►
From YouTube: Kingston Ontario - Planning Committee - February 7, 2019
Description
Planning Committee meeting from February 7, 2019. For the full meeting agenda visit http://bit.ly/2uOlbLf
A
So
I'll
get
started
with
reading
the
Gospel.
According
to
the
Planning
Act
notice
of
collection,
personal
information
collected
as
a
result
of
this
public
hearing
and
on
the
forms
provided
at
the
back
of
the
room,
is
collected
under
the
authority
of
the
Planning
Act
and
will
be
used
to
assist
in
making
a
decision
on
this
matter.
All
names
addresses
opinions
and
comments
may
be
collected
and
may
form
part
of
the
minutes
which
will
be
available
to
the
public.
Questions
regarding
this
collection
should
be
forwarded
to
the
Director
of
Planning
and
Development.
A
The
purpose
of
public
meetings
is
to
present
planning
applications
in
a
public
forum,
as
required
by
the
Planning
Act
following
presentations
by
the
applicant
committee.
Members
will
be
afforded
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
for
clarification
or
further
information.
The
meeting
will
then
be
open
to
the
public
for
comments
and
questions.
A
Interested
persons
are
requested
to
give
their
name
and
address
for
recording
in
the
minutes.
There
is
also
a
sign-in
sheet
for
interested
members
of
the
public
at
the
back
of
the
room.
No
decisions
are
made
at
public
meetings
concerning
applications.
Unless
otherwise
noted
the
public
meeting
is
held
to
gather
public
opinion.
An
exception
to
this
rule
is
combined
reports
which
consolidates
the
public
meeting
and
comprehensive
reports.
These
applications
are
deemed
by
staff
has
straightforward
and
routine.
A
The
business
practice
has
been
in
place
for
a
number
of
years
and
is
received
by
the
applicants
as
efficient
customer
service
and
effective
use
of
committee
time.
Please
note
that
staff
use
discretion
in
determining
if
an
application
can
be
a
combined
public
meeting
comprehensive
report
to
expedite
the
approval
process.
A
Public
meeting
reports
are
provided
to
inform
the
public
of
all
relevant
information.
Information
gathered
is
then
referred
back
to
planning
and
development
staff
for
the
preparation
of
a
comprehensive
report
and
recommendation
to
the
planning
committee
that
this
means
that,
after
the
meeting
tonight,
staff
will
consider
the
comments
made
by
the
public
in
their
further
review
of
the
applications.
A
When
this
review
is
completed,
a
report
will
be
prepared
making
a
recommendation
for
action
to
this
committee.
The
recommendation
is
typically
to
approve
with
conditions
or
to
deny.
The
committee
then
makes
a
recommendation
on
the
applications
to
City
Council
City
Council
has
the
final
say
on
the
applications.
From
the
city's
perspective,
following
Council
decision
notice
will
be
circulated
in
accordance
with
the
Planning
Act.
If
a
person
or
public
body
would
otherwise
have
an
ability
to
appeal.
B
Good
evening
my
name
is
Nancy
Wortman
and
I'm,
a
planner
with
ibi
group
I'll
be
presenting
tonight's
application,
which
relates
to
to
municipal
addresses,
168,
Division,
Street
and
2
to
7
Broad
Street
for
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
and
I'll
be
presenting
on
behalf
of
highpoint
Management
Inc.
This
evening
we
are
requesting
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
in
order
to
permit
a
six-story
mixed-use
building
at
168,
Division
Street
and
the
related
property
relates
to
the
offsite
parking
that
we
provided
for
this
development.
So
sort
of
think
of
168.
B
B
168,
Division
Street
is
located
just
in
the
hub,
near
the
interests
of
the
intersection
of
Garrett,
Street
and
Division
Street,
and
whereas
Brock's
streets
about
460
meters
down
down
Brock
next
to
the
town
parking
garage
so
for
the
presentation,
I'll
be
speaking
first
to
160,
Division
Street
in
the
relief
that
we're
requesting
there
and
then
at
the
end
of
the
presentation.
I'll
be
addressing
2
to
7
Rock.
B
B
In
terms
of
the
surrounding
buildings,
there's
kind
of
a
mishmash
of
things
there
in
terms
of
sort
of
more
sensitive
residential
uses.
There
are
some
to
the
river,
the
property
along
Rock,
Street,
I'm,
not
sure
if
you
can
really
see
my
cursor
there,
but
along
Brock's,
Street
and
then
immediately
next
to
the
property
to
the
west.
B
Is
a
commercial
development
called
the
Brooklyn
right
now
and
then
beyond
that
is
low-rise
residential
and
then
everything
sort
of
a
long
division,
Street
and
in
the
hub
area,
is
commercial,
just
north
of
the
property
that
you
sort
of
get
the
rear
of
the
Princess
Street
facing
commercial
uses.
So
there's
kind
of
a
parking
lot
and
in
the
rear
of
a
large
commercial
building
there
in
the
vicinity
also
got
princess
towers
as
well
as
Brock
towers.
B
In
terms
of
what's
being
proposed,
we
did
have
a
lot
of
back-and-forth
with
staff
before
the
submission
and-
and
we
have
received
some
preliminary
comments
which
we
have
been
diligently
working
to
address
to
sort
of
prevent
present
a
revised
design
tonight.
So
what
we'll
be
presenting
in
the
images
this
evening
may
be
different
than
you've
seen
uploaded
to
currently
in
terms
of
the
proposal.
It
will
be
six
storeys,
mixed-use
35
residential
units,
a
mix
of
two
three
and
four
bedrooms.
The
breakdown
provided
there
on
the
screen.
B
There
are
commercial
uses
proposed
at
grade,
focused
along
the
division
street
frontage
and
then
the
the
front
part
of
Garrett
Street.
We
are
proposing
19
parking
spaces,
which
would
be
a
point.
Four,
nine
ratio
for
the
residential
and
one
space
per
150
meters
squared
on
the
commercial
five
spaces
are
proposed
to
be
provided
off-site
at
the
two
to
seven
barak
location.
As
mentioned,
there
are
36
bicycle
parking
spaces
proposed
we're
also
proposing
10
meters
squared
per
unit
amenity
space.
We've
incorporated
a
loading
space
with
access
off
of
Garrett
Street.
B
B
I've
highlighted
the
area
that
will
be
six
storeys
and
then
the
portion
of
the
rear
closer
to
the
residential
uses
on
Brock
Street
is
limited
to
two
storeys,
with
the
parking
being
provided
at
grade
and
enclosed
and
outdoor
amenity
space
and
provided
on
top
the
ground
floor
kind
of
provides
you
an
idea
of
how
how
the
site
will
function
from
the
street
and
and
for
the
users
of
the
site.
So
we've
got
Division
Street
I'm
along
here
with
the
big
retail
space
around
the
corner.
B
B
At
a
separate
entrance,
we
haven't
quite
worked
out
the
details
of
where
all
the
commercial
entrances
will
be
because
we're
not
at
quite
at
the
detailed
design
stage,
but
the
arrows
kind
of
give
you
an
indicator
of
where,
where
those
could
be
depending
how
the
space
is
broken
up
off
of
Garrett
Street
is
where
vehicular
access
to
the
building
will
be
provided
and
into
the
parking
area
down
below.
Here.
B
We've
also
got
bicycle
parking
in
here,
and
it
is
I.
Have
an
image.
I
can
try
and
show
you
later
of
a
sort
of
a
stacked
bicycle
parking
system
that
the
architect
has
found,
where
the
bikes
kind
of
pulled
down
and
stack
on
top
of
each
other.
We've
also
got
a
loading
space
incorporated
to
help
with
move
in
move
out,
as
well
as
garbage
and
other
deliveries
associated
with
the
retail
space
and.
B
So
these
are
sort
of
the
the
elevations
that
you
would
see
from
the
various
angles.
You
will
notice
that
this
one
wall
in
the
South
elevation,
it's
obviously
very,
very
plain-
and
that's
the
building
that
would
be
immediately
budding
something
on
on
Division
Street,
with
the
intention
being
that,
hopefully,
when
this
site
gets
developed,
that
that
will
spur
further
development
on
Division
Street
and
with
a
zero
yard
setback.
Something
would
be
built
there
in
the
future.
B
Here's
some
more
pretty
renderings
that
the
architect
is
prepared
for
us
and
to
give
you
some
idea
of
what
you'd
be
seeing
seeing
at
the
streetscape
at
the
corner
here
of
division
and
Garret.
Obviously,
there's
an
architectural
feature
kind
of
incorporated
to
draw
attention
and
really
accentuate
the
corner,
the
building
and
then
the
4.9
meter
at
grade
level.
B
That's
great!
The
renderings
don't
always
show
sort
of
what
the
coloring
that
the
materials
are
intended
to
be
so
I
think
the
architect
has
uploaded
a
slide.
That
shows
what
is
intended
to
be
used.
I
know
some
of
those
images
are
kind
of
coming
across
as
a
burnt
orange,
whereas
it's
supposed
to
be
sort
of
a
clay,
a
clay
red,
but
it
would
be
gray
charcoal
brick
is
the
thought
and
then
gray,
gray,
siding
as
well
as
gray
architectural
panels
and
the
red
architectural
panels,
and
then
black
window
frames
and
doors.
B
So
we
have,
as
I
mentioned,
there's
sort
of
the
more
sensitive
land
uses
are
located
further
along
Garrett
Street
and
the
houses
backing
on
to
onto
the
site
along
Brock
Street,
which
I've
identified
as
residential.
So
on
Garrett
we've
got
the
Brooklyn
separating
providing
separation
and
providing
a
transition
to
those
low-rise
uses
and
then
on
the
Brock,
State
Street
side.
That's
where
we've
prioritized
and
we've
we've
done
a
ten
point.
B
Three
meter
setback
to
help
minimize
any
adverse
impacts
to
those
sensitive
land
uses
in
terms
of
the
height
along
Division
Street
and
if
you're
familiar
with
the
area-
and
you
know
it's
kind
of
a
mishmash
of
uses
there.
But
it's
certainly
not
what
we
would
refer
to
as
the
highest
and
best
use
of
these
properties,
and
the
hope
is
that
these
uses
are
on
a
major
arterial
and
in
a
corridor
and
that
over
time
that
will
transition
to
there'll
be
some
redevelopment
in
this
area.
B
In
terms
of
the
massing,
the
building,
we
have
worked
with
staff
and
gotten
some
feedback
and
tried
to
incorporate
as
much
articulation
of
the
street
wall
on
Garrett
Street
as
possible.
We've
added
you
can
see
where
the
inset
balconies
are
with
the
arrows.
Those
are
where
the
building
will
be
will
be
set
back
to
create
the
illusion
of
multiple
facades.
B
B
In
terms
of
the
more
the
policy
elements,
the
site
is
designated
Main
Street
commercial
in
the
Official
Plan
commercial
uses
are
permitted
at
grade
with
residential
above,
which
is
what
is
proposed
and
parking
is
encouraged
to
be
enclosed
or
off-site
within.
This
designation,
which
we
have
also
corporated
in
terms
of
it,
also
does
meet
the
high
density
residential
tests
in
that
it's
located
in
a
corridor
and
approximated
commercial
on
a
transit
route,
as
well
as
close
to
Victoria
Park.
B
B
So
as
as
such
we're
of
the
opinion,
that
request
is
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
Official
Plan
in
terms
of
the
existing
zoning
for
the
site.
It
is
in
a
sea
zone
and
we
are
proposing
to
place
it
in
a
site-specific
commercial
uses
zone
to
permit
the
proposed
development,
and
it
is
in
the
eight
four
nine
nine,
whereas,
if
you're
across
the
street
you'd
be
in
downtown
at
Harbor
zoning
bylaw,
but
we're
just
on
on
the
fringe.
B
In
eight
four,
nine,
nine
so
in
terms
of
the
relief
we're
requesting
and
commercial
uses,
are
permitted
as
well
as
residential,
but
it
doesn't
explicitly
state
that
a
mixed-use
building
is
permitted
and
so
we'll
be
specifying
that
we're
asking
for
the
building
height
of
six
storeys
and
the
priest
FX.
As
you
shot
saw,
shown
on
the
site
plan.
B
That
would
that
we're
proposing
in
terms
of
the
justification,
I
I
kind
of
touched
on
sort
of
the
elements
of
where
we
had
come
from
on
the
height
piece.
So,
just
more
generally,
the
feeling
the
skill
of
development
is
appropriate,
given
it
is
located
in
a
toward
or
near
transit,
commercial
uses,
parks
and
employment
uses.
We
did
complete
a
parking
study
in
support
of
the
residential
and
commercial
parking
ratios,
which
is
being
reviewed
by
staff.
The
offsite
parking
is
within
walking
distance
as
defined
by
the
Official
Plan.
B
B
So
now
switching
gears
over
to
2
to
7
brock.
Again.
This
relates
to
the
site
that
we're
going
to
be
providing
the
offsite
parking
on
and
the
request
is
from
trivet
permit
a
reduced
parking
ratio
and
dimensions.
So
the
site
is
already
developed.
There
is
no
new
development
proposed
at
two
to
seven
brach,
there's
an
existing
10
unit,
residential
building
and
there's
an
existing
parking
area
at
the
real
rear
which
does
accommodate
ten
parking
spaces.
B
So,
with
the
ten
units
I'll
allocated,
there's
one
space
per
each
unit,
there's
ten
spaces
at
the
back
there
we
are
requesting
a
reduction
2.5
spaces
and
so
that
five
spaces
will
be
allocated
to
two
to
seven
brach
and
five
spaces
will
be
allocated
to
168
division
Street
through
an
offsite
parking
agreement.
So
the
total
number
of
parking
spaces
will
be
unchanged.
B
It's
just
a
matter
of
reconfiguring
and
formalizing
the
parking
layout
and
allocating
the
spaces
differently
site
is
in
a
central
business
district
in
the
Official
Plan
residential
uses
and
parking
are
permitted
in
terms
of
the
zoning
it's
in
a
C
1-1
zone
so
we'll
be
need
site-specific
relief
to
permit
what
we're
interesting.
As
mentioned,
it's
related
to
the
reduced
parking
ratio
for
the
ten
existing
units
in
the
building
and
as
well
as
reduced
parking
space
dimensions.
B
B
So,
overall,
where
the
opinion
both
sites
and
the
requested
amendments
are
appropriate
in
that
they're
consistent
with
the
PPS
they
conform
to
official
plan
policies
and
are
compatible
with
surrounding
land
uses
and
we're
the
opinion.
The
proposed
development
represents
good
planning
and
is
in
the
public
interest
and
I
would
happy
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
from
the
committee
and
then
subsequently.
A
D
We
have
two
problems
for
this
circulation,
so
for
168
division
street
a
sign
was
placed
on
the
property
20
days
in
advance
of
the
meeting
and
notices
were
sent
by
mail
to
all
119
property
owners
within
120
meters
of
the
subject:
property
for
227
Brock
Street.
A
sign
was
also
placed
on
the
property
20
days
in
advance
of
the
meeting,
and
a
notices
were
sent
by
mail
to
all
83
property
owners
within
120
metres
of
the
property
and
for
both
an
ad
was
placed
in
the
wig
stander.
D
E
You,
mr.
chair,
through
you,
I,
just
wanted
about
the
parking
and
the
five
spots
over
at
on
Brock
Street.
How
will
you
determine
which
spots
like
which
tenants
get
those
five
spots?
Would
there
be
any
criteria
or
will
just
be
first-come?
First-Serve
they
get
a
park
on
site
on
division
and
garret,
and
after
that
you're
gonna
be
going
over
to
Brock
Street.
B
I'm
not
entirely
sure
how
the
details
of
the
of
the
parking
will
work.
My
understanding
is
often
a
unit
won't
necessarily
come
with
a
parking
space
because
often
they're
the
intended
user
doesn't
need
one,
but
they
have
them
available
and
then
it
would
be
first
come
first
serve
and
I
would,
as
you
mentioned,
I
would
think
that
people
would
take
168
sites
first
and
then
the
further
away
ones.
B
B
You
mister
Chariton
designated
to
visitors,
I
guess,
unlike
the
city
Ottawa,
which
has
a
sort
of
a
specific
ratio
in
its
bylaw
to
allocate
parking
to
visitors,
the
City
of
Kingston
hasn't
incorporated
something
like
that
to
date.
So
I
would
there
wouldn't
be
any
visitor
designated
visitor
parking
on
site
per
se,
but
there
is
on
street
parking
in
the
area
and
it's
obviously
in
a
very
walkable
neighborhood
relative
to
lots
of
things.
So
thank.
E
C
B
This
is
it.
This
is
what
have
been
provided
by
the
architect
until
it
that
we
have
measured
that
there
are
dimensions
there,
that
you
can
pull
it
down,
but
my
understanding
is
effectively
you
like.
Take
your
bike,
you
load
it
up,
and
then
you
kind
of
the
rock
then
lifts
up
kind
of
slots
back
into
into
its
spot
and
then
would
come
down.
So
you
can
have
sort
of
it'll
end
up
being
two
two
tiers
of
bicycle
parking
effectively
so
sort
of
similar.
B
F
F
So
and
then
it
calls
for
something
to
be
almost
seven
feet:
high
83,
inches
high
and
you're
saying
get
away
with
a
meter,
three
foot,
three
three
yeah
three
point
three
so
or
four.
So
I
can't
tell
from
that
whether
they
you're
action
so
I'll
just
staff
to
look
at
that.
Okay
make
sure
it's
the
system
actually
works.
F
The
I
had
a
question
about
the
parking
as
well,
and
that's
because
the
general
rule
is
that
parking
off-site
for
residents
that
is
in
detached
houses
or
tunnels,
got
to
be
within
sixty
meters
and
you're,
saying
that
I
have
the
significant
part
of
your
parking
for
this
building.
Five
hundred
four
hundred
and
sixty
eighty
meters
away
to
be
precise,
said
here
is
described
as
five
hundred.
So
do
you
have
any
alternatives
for
that?
The
big
problem
is
just
to
be
clear.
Is
that
people
are
not
allowed
to
park
in
the
front
yards
okay?
F
B
So,
with
respect
to
the
offsite
parking
again
sort
of
when
we
were
doing
our
preliminary
discussions
with
staff,
obviously,
as
I
mentioned
the
site's
constrained
and
it
becomes
very
costly
to
start
going
under
underground
and
adds
substantial
costs
to
the
project,
so
we
again
giving
that
the
new
sort
of
the
tenants
and
the
general
uptake
on
parking.
We
were
sort
of
looking
at
some
alternatives.
How
can
we
provide
some
parking
and
sort
of
meet
a
ratio
that
we
think
can
be
supported
and
then
to
provide
a
solution?
B
So
high
point
obviously
does
have
a
number
of
properties
in
the
area
we
looked
at
a
number
of
them.
We
started
saying:
okay,
there
was
some
closer.
Could
we
break
up
and
put
two
spaces
on
on
two
different
properties
and
it
was
getting
then
you'd
be
kind
of
tying
all
these
different
properties
together,
so
sort
of
the
solution
that
we
came
up
with
with
staff
when
we
were
working
with
them
at
the
time
was
sort
of
effectively
anything
sort
of
within
500
metres.
B
That
means
the
I
believe
the
Official
Plan
defines
walking
distance
as
600
metres
that
if
we
could
find
a
site
within
that
within
that
radius,
that
that
would
be
appropriate,
I
mean
in
terms
of
it
being
so
far
away.
The
intention
is
that
the
people
that
have
cars
in
this
building
and
that
our
parking
off-site
are
likely
not
using
their
cars
every
day.
We
are
obviously
in
a
very
walkable
area.
B
Employment
uses
the
long
princess
we're
close
to
Queens
there
as
well
as
the
hospital,
so
the
intention
of
when
you
provide
offsite
parking
asking
them
to
walk
500
meters.
It's
certainly
not
people
who
are
are
using
their
car
five
times
a
day
and
need
to
do
that
commute
every
every
day,
so
sort
of
the
location
that
was
selected
and
sort
of
met,
the
criteria
we
discussed
with
with
staff
and
because
I
mentioned
it
does
meet
the
definition
of
walking
distance
in
the
opie
and
it
consolidates
it
all
on
on
one
site.
So.
C
B
High
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong
on
interpreting
your
question,
like
in
the
official
plan,
there's
a
definition
for
walking
distance
and
walking
distance
is
defined
as
something
within
600
meters,
so,
whether
it's
a
transit
shop,
whether
it's
parking,
whether
it's
any
retail
use.
That's
my
understanding
of
the
definition.
If
staff
have
a
different
interpretation.
B
So
we
had,
as
I
mentioned,
we
had
made
a
submission
originally
which
had
different
drawings
and
generally
the
same
built
form,
but
we
have
been
working
on
the
materials
we've
tried
to
add
articulation
to
the
building,
and
so
we
were
presenting
a
revised
design
based
on
feedback.
We've
gotten
preliminary
from
staff
sort
of
will
take
of
the
comments
away
from
from
tonight's
meeting
and
continue
to
try
and
work
to
make
a
design
design
that
happens,
that
a
design
that
we
can
get
everyone
on
board
with.
B
So
we
were
certainly
open
to
hearing
suggestions,
as
I
mentioned
sort
of
in
terms
of
the
built
form.
It's
a
very.
It
is
a
tight
site
and
I
we've
prioritized
sort
of
that
set
back
off
of
broch
street
and
and
pushing
the
building
towards
the
streetscape.
So
then,
we've
tried
to
use
materials
to
kind
of
break
up,
break
up
the
building
on
Garrett
and
Brock
there.
F
B
So
at
this
point
we
submitted
an
application
for
zoning
bylaw
amendment
and
the
materials
nothing
in
the
zoning
is
specified
about
the
material.
Is
that
something
that's
addressed
through
site
plan
control,
so
we
will
have
to
submit
a
site
plan,
control
application
and
that's
where
the
materials
will
be
finalized
and
we'll
have
to
adhere
to
whatever
selected
an
insight
plan.
Site
plan
is
dealt
with
through
staff,
so
we
tried
to
present
the
materials
to
the
committee
so
that
they
can
have
input
at
this
stage,
so
materials.
G
You
thank
you
for
your
present
I
think
this
is
a
great
example
of
the
kind
of
downtown
infill
that
we're
looking
for
so
I
favorably
disposed
to
this
kind
of
development.
My
question
would
be
if
this
building
and
I'm
just
talking
about
the
Garrett
Street
building
were
up
in
Williamsville
off
of
Princess
Street.
Would
the
allocation
of
parking
spaces
on
that
site
be
be
within
the
by
lot?
No
still,
not
okay,
so
it
just.
G
It
just
seems
to
me
that
it
I
think
they're
making
a
real
effort
to
try
and
incorporate
more
parking
into
the
into
into
a
site
where,
on
some
level,
we're
hoping
that
people
don't
bring
their
cars
into
the
downtown
as
much
so
I
I
understand
that
that's
what's
required
right
now,
but
it
I
like
the
I
like
the
proposal
as
it's
shown
there.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
I
have
a
few
question:
I
noticed
I
and
I
appreciate
I'm,
really
supportive
of
the
Williamsville
corridor
study
and
you
reference
it
for
one
variance
that
you're
seeking
but
I
have
some
concerns,
because
there
are
other
aspects
of
the
Williamsville
study
that
I
don't
believe.
Your
proposal
has
adopted
setback.
For
instance,
we
have
an
urban,
we
have
a
active
transportation
plan.
Our
priority
is
enhancing
pedestrian
and
I'm,
not
sure
about.
A
It
looks
almost
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
as
if
there's
a
zero
setback
or
just
a
minimal
set
back
along
Garrett
and
I,
appreciate
that,
at
least
in
the
sketches
it
looks
like
a
wider
setback,
long
division,
but
division
being
a
corridor
I
would
hope
that
there
was
enough
setbacks
so
that
you
were
actually
enhancing
the
pedestrian
way.
Would
you
care
to
comment
on
that.
B
Through
you,
madam
chair,
sorry,
the
study
that
I
was
explicitly
referencing
was
the
amenity
review
study
completed
by
Dillon.
Consulting,
not
the
Williamsville
study.
I
was
referring
to
how
the
amenity
review
study
had
been
implemented
in
the
Williamsville
zoning
and
in
the
downtown,
and
just
to
speak
a
bit
to
that
piece.
So
no
I
haven't
reviewed
the
proposal
against
the
Williams
study
specifically,
but
yes,
generally
can
speak
to
the
comments
that
you
made
yeah
this.
B
B
It
is
a
very
narrow
street,
so
we're
kind
of
challenged
with
working
with
sort
of
this
very
narrow
street,
and
then
you've
got
Division
Street,
which
is
which
is
much
wider
and
the
thought
was
sort
of
to
provide
the
active
patio
space
out
front
of
Division
Street,
because
that
would
be
desirable
for
for
the
commercial
tenant.
I
can
certainly
see
and
talk
to
the
architect
and
the
applicant
about.
B
Should
we
push
that
forward
and
see
if
there's
a
way
to
add
more
of
a
setback
along
Garrett
Street,
but
in
sort
of
the
slide
that
I
had
shown
to
sort
of
show
the
acrid
uses?
We
have
tried
to
to
enhance
the
public,
the
public
realm
sort
of
with
with
the
glazing,
the
the
materials,
but
there
are
limitations
in
the
setbacks.
A
Parking
aside,
offsite
parking,
I'm
gonna
ask
this
question
of
staff.
It's
my
understanding
that
that
becomes
that
goes
on
to
a
deed
and
the
owner
of
that
property,
where
the
offset
parking
is
going,
cannot
sell
their
property
without
fulfilling
the
requirements
of
the
deeded
parking
from
another
site.
Is
that
accurate.
D
Site
parking:
we
do
require
site
plan
control
for
that
property
as
part
of
the
site
plan
control
agreement.
There
are
conditions
within
that
that
specify
it'll
have
X
number
of
spaces
for
offsite
parking,
so
that's
how
its
carried
over
from
owner
to
owner,
whether
the
property
sold
or
not.
It's
in
the
site
plan
control
agreement.
Yes,.
A
And
my
other
question
regarding
the
parking
on
that
site.
I
would
assume
that
that
ten
unit
when
approval
was
gained
for
that
ten
unit
apartment,
the
rezoning
requirement
at
the
time
would
have
been
one
per
unit,
so
would
have
required
ten
parking
spaces,
but
we're
now
removing
five
of
the
required
parking
spaces
from
that
agreement
and
am
I
missing
something
here.
D
There
are
10
there.
Excuse
me,
there
are
10
units
in
that
building
now
I
believe
this
building
being
an
old
limestone
building
was
constructed
prior
to
the
current
zoning
bylaw,
so
it
does
have
legal
non-conforming
status
so
moving
forward.
I
think
what
the
owners
are
trying
to
do
is
look
at
the
actual,
optimization
usage
rates
of
the
building
and
understand
the
parking
ratios
in
the
area
to
look
at
a
revised
parking
rate
for
that
property,
so
they
so
the
building
being
as
it
is
now
well,
it
does
provide
ten
parking
spaces.
D
A
Oh
help
with
some
questions
about
that
later,
so
I
can
get
my
head
around
it.
The
bike
parking
I'm
wondering
if
this,
if,
if
I'm
a
tenant,
there
is
my
bike,
gonna
be
totally
secure
because,
quite
frankly,
the
core
of
Kingston
is
probably
the
bike
theft
capital
of
Canada.
So
is
your
system
totally
secure
for
bicycle
parking.
B
So
the
bicycle
parking
will
be
within
that
ground-floor
area
and
actually
it
will
be
secure
from
the
outside.
All
the
36
bikes
will
be
accessible,
I
guess
to
all
of
the
tenants.
I'm
not
I
need
to
do
some
more
research
on
this
system
clearly
and
I'm,
not
sure
if
there's
a
way
to
lock
your
bike
to
this
system,
but
there
will
be
like
a
door
to
the
vehicular
entrance
and
the
loading
dock
along
Garrett
Street.
So
you
wouldn't
have
external
users
of
the
site
coming
into
that
area
and
then
along
the
back
of
the
property.
B
A
My
other
question
is
accept
your
parking
proposed.
There
are
new
AODA
standards
for
accessible
parking.
Will
you
be
meeting
I
noticed
you're
requesting
a
slightly
diminished
parking
space
allocation?
Will
all
of
your
how
many
of
the
accessible
parking
spaces
will
there
be
and
will
they
all
be
up
to
current
AODA
standards.
B
Yes,
all
the
accessible
parking
proposed
will
meet
a
otis
standards.
We,
as
we
have
run
sort
of
the
turning
ratios
to
make
sure
everyone
can
get
in
and
out.
They
will
be
able
to
comply
on
both
2:00
to
7:00
brock.
We've
incorporated
one
there
and
at
160
division
we've
got
the
one
type,
a
and
one
type
b.
A
H
This
a3
mr.
chair,
in
this
instance
staff,
have
made
a
preliminary
determination
that
a
peer
review
of
the
urban
design
studies
not
required
and
we've
done
a
very
comprehensive
review.
Internally.
We
have
communicated
to
the
applicant
that,
pending
the
submission
of
their
second
circulation,
that
we
might
require
that
second
circulation
to
be
peer,
reviewed,
depending
on
the
nature
of
the
revisions
that
have
been
submitted
and.
A
I'm,
looking
forward
to
your
the
future
submission
be
I
mean
you
mentioned
yourself.
Well,
this
it's
a
challenging
site
because
it's
a
very
tight
site,
I'm,
not
I'm,
concerned
that
we're
trying
to
fit
a
size,
12
foot
into
a
size,
10
shoe
it
is
a
really
really
tight
site
for
that.
The
requirements
so
I
look
forward
to
your
future
submissions
so
and
I
think
I've
had
enough
time.
A
I
Just
as
ex-officio
Kamber,
not
as
a
planning
committee
member,
just
have
a
couple
questions
about
the
parking
I
wasn't
intending
on
asking
I
liked
the
approach
that
I
saw
in
the
in
their
proposal,
but
I
wanted
to
clarify
some
things,
because
some
of
the
questions
may
have
confused
the
public.
So
in
the
chart
on
page
eight,
nine,
nine
of
the
of
the
package,
its
the
chart
of
what
the
regulation
is
and
then
what
the
proposed
amount
is
sorry
page
11
that
has
the
parking
one
and
and
I
think
the
chair
spoke
to
this
about.
I
So
there's,
there's
10
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong,
there's
10
parking
spaces
currently
at
the
site
in
the
old
building
which
predates
the
zoning
bylaw.
Is
that
correct,
yeah,
okay
and
then
the
calculation?
That's
on
page
11
5.3,
a
section
B
to
the
calculator
one
is
by
square
meters
and
it
says
tents,
park,
parking
spaces,
28
square
meters
for
space
right.
I
I
Okay
and
I'm,
looking
at
that
on
page
16,
I
guess
of
the
package,
also
calculates
ten
parking
spaces.
That's
one
parking
space
per
unit
with
the
current
non-conforming
use
of
the
current
build,
and
then
the
requirement
would
be
what's
proposed
is
half
of
that
which
is
the
five
parking
spaces
councillor
Neill
was
talking
about.
D
Well,
on
the
choking
at
under
five
point:
twenty
two
point:
five
on
page
16
regulations.
What
is
required
now
is
one
parking
space
per
unit
which
I've
calculated
is
ten
parking
spaces.
So
that's
what's
currently
required,
given
the
number
of
units
that
have
been
developed
on
site,
the
proposed,
which
is
a
second
column
next
to
it,
is
what
they're
seeking
relief
for,
which
is
half
a
parking
space
per
unit
which
would
give
them
the
five
that
would
be
associated
with
the
existing
residential
okay.
I
So
on
the
broad
street
for
differences,
five
parking
spaces
and
on
the
division
street,
it's
a
different
category,
because
that's
the
commercial,
but
it
also
it's
it's
going
from
ten
to
two
is
that
correct
is
this?
Is
this
also
the
is?
Are
we
talking
about
both
of
these
proposals?
Yeah,
okay,
so
5.3,
a
page
11
one
space
for
every
28
square
meters?
So
that's
the
way
you
calculate
commercial
parking
spaces,
correct.
D
I
So,
similarly
for
the
residential
half
of
the
requirement,
okay,
so
my
question
yes
is
to
staff.
Is
this
because
I
remember
when
the
report
on
the
internal
control
bylaw
file
came
from
planning
or
from
the
planning
department?
There
was
a
change
in
the
recommendation.
There
was
a
recommendation
for
a
change
in
the
number
of
parking
spaces
or
the
calculation
of
parking
spaces.
So
has
that
already
been
enacted
is
my
first
question
and
my
sacrifice
will
have
to
do
with
the
current
study.
H
Three
mister
charities
study,
those
referenced
in
the
interim
Control
bylaw
study
is
currently
underway.
We
have
not
presented
the
proposed
ratios
to
the
public,
yet
so
we're
actually
in
the
final
throes
of
working
through
that
draft
study
with
the
consultant
and
we're
anticipating
consulting
with
the
public
on
that
in
the
near
future.
So
to
answer
your
question,
the
the
current
standard
does
not
reflect
the
work
that
we're
doing
that
would
establish
parking
ratios
for
multi-unit
dwellings
on
a
per
bedroom
basis,
rather
than
a
per
Twellman
unit
basis.
So
that's
work.
That's
underway.
Okay,.
I
So
so
that
clarifies
that
that
there
has
there
wasn't
a
change
that
was
in
effect,
that
that
it
was
an
effect
from
that
initiative
other
than
the
study
and
whatever
comes
out
of
the
study,
and
it
has
not
been
discussed.
Yet.
Are
you
able
to
say
whether
the
study
will
end
if
it
was
applied
to
this
building?
I
H
You,
mr.
chair
I,
don't
have
current
draft
ratios
in
front
of
me.
The
we
would
have
to
review
it
on
how
many
bedrooms
are
in
each
unit
and
do
a
comparison
of
the
ratios
in
general
and
number
of
the
ratios
would
go
down
from
the
one
parking
space
per
dwelling
unit
to
a
lower
ratio
to
reflect
the
the
smaller
unit
sizes.
I
know
that
a
number
of
the
units
in
this
building
are
a
larger
four
bedroom:
three
bedroom,
five
bedroom,
two
three,
four,
sorry,
two
three
or
four
bedroom
ratio.
H
H
Mr.
chair,
yes,
there
will
be
so
draft
recommendations
are
proposing
four
different
parking
areas
within
the
city,
so
the
center
in
Williamsville,
Main
Street
corridor,
would
have
the
lowest
parking
ratios,
followed
by
areas
that
are
on
like
closer
to
the
center
and
on
express
transit
route,
followed
by
areas
that
are
on
express
transit
routes
that
are
outside
of
the
center
and
then
followed
by
the
rest
of
the
city.
H
I
B
So
through
you,
mr.
chair
as
part
of
our
submission,
we
did
have
a
parking
study
completed
by
WSP
and
so
generally,
my
understanding
of
how
they
sort
of
do
that
is
they
look
at
comparable
sites
and
what
the
uptake
on
those
sites
is,
and
then
they
say
whether
or
not
they
can
support
the
ratio.
In
this
case
you
know
on
similar
sites
they've
seen
an
uptake
of
0.5.
Hence
why
they
could
support
the
ratios.
We
were
proposing
I,
guess
more
generally,
sort
of
also
some
of
the
thinking
behind
providing
offsite
parking.
B
Is
that
maybe
not
now
but
in
in
the
future,
as
we
sort
of
become
hopefully
more
transit,
oriented
more
more
walking
that
we
see
the
ratios
come
down
and-
and
we
wouldn't
even
necessarily
need
those
off-site
parkings
for
a
project
like
this.
Obviously,
it's
very
costly
to
kind
of
build
it
into
the
project
going
underground
or
doing
above-ground
parking.
B
J
I
I
There
are
two
can
trends
in
today's
cities
that
we
need
to
be
aware
of,
and
that
are
the
reason
for
the
recalculation
of
the
parking
ratios.
One
of
those
trends
is
that
the
closer
you
are
to
the
center,
the
last
car
dependent
you
are,
everybody
can
agree,
that's
already
the
reality
and
I'm
a
living
example
myself.
I
The
other
trend
is
that,
with
the
demographic
commonly
known
as
Millennials,
car
use
is
astonishingly
low
like
like
way
way
way
lower
than
in
any
other
demographic,
and
that
would
be
a
large
proportion
of
the
users
I'm
guessing
in
this
in
this
core
high
density
area.
Once
it's
open,
so
just
those
two
trends
or
we
might
actually
miss
the
mark
with
our
recalculations
and
actually
still
be
overdoing
it
for
parking.
I
A
You
any
other
member
of
the
public
who
wishes
to
speak
to
the
pro
project.
Yes,
and
just
a
reminder:
I
was
derelict.
I
should
have
recognized
the
counselor
as
a
councillor
ex-officio
and
given
him
an
opportunity
to
speak
when
we
were
still
in
the
in
the
committee.
But
just
a
reminder,
you
ask
your
questions
and
make
you
comments,
and
you
have
five
minutes
to
do
so
and
then,
at
the
end
of
that
staff
or
the
proponent,
have
an
opportunity
to
answer
the
or
comment
on
your
comments.
Okay,
so
that
was
my
faux
pas.
K
K
K
L
K
So
if
you're
gonna
have
no
elevators
you're
limiting
the
range
of
tenants,
you
may
be
able
to
live
there
to
those
who
are
mobile
and
active
and
athletic
and
so
forth,
so
going
along
with
that.
What
are
the
existing
City
of
Kingston
regulations
stating
as
well
as
the
Planning
Act
of
Ontario,
an
official
plan
as
to
the
minimum
height
that
a
building
has
to
have
to
require
elevators?
Could
you
build
a
100
storey
building
with
no
elders,
don't
think
you'd
want
to
do
that.
K
Right,
elevators
were
invented
in
the
1800s
at
some
point,
so
they're,
a
fact
of
life
they've
been
around
I,
can't
support
this
project.
For
that
reason,
I'm
generally
supportive
of
it.
We
need
you
know
greater
density
in
the
downtown.
We
certainly
need
more
housing.
Those
are
true
aces
in
your
favor
right.
If
you
had
all
theaters
proposed
on
it,
be
supportive
almost
entirely
of
it,
along
with
moose
some
minor
points
so
going
along
with
that.
On
this,
a
very
significant
point:
is
you
don't
have
any
outside
fire
escape
shown
here
either?
K
K
K
K
This
is
a
substantial
development,
so
what
is
the
threshold,
as
explained
by
staff,
on
a
peer
review?
Is
that
in
terms
of
number
of
units,
and
does
the
big
dig
for
work?
That's
been
done
right
there
is
that
enabling
this
project
to
be
built
due
to
increased,
draw
on
utilities
and
water
and
so
forth.
We
have
the
capacity
to
be
able
to
handle
this
projection.
Thank
you.
A
L
So
I
just
wanted
to
take
a
moment.
My
name
is
Donald
Mitchell
I'm,
a
resident
43,
Gibson,
Avenue
and
at
a
very,
very
high
level,
because
I
know
that
a
couple
of
us
in
the
public
have
made
this
comment.
I
felt
it
was
worth
saying:
I
thought
it
was
a
very
attractive
building
and
I
think
people
there
was
a
seam
of
favor
in
some
of
the
reaction
of
some
of
us
I
thought
that
was
worth
knowing
I.
L
Think
part
of
it
is
the
materials
and
I
know
one
of
the
counselors
referred
to
that,
and
so
I
think
that
variation
of
materials
seemed
very
active
to
us.
I
wanted
to
ask
a
couple
things
that
are
gonna
get
in
the
nature
of
the
Ontario
Building
Code
and
accessibility.
I
mean
them
at
a
very,
very
high
level,
but
I
just
had
a
few
curious
things
that
I
think
are
also.
They
lead
to
positives.
One
is
I'm:
a
big
fan
of
the
at-grade
entrance
I
think
that
that's
really
important.
L
We
often
think
of
a
person
that's
living
there,
but
we
also
have
to
think
of
the
person
who
is
visiting
I.
Think
it's
an
excellent
location
for
access
to
downtown
amenities,
drug
stores,
restaurants
and
places
so
I
think
there
will
be
a
lot
of
diversity
of
people
who
would
be
attracted
to
living
in
such
a
site.
So,
in
terms
of
the
accessibility,
these
questions
are
more
intended
to
go
towards
the
positive,
but
does
the
building
actually
have
like
barrier
free
access
into
the
common
areas?
L
L
Would
some
of
the
units
actually
have
a
measure
of
accessibility?
We
often
think
of
accessibility
is
one
extreme.
You
know
from
another,
but
there
is
a
whole
range
of
the
whole
diversity
of
disability
and
I
wondered
if
some
of
the
ground-floor
stuff
or
some
areas
might
actually
have
a
reasonable
level
of
accessibility.
I
think
that
would
be
a
very
positive
thing
and
it
might
be
a
subtle
change.
You
might
be
able
to
make
considering
the
parking
I
wondered
about,
there's
a
variance
about
the
length
I.
Think
of
the
accessibility
parking
on
one
of
them.
L
I
think
that's!
The
only
variance
I
saw
and
I
saw
three
spots.
I
just
wanted
to
caution
that
and
obviously
you
know
this,
and
obviously
it
goes
through
the
city's
accessibility
site
plan.
But
sometimes
those
ranges
are
there
to
accommodate
different
vehicles
and
different
needs.
So
I
just
throw
that
out
there.
L
The
biggest
thing
that
I
thought
was
a
real
positive
was
if
I
read
it
correctly
and
it
was
quick
there's
under
the
building
accessible
parking.
Is
that
correct
and
if
it
is
I
commend
that
because
I
think
it's
really
important
in
inclement
weather,
especially
why
that
we're
all
experiencing
right
now
that
there
is
an
opportunity
to
park
indoors
and
if
the
height
is
the
correct
height
that
might
accommodate
a
van
or
a
car
in
a
reasonable
level,
and
it
gets
people
out
of
the
elements.
L
A
B
Pointer
but
the
two
elevator
shafts
are
are
here,
so
there
will
be
elevator
access
for
the
six
floors
there
is
also
I
had
mentioned.
This
was
the
primary
residential
entrance,
where
you
hop
the
lobby
and
your
mail
and
get
access
into
the
elevators
and
all
of
that,
but
there
is
also
a
secondary
residential
exit
that
would
exit
to
Division
Street,
and
my
understanding
from
the
architect
is
again
to
meet
all
the
necessary
code.
Requirements
for
entering
and
exiting
a
building.
B
There
was
a
comment
about
the
Big
Dig
and
actually
they
were
doing
work
in
in
this
area
at
the
same
time
as
we
were
sort
of
in
pre
consultation
with
staff,
so
I'm
not
sure.
If,
specifically
the
upgrades
enabled
this
this
project,
but
we
were
able
to
capitalize
on
coordinating
upgrades
to
services
that
we
needed
to
the
same
time.
So
it's
been,
it's
been
great
working
with
staff
to
facilitate,
obviously,
there's
there
is
a
fee,
but
there
is
cost
savings
ultimately,
overall,
in
terms
of
the
heritage.
B
With
respect
to
the
accessibility,
so
the
two
accessible
spaces
are
provided
indoors,
as
I
mentioned,
that
parking
area
will
be
fully
enclosed
and
they
are
located
near
the
nearest
entrance
in
there
an
architect
myself.
So
my
understanding
is
everything
has
been
designed
to
meet
accessibility
requirements,
as
for
for
the
Building,
Code
and
I'm
I'm,
not
sure
I
can't
think
off.
B
Think
I've
tried
to
adjust
everything
and
in
terms
of
the
materials,
as
I
mentioned,
they
will
be
determined
at
site
plan.
But
if
people
have
specific
materials
they
are
interested
in,
we
are
open
open
to
hearing
them
as
we've
gone
back
and
forth
within
our
team.
A
lot
on
the
materials
so
obviously
subjective
in
nature,
but
always
good
to
have
different
different
ideas.
So
we
thought
I
think
I
will.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Staff
had
no
comments
to
make.
No
we'll
go
back
into
the
committee
very
quickly
and
then
we'll
we'll
close
this
meeting.
Are
there
any
comments
or
forgotten
comments?
No,
okay,
just
very
quickly.
If
you
want
to
talk
to
staff
about
parking,
I
know
the
university
suites
to
meet
their
parking
requirement,
we're
proposing
a
four-story
parking
garage
where
the
Brooklyn
is
now,
which
would
be
a
lot
more
convenient
for
and
I
know.
Two
stories
were
for
their
parking
and
two
we're
going
to
be
commercial,
so
you
may
want
to
contact
them.
A
M
So
this
application
is
requesting
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
to
permit
the
construction
of
a
new
three
unit
dwelling
the
site
is
located
at
218.
Albert
Street
is
located
at
the
west
side
of
Albert
Street
between
Cooper
Street
and
Union
Street,
it's
in
a
primarily
residential
area
and
is
nearby
to
Queens
University.
M
The
proposal
is
to
demolish
the
existing
dwelling
to
construct
the
new
three-story
dwelling
consisting
of
three
residential
units.
Each
unit
will
consist
of
four
bedrooms
for
a
total
of
twelve
bedrooms
on
the
site.
Two
parking
spaces
are
proposed
in
the
rear
yard,
as
well
as
three
parking
spaces
indoors.
Adequate
amenity
area
and
open
space
are
provided.
M
Here's
a
picture
of
the
site
plan.
The
proposed
development
is
outlined
in
pink.
The
existing
building
is
shown
in
the
as
the
brown
outline.
As
you
can
see.
The
proposed
development
is
consistent
width
of
the
existing
building.
However,
it
does
extend
further
into
the
rear
yard.
Two
parking
spaces
are
proposed
in
the
rear
yard
and
they
are
accessed
by
a
paved
driveway
along
the
south
side
of
the
property
connecting
to
Albert
Street.
There
is
also
a
turnaround
feature
so
that
way
cars
are
easily
able
to
back
in
and
out
the
units
are
accessed.
M
In
coming
up
with
the
design
of
the
building,
the
applicant
and
us
went
back
and
forth
with
city
staff
in
order
to
come
up
with
a
development,
that's
compatible
with
the
existing
neighborhood.
As
you
can
see,
the
design
features
bay,
windows
dormers,
as
well
as
a
porch
feature,
which
is
are
which
are
all
common
architectural
elements
in
the
neighborhood.
The
materials
are
proposed
to
be
red,
brick
with
painted
cedar,
siding
asphalt,
shingles
and
white
window
trim
and
again
you
can
see
the
entranceway
is
on
the
front
and
south
just
depicting
those
access.
M
Moving
to
policy,
the
proposed
development
is
designated
residential
in
the
Official
Plan
and
proposes
the
density
of
44
dwelling
units
per
net
hectare
under
the
opie.
This
is
classified
as
a
medium
density,
residential
use
and,
however,
the
built
form
is
consistent
with
what
would
be
considered
low
density
in
terms
of
the
look
of
the
look
of
the
building.
This
is
an
appropriate
site
for
medium
density
and
for
medium
density.
M
Overall,
the
proposed
development,
the
residential
use,
is
compatible
with
adjacent
residential
uses.
It's
not
anticipated
to
create
adverse
effects.
There's
adequate
amenity
area
parking
and
out
landscape,
open
space
to
meet
the
functional
needs
of
the
users,
and
it
in
helps
achieve
the
city's
intensification
targets.
Overall,
this
request
is
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
Official
Plan
I'm.
Moving
to
zoning,
the
existing
zoning
for
the
property
is
it's
located
in
a1
family
and
to
family
a
zone.
M
So
this
proposal
looks
to
place
the
land
in
a
site-specific
B
zone
in
order
to
in
order
to
recognize
the
three
dwelling
units
and
includes
and
includes
provisions
for
amended
standards
for
minimum
yards
lock
coverage
and
parking.
So
this
location
is
appropriate
for
higher
density
and
given
its
proximity
to
transit,
commercial
uses
parks
and
institutions,
the
minimum
yards,
the
yards
are
consistent
with
the
existing
dwelling
on
Albert
Street
and
are
in
line
with
the
adjacent
houses
on
either
side,
which
is
which
is
desirable
in
terms
of
the
opie
and
zoning
and
as
well.
M
The
lock
coverage
is
a
fairly
minor
increase.
We
are
asking
I
reduced
for
a
reduced
parking
ratio.
This
is
given
the
owners
experience
with
anticipated
demand.
We
do
know
that
there
is
adequate
space
to
provide
a
third
parking
in
the
rear
yard.
If
the
public
seems
to
think
that
the
two
spaces
would
be
inadequate
and
again,
there
is
sufficient
amenity
space
landscaped
open
space
requirements,
they
are
all
met.
In
conclusion,
it's
our
opinion
that
the
proposed
amendment
is
consistent
with
the
provincial
policy
statement,
conforms
to
Official
Plan
policies
and
is
compatible
with
surrounding
land
uses.
M
N
Say,
and
through
you,
mr.
chair
application
was
noticed
per
the
requirements
of
the
Planning
Act,
that
included
public
notification,
provided
by
big
signage
placed
on
the
subject
property.
It
concluded
a
notification
in
our
Kingston
wig
standard,
as
well
as
public
mail,
it's
to
one
hundred
and
five
properties
located
within
a
hundred
and
twenty
meter
radius
of
the
site,
all
of
which
was
provided
minimum
of
20
days
before
tonight's
meeting.
N
To
date,
staff
have
received
four
pieces
of
written
correspondence,
some
of
which
was
received
in
advance
of
the
agenda
being
printed,
so
it
was
included.
The
information
received
closer
to
tonight's
meeting
is
attached
for
you
tonight
in
addendum
form,
further
to
that
staff
have
received
approximately
three
phone
calls
and
and
conversed
with
neighbors
regarding
the
proposal
and
welcomed
their
attendance
here
tonight.
Thank
you.
E
You
mr.
chair,
through
you
to
the
applicant
for
the
rear
yard,
it's
not
that
I
want
to
convert
any
of
the
proposed
landscape
open
space,
but
I
read
in
tonight
some
comments
that
some
people
have
a
concern
that
there's
not
enough
bicycle
parking.
Instead
of
putting
the
bike
parking
and
the
basement
of
the
three
units,
is
there
any
space
in
the
rear
yard
to
put
a
shed
to
accommodate
and
some
of
the
bike
parking?
Is
it
going
in
the
garage
or
was
the
intent
to
put
all
of
the
bike
parking
in
the
basement?.
M
E
Okay,
thank
you
and
for
the
study
like
it
looks
like
there's
some
on
the
top
floor,
there's
two
two
areas
that
are
considered
like,
maybe
to
be
study
areas
and
what
would
prevent
those
from
being
used
as
bedrooms.
Thank
you
is
it
because,
like
there's
not
closet
space,
so,
therefore,
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
be
used
as
bedrooms,
because
there's
no
closets
or
what
would
prevent
that
from
being
used
as
closets
a
third
bedroom.
M
Does
include
a
maximum
number
of
bedrooms,
so
the
proposed
development
will
be
restricted
to
twelve
bedrooms
for
the
development
and
as
well.
The
site-specific
zoning
provides
a
definition
of
bedrooms
which
says
that
common
area
is
open
to
all
occupants
of
the
unit
are
not
considered
bedrooms.
So
again,
these
the
two
study
units
don't
have
don't
have
doors.
E
M
G
Thank
you.
It
does
seem
like
quite
a
departure
this
street.
It
looks
to
me
I
drove
down
there
tonight
before
I
came
to
the
meeting,
and
it
looks
to
me
as
though
that
is
a
pretty
long-standing
neighborhood.
Without
this
kind
of
development
previously
and
I'm
wondering
you
know,
first
of
all
the
Heritage
status
of
the
building,
that's
there
now
and
secondly,.
G
M
So
here
we
have
some
images
from
taken
from
Google
Streetview
of
existing
development
in
the
area,
and
so
the
first
one
is
the
house
immediately
adjacent
on
the
corner,
followed
by
the
existing
dwelling.
Next
to
the
red
brick
house,
you
can
see
from
the
street
sort
of
that
juxtaposition.
The
existing
dwelling
is
shorter
compared
to
the
two
and
three
storey
buildings
next
to
it,
and
then
across
the
street.
It
is
quite
common
to
have
two
and
three-story
red
brick
buildings
and
in
terms
of
heritage.
M
B
Maybe
just
to
jump
on
and
add
to
what
mi
said
we
did
work
through
a
lot
of
designs
and
went
back
and
forth
with
staff
a
number
of
times,
as
Emma
pointed
to
in
the
image
sort
of
the
two
houses
on
either
side,
our
big
red,
brick,
brick
homes.
So
we've
tried
to
incorporate
something
that
we
think
would
be
compatible
with
those
into
the
into
the
design
as
a
house
is,
it
currently
sits.
Is
it's
actually
much
smaller
than
than
those
other
homes,
so.
G
It
would
be
useful
to
have
a
visual
rendering
of
of
that
what
it
will
look
like
if
it
was
inserted
into
that
neighbourhood
with
them
with
the
materials
and
the
you
know,
the
cladding,
etc.
That
would
give
us
a
better
sense
of
of
how
that
building
would
actually
fit
in
with
what's
existing.
In
my
mind,
thank
you.
A
H
Merit
you're
correct
the
nada
listed
or
designated
property.
It
is
on
a
list
of
properties
to
be
considered
in
the
future.
So
at
this
point
in
time,
there's
no
heritage,
protection
and
and
staff
certainly
couldn't
comment
on
the
heritage
value
without
doing
further
study.
So
at
this
point
in
time
with
without
the
listing
or
the
designation,
there
there's
no
heritage
protection
on
the
property.
Great.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
something
that
was
mentioned
and
that
frankly,
I
mean
some
years
ago
we
got.
We
had
a
lot
of
developers
with
dens
and
all
kinds
of
things
that
clearly
once
for
especially
for
student,
housing
became
bedrooms
and
I
thought
that
our
policy
was.
If
it
looks
like
a
bedroom,
if
it
can
function
as
a
bedroom,
we
count
it
as
a
bedroom.
Is
that
still
our
policy?
A
H
Mr.
chair,
we
certainly
undertake
a
very
careful
review
of
the
floor
plans
and
ensure
that
we
have
the
discussion
with
our
building
department
through
the
OVC
there's
very
strict
regulations
on
what's
considered
a
bedroom
and
what's
not
considered
a
bedroom.
So
when
we're
looking
at
it
from
a
planning
perspective,
we
do
consult
and
ensure
that
our
the
way
that
we're
approaching
it
from
his
owning
perspective
aligns
with
the
building
code
in
the
way
that
it
would
be
inspected
for
those
permits
and.
A
M
N
Mr.
chair,
just
clarification:
amenity
space
as
presently
is
calculated
per
unit
basis
at
eighteen
point
five
per
unit
in
in
this
context,
and
you
heard
in
the
earlier
presentation
in
the
Williamsville
corridor.
It's
at
ten
unit
square
meters
per
per
unit.
That
said
in
a
lot
of
the
larger
development
applications
that
we've
seen
I'm,
specifically
thinking
of
five
cent,
five
princess
three
justifications
have
been
put
forth
and
an
amendments
have
been
made
on
the
justification
as
it
relates
to
a
bedroom
unit,
a
bedroom
square
meter
portion
allocated.
A
N
Enter
you
mr.
chair,
absolutely
as
you've
made
a
site
plan.
Control
bylaw
has
directors
in
which
say
plank
intrude.
This
application,
as
pretty
does
not
trigger
and
for
site
plan
control
and
for
the
benefit
of
the
room.
So
I
was
an
agreement
to
be
retinal
that
would
restrict
things
such
as
the
location,
edge,
bicycle
parking,
material,
etc.
N
Through
previous
reporting
and
comprehensive
recommendations
put
forward
by
staff,
we
have
included
recommendations
to
Council
that
such
application
shall
be
subject
to
say,
plan
control
and
it
it
has
been
received
previously
and
supported
through
that,
and
this
could
very
well
be
a
prime
candidate
for
such
application
and
recommendation,
although
it
not
as
today,
hit
all
their
crime
runs
of
the
specific
by
law.
Thank.
A
You
I
appreciate
that
and
lastly,
just
a
very
quick
comment
on
parking
I
like
my
colleague
councillor
Stroud,
look
forward
to
the
day
when
we
need
less
parking,
but
the
reality
of
this
site
is
that
there's
going
to
be
given
its
proximity
to
Queens,
there's
going
to
be
12
adults
living
it
in
in
this
3
unit
dwelling
and
the
idea
of
only
having
two
parking
spaces.
The
reality
is,
there
will
be
parking
on
the
prescribed
amenity
space
in
the
backyard
will
be
a
reality.
A
I
A
I
My
second
question
asked
is
for
staff,
so
this
proposal,
because
of
the
three
unit,
is
not
being
created
in
a
zone,
as
you
were
saying
this.
The
proposal
saying
that
a
be
site,
specific
B
zone
is
required,
which,
if
you
look
on
the
map,
I
don't
know
if
we
have
access
to
map
there,
but
the
site
itself
that
this
property
would
alone
would
be
a
B
zone
in
the
middle
of
the
residential,
a
zone
which
was
eighty
four.
Ninety
nine,
which
allows
up
to
two
drawing
units
per
site.
So.
I
Today
and
then
the
central
growth
in
infill
strategy
recommends
changing
areas,
not
not
individual
properties,
but
an
area,
a
specific
area
to
a
higher
density
zone
such
as
B,
but
but
this
street
is
not
identified
as
one
of
those
streets
does,
with
this
proposal.
Stick
out
against
that
strategy,
which
is
more
of
a
big
picture
strategy.
H
Three,
mr.
chair,
we
are
currently
in
the
process
of
completing
the
Central
Kingston
growth
strategy
study.
As
you
know,
we
don't
have
the
proposed
provisions.
I
would
apply
in
this
specific
area,
so
it's
a
it's
challenging
and
that
we're
not
able
to
compare
this
proposal
against
those
provisions,
certainly
with
the
way
that
the
new
zoning
bylaw
was
first
drafted
any
exception
zones
within
that
zoning
bylaw
would
prevail.
H
So
if
we
were
to
pass
an
amendment
in
this
area
that
had
a
site-specific
nature
to
it,
it's
likely
that,
through
the
central
Kingston
growth
strategy
study
that
it
would
be
recommended
to
recognize
those
existing
permissions
and
upload
them
away.
So
there's
certainly
as
potential
that
the
zoning
standards
in
this
area
could
change
and
and
this
property
would
be
allowed
to
maintain
the
site-specific
zoning
I.
I
Guess
interest,
so
if
I
could
just
ask
you,
there
are
two
other
site-specific
be
zoned
properties
that
exist
currently
that
I'd
saw
in
mr.
sands
report
on
Cooper
Street
and
another
nearby
I
think
on
Albert
Street,
if
okay,
so
the
central
growth
strategy.
What
you
just
said,
the
central
growth
strategy
may
say
that
on
blocks
or
on
on
sections
of
Street
that
already
have
an
existing
be
zone
approved
by
council,
the
recommendation
might
be
to
approve
the
whole
that
be
zoned
to
extend
to
the
entire
block.
Is
that
we're
saying
through.
H
You
mr.
Church,
has
a
clarification
point.
It
would
just
be
for
that
specific
property.
It
certainly
wouldn't
be
adopting
those
recommendations
on
a
site-specific
property
across
the
entire
block.
It
would
just
be
maintaining
those
permissions
on
that
site-specific
property,
obviously
through
the
central
Kingston
gross
strategy
study.
I
Okay,
another
question
I
opened
over
enough
time
about
this
b-zone,
so
I
I
think
it
was
during
the
discussion
on
the
in
control
bylaw
and
when
we
were
given
the
rationale
for
the
central
growth
study
itself,
we
were
told
it
might
have
been
in
a
private
meeting
with
Director
of
Planning,
but
I
was
told
that
it's
not
best
practice
to
spot
zone.
Higher
density
zones
like
Swiss
cheese
in
a
larger
zoning
bylaw
in
80
40
99,
is
their
largest
owning
bylaw.
Is
that
true
that
it's
not
best
practices
to
to
have
this
solution.
H
3Ms,
obviously,
within
the
Planning
Act
people
have
the
right
to
apply
for
site-specific
amendments
from
a
overall
planning
perspective.
I
think
that
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
zoning
bylaw
that
fits
and
works
well
within
the
neighborhood,
so
there
wouldn't
be
the
need
to
have
site-specific
amendments
or
have
the
policy
framework
to
continuously
allow
different
forms
of
development.
So
that
being
said,
there
is
an
existing
framework
that
permits
this
type
of
application
to
be
submitted
and
and
there's
a
policy
framework
that
would
support
it.
I
Okay,
that's
all
merchants.
My
comment
would
be
and
I'm
just
restricting
it
to
this
rezoning
to
be
there's
other
problems
with
the
application,
but
councillor
Hill,
especially
who
wasn't
here
last
term.
There
was
a
similar
application
at
268
Victoria
that
went
from
seven-bedroom
house,
and
then
there
was
a
duplex
added
to
make
it
17
bedrooms.
This,
similarly,
is
going
from
six
bedrooms
to
twelve,
however,
in
this
case
3
for
unit
dwellings,
which
is
actually
a
positive
rather
than
a
large
number
of
bedrooms
per
unit.
I
If
that
was
done
here,
the
existing
building
would
have
been
retained
and
an
differently
built
addition
would
have
been
added
into
the
back
yard
to
give
you
the
12
bedrooms
and-
and
we
already
know
that
that
was
not
popular
with
my
residents
and
they
fought
it
on
in
case
of
268
Victoria
Council
voted
against
that
application
and
it's
in
Appeals
in
this
case,
what
we
have
is
is
a
built
form,
that's
similar
to
a
house
with
the
dormers
and
everything.
But
it's
it's.
I
Minh
the
potential
for
more
spot
zoning
to
come
if
we
allow
this
essentially
could
turn
out,
could
destroy
the
the
fabric
of
Albert
Street.
These
these
wonderful
old
homes
near
campus
homes,
obviously
house
many
faculty
members
of
Queens
over
the
years
and
actually
I
was
born
on
the
street
one
block
away
when
my
father
was
a
prophet
Queens
and
a
very
similar
house.
I
So
this
is
really
kind
of
emotional
for
me
to
see
us
at
this
point
and
I
will
respect
the
will
of
council,
but
I
I
suspect
we
may
be
hearing
from
residents
of
my
district
that
are
just
wishing.
We
we
had
the
new
central
growth
strategy
already
and
that
we
wouldn't
be
having
these
conversations
we're
square
we're
talking
about
spot
zoning
apartment
density
in
the
middle
of
residential
area.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
F
H
Three
mister
I,
don't
think
describing
it
as
best
practice
is
the
appropriate
way
from
a
professional
planning
perspective
to
look
at
it.
It's
really
there
are
the
appropriate
tools
and
mechanisms
to
make
this
application
and
we
have
to
review
it
under
the
policies
that
apply
in
the
provincial
framework
that
we
have.
H
Obviously,
the
purpose
and
intent
of
creative
going
through
the
central
Kingston
growth
strategy
study
is
to
create
a
much
more
robust
policy
framework
and
appropriate
set
of
Zoning
tools
so
through
that
work,
we're
hoping
to
have
a
better
set
of
tools
to
which
we
can
evaluate
this
type
of
proposal.
But
for
the
time
being,
we
have
to
use
the
tools
that
we
have
available
to
us
right
now.
H
Three
mr.
chair
there
certainly
stabled
neighbourhood
policies
within
the
Official
Plan.
So
through
our
review
of
this
application,
we
will
be
reviewing
this
application
against
those
policies
that
are
in
Section
two
six
of
our
official
plans,
so
I
believe
our
public
meeting
report
identifies
some
of
the
two
point,
six
policies
and
it
will
certainly
be
reviewed
in
a
future
comprehensive
report.
H
F
A
Can
just
comment
quickly
on
that:
it's
my
understanding
that
the
presumption
is
it's
a
stable
neighborhood
unless
it's
gone
through
a
criteria,
lack
and
it's
been
reassigned,
an
area
in
transition.
So
if
that
exercise
hasn't
taken
place,
it's
my
understanding
that
this
would
be
considered
a
stable
neighbourhood.
Is
that
accurate
to.
H
A
L
These
are
my
thoughts
based
on
what
I
read,
which
wasn't
a
lot
of
time
to
absorb
it,
and
I
just
want
to
make
the
point
that
they're
directed
at
no
one
other
than
myself
and
my
maybe
inability
to
understand
all
this.
At
times
it
seems
a
disservice
to
all
residents
and
community
harmony
to
hold
the
statutory
public
meeting
on
an
application
without
the
public,
actually
having
the
benefit
of
the
fullest
technical
comments
and
comprehensive
evaluation.
L
L
This
is
an
application
that
seeks
to
significantly
change
a
zoning
to
be.
Zoning
sends
an
unclear
message
to
all
area,
property
owners
and
developers
about
land
value
and
profit
expectation,
City,
Planning,
consultant,
Brent
tolerance
said
On,
January,
17
2018.
That
policy,
sending
a
clear
expectation,
was
a
component
of
smart
planning.
I
have
a
concern
about
what
message
this
up
zone
sends
to
the
north
and
south
property
owners
and
the
nearby
subject
of
to
the
nearby
subject,
property
and
other
district
property
owners.
L
It
appears
contrary
to
optimum
practice,
as
suggested
by
sections
of
the
provincial
policy
statement
2014
in
section
4.0
implementation
and
interpretation,
where
the
applicable
zoning
bylaws
may
be
out
of
date.
With
the
OPA
50
and
the
provincial
policy
statement,
it
appears
to
be
resting,
doning
change,
justification
on
previous
precedent
applications
where
recently
approved
applications
referenced
in
the
report
may
likewise
be
contrary
to
optimum
practices
and
in
harmonious
with
newer
policies.
Despite
receiving
these
planning
approvals,
the
general
understanding
is
that
all
applications
are
to
proceed
on
their
own
merits.
L
Context
and
planning
appear
out
of
balance
where
the
central
Kingston
growth
and
in
field
studies,
secondary
planning
and
citywide
zoning
bylaw
update,
update,
might
have
provided
optimum
community
clarity.
This
zoning
change
would
seem
the
wrong
thing
at
this
time
where
major
policies
are
potentially
out
of
date
and
then
I
just
have
a
couple
of
quick
questions.
Just
for
consideration,
how
would
this
application
measure
in
the
context
of
the
developing
second
residential
unit,
new
permissions
policy,
I,
just
read
that
and
I
just
it'd-
be
neat
to
know
how
that
would
fit
in
in
comparison
to
that.
L
How
does
this
application
intend
to
meet
and
mitigate
section?
Two
point:
seven
point,
one
of
the
o
P
and
it
returns
the
original
point,
which
is
we're
not
really
given
any
information
and
I
think
that
you'll
hear
comments
from
many
people
that
there
is
a
subjective
level
to
this,
and
there
is
some
understanding
that
the
public
needs
and
we
really
can't
provide
proper
comment.
L
I'd
have
some
concern
about
related
aspects
of
ope,
you
know
compatibility,
etc.
How
does
the
application
intend
to
improve
accessibility
for
persons
with
disabilities
and
older
persons
by
identifying,
preventing
and
removing
land
use
barriers?
As
for
the
provincial
policy
statement,
section
one
point:
one
point:
one
point:
F
that's
referenced
in
the
report:
I
just
wondered
why
and
there's
no
other
evidence
to
it
again.
I
think
it's
something
that's
supposed
to
come
later,
while
there
is
likely
no
planning
control
over
interior
use
of
space,
as
already
mentioned,
it
could
be
15
bedrooms
to
me.
L
It's
the
washrooms.
You
know
we
live
in
an
age
where
we
have
to
have
washrooms
on
every
floor.
Remove
the
washrooms
there's
a
more
compelling
cases
to
study
to
me
the
large
tree
in
the
backyard.
It
was
mentioned
that
there
might
be
three
parking
spaces.
It
is
actually
one
of
three
large
trees
in
that
general
area.
L
O
O
I'm
Ruth,
pester
and
I
think
I'm,
probably
the
one
most
affected.
If
this
building
is
built,
I
live
at
Cooper
Street
and
my
property
goes
along
the
side
of
four
properties
like
the
back
the
end
of
the
gardens.
So
my
kitchen
window
is
overlooking
where
the
beautiful
pool
was
the
beautiful
garden,
the
beautiful
property,
which
is
now
disgraceful.
O
The
trees
have
been
cut
down.
The
pool
filled
in
and
now
he's
hoping
to
build
some
humongous
wealth,
tear
down
that
beautiful
lady
who's
being
kicked
to
the
curb
which
I
considered
that
house
I
have
lived
at
Cooper
Street
for
47
years,
it'll
be
48
July,
first
and
I
will
have
no
natural
light
coming
into
my
east-facing
windows,
which
are
my
kitchen,
my
dining
room,
which
is
a
part
of
a
living
room,
and
that
would
be
it.
I
only
have
windows
on
the
other
side,
but
it's
beside
a
side
drive
and
another
building
and
windows.
O
Looking
at
the
back,
this
community
was
Anna
Mae
using
community
I
brought
some
pictures,
which
I
will
show
you
later
we
had
profs,
we
had
Padraig
Laverty,
we
had
doctors,
we
had
young
families,
it
was
wonderful
and
then
in
moved
the
folks
who
wanted
to
make
money-
and
you
all
know
that
the
love
of
money
is
the
root
of
all
evil.
Anyway,
I
will
not
get
any
natural
light,
and
now
tonight
I
hear
that
the
cars
are
going
to
be
parked
behind
the
building,
which
will
be
right
outside
my
window.
O
O
Every
time
there
was
something
that
came
up
with
slum
landlords
and
I
live
directly
across
from
one
which
used
to
be
one
Cooper
Street
they've
changed
the
numbers
now
and
the
what's
his
name.
Anyway,
it
doesn't
matter.
He
built
a
big
three-story
building
attached
to
an
older
building
at
the
time
that
was
built.
He
was
not
allowed
to
use
the
third
floor.
I
noticed
their
lights
on
there
now,
so
I
think
it's
being
used,
but
that
was
that
was
not
allowed.
O
In
fact,
when
he
took
the
city
to
court,
judge
Campbell
said
to
him,
so
you
want
to
build
a
hotel
on
Cooper,
Street.
Well,
I
think
we
can
kind
of
say
that
about
Albert
Street
too,
and
what's
going
to
happen,
I
just
oh
and
I
want
to
tell
you
two
comments.
I
want
to
leave
you
with
two
really
interesting
comments
both
made
by
young
people,
one
by
a
carpenter
who
said
to
me
last
year
when
I
asked
him
what
he
thought
about
a
certain
building.
O
O
Okay,
in
the
second
comment,
its
we
were
walking
through
the
university
area
with
two
cousins
of
Charlie's,
one
from
Paris
France,
one
from
Germany,
and
they
said
this
would
never
happen
in
our
countries
and
they
meant
the
university
area
allowed
to
become
such
a
mess.
Really
a
mess
and
I
don't
want
that
to
happen
to
Albert
Street
Cooper.
P
P
A
P
So
I'm
speaking
it
on
my
own
behalf
and
as
co-chair
of
Sydenham
district
Association
and
we
are
an
incorporated
residence
Association
and
we
object
to
the
subject
proposed
development.
The
city
of
Kingston
has
a
number
of
planning
initiatives
underway
to
determine
appropriate
types
and
locations
for
infill
and
densification
example.
The
central
Kingston
growth
strategy
you've
heard
this
all
tonight.
Until
these
initiatives
are
finalized,
any
development
should
be
evaluated
in
relation
to
existing
zoning
and
bylaws,
in
other
words,
proposals
to
deviate
substantially
from
existing
zoning
and
by
laws
such
as
the
subject.
Development
should
be
denied.
P
The
City
of
Kingston
recently
made
changes
to
setback
requirements
to
curtail
somewhat
the
size
of
additions
to
residential
homes.
This
is
in
response
to
concerns
raised
by
residents
about
monster
additions.
The
subject
proposal
asks
the
city
to
now
go
in
the
opposite
direction.
It
seems
in
the
rationale
for
subject
development
references
made
to
nearby
developments
of
:,
Wood
Street
and
Cooper
Street
as
precedent
for
818
Albert
Street
property.
It
follows
that
if
approval
is
granted
for
the
218
Albert
Street
proposal,
the
City
of
Kingston
Planning
Committee
has
set
a
precedent
for
demolition
of
houses.
P
In
Sydenham
district,
this
is
how
infill
and
densification
will
take
place
and
sidon
dentist
with
a
wrecking
ball
to
find
homes,
notably
the
fine
home
that
is
the
subject
or
the
object
of
the
subject.
Proposal
was
the
long-term
residence
of
a
Kingstonian
with
a
national
and
international
reputation
and
a
key
part
of
the
streetscape
attached
and
I'll.
Come
to
that
in
a
second
is
a
summary.
I
have
prepared
of
the
Queen's
campus
master
plan.
P
Looking
at
the
218
Albert
Street
developments
objectively
and
asking
myself
what
I
want
this
complex
built
in
my
neighborhood
next
to
me,
I
would
quickly
express
my
dismay
at
having
such
a
large
complex
over
sharing
my
home
and
changing
the
character
and
feel
of
the
neighborhood
I'd
like
to
return
now
to
what
I
was
saying
earlier
about
the
Queen's
campus
master
plan,
because
there
are
items
in
that
campus
master
plan.
That
I
think
would
be
helpful
to
the
planning
committee
in
assessing
this
proposal.
P
Is
it
possible
to
to
flip
that
attachment
up
on
the
he's
up
there?
Now?
Oh,
very
good?
Okay.
So
it's
important
to
look
at
this
master
plan.
The
university
retained
a
team
of
experienced
consultants
led
by
urban
strategies,
incorporated
with
a
range
of
skills
and
expertise
to
assist
the
university
in
the
project.
Regular
meetings
with
the
campus
master
plan
advisory
committee,
consisting
a
representation
from
faculty
staff,
students
commuting
and
alumni,
ensure
that
the
plan
evolved
in
alignment
with
broader
university
objectives
and
responded
to
the
needs
of
all
users
of
the
Queen's
campus.
P
The
first
category
historic
illustrates
buildings
with
either
and
individual
historic
significance,
or
that
strongly
contributes
to
a
historical
landscape
and
I
propose
I
put
to
you
that
that's
the
nature
of
the
building
on
Albert
Street
218,
it
has
a
it
strongly,
contributes
to
a
historic
landscape.
You
look
on
the
King
City
of
Kingston
website,
it's
the
historic
city
of
Kingston,
and
so,
while
this
is
not
a
heritage
building,
it
strongly
contributes
to
a
historic
landscape.
In
my
view,.
A
P
P
Seconds
30
seconds,
thank
you
well,
I
could
leave
this.
This
master
campus
plant
with
you.
It's
it
areas
for
preservation
and
modest
change.
Our
areas
of
stability
such
as
the
city's
residential
neighborhoods.
If
new
development
is
located
adjacent
to
or
within
it,
you
know,
I
think
I'm
going
to
stop.
Yeah
I
think
there's
just
too
much
to
go
through
you'll
have
the
campus
master
plan
and
it'll
speak
against
this
development.
Thank.
A
P
Q
Q
I
won't
go.
This
will
be
more
just
a
personal
comment,
I'm,
not
in
support
of
the
development.
The
some
of
the
written
submissions
I've
seen
go
through
some
of
the
technical
issues
which
I
agree
with,
but
I'm
gonna
say
just
from
a
personal
point
of
view.
I
live
on
the
street.
I
live
on
a
was
well
a
quite
an
old
house
on
the
street
and
I've
been
subject
to
neighboring
houses
that
have
been
previously
approved
to
have
additions
on
the
back
that
really
block
out.
Q
My
sunlight
directly
adversely
affect
my
enjoyment
of
my
property
remaining
areas.
Our
parking
lots
covered
in
gravel
snowplows,
taking
out
my
fences.
It's
it's
a
significant
impact
on
people
who
live
in
these
neighborhoods
to
have
this
kind
of
thing,
a
significant
large
mint
or
these
monster
additions
occurring.
Q
It
really
has
an
effect
on
the
few
remaining
people
who've
living
on
the
street
and
the
proponent
put
up
some
pictures
of
some
of
the
neighboring
houses
and
the
ones
across
the
street,
in
fact,
are
examples
of
some
of
the
worst
extensions
and
additions
that
have
been
allowed
to
happen
on
the
street.
Large
brick
additions
put
on
the
back
garbage
everywhere,
too
much
density.
The
front
facades
are
sort
of
theirs
in
some
of
those
places,
but
it's
really
been
a
detraction
from
the
rest
of
the
street.
Q
I'll
speak
to
the
historic
character
of
the
street.
This
is
from
a
very
personal
point.
It's
a
stable
neighborhood.
Much
of
it
has
been
there
for
a
hundred
years.
The
houses
in
question
my
house
and
a
number
of
others
have
been
there,
probably
140
years
or
more.
It
is
an
old
street,
so
it's
really
quite
stable.
There's
relatively
few
new
places
on
it.
The
house
in
question
is
one
of
a
beautiful
wooden
houses
at
the
lower
end
of
the
street.
It's
it's
an
identical
house
to
another
one
and
it's
really
a
gem
of
the
street.
Q
So
I
really
just
want
to
emphasize
that,
aside
from
the
turning
it
into
a
three
family
dwelling,
making
allowances
for
exceptions
for
the
side,
yard,
front
yard
and
backyard,
which
don't
seem
to
make
sense
to
me
in
that
neighborhood,
it's
yet
another
example
of
the
corrosive
nature
of
these
kind
of
developments
and
expansions
that
really
sort
of
tear
apart
this
neighborhood
when
I
moved
in
it
was
probably
80%
permanent
family
residence
on
the
street
and
the
rest
rental
student
rental.
Typically
it's
more
than
inverted.
Q
Q
Why
don't
I
tear
my
house
down,
put
in
an
identical
proposal
and
and
put
in
a
3
a
3
unit
thing
on
it?
Well,
this
would
be
the
shoe
in
the
door
for
someone
like
me
to
do
that.
I've
got
the
law.
It's
big
enough.
I
could
do
that
it's,
but
it
would
be
tearing
down
yet
another
house
on
the
street.
That
really
is
part
of
the
fabric,
so
I
just
want
to
reinforce
from
a
very
personal
perspective.
It
does
make
a
difference.
Q
You
know
the
facade
on
this
house
looks,
looks
reasonable.
It
doesn't
quite
fit
in
with
the
neighborhood,
but
it
really
the
kind
of
enlargement
and
intensification
on
that
density.
Just
sort
of
bit
by
bit
bite
away
at
these
neighborhoods
and
tell
there's
not
much
left.
So
that's
all
I
have
to
say
Thanks
Thanks.
A
J
J
J
The
reasons
have
been
stated,
obliquely
or
fairly
directly
by
some
of
the
previous
speakers,
but
just
to
underscore
it.
We
have
to
remind
ourselves
of
what
makes
a
neighborhood
a
neighborhood
and,
in
this
case
the
history,
the
streetscape,
the
charm,
the
memories
of
beautiful
old
homes,
the
subject
property
at
2:18,
Albert
Street,
was
built
in
the
1870s,
the
same
builder
in
the
1870s
built
my
home
they're
twins.
They
have
different
cladding.
They
look
different
on
the
exterior,
but
they're.
J
It's
a
utilitarian
box
with
minimal
adornment
trying
to
replace
something
with
character.
Proportion
charm
harmony
with
a
neighborhood
when
you
rip
out
the
character
of
a
neighborhood
home
by
home,
there's
a
tipping
point.
The
previous
speaker
referred
to.
There
have
been
some
atrocities
in
the
near
neighborhood,
but
that
block
that
we're
talking
about
still
has
integrity.
J
It
still
has
charm,
it's
still
quite
lovely,
it's
attractive
to
the
students
they
want
to
be
on
a
street
like
that
it
has
the
highest
friends,
there's
a
reason
for
that,
as
well
as
its
proximity
to
Queens,
it's
still
attractive
to
Believe,
It
or
Not
to
the
the
last
holdouts,
the
the
family,
residence
in
the
neighborhood,
but
I'm,
not
really
speaking
for
us.
We
may
be
the
last
of
the
Mohicans
and
and
a
generation
from
now
it
may
be
old
student
housing,
but
the
arguments
still
apply.
J
What
makes
a
neighborhood
a
neighborhood
when
you
rip
out
a
perfectly
beautiful,
charming
home
with
integrity
that
fits
into
that
neighborhood.
This
new
structure
fits
in
a
utilitarian
way.
Only
apart
from
that,
it's
really
a
colossal
mistake.
It's
an
error
of
judgment.
It's
an
error
of
of
sociability
of
culture
of
community
I.
Don't
have
any
questions,
that's
my
comment.
I'm
opposed
to
the
project.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate.
R
Thank
You
mayor,
my
name,
is
Carl
Bray
I'm,
a
professional
planning
consultant
I'm,
also
acting
on
behalf
of
my
mother-in-law,
Margaret
Gibson,
who
lives
at
1:51,
Union,
Street
West,
just
around
the
corner.
A
couple
of
questions
are
actually
a
couple
of
comments
here:
I
do
a
lot
of
work
in
neighborhoods
all
over
Ontario
and
it's
very
clear
in
the
provincial
policy
statement
and
in
own
be
decisions
that
intensification
isn't
appropriate
everywhere.
R
In
fact,
best
practices
and
planning
place
intensification
at
the
edges
of
neighborhoods,
more
adjacent
to
transit
along
major
routes,
and
that
is
pretty
commonplace
in
most
of
the
official
plans.
I'm
familiar
with.
On
top
of
that,
there
is,
this
thing
called
a
sense
of
place
and
fabric,
and
this
is
an
instance,
particularly
when
you
have
a
pair
of
houses
built
by
the
same
builder.
You
also
have
a
streetscape
that
has
permeability
visual
permeability
where
you
have
generous
side
yards.
R
You
have
a
lot
of
trees
and
rear
yards,
there's
a
distinct
character
to
this
mature
neighborhood,
and
this
type
of
infill
is
completely
counter
to
that
type
of
character.
So
you
may
say:
characters
the
rather
subjective
aspect.
I,
don't
think
so
talk
to
any
real
estate,
agent
and
I
think
you'll
find
a
different
opinion,
certainly
an
in
standard
planning
practice.
The
point
being,
is
you
try
to
reinforce
stable
neighborhoods?
You
try
to
place
development
where
it's
most
appropriately
placed,
and
you
certainly
do
not
want
to
induce
the
tipping
point
that
the
previous
speaker
just
mentioned.
R
So
a
couple
of
quick
things
to
keep
in
mind.
Kingston's
population
is
proposed
to
peak
in
the
not-too-distant
future
and
remain
stable.
Similarly,
the
university
is
trying
very
hard
to
accommodate
accommodation
on
campus,
rather
than
spread
it
into
the
neighborhoods
and
the
students
that
I
teach
is
an
adjunct.
Professor,
they
don't
necessarily
want
to
live
in
the
type
of
thing
that
this
is
being
proposed
to
be
to
be
built.
They
appreciate
older
buildings.
They
appreciate
also
the
ability
to
get
away
from
campus
and
have
a
little
respite
from
what's
happening
in
and
around
campus.
R
They
also
don't
tend
to
own
cars.
So
there
are
a
number
of
different
things
that
are
trending,
that
I
don't
see
this
particular
type
of
development
working
towards.
So,
in
summary,
I
think
this
is
premature
based
on
the
growth
strategy.
It
is
spots
owning,
it
could
be
crudely
called
neighborhood
busting,
and
it
is
definitely
not
the
sort
of
thing
that
most
communities
are
trying
to
support.
Thank
you
thank.
A
K
K
We
see
that
there's
nothing
in
the
agenda
package
concerning
the
date
of
construction
of
the
current
house
on
the
site,
so
we
wouldn't
have
known
that
unless
the
gentlemen
had
provided
it.
So
thank
you
for
doing
that.
So
my
question
is:
why
not?
Why
isn't
that
information
in
the
report
visit
screwie
very
relevant
to
how
the
process
is
gonna
unfold
for
this
file?
And
my
second
point
is
what
would
happen
if
city
staff
tomorrow
moved
to
designate
this
1870s
house
from
a
heritage
perspective?
K
A
Seeing
none
I
will
quickly
return
to
the
horseshoe
any
comments
from
Council
members
seeing
none.
This
will
go
through
a
continued
process.
Make
sure
if
you
didn't
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
or
something
else
comes
to
mind.
Please
share
that
with
with
our
staff
and
make
sure
that
you've
signed
up
on
the
list
so
that
you're
recognized
in
the
event
that
there
there
is
an
appeal
at
some
future
date.
So
great!
N
Your
mr.
chair,
I,
don't
I,
don't
have
any
answers
to
give
right
here.
I
just
wanted
to
mention
to
you
that
if
you
sign
into
the
to
the
sign-in
sheets
provide
any
written
correspondence
to
myself,
you
will
be
noted
down
in
the
processing
of
the
applications
and
provided
any
future
notification,
as
it
relates
to
this
project,
moving
forward
with
key
dates,
etc.
So
please
do
feel
free
to
reach
out
to
me
directly
and
sign
in
at
the
sign-in
sheets
at
any
time.
Thank.
M
Yes,
so,
first
of
all,
we
just
like
to
say
thank
you
for
everyone
for
coming
out
and
providing
their
comments
back
to
the
applicant
and
again
working
with
city
staff
moving
forward
to
help
refine
this
proposal.
Just
speaking
to
a
few
of
the
comments,
there's
a
lot
of
reference
to
this
proposal.
Setting
precedent
in
the
neighborhood
and
planning
is
considered
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
so
just
making
everyone
aware
that
it's
considered
case-by-case
and
a
reference
to
other
studies
would
simply
be
be
just.
M
M
There
was
a
comment
about
concerns
that
could
be
potentially
be
converted
in
the
future
and,
given
that
there's
a
site-specific
zoning
limiting
it
to
twelve
bedrooms
and
a
future
proposal
would
then
have
to
be
re-evaluated
by
staff
and
would
come
before
committee
again
so
could
be
addressed
at
that
time
and
then
again
just
wanted
to
reiterate
that,
in
terms
of
the
the
building
we're
working
very
closely
with
staff
going
back
and
forth
to
ensure
that
it's
compatible
at
the
neighborhood
and
are
open
to
comments
and
feedback
from
the
public.
Like
we
heard
tonight,.
H
To
you,
mr.
chair
I
had
some
response
to
mr.
Dixon's
comments
related
to
the
heritage
designation.
So,
as
Frank
identified,
the
property
is
not
currently
listed
or
designated
under
the
interior,
Heritage
Act.
There
are
two
different
processes
that
council
and
Heritage
Kingston
and
staff
could
go
through,
so
the
first
would
be
listing
the
property
under
and
it's
adding
it
to
our
heritage
properties
register.
So
in
order
to
do
that,
heritage,
Kingston
would
need
to
be
consulted
on
the
potential
listing
of
that
property
and
something
that
council
would
need
to
decide
on.
H
As
far
as
actual
designation
under
part,
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
staff
would
need
to
be
directed
to
complete
a
906
review
so
essentially
do
a
Folsom
review
of
the
Heritage
features
and
attributes
of
the
property
and
determine
whether
it's
appropriate
to
designate
so
again.
That
would
be
a
process
that
would
need
to
go
through
Heritage,
Kingston
again
to
council
for
any
type
of
recommendation
and
if
it
were
decided
to
designate
the
property
there.
There
is
a
period
of
time
where
the
owner
could
object
to
that
designation.
A
A
All
those
in
favor
carried
confirmation
of
mid
minutes
from
our
January
20
January
24th
meeting
Thank
You
councillor
Hill
Thank
You
councillor
of
sanik
comments,
seeing
none
all
those
in
favor
carried
disclosure
of
pecuniary
interest.
Seeing
none
delegations,
none
briefings
non
business,
non
motions,
non
notices
of
motion,
none
other
business,
none
and
we
did
receive
correspondence
and
I
believe,
there's
probably
some
future
correspondence
that
we've
received.
That
may
not
be
on
the
list
yet
date
and
time
of
our
next
meeting,
February
21st
2019,
so
I
will
see
well.