[0:30] Good evening everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to
[0:33] order under the authority of subsection 45 of the planning
[0:37] act, RSO 1990 chapter P13 has amended to provide relief
[0:42] from zoning bylaw 07 - 67. We will be hearing
[0:47] Application A07 - 26 this evening. The purpose of this
[0:52] hearing of the Committee of Adjustment is to allow the
[0:55] presentation of an application for a minor variance and to
[0:59] allow interested members of the public the opportunity to ask
[1:02] questions or offer comments regarding this application. The Committee will
[1:07] exchange views and the decision will come after full consideration
[1:12] of input from the hearing submissions from any interested parties
[1:16] and comments from agencies. If any member of the public
[1:19] would like to be notified in rating of the Committee
[1:22] of Adjustments Decision on an application there to email coa
[1:27] at iron. ca or mail this request to 568 Forge
[1:32] or Fogger Road. Hillsburg, Ontario, NOB 10O. For anyone who
[1:38] has completed the sign - in sheet at the podium,
[1:41] please note you do not need to separately submit a
[1:44] written request to be notified. We'll start with deferrals. Consider
[1:49] the Application allow any parties interested in the Application to
[1:53] speak. Allow additional comments from the Applicant and then come
[1:56] to a decision. So I have a, the following motion
[1:59] before the committee, be it resolved that the Committee hereby
[2:02] approves the Agenda circulated. Do I have a mover and
[2:06] a secondary for this motion. I'll second. All those in
[2:13] favor. Carried. Declaration of Prachinitary interests. Do any members of
[2:20] the Committee have any pequenitary interests regarding an application before
[2:23] the Committee today? Seeing none, we will carry on. I
[2:29] have the following motion before the committee, be it resolved
[2:32] that the Committee hereby adopts the minutes and circulated for
[2:35] the meeting of June 17, 2026. Do I have a
[2:39] mover in secondary for that motion. I'll move it. Remember
[2:47] Bruce will secondly. All those in favor. Carried. Request for
[2:53] withdrawal defer. So does the Applicant wish for whatever reason
[2:57] to withdraw or to further application? And I'm calling on
[3:03] Maria Jones. Okay, thank you. Justin, will you please confirm
[3:12] that Notus was provided. Thank you, Mr. Chair, through you.
[3:16] Notice was given on August 6th to every owner of
[3:18] land within 60 metres of the subject property and to
[3:21] ages requiring Notices prescribed under the Planning Act. Thank you.
[3:26] We will now consider the Application file number A07 -
[3:31] 26. Location is 5916 Trafalgar Road North Hillsburg. I will
[3:38] now invite the town senior planner who is with us
[3:41] virtually. Thank you Jessica for being here to present her
[3:45] report. Jessica, do you solemnly affirm that the evidence to
[3:49] be given by you at this hearing touching the matters
[3:52] and questions shall be the truth, the whole truth, and
[3:54] nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, carry on.
[4:00] Through you Mr. Chair, this is minor variance applications 07
[4:04] - 26 for Hillsburg Heights, Inc. Located at 5916 Trafalgar
[4:09] Road North in Hillsburg. The Application is to facilitate the
[4:14] development of single detached and townhouse dwellings associated with the
[4:18] proposed redline revisions to the county - approved draft plan
[4:22] of subdivision 23t . 2. And the red line revisions
[4:28] will our subject to count the approval. Four variances were
[4:33] requested. A minimum exterior side yard of. Such dwellings in
[4:38] the UR - 1 - 102 zone, whereas the minimum
[4:42] exterior side Jared shall be four metres. A maximum building
[4:46] height of 13 metres for single detached dwellings in the
[4:49] UR - 1 - 102 zone, whereas the maximum building
[4:53] height shall not exceed 11 metres. Building height of 13
[4:58] metres for all - town. Have you are 2 -
[5:01] 101 zone, whereas the maximum building height shall not exceed
[5:05] 12. 5 metres for a stack townhouses and 11 metres
[5:09] for all other. A minimum watt frontage of 6 metres
[5:13] per end unit or corner lot for a townhouse. In
[5:17] the UR2 - 101 zone, whereas the minimum lot -
[5:22] fronted shall be 6 metres per unit on an interior
[5:25] lot and 7 metres per year and unit or corner
[5:30] lot. Staffer satisfied that the Application meets the 4 tests
[5:34] of the planning act. No objections were received from circulated
[5:38] agencies or departments as the Hillsburg subdivision has already received
[5:44] approval establishing an overall development framework, including road network and
[5:48] housing forms. The applicant is requesting that certain permissions already
[5:53] established elsewhere and be extended. Three written submissions from members
[5:59] of the public were received by staff after this report
[6:01] was finalised and were subsequently forwarded to the committee for
[6:05] consideration. Planning staff recommended approval of the Application. Thank you
[6:13] very much. We'll now provide an opportunity for representation and
[6:20] questions regarding A07 - 26. So at this time I'll
[6:24] call Maria to the podium if she could please. Maria,
[6:34] do you solemnly affirm that the evidence to be given
[6:36] by you at this hearing touches the matters and questions
[6:39] shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
[6:42] the truth. I do. Thank you, carry on. Good evening.
[6:49] My name is Maria Jones. I'm a planner with Candevcon
[6:52] group representing the Applicant Hillsburg Heights. Our presentation complements that
[7:00] was present, the one that was presented by the town.
[7:04] We had submitted a minor variance application to facilitate the
[7:08] development of single detached in townhost dwellings in accordance. With
[7:17] the, in accordance with the proposed red line revisions to
[7:21] the county approved draft plan as subdivision 23T - 21002.
[7:29] For some background, the site was rezoned on December 12,
[7:35] 2024 through zoning bylaw, amendment 2454, and the plan of
[7:41] subdivision was approved on December 19, 2025. The approved subdivision
[7:46] included 195 single detached lots, 174 townhouse units, a school
[7:53] block, a park. And stormwater management facilities. During the detailed
[8:00] engineering design, it became apparent that the site topography, particularly
[8:06] within the townhouse blocks north of the stormwater management pond
[8:11] near Trafalgaro created some grading challenges due to the southward
[8:17] slope. To address these conditions. A limited number of single
[8:22] detached in townhouse lots were reconfigured to better accommodate the
[8:27] site. This area of photo here illustrates the subject lands
[8:33] in context to the surrounding area. As indicated, the requested
[8:42] through the planner, the requested variance is provide flexibility by
[8:47] both single detached and townhouse lots within the UR -
[8:52] 1 102 and you are 2101 zones of the site
[8:57] - specific bylaw. For the townhouse lots in the UR
[9:03] - 2101 zone, relief is requested to permit the minimum
[9:08] frontage of 6 metres for ending corner units, whereas seven
[9:13] metres is permitted or required. To permit a maximum height,
[9:19] building height of 13 metres, whereas a maximum of 12.
[9:24] 5 metres for Stack Townhouses and 11 metres for other
[9:28] townhouse forms is permitted. For single detached lots in the
[9:34] UR - 1 - 02 zone, relief is requested to
[9:38] permit exterior side yards of 3 metres, whereas 4 metres
[9:43] are required, and to permit a maximum building height of
[9:46] 13 metres where 11 metres are permitted. These variances allow
[9:50] the single detached in townhouse lots to be developed interchangeably
[9:55] within the affected zones. This slide identifies the area affected
[10:04] by the proposed red line revisions through the red lines.
[10:11] The affected area is located north of the stormwater management
[10:15] blonde near Trafalgar Road. The proposed law configurations correspond to
[10:21] existing grading constraints and will accommodate walk out basement designs.
[10:28] It will reduce the need for between walls, between homes,
[10:33] minimize existing grading and slight alterations and avoid unconventional building
[10:38] designs that would otherwise be required due to the sight
[10:42] slope. In our opinion, the Application satisfies
[10:52] all four tests under the planning act. It may, the
[10:55] Application maintains the intent of the official plan. It proposes
[11:00] development required development. The proposed development remains residential in nature
[11:09] and continues to implement the approved residential designation. Both townhouse
[11:15] and single detached dwelling are permitted forms in the official
[11:20] plan. It does maintain the intent of the zoning bylaw.
[11:26] The variances do not alter the overall vision or function
[11:29] of the approved zoning. Rather they introduce limited site -
[11:34] specific provisions to provide flexibility while maintaining appropriate setbacks, streetscape
[11:40] character, landscape opportunities, and building design. It is desirable for
[11:46] the appropriate development of the land, the variances support practical
[11:51] development solutions that respond to site conditions. They allow for
[11:57] efficient lot layouts and building designs while maintaining the intent
[12:01] of the approved subdivision. And we feel that it is
[12:06] minor in nature. The request relief is technical and limited
[12:10] in scope. The subdivision continues to provide the same housing
[12:14] forms already approved and will end with only minor adjustments
[12:20] to lock configurations. In conclusion, upon approval of the variances,
[12:28] a red line revision to the approved draft plan of
[12:31] subdivid or to the approved plan of subdivision will be
[12:34] submitted to the town and county for final approval. And
[12:37] the county will be the final approval authority. The revised
[12:41] plan proposes 198 single detached lots and 173 townhouse units
[12:47] representing essentially no change to the overall density of the
[12:51] subdivision. The proposed red line revisions and associated variances are
[12:57] technical in nature, and they respond to site - specific
[13:00] grading constraints and represents good planning. That concludes my presentation.
[13:09] Thank you very much. I'm sure we will be back
[13:14] to you here shortly. So next we will allow any
[13:19] members of the public desiring to speak to make their
[13:23] representation. Please note that you'll have up to 10 minutes
[13:26] to make your representation and that your comments or questions
[13:30] should specifically relate to the Application before the committee. So
[13:35] that is just strictly on the variances that they're requesting
[13:39] of the height to go from 11 metres to 13
[13:47] from 12 and a half to 13. The front edge
[13:51] to go from 7 to 6, and the side lots
[13:55] to go from 4 metres to 3 metres. So, um,
[14:01] at this time, I believe we have one person that
[14:04] would like to speak. So is there a stert, Brennan?
[14:09] Okay. So Stuart. Hang on a second. Go - brother.
[14:14] Do you solemnly affirm that the evidence to be given
[14:17] by you at this hearing touching the matters and questions
[14:20] shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
[14:22] the truth? Absolutely. Thank you very much. I may be
[14:26] at the wrong way say it in regards to the
[14:31] application. For the variants. However. You're asking, they're asking the
[14:41] residents for support. And we as the residents, we don't
[14:47] seem to be getting any support back from this company.
[14:53] So we have a few issues in our neighbourhood. And
[14:58] unfortunately it's not to do with the variance. So that's
[15:02] where you're here for today, correct? However, because we've been
[15:07] chased in the company because they have so many different
[15:12] people in between, the towns hired, I believe, it's Ainsley
[15:18] group. That represent any problems. And the gentleman's name is
[15:24] Josh McLean. Who is the goal between. For the town.
[15:29] And we've had issues since they started construction, but it's
[15:34] really come to a light with their grading. And I
[15:38] live, I back on to the stormwater management pond. So
[15:47] this is going to directly affect me. Now the grading
[15:52] they have there on my side is I was told
[15:57] by this Josh gentleman that they were supposed to change
[16:01] the grading there. Now you're talking about the grading on
[16:05] the other side. I'm talking about the grading that box
[16:08] on our place. And the issue we have and myself
[16:16] and my other neighbours is. During the first time they
[16:21] put up that black fence. Now you put around it
[16:25] for a construction. Well, that fence fell down. And they
[16:28] had Bellsley haze in between, right? So the pressure then
[16:32] went and it threw my fence down. And then they
[16:37] came and I said, you got to put a new
[16:39] fence up, right? Like not a new one, but repair
[16:42] my fence. So they came and they put another black
[16:48] fence up another six yards in behind the black fence
[16:52] that went down. So nobody since then, uh, we've sent
[16:59] out my neighbours that sent out emails to all the
[17:03] town councillors, no reply. The only person that has replied
[17:08] to us is a mayor so far. And we had
[17:12] a conversation last week, they replied to another one of
[17:18] the other replied from the mayor. That's all a phone
[17:21] call. Okay. And I explained what was going on. I
[17:25] didn't know that this, this variance was going on. So
[17:28] he said he can't get involved or whatever. And this
[17:31] may not be the place for. It. But if this
[17:36] is what this company is doing now. I expect, because
[17:41] it's been almost three years, I would suspect that this
[17:44] is what they're going to do in the future. And
[17:47] that's why I'm dead against this. I don't care how
[17:51] big they build it or anything, but they, they have
[17:54] to at least address our concerns as neighbours. If they
[18:00] don't want it, then we have a big issue. And
[18:05] we're held, unfortunately, we're health issues. Now our neighbours across
[18:10] the street also us, my wife, her eyes, but the
[18:14] kinds of stuff that's going on. Nothing that's addressed. Nope.
[18:18] And they tell Josh, they're going to come and redo
[18:21] the, uh, the hill. I have seen, when he plays,
[18:25] they redid the hill is where the town's fire extinguisher,
[18:29] uh, fire hydrant is. Other than that, they have done
[18:33] nothing with redoing that hill. It's a mess. Okay. Um,
[18:38] Jessica and between you and Justin, maybe there's somebody that,
[18:43] um, you guys can have contact the local residents that
[18:47] have filed questions and stuff like that. Uh, I'm sure
[18:52] you guys will have a, have somebody that could contact
[18:55] them and work through some of this. Um, it doesn't
[18:58] affect the, um, the application tonight. But, um, there is
[19:04] concerns that they've had that they've been trying to get
[19:06] some answers to. So maybe between the two years you
[19:10] can figure out or this other company. You guys can
[19:13] have them reach out to them and see if they
[19:16] can't get them some answers. Um, just cause you guys
[19:19] are with the town. I'm hoping that, um, that you
[19:21] guys know somebody that you guys can get in contact
[19:24] with that they can go and see some of the
[19:26] residents that are right there that are being affected. And
[19:30] hopefully get them some answers and that might help, help,
[19:33] uh, straighten a lot of things out. I appreciate that.
[19:39] But we have been in contact. I got all kinds
[19:41] of emails that's coming. But okay, no resolve. Okay. Well,
[19:45] hopefully we can get you something. Thank you. Thank you.
[19:50] Is there anyone else that would like. Please step up?
[19:54] You're going to have to state your name. Cause unfortunately
[19:55] I don't have it here on my list. My name
[19:57] is Marilyn. My last name is Pressful. He put several
[20:00] emails. From me. Okay. Maryland, do you saw me affirm
[20:04] that the evidence to be given by you at this
[20:06] hearing touching the matters in questions shall be the truth.
[20:09] The whole truth and nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank
[20:11] you, carry on. So I have no problem with the
[20:14] growth at Hillsburg. I think it's fabulous what we're doing.
[20:17] I'm directly affected because I do back on. I'm one
[20:20] of the neighbours. I know Molly and Dan, Paul and
[20:23] Pearl. I can name them all. Well, my concern is,
[20:26] is not the minor variance. Thank you, Jessica, for all
[20:29] your work. It's that it's a blanket variance because what
[20:33] they've asked for is not just for these specific homes,
[20:37] but they're now saying we don't have to do the
[20:39] rest of the paperwork. We want to be able to
[20:41] do these variances as we go forward. I would be
[20:44] fine if you just specify those houses. And said, that's
[20:49] what we're going to make the changes to. Those are
[20:52] minor variances. But this is asking for a blanket change.
[20:56] And I agree with you. I don't trust them. I
[20:59] don't trust. And this is going to sound horrible. Council
[21:04] to have the time to be able to address all
[21:07] the small things that we as homeowners. I've been here
[21:09] for over two decades with my husband. I don't think
[21:13] it's appropriate. That this is considered minor. It is blanket
[21:17] for the entire subdivision. Sorry Jessica. I know it's more
[21:21] paperwork for you, but it is my home. Additionally, we
[21:26] have to consider the green spaces. So if the builder
[21:29] can admit that it's not minor, this is asking for
[21:32] a blanket change to save the paperwork. And I understand
[21:36] it's a lot of work. But it is not okay.
[21:38] To be signed off as minor. If you can specify
[21:42] the lot numbers, the changes to those lot numbers and
[21:46] not make it future forward because I don't think you
[21:49] can go back once you've given them off the leash.
[21:53] They're going to be off the leash. Jessica, it only
[21:59] affects the ones within the red line on the diagram,
[22:02] correct? The Applicant is proposing changes which are the red
[22:07] lines. Um, however, it is for the whole zone. And
[22:15] I hear the residents concern. However, there are already existing
[22:22] established permissions for 13 metre kites. They're permitted to put,
[22:32] they're already exist permissions to put townhouses where singles are
[22:36] and singles where townhouses are, um, it's just those slight
[22:41] iterations of, um, a metre or two metres that is
[22:46] in question. So, um, backing on to upper Canada Drive,
[22:52] um, they're already permissions for 13 metre heights. And three
[22:58] metre, um, exterior, uh, side air. So the permissions are
[23:03] already there in certain zones. Okay. Thank you. No, that
[23:11] does not clear it up. It already is passed on
[23:14] some. Of it. And this is all. We're really looking
[23:16] at. Is the red line. Because it's already passe. On
[23:20] the other stuff. It didn't come from a. So can
[23:22] I ask a question, Jessica? Are they able to change
[23:24] those, um, single unit homes. And obviously I'm asking for
[23:30] myself and for the people who are not here, that
[23:33] back directly onto it. Are those going to remain single
[23:36] unit homes. Those will remain single detached dwellings. However, there
[23:42] are permissions if they wanted to without coming for a
[23:45] minor variance. To change them into townhouses. And when they
[23:50] wouldn't need a minor, may I ask, sorry to cut
[23:52] you off. When did that happen? Uh, well, it didn't
[23:58] happen. It's not happening. They're, they're keeping them as singles.
[24:03] But the zone, the, the exception zone already permits townhouses.
[24:09] So they could go straight to the county and request
[24:11] a red line revision and put in towns. They wouldn't
[24:14] even have to come to, uh, the Committee of Adjustment.
[24:18] But they're not going to do that. We've worked with
[24:23] them and, um, public. And they're going to put single
[24:29] detached dwellings in that area. Only a few minor homes
[24:33] will be changed. And it is for grading purposes. I
[24:40] will leave this in the council's, the committee's hands. I
[24:44] want you to understand what it's like to live behind
[24:47] these developers. We've definitely worked with them. And I've had
[24:50] a different experience on a couple of occasions where they
[24:53] have been quite supportive when we had flooding across our
[24:56] entire backyard in our septic for several days. They did
[25:00] come and support that. So please forgive me if I
[25:03] appear to be a little over concerned. I don't think
[25:06] you can be over concerned given the situation that we
[25:08] are in in Ontario at this time. And I do
[25:11] not want to see something that is not reflective. That's
[25:16] the word. Of Aaron's charm. And I don't want to
[25:20] see less green space or less consideration for the people
[25:23] that should have the charm and the ability to have
[25:26] a wonderful community there. Thank you for putting up with
[25:28] all my emails, Justin as well. Anyways, um, I do
[25:32] think it could have been a better, uh, application being
[25:35] minor. If it is truly minor not being blanket, um,
[25:39] because you may know these things, Jessica, but I do
[25:41] not. And the people up and down my street do
[25:44] not. And we are very concerned. So thank you for
[25:47] listening to me this evening. Thank you very much. Is
[25:53] there anyone else. Seeing none, I will now invite questions.
[26:02] Um, that they have for the Applicant or the staff.
[26:05] And Marielle invite you back to the podium just to
[26:09] answer your questions from the committee. And I will turn
[26:11] it over to the committee. Bill, you got to help
[26:15] me out here. You got to have a question. Yes,
[26:18] hi Maria. Uh, I do have a few questions. Um,
[26:22] obviously it's just the townhouse lots and those singles that
[26:25] are on the red line revisions, um, I mean, yes,
[26:29] uh, the variances requested are specific to the, uh, the
[26:34] zone categories, I would assume, um, would you have any
[26:37] objection if we tied it, the approval. To the red
[26:42] line plan essentially. Like a simple condition, tying it to
[26:46] the red line plan that these variances are for those
[26:48] particular lots that are outlined on the red line plan.
[26:51] I mean, that basically would entail that the variances as
[26:55] approved cannot be as the neighbour suggested used elsewhere. And
[26:59] I know that there's 14 metre approvals throughout the set
[27:02] of vision height approvals. The setbacks and so forth. Um,
[27:07] just, I can't see a reason why we can't tie
[27:09] it to these specific lots. As opposed to the whole
[27:12] zone category. And maybe that's a question through Jessica and
[27:14] Justin. But, uh, it may satisfy the neighbours to a
[27:17] certain extent. Is that possible. Jessica. I would just caution
[27:27] in case that the Applicant had to come back and,
[27:30] um, make further minor adjustments. Um, and that's why the,
[27:37] um, exterior lots were included in here. Um, because they
[27:42] may need to move some of the singles to the
[27:46] outside of the street. Um, so we would be back
[27:50] at committee again, asking, uh, for relief. Uh, this way
[27:56] we do it once. Um. The revisions are just in
[28:02] that area. Uh, and it's just so that the developer
[28:05] can get going with these with the first phase. Not
[28:11] that it ultimately it's committee's decision. But Jessica, if we
[28:15] were to do it just on the red line, um,
[28:17] units affected within the red line. And they did have
[28:20] to come back to the committee. That would at least
[28:22] keep the neighbours inform, um, I believe they feel that
[28:27] they're not informed right now. Um, that that would make
[28:31] them be informed because they would have to come back
[28:35] and get approval. They know what's, what's being changed. Um,
[28:40] so do you see any problem with that? If we
[28:42] had, we had that. Uh, there would be no problem
[28:46] with that. All right. Thank you. Any. Other questions. Um,
[28:53] just one more question. Just, you know, this, we're dealing
[28:56] with the minor variances. I know the neighbours have brought
[28:58] up the grading and drainage. Isn't there a relatively large,
[29:01] uh, deposit as part of the planet television that's being
[29:04] put forth to the town that if there is issues,
[29:06] I mean, the town could threaten to take some of
[29:08] that money that's been part of the LC or bond
[29:12] and put it towards the town going out and repairing
[29:15] things. I mean, it's just a consideration. Yeah, that would
[29:19] come through there are securities held. With a town. The
[29:25] Applicant had to submit those. Um, and our engineer Ainley,
[29:30] uh, the, um, consulting engineer for the town is working
[29:34] with the Applicants engineer. However, if it does get to
[29:38] that point, there are securities that we can draw on.
[29:42] Okay. Perfect. Thank you.
[29:53] Yeah. I mean, simply put, I just think, uh, there
[29:56] should be a, uh, just the plan tied to it
[29:59] that the lots are specific to what is redlined. Like
[30:01] I don't know, honestly, don't think it's a, any, uh,
[30:04] issue pertaining to the developer, uh, they came in with
[30:07] a specific application. It's to do a specific grading issue.
[30:10] So if we tied it to a site plan or
[30:12] those specific areas or lots, um, simple enough, I just
[30:16] suggest the condition specifying that the variances are as approved
[30:21] are tied to the, uh, redline revisions that were submitted
[30:26] as part of the application. Is that okay, Justin? Three
[30:32] year, Mr. Chair. I'm just going to suggest some language
[30:34] here that I'll get feedback in real time for my
[30:36] senior planner on. It would be resolved that the town
[30:40] of Arian Committee Adjustment hereby approves, semi - variance application
[30:43] A07 - 26. Subject to the following condition that the
[30:48] relief granted shall be limited to the red line revisions
[30:52] to draft plan of subdivision file number 23t, 2102, as
[30:58] submitted with minor variance application A07 - 26. And that
[31:03] would, Jessica, can you provide feedback on that? Is that
[31:05] language sounding okay to you as a condition. Yeah. Could
[31:09] you just repeat it one more time, Justin? Sure. So
[31:12] the condition would be that the relief granted shall be
[31:15] limited to the red line revisions to draft plan of
[31:18] subdivision, file number 23t 21002 as submitted with minor variance
[31:25] application A07 - 26. Yes, that would be fine. Okay.
[31:33] So Mr. Chair, through you, that would still require a
[31:36] mover and seconder and reasons for the committee. But I
[31:39] will just put that forward. As a proposed condition if
[31:43] the committee were desirous of including that. Committee
[31:53] adjustment here might approve some minor variance application A07. That's
[31:58] 26. Sends the applicant means the planning activist for minor
[32:03] variants being. The requested variants that you're concerned. Hang on
[32:09] a second. Sorry about that. DD me to start back.
[32:12] Okay. So be it resolved that the town of your
[32:15] Committee of Adjustment hereby approves a minor variance application A07
[32:20] - 26. With the following conditions. That the relief granted
[32:27] shall be limited to the red line revisions to draft
[32:30] plan of subdivision file number 23t - 21002 as submitted
[32:35] with minor variance application A07 - 26. Thanks, Justin. Um,
[32:41] as the Application meets the planning Act test for minor
[32:46] variants being the requested variance, they're considered minor in nature.
[32:50] The variances are desirable for the appropriate development of or
[32:54] use of the land building or structure, the general intent
[32:57] and purpose of the zoning bylaws maintained and the general
[33:01] intent and purpose of the official plan is maintained. Do
[33:04] I have a mover and secondary for this motion. Yes,
[33:08] member Eltrood, I'll move it. Member Parkinson will second it.
[33:14] All those in favor. Carrie. And I will now adjourn
[33:23] the meeting at, um, 633 PM.