society. We're giving away every season over $50 million in winning prizes. H some of them are homes, some of them are cottages, uh trips, uh cars and beautiful things. Uh we are now doing an open house for Princess Margaret in H in city of Van that they were our partners for the last five years. We gave away half a dozen homes over there. So all our commitments are kind of commitments to the Princess Margaret. >> So So Mr. Seagull, I think I just want to be more like stay specific to to Westwood. >> Yes. >> Right. So, the operative word that you said here was hope because the agent presenting the Princess Mar uh the Princess Margaret argument means that you're interested in having us consider that as a factor in her decision. So, I'm asking you if you can explain when you say hopefully what does that mean exactly? >> Okay. So, firstly hopefully our hope is that this thing is going to be successful tonight. The reason I approach it because when I start entertaining this property, there would be a a big bonus for the organization because for the price of one, we're going to get two properties. So, we have more to give back. The whole idea now let me just finish please. There's many properties available in this neighborhood that if this is not going to be successful, I'm going to go buy another property like I did in the last two properties that we just purchased in the last couple months. And uh we are planning to stay in Richmond Hill because our study says that in Richmond Hill most of the tickets buyers looking online coming from this side of our city. So instead of doing it in Oakville or right now we did one in Lauren Park and Miss Saga, we find out that >> Mr. Sig, listen. I I appreciate what you're saying, but you're not you're kind of not giving me the answer that I'm looking for. >> Okay. So, what is a lot of history question? >> So, the question is, are they just purchasing theo the houses from your from your company for giveaway in the lottery? It's just a simple transaction. You're building, they're buying, and you need to meet you need to meet certain dates to make that happen. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And everything is written in our contract. If you want a copy, I forward you a copy. >> They could buy your house just as well as they can buy anybody else's house. Not true. Not true. There is three assigned builders to the Princess Margaret organization. There is Lynwood Homes. >> There is the Bombers. Yeah. >> And there is Seagull Homes. Used to be for many years used to be Green Park and used to be PCL. They are out and we are in with them right now. We are they're dedicated builders. They could go and buy any house that is available on the market and finish it and decorate it and sell it. The whole mission about Princess Margaret, it's the circle of the people who putting it together and we call them collaborators. Our business built with 90% collaborators, >> right? that uh listen this organization been around for 30 years. I did not build it. >> I understand you're qualified and vetted to do their build. So, can I ask the agent the same question, please? >> Sure. >> I'm looking for more of a direct answer >> because if you're putting it in your presentation, right, that's a big thing that you're actually making a statement regarding. In my mind, it makes no difference at this point. Convince me why that's not the case. through the chair. The intention behind including that in the presentation was just to provide committee with background information on what's uh going on. Why is this uh owner here tonight? What drove them to come here? It's meant to provide background context. As you saw throughout the remaining portions and the majority of my presentation, uh, our planning justification for why this consent and variance is appropriate was based on our evaluation of the existing neighborhood, what's already established, the lot fabric that is there, and whether or not what we are proposing through this application is actually compatible. and um the city's own uh planner has also demonstrated the same through the staff report that they provided. So I didn't mean to imply anything by incorporating that part in the presentation. It was just background information. That is all. >> It's fine. I just wanted to interpret it properly. Thank you. >> Of course. >> Thank you. Um do we know which parcel would be the Princess Margaret, the retained or the severed? through the chair. Uh both are intended to be from what I understand at uh for different years though. I believe one is intended for 2029 and the other is intended for 2030. And actually I'm I'm glad that you asked that question because that was another reason for why that was included in my presentation. It was also intended to help committee uh understand the timeline behind the con construction that's planned uh for this application should it be approved. Thank you. But irrespective of that, we make a decision based on the technical merits of the application and and and staff's recommendations as well. Um, any other comments from our member member? Any comments, questions, concerns? >> Sorry, member Gossi. There's one more member of the public who's got their hand up. I think they'd like to speak. >> Okay, let's uh we'll >> finish with our members. I was going to address the the letters as I assume the the folks who wrote the letters aren't here tonight. So, I thought it'd be um appropriate to address them, but I I'm happy to hear from the public first. >> Okay. Please come forward, sir. State your name and address for the record, please. >> My name is uh Andrew Muller. >> I'm 99 Westwood Lane. I'm actually one of the people uh that wrote the letter. Uh and uh uh this is hard for me to do because this is not what I do. Um I have a lot of respect for Don. He's been a great neighbor. I have a ton of respect for the Princess Margaret Foundation. Um uh um uh but one thing that we haven't talked about tonight is just the the shape of the parcel, right? I mean, leaving what is effectively a triangle that has frontages onto both Pebble Lane and Westwood. Um leaves some portion of that land that has a frontage of effectively zero. Uh that's going to make for a very awkward design and layout of the lot. It's going to require more destruction of the canopy that's actually there. I don't understand how the sideyard is actually going to work. Um, and at a minimum, you know, I you guys seem to be asking questions around what's the envelope going to look like? What what are the required setbacks going to be? Um, if this is only an example, um, placement of the house on the lot. U, this might actually be one of the smallest Princess Margaret houses ever built. There's another one built on Mbell about a decade ago, um, which has a substantially larger footprint. Um, and so, uh, you know, before we, you know, you guys consider what you're going to go do, I'd like to actually understand what's going to be done with the lot, what's going to happen to the canopy, uh, what does the frontage look like, and how would we think about the frontage on what would effectively be the foresight of the lot that doesn't exist. >> Thank you. >> Uh, if if the applicant's agent could come up and uh, we have the site plan uh, still on here. I know this is just a uh a sketch, a concept plan. There is a location of the driveway. Um so maybe you could speak to um that for the gentleman and explain uh uh how a dwelling is going to fit on that lot and where you envision the driveway going etc. And if you need any assistance from the builder, he can also speak to that. Thank you >> through the chair. Um so I I will ask the owner to expand on the the design that they're thinking of. However, uh before doing so, I do want to emphasize that um approving the consent and variance tonight does not mean that uh committee has approved a dwelling on there. Um the applications tonight are just to establish the lots. Whatever ends up actually being uh constructed has to go through a very thorough process as part of obtaining a building permit. You go through zoning review. There are a number of conditions that uh staff have imposed on our uh application tonight as part of their recommendation for um approval. And these all taken to these very these very valid concerns that are being shared tonight. These have all been considered by city staff in their review and they've incorporated a number of conditions to ensure that whatever does get developed is done so in a way that is respectful of the regulations that the city has. Um if I may invite uh Mr. Seagull to perhaps expand on the uh specific questions you may have about the design. >> Sure. I just want to emphasize you know we don't want to mislead anybody in our audience. you did make a statement that no other variances will be required. So, you're going to come and uh potentially put some dwellings here and uh are you going to be seeking other variances from this committee for sideyards, front yard set? >> No, I think that's what the gentleman is getting at. >> No, I'm not. If I may add, uh, we looked a little bit deeper into it and we decided that both of the driveways for both dwellings will be on the pebble lane side. So therefore, we don't disturb anything on Westwood since it's kind of a main sleeve over there. It's a main road. So because we have two frontages, we designed on the triangle lot. We designed actually a low profile bungalow in actually in a shape of a triangle that reminds us the shape of a boomerang. Why a boomerang again? Boomerang we give to get back. So it's not going to be a twostory home. It's going to because of the shape of the lot. It's we planning to have a low profile home. We planning not to touch any of the existing trees over there except the one silver maple that's it's in the middle of the lot. But all the trees around the par perimeters are going remain as such and uh they're going to look beautiful. >> Thank you. through the chair. If I just may uh add something. Um as I mentioned earlier and I want to emphasize this uh when the uh owner wants to go and construct something, they will have to go through the building permit process uh there will be a person that will do a complete uh zoning compliance review. And if any other variances are identified, we will be going through this exact same process again. And all the uh residents that are here tonight will have the opportunity to weigh in on any additional variances that we may require potentially. So if anything else is required, they will be notified of that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anything further? Member Kalbus, do you have any questions, comments? >> Uh, you me um Mr. Chair, I will say that having the uh gentleman come up and speak to his letter was quite helpful as then some of his concerns were perhaps addressed by the applicant and the owner. Um, to me, this uh, you know, I'm not really looking at what is going to be done with the property. That will be up to the owner. We can't really control what the use of the land will be. That's really not what we are here to do. We're looking at the application from a technical perspective of um is the lot fabric appropriate for the neighborhood and is the development of the additional home in in that uh parcel appropriate. Uh based on the preliminary drawings here that I see in front of me and the presentation, I I see no reason to uh deny this application. >> Thank you. In that case, I would ask for a motion. Member Gossi. >> For you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve item 4.1 on today's agenda. Uh that is application CN-26-0016. Application MV-26-0027. Application MV-26-0029 at 100 Westwood. Subject to terms and conditions in the staff report. >> Moved by member Gossi. Seconded by member Calbus. All in favor? It's approved. Thank you. That is it for our applications this evening. So, everyone can exit the room. Excuse me. Could excuse Could you all take it outside, please? Thank you. Thanks very much. >> Have a good evening. >> Sure. We're from the University of TMU. >> Okay. >> And I just wanted to repeat the numbers of the file. >> Yes, I can. >> Sorry. Could I repeat them as as a TMU alumni from the planning program >> who who sat in the same chairs as you did at a council meeting had to attend one. So, I'd be happy to repeat those for yourselves. Go ahead. >> Absolutely. Be my pleasure. So, the uh applications we considered tonight were applications number CN-26-0016, MV-26-0027, MV-26-0029 at 100 Westwood Lane. Thank you all for coming. Yes, no problem. Yes. So, it's 0027 and 0029. >> You want to read them back just to make sure? [laughter] I can give you guys a copy of the agenda if you want. That way, >> thank you. >> Any other questions? >> This was for both and a consent. >> Correct. >> That's correct. In order to approve the consent, they had to have the minor variances approved. Otherwise, the consent couldn't go forward. uh through Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. Sorry, I have to apologize. We cannot discuss the applications after they've been heard and we have to continue on with the meeting. >> Thanks. No worries. >> We have any other business? >> Uh through you, Mr. Chair. There is no new business. >> Okay. >> We can proceed to the minutes. >> Okay. Does anybody have any comments with respect to the minutes? I reviewed them. I didn't see any issues. through you, Mr. Chair. Very well written, very thorough. Excellent job, guys. >> Okay, maybe we can uh make a motion to adopt the minutes. >> Then I'd like to make a motion to adopt the minutes, please. >> Moved by member Calbus, seconded by member Gossi. All in favor? Minutes approved. We need a motion to adjurnn. >> Uh motion to adjurnn today's meeting. >> Moved by member >> to the terms and conditions of the >> agenda. >> City's agenda and >> moved by GSI. Seconded by member Kalbus. All in favor?