Thank you. I just hit 10 a.m. We'll get uh get going here. Uh this meeting of the committee of adjustment is being called here applications under the planning act for minor variance andor consent. This is a statutory public meeting and anyone having interest in any of these applications may make oral or written submissions for the committee's consideration. The committee will render a verbal decision this date and the agent or applicant will receive a copy of the committee's decision in writing via email 10 days after the meeting. Uh meeting procedure. Please note each application will be addressed in the following manner. The planning coordinator will introduce the application and staffer recommendation outlined in the report which is posted on the city of Kitchener website the Friday prior to today's meeting. The chair will remind the committee of late written submissions circulated prior to the meeting that should be taken in consideration. The chair will confirm with the applicant if they have reviewed the staff report and whether in support of the staff recommendation. The chair will invite parties in opposition to make an oral submission. Parties providing oral submission should endeavor to keep their comments succinct and avoid repeating comments already stated by other parties. The committee members may ask questions of the parties in opposition if there are any and then the chair will invite the agent/applicant to make any comments if they have any further. The agent/pplicant can ask questions regarding the staff recommendation. The committee members may ask questions of the agent/applicant and the committee members can also ask questions of city staff. Afterwards, the committee will pass a motion to approve, reject, or defer the application. Next up, minutes. Uh, can I call for someone to move uh a recommendation to approve the minutes from our last meeting? Member Amanda made that motion seconded by member Marco. So, this is that the regular minutes of the committee of adjustment meeting held on August 18th, 2026 as circulated to the members be accepted. So, we have a first and a second. All those in favor? One, two, three, four, five. All five are in favor. Uh, that is carried. Uh, next up, uh, disclosure and a pecuniary interest or and the general nature thereof. Anyone have any conflicts to declare? Seeing no conflicts, so we'll, uh, keep going. Now, we have nothing as far as unfinished business. So, that's uh, that's going well. Uh, to new business. So, 6.1, we start off with a 2022-056. It's a 30 Sunbridge Crescent. If I can please ask the agent uh or the owner to be seated there uh to my right uh your left. And uh while you're taking your spot there, if I can ask the planning coordinator to introduce the application and staff recommendation, please. >> Yes. Thank you, chair. This is a minor variance application for 30 Sunbridge Crescent. These are variances to facilitate the construction of a cabana in the rear yard of the subject property. There are two height variances. Uh the first one, the applicant requested 7.32 m instead of the maximum building height of 5.5 m. Staff are recommending that this number be 7.4 meters rather than 7.32. Uh round up just to give a little bit of uh leeway. And our zoning bylaw only goes to one decimal place. So I'm suggesting a 7.4 variance rather than 7.32. And to permit a building height under the side of the fascia of four meters instead of the maximum 3 meters. staff have reviewed these two variances in light of the tests in the planning act and find that they meet all four and is recommending approval. >> Thanks a bunch for that. Uh if I can ask you to uh just introduce yourself please uh confirm if you review the staff report and whether you're in support of the recommendation please. Thank you. >> Yes. Good morning. My name is Daryl. I'm the agent from Hickory Dickory Dex representing the client for 30 Sunbridge. I did have a chance to review it and I have no questions or uh or concerns. Excellent. Thank you. Are there any parties in the gallery here in opposition to this application? Uh seeing none, uh members of the committee, do you have any questions for the agent that's here or for city staff? Uh seeing none. So if there's no questions or concerns, just need a a motion, please. Member Bob. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is fairly straightforward. I have no concerns with it. So I move that this be approved as per the staff report. >> Thank you so much. So member Bob make that motion to approve, seconded by member Marco first and a second. Any discussion? Seeing no discussion and uh yeah, gentle little bump up be hard to measure that. So I'm happy that got changed. >> So the chair, I just want to clarify the motion. Does that include the amendment that staff was proposing for it to be 7.4 meters rather rather than 7.3? >> Correct. Correct if I'm if I'm wrong, but the motion was to the 7.4 four that was uh increased to add for a little bit more of that um wiggle room I suppose right guys. >> Yep. Cool. So uh you okay there madam secretary? Excellent. So I will call for the vote. Uh so it's at 7.4 meters. All those in favor? One two three four five. All five are in favor. Unanimous. Carried. Good luck. [snorts] Uh next up we have agenda item 6.2. So it's A2026-057 261 Broadacre Drive. If I can ask for the agent or owner come forward to that chair, please. While you're taking your seat, if the planning coordinator can please introduce the application and staff recommendation, please. >> Yes, thank you chair. This is a minor variance application for 261 Broadacre Drive. Uh it is a variance to permit a minimum contiguous front yard landscaped area of 13.4 four square meters instead of the minimum required 17 square meters. And this variance is to allow an additional dwelling unit. So a conversion of the single detached dwelling to a duplex. Staff have reviewed the variance in light of the four tests the planning act find that it meets all four and is recommending approval. >> Thank you so much. If you can please introduce yourself uh whether you've read the report and whether you're in support of the application. Thank you. >> Uh my name is Julian Amau. I am uh representing the the owner here as an agent. >> And have you reviewed the staff report and you're in support of it? >> Yes. >> Excellent. Thank you. Uh anyone here in opposition to this uh application? Uh seeing none, uh members of committee, any questions for the uh agent or for city staff? Uh seeing no questions. So then I'll just um yeah, wait for a motion, please. Member Marco. I will move the staff recommendation to approve. Member Marco made that motion to approve. Uh seconded by member Amanda first and second. Uh floor is open for uh for debate. Yeah. Don't love these things because just hope people don't park in front of them, but there's always bylaw for that. Um so neighbors don't like that, they can always call. But um yeah, otherwise seems pretty straightforward. Uh so we'll call for the vote. All those in favor? One, two, three, four, five. Five are in favor. Uh carried. Good luck. Thank you. >> Uh moving along. 6.3 uh A2026-058. That's 4202 King Street East. If I can invite uh the Oh, wait. My apologies. I forgot. This is one they have an issue with their vehicle. Um they're trying to get here. So if it's okay, committee members, uh we'll push this one to the back of the agenda and we'll try to circle back and hopefully they're able to make it here uh in time. So yeah, 6.3 will move to the back of our uh agenda and hopefully allows an opportunity for them to uh to make it to our meeting. So if that's the case, we don't need a motion for that, right, Madam Secretary? We just move it. All right, cool. Uh agenda item 6.4 4 A2026-059. That's 289 and 295 Sheldon Avenue North. If I can ask the agent for Sheldon to come to the microphone, please. While you're walking up, if the planning coordinator can please introduce the application and staff recommendation, please. >> Yes. Thank you, chair. This is a minor variance to permit a maximum building height of 12.5 m instead of the maximum permitted building height of 11 m. This variance is to facilitate the development of the site with a multiple dwelling um having 40 dwelling units in the form of a stacked townhouse built form. Um this has been reviewed in accordance with the site plan application. Planning staff have reviewed the variance in light of the forecast of planning act find that it meets all four and is recommending approval. >> Excellent. Thank you. If I can ask you to introduce yourself please whether you've read the staff report and if you're in support of it. Thank you. >> Sorry Jeff. Can you put the uh mic on so we can hear you? Sorry about that. >> No worries. Thank you. Uh my name is Jeff Horton. I represent the builder in this case. Uh we've read the report and uh we are in support of it. >> Excellent. Thank you, Jeff. Uh anyone here in opposition? Uh seeing uh none. Committee members, any questions? No questions. Mayor Bob. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick one for staff. Uh there's this u four pages of comments from uh six nations and I'm just wanting to reaffirm that those have been dealt with at the site plan level. >> Yes, at the committee of adjustment stage there are advisory comments and would be most appropriately dealt with at the site plan application stage. Any more questions? If seeing no questions, we'll just uh need a a motion then. Memoria, >> I move that this be approved as per the staff report. >> Excellent. Thank you, Memoria. Seconded by member Mark. We beat you to it there. Sorry, member. Uh so we got a first and a second. Floor is open for debate. Uh no debate, no comments. I will then call for the vote. All those in favor? One, two, three, four, five. All five are in favor. Carried. Good luck. Thank you. >> Uh, next up, uh, item 6.5, that's B2026-025, uh, -176 Witch Street. If I can invite, uh, the agent or the owner to come forward to the microphone, please. And, uh, while you're on your way, if I can finally ask the planning coordinator to introduce the application and staff recommendation, please. >> Yes. Thank you, chair. This is an application for consent to create a new building lot for a single detached dwelling. Uh this application was before the committee on July 16th, 2024. Uh the committee of adjustment granted approval of the consent application subject to conditions. Unfortunately, the applicant was not able to satisfy all the conditions within the 2-year window for um clearance of those conditions and the approval will has lapsed. So, the applicant has had to reapply for the consent. uh the conditions um that have been fulfilled are not part of this decision but the standard other conditions and the conditions that were not satisfied within the two years are included in the recommendation for your consideration. Staff have reviewed this consent in light of provincial, regional and city policies finds that it meets all of those and is recommending approval. >> Thank you so much. If I can ask you please to introduce yourself whether you've read the staff report and you're in support of it. Thank >> uh Hector Lopez, owner of 176. I have read the staff report and I'm uh okay with it. >> Excellent. Thank you so much. Anyone here in opposition to this application? Uh seeing uh none. Any questions for the uh owner? No questions. Um so the conditions from before that lap. So we've met them or they're back in which ones just for our uh benefit here. >> Yes. So the conditions re relate I will just point out it's number um eight um and number nine. So seven eight and nine were the conditions that were not satisfied or could not be satisfied prior to the lapse of the decision. >> Okay. Thank you. And those conditions Hector won't be an issue now to uh >> uh those won't be an issue but the major one that was the issue was the um crossber agreement. Um because I sit right between Kisher and Wateroo, the crossber agreement had to come from the solicitor of Wateroo and they literally took nine months for uh to give me a copy of it. So that's why one of the main reasons why it passed July 24th. Oh wow. Okay. Um committee members questions for the owner that's here or for uh city staff? Seeing none, uh, I'll wait for a motion. Me Marco. >> I will move the staff recommendation to approve. >> Okay. Member Marco made the motion to approve, seconded by member Amanda. Thank you. So, first and a second. Uh, floor is open for debate on this uh item. Anyone want to chat about it? No. Came be back again. So, one more time. Uh, I'll call for the vote. All those in favor? One, two, three, four, five. All five are in favor. Good luck. Uh, next up we have number 6.6 that says CC2026-00001525 Highland Road West. If I can invite the agent to come forward. You're there. Thank you. If I can invite the planning coordinator to the application and staff recommendation, please. >> Yes. Thank you. Thank you, chair. This is a change of conditions application for a consent application that was granted in September 2024. Um the owner of the subject property requested consent to adjust the lot lines between 525 and 563 Highland Road West. Uh this adjustment was for administrative and financing purposes. Um the applications were also undertaken to normalize and realign the existing property lines within the shopping center between existing buildings to better accommodate minor commercial infill and development opportunities. At the time that staff reviewed the consent application and recommended it for approval, um there was not a condition to require updating of the site plans for the two properties. So staff are recommending that there be a change of conditions to add a new condition that there be a site plan application to reflect the lot line adjustment. Staff have reviewed this application and finds that it meets all policies is recommending approval. >> Excellent. Thank you for that. if I can ask you please to introduce yourself if you've read the staff report and if you're in support of it. Thank you. >> Morning chair, members of committee. Uh I'm Michael Whitmer and I am a planner with GSP Group in Kitchener and I have reviewed the staff report and agree with the recommendations put forward by staff. >> Wonderful. Thank you. Anyone here in opposition? Seeing none. Uh yeah, any questions for uh the agent overseas staff? No, this one keeps coming back though, too. It's another one. [laughter] But yeah, if there's no questions or comments, um, we need a motion. Member Marco, I will move the staff recommendation to approve. >> Excellent. Thank you. Me, I saw your hand up. Is that a second? >> Yeah. Amanda seconded. Uh, discussion on this item. Uh, no discussion. I will call for the vote. Uh, all those in favor of approving. One, two, three, four, five. All five are in favor. Carried. Uh, good luck. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Madame Secretary, we are Any update from our friend? That's agenda item 6.3. No. So, should we uh defer? Okay. You let them know if you don't uh lightning uh lightning speed today, too. So unfortunate day to have something like that happen then too. So um we need a motion to defer that uh item. So it's agenda item 6.3. It couldn't be here. So we'll defer it to our next uh meeting. Can I get someone to make that motion uh please? Uh member Marco >> if you don't mind. Sorry. >> Yeah. I will make the motion to defer uh agenda item 6.3. So me mark that motion defer item 6.3 which is 4202 King Street East next month. One month uh yeah one month okay so deferred uh for one month. So that's a moved by member Marco seconded by member Bob. Any discussion? No. So we will call for the vote. All those in favor of the deferral uh one two three four five. All five are in favor. So that's been deferred uh to the next meeting. I believe that is all our agenda items. So we'll just need uh a motion to adjurnn. Member Amanda quick on that one. All right. Thank you. Member Amanda made the motion to adjurnn. Seconded by member Maria. Uh all those in favor of adjournment. Uh all five are in favor. Motion adjourned. Thank you everyone.