Good evening everyone. It's 601, so we'll begin. The meeting's being held tonight, our public meetings held under the planning act. Please note that this meeting will be live streamed on the city website, audio, video, and we'll be collected by the city of Kingston and the meeting recording will be archived on the city website for public consumption. I will take this opportunity to remind everyone in the room to please ensure that your cellular devices are turned off. Notice of collection, personal information collected as a result of the public meetings are collected under the authority of the Planning Act and will be used to assist in making a decision on this matter. Persons speaking at the meeting are requested to give their name for recording in the minutes. All names, opinions and comments may be collected and may form part of the minutes, which will be available to the public. To be notified of the decision you must either fill out the sign - in sheet at the back door, or you must email the file planner or committee clerk requesting notice of the decision. The first portion of Tani's meeting is to present planning applications in a public form as detailed in the Community Meaning Report. This report does not contain a staff recommendation and therefore no decision will be made this evening. Each application in the Community Meeting Report will be presented individually and following each presentation by the applicant. The meeting will be open to the public for comments and questions. The second portion of tonight's meeting is to consider public meeting reports. These reports do contain staff recommendations and the recommendation is typically to approve with conditions or to deny. After the planner's presentation, committee members will be asked questions of staff followed by members of the public following the question and answer period. This committee then makes a recommendation on the application to city council who has the final say on the application. Following Council's decision, notice will be circulating accordance with the Planning Act. Members of the public cannot appeal a decision. Only registered owner of land to which the amendment applies or prescribed person under the planning act has the ability to appeal a decision. Of the Council. For more information about appeal rights on or how to be added as a party to an appeal, please contact the assigned planner. I'll now call the meeting to order. The purpose of the Community meeting is to provide an applicant with an opportunity to present a potential development proposal in the early stages of the development process and to seek feedback from the public and members of Planning Committee. Anyone who attends a Community meeting may present an oral submission and or a written submission on the proposals being presented. The first application is for 5 - 7 Cataraqui Street. I invite the applicant to present the proposal. I'm sorry. Is there any sound. Speaking. Thank you Councillor Usterhoff. We're just checking the. Councillor Stroph. Can you hear me now? Yes, I can. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you and good evening everyone. My name is Yuko LeClaire. I'm a planner with Photen Planning InDesign. And I'm here this evening presenting applications for zoning by Law Amendment. An amendment to draft plan of subdivision conditions for the property at five to seven Catarawkway Street on behalf of Rose Cove Developments. The way this is going to sort of roll out, I'll provide a little bit of an overview on where this site is, what's in the surrounding area, what's there today, what's the current official plan and zoning on the property. I will recap previous planning approvals. There are only a few years old and I think that would be beneficial. Uh, and then we'll talk about the particulars of the application that's before committee and before the public this evening. So our site is shown on the slide up here. It's marked in yellow there. Uh, there's a sort of five minute walking distance radius, uh, shown around it. This is in the Inner Harbour neighbourhood of Kingston. So it's in North Kingstown. Uh, it's just east of the unopened Road allowance for Wellington Street. This is an area that's fairly mixed in use with a lot of Parkland. As you can see on the slide, the, within Walking Distance of four or five parks and open spaces, uh, there are some community facilities nearby with city offices, the housing offices on Montreal Street, the Boys and Girls Club as well. And we're just a little bit more than a five minute walk to the downtown and to artillery park. This site is also in proximity to, uh, and walk within walking distance of transit routes on Montreal Street. This slide here is showing a few different things. And I'm just going to take a moment to explain. Uh, we have a portion of the site outlined in blue. That's the development site I'll be referring to that as the subject site. That's where we're actually proposing to rezone, uh, this evening. The area outlined in red is the overall property. So you can see that there's a portion of the, of the property that's not proposed to be rezoned at all. And that'll be relevant when I, when I, when I capture the previous planning approvals. So the portion of the site, uh, that's proposed to be rezone. This subject site has an area of just under 6, 500 square metres. So it's a little over an acre and a half. Has about 44 metres of frontage on Ketaraqua Street. It's been used for various sort of fuel - based uses over the years. It was fuel storage. There was servicing there. Uh, it served as a warehouse as well. And it is still occupied with a few vacant Industrial buildings. And the vacant house on the property. You can see on this slide a little bit more clearly kind of what's in the immediate vicinity. So to the immediate west is the unopened road allowance of Wellington Street, west of that is the broom factory, uh, and the houses and sort of mechanic shop on to the west of that facing Rideau Street. To the north of the site is the portion of the property. That's subject to previous planning approvals. And then north of that is River Street. And of course, the Davis Tannery lands to the north of that. East of the site, um, facing on Orchard Street are some existing houses. There's a few single detached houses there. There's a small apartment building. And then east of that is, uh, MMart and Park along the south and then to the north of that is an existing Industrial building. Uh, then to the south across Cataraqui Street is the woollen mill parking lot east of the parking lot is the woollen mill itself. And then to the west is the national grocery building. This is an area of the city that has a very deep industrial history. And it's been transitioning towards more sensitive uses over time. We've seen that transition happening with the conversion of the woollen mill to office and commercial space with the national grocer building. More recently with the broom factory. Uh, and we're starting to see an increase in the residential redevelopment that's happening with, uh, previous approvals for an ongoing planning applications for a six - story apartment building on the sort of the south line of the woollen mill. This development proposal on these lands in the previous approvals as well as of course the Davis Tannery. Looking at the official plan policy framework for the site, it's fairly straightforward. It's designated residential, which allows a wide range of residential uses, everything from houses to apartment buildings. There are criteria in the official plan to allow, uh, that must be met, their locational criteria. That must be met when proposing Midnight Rives or High Rise buildings. So this site is the subject of an application for a mid - rise building. It must meet those criteria. In terms of the current zoning, uh, the zoning on the property is a legacy of the recent applications back in 2023. There is a urban residential type three zone that applies to the site. And then a site - specific exception overlay one, two, three. That applies certain setback requirements, additional parking standards. This approval, this rezoning was established as part of those applications and was seeking to permit that this development right here. So on the slider, this is the plan of subdivision and planet subdivision that was approved back in September of 2023, along with a rezoning. It was to allow a total of 76 townhouses, a few other sort of functional blocks. The roads within this subdivision were proposed to be condominium roads. So effectively private roads. Uh, the zoning I mentioned that it was UR3. At the time it was actually approved as a different zone at UR3B. And then that was amended through some housekeeping amendments in 2024. But basically the idea with this plan was to remediate and redevelop the site with townhouses with basements, uh, and basement units. Uh, the first phase of this plan development was on the northernmost portion of the site facing onto River Street. And then the second phase would have been the balance of the subdivision. So the 61 lots. In advancing, the technical applications for registration and to create the lot. So the final advancing, the final plan of subdivision process on these lands. One of the elements that was done was an advancement of the environmental studies, the soil effectively an examination of the soil conditions to pin down in greater detail. Where is the contamination? What's the extent of the contamination? How can the contamination be remediated. Um, and as a result of that exercise, uh, what our environmental engineer found was that the level of contamination on a portion of the site was greater than what was expected and what was sort of, they had been led to understand from previous investigations. So why they do these more detailed investigations is to find out, you know, is that preliminary information accurate or not? And what they found was that the sort of a broader area and it was sort of a greater volume of soil that was ultimately contaminated. That greater degree of contamination was in the phase two land. So it was in the southern portion of the site. I'm going to see if I can get the laser. I forgot the laser. Effectively the subject site that is the subject of the applications this evening, uh, we found that there was greater contamination there. And as a result of that sort of two related consequences came about. One is that it was no longer, we determined through these exercises that these investigations that it would not be economically viable to remediate the soil to a degree that would allow the townhouses to proceed. Uh, and specifically what that means is that what I mean by that is that we couldn't clean the soil completely. We couldn't get a clean bill of health on the soil conditions to get a record of site condition to allow for townhouses to be built with occupied basements. But through the investigations, what we came up with as an alternative option is, um, a risk assessment. And in order to advance over risk assessment, uh, and in order to receive approval for a risk assessment and ultimately a record of psychonition on that basis, the soil must be remediated to a certain degree that would significantly reduces the risk to human health. And that a significant degree of remediation is still required in order to arrive at that level, uh, but it wouldn't be a clean, clean bill of health effectively. And we found that that would be feasible, provided that certain soil volumes were removed, et cetera. But in order to receive a riskist approval for a risk assessment, one of the standards sort of a approaches and solutions is the installation of a layer sort of beneath the building that's ventilated. So we're separating the occupy portions of the building from the soil. And we couldn't do that with Occupied Basements in Townhouses, of course. Um, in order to receive approval from the province for this type of layer, you also, the monitoring requirements, there's significant obligations that just make it not feasible for 33 townhouses to have this mechanism installed. So an apartment building is the sort of the, with underground parking is the more typical solution that we see, uh, that allows this type of. Remediation mitigation solution to occur. Uh, so that led us down the path of an apartment building, what scale of apartment building would be appropriate with this neighbourhood? What is the apartment building need to look and feel like? What do we need to do to make this apartment building fit? And effectively how many units do we need in this apartment building for it to be economically viable? So strike trying to strike this balance is the exercise that sort of, um, I took the better part of a year. So that brings us to the Intent of the Applications that are before committee in the public. So we are proposing a six story building, uh, the topmost level. So above the sixth floor, we'll have, uh, penthouse, uh, space with an indoor amenity space and access to some outdoor rooftop space. I mentioned 141 residential units. We're proposing 104 parking spaces, including some surface parking and some underground parking. We're proposing over 2, 000 square metres of amenity space collectively across the site that's in a mix of balconies, indoor amenity, rooftop amenities, some outdoor amenity. That works out to a little bit more than half an acre. Uh, we have some substantial setbacks that are incorporated into the site design as well. So recognising that there are existing homes along Orchard Street. We wanted to maximize the separation from those homes to mitigate against any potential shadow impacts, privacy, overlook, et cetera. So we push the building as far west as we could, uh, which gives us a little bit more than a 20 metre set back from those homes at the narrowest point on orchard street and the property lines there. Uh, we also didn't want to incur additional shadow impacts in privacy concerns, et cetera on the proposed subdivision lots to the north. So we have a 25 metre setback from the northern lot line. So the building is situated sort of in that southwest portion of the site to the extent possible. We also wanted the building to sort of fit in from a, with the character of the area. And this was a, this was a. Fun exercise in some ways. It was very interesting to sort of work. We collaborated very closely with the architect, the Heritage Consultant, uh, urban designers to arrive at a building that fit with the area and reflects the character of the area. So that's not easy to do in a space where we don't have existing buildings of this size. We have the woollen mill, which sort of gets there. It's three stories, but it feels like more like five. But it's, it's, it's, it's a bit of an exercise and a challenge in urban design. And it was a very important objective because we have a fairly robust framework requiring that we fit in with the character of the neighbourhood. So just showing some images here of some element of what the building sort of has looked, is designed to look and feel like, um, we, uh, there's sort of a pinch point towards that northern portion of the northern portion of the building. We've used that to, sort of an articulation where the building sort of steps in a little bit there, uh, and we've used that as an opportunity to change the materiality of the building so that the idea is effectively to try and make it look and feel like two buildings. Uh, that's what we were going for and hopefully achieve that with this design. We worked, the architect worked very closely with the Heritage Consultant in particular who was themselves has sort of an architectural background to understand what are the elements of this neighbourhood that we need to incorporate in the design of this building. We didn't want to mimic or try and copy the Industrial character of the surrounding heritage features, but we wanted to have it feel like it was, this was something that fits with this neighbourhood. So the heritage consultant explore the area and sort of determine what are the elements, what are the architectural elements? What are the heritage elements that have significance? Uh, and that we should be striving to reflect in the design of the building. And that's what's led to this building design. So this sort of red brick style with the punched windows, the fenestration, the windows are sort of designed to look and feel like what we see in this neighbourhood, uh, on the Industrial Buildings in particular. Um, the, the building itself is fairly simple. Some of the earlier versions of the building were a little bit more sort of fancier elements. The cornicism, so on, were a little bit more designed. And the heritage consultant suggested we should simplify that, make it feel more like a practical type of industrial building that's been converted. And that's, that's what you can see on this slide. We also, you know, we wanted to try and provide as much landscaping as possible along Cataraqua Street. The grading on the site sort of forces us to have a bit of a separation there and stairs coming down from the South entrance of the building. So we wanted to have this terrorist landscaping space there. And the rooftop amenity, the rooftop space. So the fifth and sixth floors are stepped back progressively to reduce their scale in terms of the massing of the building, but also to provide a little bit of separation from, um, uh, sort rather an opportunity for amenity space. So there's some rooftop terraces there, uh, for some of the units. Um, but also to try and maintain that scale. So that sort of four story - ish scale that has effectively present in the woole. The woollen mill goes up to three floors, but the floors are so high that it functions more like I said, like a four or five story building. The national grocery building across the street is three stories. Um, but they're tall industrial floors. So the functionally the floors themselves are taller. Just showing some renderings. These are just more architectural type renderings, but really showing those particular elements that I've been discussing in some detail here, but just that sort of, to the, the image on the bottom is sort of a view from the east elevation. So to the left is sort of the portion of the building that's closer to Cataraqui Street to the north is the portion that's further north. And you can see that sort of entrance, having that sort of breakup between the two elements of the building and that glazed portion, uh, we really tried to make that entrance a little bit more prominent and a little bit more intuitive so that when you sort of enter the site, you sort of drawn towards that entrance. You can find it without really having to look for it. I won't spend too much time on the floor plans, but certainly they're available here and we can go through them, but you can see we have some underground parking proposed, which is where the bulk of a bike parking would be contained as well as, um, some storage. The ground floor would have units in this building with a sort of a small amenity space and a very small lobby. The second through the fourth floors are fairly typical. Uh, for the most part, balconies and the building are insets so that they don't project out on these lower floors except for that portion that's a little bit more modern in that, in that central portion. Um, and then we move into the fifth floor where we have that sort of terracing because there's a step back for that floor. There's opportunities for a lot of balcony, a lot of outdoor space for the residents of those units. And then the sixth floor above that steps back a little bit. Um, and we needed to have projecting balconies sort of all along that building, uh, to the north and south, the balconies sort of take advantage of the step back that's provided in those locations, but they put there's a little bit of projecting balcony sticking out a little bit, uh, further towards the south and north as well. And of course the rooftop, you can see that on the bottom. That's just showing the combination of amenity space and indoor and outdoor space. So there were a number of technical studies completed and supported these applications, uh, talked a bit about heritage. Obviously there was some noise study. There was a traffic study. We can speak about that. There's been certainly some questions from the public. I won't get into the details of that study, but I'll do my best to answer any questions that come out of that. Um, uh, as well as any other studies, of course. So what we're proposing in order to facilitate this story building is a zoning by law amendment. We're proposing to change the zoning on the site to an urban multi - unit residential zone. Multi - residential. The URM eight zone, which is a zone that was established for the Central Kingston area. And it's sort of facilitates this four - story street wall with a maximum of six - story height. So it has a lot of the performance standards that we're looking for for a building of this scale. Uh, we're also proposing to apply a site - specific exception to the site, recognising a few performance standards that we can't quite meet with the configuration as proposed. So we need a little bit more space. There's a requirement that short - term bike parking be within 15 metres of the main entrance. We need 20 metres to make it quite work because of the, just because of, uh, the driveway and the parking that we have near the entrance. We're proposing a particular bike rack system. There's Zoning by Law permits vertical bike spaces. So bikes that are sort of put up against the wall. We have a particular racking system that we're proposing. It doesn't quite meet the dimensions of the zoning bylaws. So we're proposing to amend those dimensions to facilitate that bike parking. Uh, we're asking to reduce the communal amenity space for that ground floor communal, uh, that ground floor amenity space. And then where I mentioned those balconies on the sixth floor were proposing some provisions to allow that. No changes. And I want to sort of emphasize this, but the changes at all proposed to the northern portion of the site. So the previous planning approvals on these lens proposed 76 townhouses. We're still proposing 43 townhouses on the northern portion of the site. It's the southern 33 townhouses that are no longer being proposed and that were proposing this building on instead. Uh, we also have to amend the draft plan of subdivision conditions to establish appropriate conditions for this change in built form on the southern portion of the site. So this plan here shows you the updated draft plan. It shows those townhouses shows the new block that we're proposing along the south. So we were still proposing 43 townhouse lots condominium road and it's called a one foot reserve as well as an apartment block on this southern site. So in summary, this development will facilitate the remediation of a brownfield site. It's in proximity to transit schools, parks. It's in an appropriate location for density and intensification of the scale. It's been designed to fit with the character and the defining elements of the neighbourhood. It has matters. It has regard for matters of provincial interest and the planning act. It's consistent with the PPS. And it conforms to the official plan, uh, it is our opinion that this represents good land use planning, but certainly there's always opportunities to, um, refine these types of designs. And so over here. So I'm happy to take any questions, uh, respond to any questions from the public and from committee. And I thank you. Thank you very much. So we'll turn to the members of the public. Is there any members of the public in the room who wish to speak to five - seven Cataraqui Street. Somebody on that side. Nobody here. You wish to speak yet so you can come to one of these mics back here. So yeah, so you just state your name and then you have five minutes. All right. Hi. Um, I'm Troy. I live at six Orchard Street. One of the questions I have, I guess is have you guys done like a damage assessment or anything for excavating the area? What it might do. A lot of century homes on Orchard Street. And, uh, just wondering if there might be any repercussions to all that. And if you hit bedrock, if there's need for blasting or, uh, what, uh, wipey entailed. That's all, actually. All right. Thank you. Uh, anyone else in the room wish to speak. Is there anyone online. If the one online who wishes to speak to this file, which is five - seven cataraqui street, please raise your virtual hand in Zoom. I'll call one more time. If you wish to speak to this file, please raise your hand in Zoom. Okay. Seeing as none, I'll turn the applicant to answer the questions. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair. So I picked up two questions there. Just has there a damage assessment been done to the area given the number of old homes. No, not per se. If there were blasting to be done, there are requirements under sort of the relevant regulations for pre blasting inspections. Um, at this point in time, I'm not able to answer on the methods of construction that are being anticipated for, um, for the site. I'm anticipating that with the soil depth and the degree to which we're really trying to optimize the soil removal so that we're not removing more soil than we need, um, to achieve the degree of, of, uh, remediation that's necessary. Um, I'm not anticipating that we'll be going any deeper than we absolutely have to, which means we're unlikely to get down into the bedrock. The bedrock, this is one of the few areas in Kingston in my experience that has bedrock. That's quite deep. It's more than 10 metres deep. Uh, so it's, it's unlikely that there would, that we would arrive to a point where there's any type of blasting required. So I can't say definitively, but I think I can just say that it's unlikely. But if there were any blasting, there are obligations and requirements for that. Just the construction process can be very disruptive as well. And there are bylaws in place regulating how that can happen and how that can proceed when it can proceed. Uh, there's also through the Sipeline Control process. There are also, I think mechanisms and maybe staff can speak a little bit more to this. But mechanism sort of regulating and dictating some parameters. One of the items that's required as part of a site plan control application, uh, which would be a future step in this process is a construction management plan sort of laying out. How would we construct this site? How would, you know, where are the lay down areas, you know, are we providing sufficient buffering from neighbouring properties? How are we managing and mitigating all of that? So. All right. Thank you. Did staff out of anything to add. To those. No. All right. I think he covered it pretty good. Okay. So now we'll move to the committee. Is anybody on a committee have any questions. Councillor Shaves. Thank you. Well, you've been your a few times. So you probably know some of these questions are coming at your way. Um, so will there be EV parking available for residents of this apartment building. Through Mr. Chair. We're not currently proposing EV parking. Uh, the Zoning by Law has a mechanism that allows us to go above the maximum number of parking. We provide EV spaces. We are not proposing to go above. We're sort of meeting the Zoning requirement. Um, that doesn't mean that there won't be further explorations for EV parking in the future. So at this point in time, this project is intended to advance with significant support from the city in terms of the Brownfield CIP funding. Uh, the applicant should this rezoning be approved and so forth. And should we, uh, be in a position to move forward, uh, we'll be looking at, uh, opportunities for potentially additional support through say greenfield, the greenfield CIP, uh, or the green standards CIP, for example, which may rely on additional, uh, electric vehicle or other sustainability measures that need to be incorporated in the building. So we're not far enough in the process. We've spent a lot of time designing the building from a sort of an exterior materiality, sort of the look and feel the building, but the mechanics of the billing itself, we haven't gotten into that level of design yet. So, um, that will come later and we'll look for opportunities to, um, make it as sustainable as necessary in order to maybe explore, uh, or to be eligible for funding under that program. At that time. Okay. That's why I bring these issues up now. And so later down the road. So you guys are already thinking about it. Oh, you're already spoke about the green standard committee improvement plan. So I want to ask that one. Um. How close net zero will the building be? The building code. Even though I do believe you touched on a little bit. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, I would defer to the same answer. Uh, yes, I should say. In that we, we don't know yet, but certainly the funding of the green standard CIP, the sort of the categories in the amount of funding that you can receive improve the closer to net zero or sort of should you reach net zero. So those, that will be taken into consideration and explored at that stage in the process, but we're just, we're not quite there yet. Concerning the location, the soil, um. There, not anybody's asking, but a community garden. Uh, probably wouldn't be wise for them to have one. Uh, but regard to the landscaping plan, uh, will you include biodiversity and polar friendly plants and shrubs. Three, Mr. Chair, we're not at a stage where we know the answer to that question, but certainly that we are looking for significant amount of landscaping, both along the West portion of the building and the sort of the South Facade of the building where on the west, we're sort of interfacing with the Wellington Street on open road allowance, uh, which may at some point in time, uh, include a sort of public pathways or something like that. Uh, and then to the south, we have sort of a grade change in the building. And we want to landscape that significantly. The idea of those landscaped areas is that they would require ideally minimal maintenance, uh, which is generally well suited to sort of biodiversity, uh, sort of pollinator friendly spaces because we're looking for sort of low maintenance spaces that sort of look out to themselves to the extent that's vegetation can. Thank you. We also need to think about our pollinating friends too. Um, cause without them, we won't be here. Uh, last question. Um, how will snow storage be handled. Three of Mr. Chair, that we expect that to be looked at a little bit more closely at site plank control. At this point in the process, my expectation is that, uh, snow would likely be trucked off site, uh, that's sort of the more common measure that we see on these, these sites where we, we don't have a lot of room to spare for snow storage. Uh, without interfering with other functions of the sites. Thank you. All right Councillor Ristoro. Yeah. Good evening. Give me Mr. Chair. And thanks. Uh, yeah. Thanks for the presentation. I just, I'm just a bit confused as to, I think I know the area quite well, but the Cataraqui Street and Orchard Street have been on that one too often. Are you showing the Wellington Street extension being R The Access Route or is the next street Rita Street. Far? It doesn't always traffic flowing there. Certainly. Uh, and through Mr. Chair. The road allowance, the unopened portion of Wellington Street that was at one point planned for extension, but is no longer, uh, is immediately to the west of the site. So that's the Western boundary of the property. We're not proposing to use that in any way. Uh, our access to the site is proposed to be from Cataraqua Street. And it, so which is to the south, um, and the site due to its relationship with the 43 townhouses from the first phase, um, may also have the ability to access orchard Street through, um, that condominium, um, road that's proposed in the townhouse development. Now that would give it access to orchard Street as part of the overall townhouse plan that was developed proposed previously. The owner is required to open River Street. So River Street, Torrito Street currently for a portion of that is an unopened road allowance. So it can't be used for access. The owner will have to upgrade that road and sort of complete, uh, the connection there and open up the street so that vehicles will be able to access, uh, REDO Street either from river to the north or from Cataracui Street to the cell. So the Division of the traffic coming through. I think I got most of that, but I guess wellington Street is not. I knew the addition of what Kind Street wasn't considered, but I thought it might be kind of appropriate for up to that point, but it's not. So I understand that. So thanks for that. I wanted to know the units look incredibly small. Is that this again? I saw the drawings. I know they're incomplete. They didn't really show it. Are there one and two and three bedroom or are they all they looked slow. Three of Mr. Chair. We have one, two, and three bedroom units, uh, proposed. The one bedroom sort of range from in that sort of high 500s to low 600, mid 600 square feet. The two bedrooms are in the, some of the smaller ones are, looks like they're around 7, 750 square feet. And the larger ones are sort of, uh, over 900 square feet. And the three bedroom units are over a thousand. Okay. So you don't have the quantity, I guess. Uh, how many three bedroom you might have there. Through you, Mr. Chair. Looks like we have about eight, three bedrooms. Although I can certainly confirm that and provide written response. That's a good number. Give us an idea either. And I'm pleased with that. So, um, it looks reasonable. This development. I don't see, we ask that Mr. Shaves asked a lot of questions. So good. Um, thank you for the Mr. Chair. Okay Councilloc. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, some questions through you. Um, my questions are sort of site plan questions. I just wondered, um, where would garbage, where would the garbage pick up be. Through Mr. Chair. We are perhaps I could ask The Clerk if we could bring up the site plan, please. On slide seven. Certainly. Thank you. Just so I'm not asking everyone here to imagine. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair. Um, so to the north, right to the north of the building, we have two loading spaces proposed. Uh, and those loading spaces just immediately to the west of those is where we're proposing to have our outdoor storage, uh, for, um, waste collection. So it would generally be collected inside the building and then brought out to this space where it would be picked up on a regular basis. Okay. Thank you. And then you have like those townhomes to the north, right? Of this building. And I heard you say like, they can use cataraqui street, uh, to access those townhomes. So I just wonder, um, Ricky, think he'll put a couple of speed humps along the frontage of, um, the apartments, like on, on your own property, but cause you got that long street away. I just have a concern that there could be some speeding cars from the town homes, you know, in a big hurry to get out to Cataraqui Street and someone's trying to back out or, you know, go across. It could be a dangerous situation. So, um, I don't know. I think you're going to need some traffic coming in there. And three, Mr. Chair, we, we haven't gotten to that level of design, but we are very conscious of that. We have some short - term bike parking on the other side of the driveway. We have some amenity space on the other side of the driveway. So making sure that that remains a safe place for residents of the building is absolutely our obligation to satisfy. Um, so we're not quite sure yet. We've been, we've been discussing options about how to manage traffic control. The townhouses to the north. You know, for example, perhaps those would not have access to cataract way street. We'd be limited to orchard and river Street. Maybe, maybe not. So we're, we're exploring these options and how to manage that, uh, most appropriately at this point in time. Um, the building would likely still have access through the townhouses to get to the north just because there's a lot more traffic generated from the building itself. Um, so how do we manage that in a way that's fair and that's safe. We don't, I wish I had the answer to that, but it's certainly an item that we'll be looking at and exploring, uh, in the future. Great. Thanks. Um, through you, Mr. Chair, another question I have with the woman mill and the smoke stack with this building and six stories. Will it still be smaller? Like a lower than the woollen mouth smokestack. Through Mr. Chair. I would have to get back to you on that question. I do not know offhand the height of the Will and Will Smokes stack. So we can, we can certainly investigate that and provide a response. Yeah. Three of you, Mr. Chair, since you were talking about the character of the neighbourhood, um, I used to work at the Willian Mill for like 10 years. And I like the looks of this apartment. I think it does blend in well with, um, the look of the woman mill, but I wonder what it looks like a pigate, the woollen mill. And in particular, the smokestack and just my own curiosity. Um, my last question is, um, looking at the diagram we have from The architect on the very last page of our report, which is like page 36, I think. And it does, no, page 37, I think it does show some trees. Are like, do you really have room for some trees. On the site. Through you, Mr. Chair, the trees shown on the architectural rendering are conceptual, uh, so there are limited locations where trees can be planted on the site. There are, there is some room in a few different locations where trees could be planted, uh, particularly to the north at the rear of the building and maybe in this sort of the northeast corner of the site. There's a little bit more space there. Um, there may be some smaller types of trees that could be planted in the front portion of the site. Subject two, um, two encroaching into the city's Road Allen. So those would have to be explored a little bit with staff to see if we can make that work. We can make that happen. Um, but we are looking for a lot of landscaping along the front of the building. So if we can accommodate some type of tree there, that there would certainly be an interest in doing so. Okay. Great. Yeah. That would be much appreciated because, uh, Emma Martin Park, right? We have the big storage tank in there. So we can't have trees. Like in that section of The Park, only in the perimeter. And this, um, this entire, like not just this apartment, but your entire development would take out trees there. And then of course the Davis Tannery lands. Those will completely be devoid of trees. So we're going to see a huge tree loss in this small area. So if you could plant some trees, make it work, have bur oak, you know, some that are tall and skinny, you know, um, whatever can work. And on that area, we'll need some trees. Thank you. Anyone else we should speak. Yeah. Council receiving. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have some, uh, feedback more so than questions. Um, so first thing I, as Councillor Sannick just mentioned, I really appreciate the Industrial Look of the Building. You can tell a lot of thought went into it. Um, I was at the broom factory a couple weeks ago with my daughter and walking by this particular lot, we both looked at it. And I said, I wonder what's going there. Um, so I'm excited to go home and tell her about this. Um, the, I really like the four stories and then the step back for the other two stories. I think that's really considerate of the character and functionally nice. Um, I think that'll blend in better with the townhouses as well. And I'm sure probably it was a surprise to residents to see that this is switching from townhouses to a six story building. I can understand that would be quite, um, alarming. One of the things I was hoping you might consider is along that West part of the building by the Wellington Street extension. Um, I don't know if hedgerows have been considered, but that's something that's coming out a little bit more in urban landscaping. Um, and I wanted to encourage you and your team to have a look, um, because to the, to the point that Councillor Sanek made, it might be kind of difficult to get some trees to survive. But that could be a really interesting way to add some, some bird and other critter kind of habitat that probably would not be problematic for the building itself. Um, so I just wanted to plant that seat as well. Um, yeah, thank you. Okay. I think everyone has spoken. So it was brought to my attention. There's been some difficulties with hand raising. Oh. Sorry. You wanted to say something? Thanks and through your chair. I just had a minor point of clarification to Councillor Osandek's question. The woole mill smokestack is 30 metres high. I just know that from all the development that's happened in the area and knowing that tower very intimately. So it is 30 metres high. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So like I was saying before there was some technical difficulties with raising hands when we had the public portion. So maybe if we could test it, um, the person who tried to raise their hand if they could try again. Is anybody else who's online if you could just raise your hand to see if we can see them? That would be quite helpful. Um, the raise hand function is at the bottom of your zoom screen. So I'll just test one more time if anybody in the public gallery online could please use the raise hand function just so that we can see it's working. Okay. Thank you very much. Um, so you can lower your hand. I know it was Miss McCluskey, I believe who is trying to speak. So I will allow you. I'll unmute you now. Um. Hi. Yeah. We don't normally do this. But since you were having difficulties. If you had any questions, you can unmute. And then you can ask them. Good evening. Can you hear me? Yeah. So yeah, so you have five minutes and you just got to state your name. Good evening. My name is Jennifer McCluski and I reside at eight orchard Street. A six story 141 union apartment building with a pentose level in the historic district would risk character inherited to view sheds and does not fit the unique waterfront heritage of this neighbourhood. The surrounding community is comprised of single to three - story homes and condos, the Wollamilla, as mentioned earlier, the National Grocers, which are three - story historic buildings on Cataraqui Street. The broom factory on Reader Street and a new four - story homestead building on Reed and Reglan, as well as a Community of Townhouses at 257 Rideau Street built on the ground to the former Eglin Coal and Fuel Company. The Inner Harbour Community has experienced lots of growth over the years, all while maintaining its architectural character and historical presence. The concern is a visual transition. Apartment construction will bring to the community and the impacts that will bring to the Inner Harbour Skyline. The Inner Harbour is essential to Kingston's identity, valued for its beauty and deep historical significance. And the protection of this landscape is vital. New housing developments are underway in the Inner Harbour, creating more housing options. The future development of four six - story buildings on River Street with over 1, 600 residential units on the former Davis Tannery site. And the new development of a Six - Story building with 84 residential units on Cataraqui Street will create a mixed neighbourhood offering different types of dwelling opportunities. For the Mar City Council has approved to build clusters of high - rise apartment buildings to attract as many as 13, 000 residents to the area known as the North Kingston. Excuse me, news Zoning measures were approved to permit a similar high - rise cluster around the intersection of Montreal Railway and Rital Street. These residential developments for the goals and objectives of the city to increase housing opportunities and options to the urban core identified in these intensification areas. Many of these developments will be apartments limiting the opportunity for home ownership at 5'7 Cataractway Street, the developer has an opportunity to create this possibility with the original approved construction of the townhouses, providing families a sense of ownership and the sense of community. The Committee of the Heritage Management Plan heard from public input the importance of built heritage and protection of historic neighbourhoods to build on what residents value most and afford looking approach to suitable preservation. The committee emphasized maintaining scale and architectural integrity of the community protecting heritage of view shed, particularly along the waterfront. The report highlighted the need to protect and activate build heritage and opposed large builds and historic areas feeling loss of character. Outlined in the North Kingstown Policy Report. The Plan Highlights Large Vacant Underutilized Properties along REDO Railway Montreal Encounter Streets with significant development, excuse me, redevelopment potential. Through port states, the construction apartments and high - rise buildings will provide the opportunity for potential growth of residential units in an area intended for change. And keeping with the Heritage Landscape of this neighbourhood, the city has outlined a build of low rise, maximum four - story buildings along Reader Street between River and Montreal Street. This build is arranged to concentrate at heights that are within notes of a contained height separation from residential homes. While Midrides maximum six story and high - rise apartments are proposed around the intersection of Montreal, Rita, Railway Encounter Street with lower density residential neighbourhoods. My question is, can the same model outline in the North King's Tam report be applied to five seven Cataraqui Street with a height to the new proposals built to concentrate heights within this community? For instance, a low rise for story building. Moving forward consideration of building height and density will support the sensitive design while still addressing housing needs. The building of harmonized low - rise or more townhomes on five slash seven Cataraqui Street will contribute to a mixed use family - oriented neighbourhood respecting existing patterns and advancing the city's long - term planning goals. The construction of townhouses by the developer in an area that has already been approved by the city council for future mid - rise and high - rise buildings will balance density and contribute to the ongoing revitalization of the Inner Harbour without taking away from heritage attributes and view lines. The original plan to develop 43 residential townhouses on the south side of 5'7 Cataraqui Street allows for the creation of a homogeneous neighbourhood on the subject property. It will create an element of inclusivity and beautification despite not having basement suites, replacing a large portion of the subdivision, which was previously approved for residential lots with a six - story plus apartment building. It's not suitable for this location. The original design promotes efficient development skate. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Do you want to respond. Or if anybody wanted to. Three, Mr. Char, I wasn't sure if, uh, the chair wanted to receive other questions if there are any, or if I should answer these questions first. I guess, um, is anybody wish to speak? Raise your hand in Zoom. Um, I think that was the only one that was unable to raise their hand. Yeah, singing is done. Yeah, go ahead. Certainly, thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that. Um. I didn't hear a whole lot of questions, but there was a few comments in me that I think would benefit from some degree of response, uh, for clarity. Um, the question of a six story building risking the view sheds in the neighbourhood. That was one of the elements I was looked at very closely through the Heritage Study. The building itself, I didn't, I didn't discuss this particular element in my presentation, but the building is set back just a little bit from the broom factory so that when sort of looking down the street from Rito and Cataraqui Street, this building wouldn't dominate the streetscape. It wouldn't sort of encroach into the street scape. That prominence remains with, uh, the broom factory and with the National Grocery Building closer to REDO Street. Uh, that was an intentional element in the design of the building. In terms of the sort of ownership opportunities, uh, I've spoken a little bit earlier about why townhouses with basements are not an option for this site, given the degree of contamination and the mitigation solutions. Uh, mitigation options. Um, the opportunity for, um, ownership exists. So as an apartment building, this could be developed as condominium with ownership options. That's not what's being proposed by the applicant. The applicant does intend to, uh, retain ownership and rent the building out long - term. There was a question, pose, maybe, maybe more for staff, but maybe I'll sort of wade into that. Just question about, could the model establish through North Kingstown for sort of a four story character along this portion of Rito Street with sort of greater height at nodes be applied. This sites was sort of explicitly left out of a lot of the North Kingston Intensification goals so that it doesn't, those policies don't specifically apply to this site. That was an intentional component. Um, through the North Kingstown process, um, allowing the site to be reviewed against the broader policy framework of the official plan as it stands today. So the sort of the locational criteria for Mid - Rise buildings. Uh, so how as it meets those criteria, uh, we, we, we have sort of come to this point where we're, we're continuing to propose a building of that scale here. And through Mr. Chair, I hope I didn't miss anything. But if I did, uh, I can certainly come back to it. No, I think that was all that I had here. Um, anybody else? No. All right. So that concludes our Community meeting at 653 PM. So now I'll call the regular meeting to order at 653 PM. Um, so I need a mover in a second order to approve the agenda with the addendum move by Councillo Sanic, seconded by Councillor Shaves. All those in favor. And that passes. Okay. So we have no minutes to confirm tonight. So are there any discussures of pecuniar interest. It's none. There are no delegations. There are no briefings. So moving on to our business item this evening is the first item for recommendation report for 1152 - 1158 Montreal Street. And I invite staff to present. Thank you and through you, Mr. Chair. Hello to the members of the public and members of the committee. My name is Nicky Van Vut and I'm an intermediate planner with Planning Services. I'll be presenting a supportive recommendation with respect to the application for 1152, 1154 and 1158 Montreal Street, known as the subject lands for the purpose of the presentation. City filed D14016 2024 submitted by photon planning and design on behalf of the property owner, public notice for this application has been given. As per the requirements of the planning act in a community meeting was held up planning committee on February 2025. The purpose of this application is to permit the construction of a one - four story plus basement level apartment building containing 48 - purpose - built rental units. The effect of the application is that it will rezone the property from the existing UR6 and your urban multi - residential five zone to an urban malture residential zone 10 to permit the proposed apartment building use. It will also introduce an exception overlay to modify specific development standards pertaining to maximum height front and interior setback for report, minimum amenity area. Minum number of parking spaces. Minimum drive aisle width and minimum number of short - term and long - term bike spaces. The subject site is located on the west side of Montreal Street near the Macaulay Street in Montreal Street intersection and in the eastern limits, the Rito Heights neighbourhood. The site is currently developed with three existing low - rise houses, including a range of accessory structures, including a shed, garage, and pool with their own individual driveway accesses onto Montreal Street. The subject site is designated residential in the official plan and split - zoned urban malture residential zone five for property at 1152 Montreal Street and urban residential zone six at 1154 and 1158 Montreal Street. Shown here is a site plan of the existing conditions and proposed removal plan. The proposal involves again the demolition of the three existing houses and their associate accessory structures, as well as reinstating the driveways to accommodate the proposed redevelopment of the subject lands. Shown here is a site plan of the proposed redevelopment and the plan includes the construction of one four - story apartment building containing 48 dwelling units and 78 bedrooms within a range of dwelling unit types from studios to three bedroom units. Providing vehicular and pedestrian access via six metre wide driveway from Montreal Street leading to surface parking at the rear. A total of 32 parking spaces with 27 spaces proposed with two accessible at this time. Three visitor spaces, one car share and one short - term delivery space, given the amount of units proposed, no loading spaces required for the purpose of the application. The proposal provides an excess of bike parking, permitting a total of 48 long - term and eight short - term encouraging reduced reliance on automobiles and increased metal shift to active forms of transportation. In addition, amenity areas, including rooftop amenity, as well as aggrade outdoor amenity are proposed, totaling 822 square metres of amenity for the 48 dwelling units. Shown here are the elevation drawings of the proposed four - story building. And in addition, here are different renderings, illustrating the same building from different elevations. In terms of areas of interest heard through the community and members at the Planning Committee meeting, this included concerns around compatibility, traffic, and noise with regards to compatibility, a planning justification report was submitted as part of a complete application for the proposal in order to address the four - story built form and policy and zoning standards pertaining to a mid - rise apartment building. In addition, careful consideration has been given to the sighting, massing and screening and height to ensure that land use compatibility printals are appropriately considered. In addition to considering the concern around increased traffic, a traffic impact study was performed and prepared and submitted as part of a complete application. The TIS has been reviewed to the satisfaction of city staff for the purpose of the Zoning application with no concerns raised relating to the reduced parking space request, drive aisle widths, or traffic throughout the study area. And lastly, in relation to noise concerns, a noise feasibility study was similarly completed and submitted as part of a complete application. Identifying that the submitted recommendations are appropriate by our city development engineering staff, as well as Canadian National Railway with no concerns relating to feasibility proposed through their recommendations. As noted before, a rezoning application includes the rezoning of the subject lands from the existing split zoning to an urban maltar residential zone 10. And this includes developing an exception overlay to address site - specific performance standards relating to the prose redevelopment. I would summarize that the exception overly is intended to reflect the development that's been demonstrated to be compatible and functional through reports and plants submitted through the technical review process. Inserted modifications are intended to secure the minimum relating to car share and short - term delivery, as well as access provided for the long - term and short - term bike spaces. So given the above, it is my professional planning opinion that the proposed zoning by law amendment is consistent with the provincial planning statement conforms to the official plan applies appropriate site - specific provisions and represents good land use planning. As such staff are recommending approval of the proposed zoning bylaw amendment. Subject to successful approval of the Zoning Amendment, the proposal would proceed to site plan control as well as municipal servicing partial hold - lift removal prior to proceeding to building permit stage. And this concludes my presentation. I'm happy to assess with any questions or comments in the next comment period. Thank you very much. And any questions from the committee, Councillor Shaves. Thank you. I think overall, like the project. I do have a concern with the late of the building, and it's due to the face, it's facing the Montreal Street and that the main entrance is on that side. However, parking is in the rare, including accessible spaces. So anyone who needs to use an accessible space needs to go all the way around the side of the building to the middle of the front. As someone who was able, especially during the wintertime, I'd be able to manage through some snow to get to my vehicle or enter the building. However, someone who has mobily issues, especially those who use a wheelchair, would have difficulty. So in regards to snow clearing, I'm just wondering how. Type of priority that would have. Like, I don't want to see any delay, especially for those who have accessibility issues. Uh, thank you for the question and through you, Mr. Chair. That's certainly something we could explore at site playing control. Uh, this is something that was brought to our attention through comments that were made to staff. Um, it's my understanding that earlier in the project, the ramp was prioritized to move to the front of the building. You have a prominence and give it a presence on the street. Uh, that being said, the two accessible spaces that are located sort of in the northwest corner of the building, uh, we could explore additional opportunities for a ramp on the north side, uh, where it seems to be the most opportunity for, uh, an additional ramp, uh, which would provide two accessible interest to the, to the, uh, to the building and closest to the barrier free parking. Certainly something we can explore at the designer at the site plan stage. Hey, thank you. I think that'd be appreciated by the residents. And, uh, maybe even the visitors. And on the same take, um, your reply will answer this as well. My concern will also be if there was emergency fire or something, then those individuals, we only have one exit unless they have assistance. So having a second exit would be beneficial net aspect too. So thank you. Hey Councillor Sanic. Thank you, Mr. Chair, through you. Um, I'm looking, um, I'm like blowing up, right? The site plan, uh, I know when we had the first meeting, the public meeting, um, there's quite a few trees in the back of the property. And I was hoping to see like one or two of those really big trees preserved, especially like along the fence, but it looks like none of the existing trees. Like it looks like all the existing trees will be cut down. Is that correct? Thank you for the question and through you, Mr. Chair. Uh, that is correct. As you'll know it on the existing conditions plan, um, when you have three properties that you're being joined together, uh, and any trees that are along those existing property lines, that's called on the interior property lines. That's where the building in the parking are going. So those, those effectively must be removed. Um, we are proposing a new landscape strip at the rear of the property, three and a half metres. And the additional space there. Although we can't get too close to the proposed hydrotransformer, uh, for new proposed plantings and anticipating the question, uh, we would be looking, of course, at native plantings that fit within the local context. Thank you. And for you, Mr. Chair, so those plantings that shows six, but I know it's just the diagram. Those would be trees. Three, you're Mr. Chair. That's correct. Uh, we'll discuss a particular species through the Lan, outside plan control. Um, but, uh, yes, the plan would be for trees along the rear property line for privacy and green space. Okay. Thank you. Miss Van Vute had something to say. Just in addition to, um, what was already noted within the new selected zone, the URM - 10 zone. There is a planting strip requirement. So as previously mentioned through the Community meeting, the detailed design of the kind of rear landscaping area will be further flushed out at SitePline control. So just wanted to add that that is secured through the change in zoning. So it will be kind of further reviewed through that process. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Three, you Mr. Chair. So along that, um, about that planting strip. So it looks like snow will be stored on site or will most of it be like packed up and take an offsite. Through Mr. Chair. So it is noted on the current site plan, an area for snow storage kind of at the south end of the parking at the rear. So that is contemplated for onset. I'm not sure if I would defer to the applicant if the plans for partial removal. But at this time there is an allocated area for snow storage. Okay. Uh, any further no. So my concern is with the snow storage in that self corner, Southwest corner. Um, what protection is there to that, that tree. If you're only going to have six trees on the lot, you know, uh, which is a pretty big lot because three homes were combined to create this lot. Uh, with snow storage, right. You have salt from all the tires, right? Some oil. And if we have a winter like we just had, I think like the good chance that the snow ploughs could push a huge mound to snow like right into that tree. We want all the trees to survive. And so I'm just going to get to site plan. Like we need some protection for that tree. Does that make sense. Uh, thank you for the comment. And again, through you, Mr. Chair, that does make sense. Uh, that's where we're showing the snow storage area right now. Your concerns about salt or duly noted. Uh, and we'll be sure to work with our landscape team to make sure that whatever's planted there is viable, uh, and resilient. Um, or alternatively, it could be that we decide to, uh, change the planting in that area and increase the buffer on the other side where we have a little bit more room. Uh, the parking lot doesn't necessarily abbut that buffer. Um, but the other things that we're considering as well. I know we had received previous questions about, uh, potential EV charging spaces. Given that's where the hydrotransformer is. It could be more efficient or economical to put EV charging spaces on that backside. Um, all things that we're exploring through site plane control, but the intent would be to have a sufficient area for snow storage and plantings. We believe we have enough room and we can, uh, certainly take those comments back and revise them, sorry. And integrate them through the site plane control process. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Anyone else have anything you want to ask questions or say. Gary. Okay. So we'll move on to the public portion. So is there any members of the public wish to ask questions about 1152 1158 Montreal Street. There's no one in the room that wants to speak. No. Is there anyone online? Please raise your virtual hand in Zoom. I'll give a little extra time to make sure that there's hand function works for you. So if anyone online wishes to speak to 1152 and 1158 Montreal Street, please raise your hand. Okay. Seeing as none. Um, so I need a mover in a second or move by Councillor Shave. Second back Councillor Stephen. Is there any discussion. Seeing as none all in favor. And that passes unanimously. Okay. So now. Is it recommendation report for 3980 highway two. And I invite staff to introduce this item. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair. Hello again to the members of public and planning committee. As noted earlier, my name is Nikki Vanbud and I'm an intermediate planner with Planning Services. The following is a presentation recommending approval for a Zoning by Law Amendment under city filed D14002 2023 for 3980 Highway 2, submitted by the Boulevard Group on behalf of the property owner. So the purpose of this application is a condition of consent app approval D105 2023, which was recently provided provisional approval to sever an existing residence and two accessory building surplus to a farming operation. From the existing parcel at 3980 highway two. The larger retain law is proposed to continue to be used for agricultural purposes, Hey, for their dairy farm operation located off - site and retain two existing outbuildings used for machinery storage. No development is currently proposed for either the suburb or retained parcel. The purpose and effect of this application is to rezone the suburb and retain property, um, to implement two exception overlays, which will be further discussed in the upcoming slides. So this map shows a location of the property and how the Zoning and By Law Amendment will apply relatively overall parcel and provisionally approved consent. The existing residential dwelling in two accessory buildings are located on the southwest portion of the property along highway two, where exception overlay E214 will apply. In addition, the separate exception overlay E215 will apply to the larger retained lot to enable the continued use for agricultural purposes. The subject property is located on the north side of highway two and south of highway 401 with frontage on highway two and highway 401. The images on the right side of the screen demonstrate the character of the lands in their entirety, including both the home to be severed and accessory buildings and the balance of the lands for agricultural purposes. The properties designated prime agricultural area and environmental protection area as shown on schedule 3C of the official plan and is zoned primaricultural zone and environmental protection area in the Kingston zoning bylaw 2022 62. So there's currently no proposed development for either the retained or subproportion that provisionally approved consent application, but as previously mentioned, a consent has recently been approved for the existing resident surplus to a farming operation, as well as the two accessory buildings on a parcel that is 0. 5 hectares in area. The use of the retained property will remain agricultural as part of the consolidated farm operation to continue on the retained property. So exception overly E204 will apply to the severed lot to enable a reduced lot area and law frontage. The reduced lot area seeks to meet the minimum requirements to support the surplus residential severance as a identified in various provincial. And municipal policy identifying that the severed lot meets a minimum lot size needed to accommodate the use and appropriate private sewage and water services. In addition, although the proposed lot frontage of 69 metres currently exceeds the minimum requirements of the bylaw, the request is to recognise the proposed new frontage for the existing house to be incorporated into the exception overlay E2 on 4 to ensure that this is carried forward for the non - farm residential law at surplus to farm. In addition, exception overly E215 will apply to the larger retain agricultural law to enable reduced lot area, lot frontage and interior setback associated with the agricultural lot while prohibiting residential development as a permitted use on the property. The retain law will be sufficiently sized to enable the continued use of agricultural on the property. In terms of public comments, no nouse was provided in accordance to the Planning Act, including Sina Johnsite, was circulation to 10 properties within 120 metres of the property and courtesy notice in the newspaper. No queries have been received, including emails or phone calls. And to underscore the reason for the Zoning by Law Amendment as per provincial and local policy when severing a resident surplus to farm on prime agricultural land, the recommended zoning by Law Amendment will prohibit residential uses on the retained property. This ensures that continued use of the Lans for productive agricultural and agricultural related uses only. Ultimately through view of the Zoning by Law Amendment application, it was determined that the application is consistent with the provincial planning statement, conforms to the official plan is appropriate in terms of zone provisions developed and represents good land use planning. Again, no new development is proposed on either the severed or retained lands and the retain lands will be restrictly restricted to not enable residential uses in the future. So I'll search the applicant will continue to clear conditions of consent approval. And they will continue to operate the retained property as part of a farming operation with the severed property as an existing residential use. As such, that concludes the presentation for recommendation of approval. And I'm happy to answer any questions or comments during this time. All right. Thank you. Are there any questions from the committee. No questions? Okay. So we'll go on to the public portion. Is there any members of the public wishing to speak to 3980 highway 2. Anybody in the room? No. Anyone online? Anybody on Zoom wish to speak? Please raise your hand, your virtual hand in Zoom. If anybody wishes to speak to 39, 80 highway 2, please raise your virtual hand and zoom. Alright, seeing as known. I'll need a mover in a seconder. Move by Councilloff, seconded by Councillo Sanic. Any discussion. All in favor. And that passes unanimously. Alright, so there are no motions. There are no notices of motion. Is there any other business. Sting as none correspondence was included in the agenda and the addendum. Uh, the next meeting of the Planning Committee is scheduled for Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 6 p. m. So I need a mover in a secondary to return. Move my Councillor Stevens, second by Councillor Sanic, all those in favor. Okay, and have a good night everyone.