January 7, 2025, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting was called to order at 1:01 PM; it being noted that Councillor E. Peloza was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

2.1   1st Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning

2024-12-11 CACP Report

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

That the 1st Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning Report, from its meeting held on December 11, 2024, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   629 Baseline Road East (OZ-9807)

2025-01-07 - Staff Report (3.1) Dipesh Patel co Siv-ik Planning and Design Inc. 629 Base Line Rd E

Moved by S. Hillier

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Dipesh Patel (c/o Siv-ik Planning and Design Inc.) relating to the property located at 629 Base Line Road East:

a)   the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting on January 21, 2025, to amend the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016, by ADDING a new policy in the Specific Policies for the Neighbourhoods Place Type and by ADDING the lands to Map 7 – Specific Policy Areas – of the Official Plan;

b)   the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting held on January 21, 2025 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), as amended in the above-noted part a), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential R3 (R3-1) Zone TO a Residential R3/Residential R8 Special Provision (R3-1/R8-3(_)) Zone;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with these matters:

-     D. Murphey, Siv-ik Planning and Design Inc.;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

-     The recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (PPS);

-     The recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions, City Building policies, and the Neighbourhoods Place Type policies; and

-     The recommended amendment would permit residential intensification that is appropriate for the existing and planned context of the site and surrounding neighbourhood;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.2   430 First Street (Z-9809)

2025-01-07 - Staff Report (3.2) - 2741943 Ontario Inc. co Europa Foods 430 First Street (Z-9809)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of 2741943 Ontario Inc. c/o Europa Foods relating to the property located at 430 First Street, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on January 21, 2025, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London,2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Restricted Service Commercial (RSC1) Zone and Open Space (OS4) Zone TO a Restricted Service Commercial Special Provision (RSC1(_)) Zone and Open Space (OS4) Zone;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with these matters;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    The recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (PPS); 

  •    The recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including, but not limited to the Key Directions, City Design and Building        policies, and the Urban Corridor Place Type policies; and,

  •    The recommended amendment would permit a range of complementary uses within the existing building that are appropriate for the            site and within the surrounding context;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Hillier

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.3   Demolition Request for the Heritage Listed Property at 1361 Wilton Grove Road

2025-01-07 - Staff Report (3.3) - Demolition Request 1361 Wilton Grove Rd

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with respect to the demolition request for all the buildings on the heritage listed property at 1361 Wilton Grove Road, the following actions be taken:

a)   the Demolition Request for Buildings 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, excluding Building 1, as appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “A” of this report, BE APPROVED;

b)   that notice BE GIVEN under the provisions of Section 29(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.O. 18, of Municipal Council’s intention to designate Building 1 on the property at 1361 Wilton Grove Road to be of cultural heritage value or interest for the reasons outlined as appended in Appendix E; and,

c)    should no objections be received to the Municipal Council’s notice of intention to designate, a by-law to designate the property at 1361 Wilton Grove Road to be of cultural heritage value or interest for the reasons outlined as appended in Appendix E, BE INTRODUCED at a future meeting of the Municipal Council immediately following the end of the appeal period;

it being noted that should an appeal to the Municipal Council’s notice of intention to designate be received, the City Clerk will refer the appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with these matters:

-    M. Whalley;

-    J.M. Mettiler; and,

-    S. Bentley;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Hillier

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Hillier

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.4   1958 Duluth Crescent (OZ-9814)

2025-01-07 - Staff Report (3.4) Housing Development Corp co MBPC - 1958 Duluth Crescent

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of the Housing Development Corporation, London (HDC) relating to the property located at 1958 Duluth Crescent:

a)    the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on January 21, 2025, to amend the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016, to amend Specific Policy 1057D_ in the Neighbourhoods Place Type to permit apartments with a maximum height of five (5) storeys;

b)    the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated January 7, 2025, as Appendix “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on January 21, 2025, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), as amended in the above-noted part a), to change the zoning of a portion of the subject property FROM a Holding Residential R5 Special Provision/Residential R6 Special Provision (hh-100R5-6(18)/R6-5(93)) Zone TO a Residential R5 Special Provision/Residential R6 Special Provision (R5-6(18)/R6-5(93)) Zone; and,

c)    The Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design issues through the site plan process:

i)    Provide an all-season landscape buffer along the rear property line to screen the parking and minimize potential negative impacts on the adjacent low-rise residential uses to the west;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with these matters:

-    L. Maitland, Senior Housing Development Coordinator, Housing and Community Growth;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

-    The recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (PPS);

-    The recommended amendment conforms to The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions, City Design Policies, Urban Corridor Place Type policies, and the Our Tools policies; and,

-    The recommended amendment would permit an appropriate form of development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and surrounding neighbourhood;

it being acknowledged that any and all oral and written submissions from the public, related to this application have been, on balance, taken into consideration by Council as part of its deliberations and final decision regarding these matters.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Hillier

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   Deferred Matters List

2024-01-07 PEC Deferred Matters List

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the Deferred List BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 1:31 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (43 minutes)

Hello everyone, it’s 102 and I will get the second meeting of the planning environment committee. Call that to order. Welcome back everyone after our Christmas break. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabic, Haudenosaunee, Lenna Peiwak and Adawadran.

We honor and respect the history languages and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. Please check the city website for additional meeting and detail information.

The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact PEC@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension, 2425. This time, I’ll ask committee, if there are any disclosures of pecuniary interest. Seeing none, we have one item on the consent agenda.

I’ll look for our motion from many. Councillor Cuddy has moved it. I’ll look for a seconder. Councillor or Deputy Mayor Lewis has second.

I’ll open for any conversation before I call the vote. Seeing none, we have a motion move to accept the Staff Committee Advisory Committee on Planning. I’ll call the vote. Seeing the vote, the motion carries four to zero.

Thank you. Moving on to our scheduled items, 3.1, regarding 629 Baseline Road East, I’ll look for a motion to open the public participation meeting. Councillor Cuddy, seconded by Deputy Mayor Lewis. I’ll call that vote.

Councillor Palose, the vote’s yes. Losing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you. I’ll look for the applicant of the applicant like to address the committee.

Please, sir, give us your name and you have five minutes. Thank you and through you, Chair. Good afternoon, members of committee. My name is Dan Murphy.

I’m a planner with civic planning and design. Here on behalf of Depeche Patel, to present the proposal for 629 Baseline Road East, for requesting a zoning change and an official plan amendment to convert the existing foreplex on the lands into a six unit apartment building. Project aligns with the city’s goals to make better use of urban land by increasing housing options where services and infrastructure are already available. This project represents a small but meaningful step towards addressing London’s housing needs without needing to change the building’s footprint or height.

Adding two units to the existing building contributes to housing supply in a neighborhood that already boasts great access to transit, bike lanes, shops, parks, and other amenities. The design respects the area’s character, maintaining the two-story height, and the existing site layout. This is a straightforward, thoughtful, intensification project that supports housing needs, fits well within the existing neighborhood, and aligns with sound planning principles. I want to thank Atlanta Riley and the rest of planning and development staff for their work on this proposal, and we are in full agreement with the staff recommendation.

Appreciate your time and consideration, and I’m available to answer any questions. Thank you. I’ll look for others in the gallery that’d like to address the committee. I will ask the clerk if there’s anyone online.

There’s no one online. I don’t see anyone coming to the mic, so I’ll look for motion to close the PPM. Councillor Cuddy, motion is seconded by Deputy Mayor Lewis. I’ll call that vote.

Seeing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you. I’ll now put that on the floor for many members. Promotion.

Councillor Hill here has removed the staff recommendation of the seconder by Councillor Cuddy. Any discussion? Seeing none, I’ll call the vote. Seeing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Okay, moving on to 3.2 is regarding 431st Street. I’ll look for a motion to open public participation meeting. Deputy Mayor Lewis, seconded by Councillor Cuddy, and I’ll call that vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you. I’ll look for the applicant if you’d like to address. The applicant would like to address the committee. Councillor Clerk, is he on someone online?

Okay, it looks like the applicant is not here. I’ll look for any others that would like to speak to us. Seeing none, I’ll look for a motion to close the PPM. Councillor Cuddy, seconded by Councillor Hill here, and I’ll call that vote.

Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, moving on. Deputy Mayor Lewis. That was just the PPM, so I’m prepared to move the staff recommendation.

My apologies. Thank you. Okay, there. Deputy Mayor Lewis has moved the staff recommendation.

Councillor Hill here has seconded any discussion on that. Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you. I want to first of all thank our staff.

I know Catherine Matin has been instrumental in helping the applicant get this brought through quickly and before us. This is a great reuse of what is currently a vacant space. It was being used for a different commercial use. They need a rezoning because of course our CSA zones do not allow all of the same uses in every zone.

If this building was just one property to the south, they wouldn’t have needed the rezoning. However, this is a great fit in the neighbourhood. And colleagues will recall in December, we approved a planning application for redevelopment at the Plaza on Dundas Street at First Street. Redevelopment for mixed use commercial and residential will actually displace the opportunity for this applicant to retain their current space, which had some issues with sanitary and sewer service anyway.

So it was going to be out of service for a while. This allows them to relocate, stay in the same neighbourhood, continue to provide the same service that they’ve been providing to the community for a couple of decades now. Fantastic Portuguese food that the neighbourhood very much enjoys. And I just encourage colleagues to support this so that Europa Foods can continue to be part of the Ward 2 community.

Thank you. Any other comments or questions? We have a motion moved in second, I’ll call the vote. Thank the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you, now moving on to 3.3. And this is regarding 1361 Wilton Grove Road. I will look for a motion to open the public participation meeting council here, seconded by Councillor Cuddy. I’ll call that vote.

Willing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Hey, thank you. I’m not gonna go to staff for presentation on this. I appreciate the report.

It was fairly extensive. Learned a lot about the property here. We all had a chance to read and consult with staff prior to this meeting. If the applicant who is seeking an demolition permit is here, I would like to address committee.

I’ll go to you first. I don’t see anyone online or here. So I’ll go to members of the public that would like to address us. Please ma’am, give us your name and you have five minutes.

Yeah, thank you. Hello everyone, I’m Maggie Walli. I would like to say that I support the designation of 1361 Wilton Grove Road. I also read the report, Heritage Planning staff, CHCP and an independent consultants report.

Also advocate for the designation of this property, particularly for the farmhouse building number one in the report. I think this is an important property, not the least because of, it is an historical gem, having been in the same family since George Laidlaw arrived in 1832 and built a log cabin there. That’s nearly 200 years. That makes that almost a record for London.

The Laidlaws were not only pioneers, but contributed much to the agricultural and civic scene. The 125 year old farmhouse as many heritage attributes of its own and meets the provincial criteria for designation, for its significant cultural heritage value. I feel that we lose our agricultural heritage, which is in fact the foundation of our city, too easily and too casually. In addition, this perfectly viable building can be used, repurposed and remain as physical evidence of the history of this family and this area.

There are many examples that were seen in the report of farmhouses remaining in urban areas or near urban areas and they make such a difference to the scene adding interest and value to that. I hope that London would like to see the same thing happening here. We all make great efforts to reuse and recycle our little bits of plastic and paper in the house. And I hate to see such a wasteful thing as a building like this being demolished.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Willy. I’ll look for other speakers.

Please give us your name and you have five minutes. Hello, members of PEC. It’s John Mark Metrayed. I’m the chair of the community advisory committee on planning.

I’m not sure if this is appropriate or if I should have asked for a delegation, but I just thought it might be helpful to provide the committee with the context around our discussion at CACB or— Yeah, you’re fine. Okay. This is a public participation meeting. It’s a time for me.

You’re fine and you’re rolled to speak during this time as you didn’t need a delegation. Okay, perfect. Thank you. So I know you’ve got a recommendation and a report that agrees with staff, but I know sometimes it’s helpful to have some context around the conversation that actually happened at committee.

So we did talk about this one a bit and we did have the owner present virtually to the committee and we had an exchange with the owner. And I won’t speak for the owner, but I’ll speak from the perspective, I think, of the committee. There was some discussion around, you know, we see staff reports that say the criteria are met were cognizant of the technical requirements for designation, but I’d like to think we’re practical and taken to consideration the competing priorities, the concerns of the owners, and so we did listen to the owners. And I’ll say the one thing that came up was, we didn’t really hear much detailed reason about why the main home, the building one, couldn’t be incorporated into the new proposed use, which was, I think, an industrial subdivision.

And so that’s kind of the context, I think, was important in our recommendation is, had we heard some detail, some evidence about why this was impeding the future use of the property and the industrial purpose there, I think we might have had some different views, but it was pretty close to near unanimous in support of the staff recommendation because they had identified the important, the notable history with the laid-off family there. And I think more importantly, we didn’t really hear much from the applicant or the owner, but why it was impeding the development there other than the building was derelict and causing some problems in that respect. Nothing really on why it couldn’t be incorporated into the new development, like some of the examples that staff presented. So that’s the context, why I think big part of why the committee voted the way it did.

So I hope that’s kind of helpful. Very much so, thank you. Look for other folks who would like to address the committee. Please ma’am, give us your name and you have five minutes.

Thank you. My name is Susan Bentley and I’ve written this, so I apologize for that, but still. The parcel of land which comprises this potential industrial park at 1361 Wilton Grove Road was farmland until quite recently and its sale is to be regretted for that reason. We’re losing far too much farmland on the edges of London.

Apart from that regret, the site is very suitable for a small industrial park as it is almost surrounded now by such uses. Increasingly, the heritage community is interested in the potential of adapters reuse projects to secure the preservation of valuable heritage structures. And the house at 1361 Wilton Grove Road strikes me as a perfect candidate for this type of undertaking. In an industrial park, there must surely be a need for office space of some kind, such as shipping and receiving offices.

Other examples of retention of heritage buildings in similar occasions were mentioned in the reports and I would like to add another one in London. The yellow brick Italian at house at 2070 Huron Street is clearly used as an office building by the engineering company that uses that large corner site. The house on Wilton Grove Road sits well forward on the site so it shouldn’t be an impediment to developing the rest of the site. I also note from the reports that there is potentially some financial assistance available to the developer of the property should he wish to apply for it.

So retention shouldn’t in fact be a financial hardship either. As all reports before you all recommend retention, I’m confident that the planning environmental committee will decide to retain the farmhouse and ensure its designation under the heritage act. Thank you. Thank you.

Look for any other speakers. I’ll ask Kirk if there’s anyone online. There’s nobody online. I don’t see anyone coming to the mic so I’ll look for a motion to close the PPM.

Councilor Cuddy, seconded by Councilor Hilliard, I’ll call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you, I’ll put this item on the floor for committee. Councilor Hilliard.

You’re working? There we go. Yes, thank you. Can you tell me one thing through staff?

What is the size of the open space block? And do we have any possible clue of what they want to put on this industrial block? ‘Cause it doesn’t really tell us in the report. I’ll go to staff and those two questions.

Through the chair, if I could provide just a point of clarity, the matter before the committee is whether the property has cultural heritage value or interest, yes or no. There is anticipated future application for redevelopment of the property, but that’s not the current ask this before this committee. Yeah, that’s correct, Councilor. I didn’t mind going there with that question ‘cause I was curious about that.

And technically that will come. There’s no planning application before us on the use of land, it’s just a heritage question. Thank you, just trying to get an idea of the future possible. You had another question there about open space.

Can you repeat that question for me? Regarding the, what is the size of the open space being designated? Okay, I’ll go to staff on that. Through the chair, sorry, I would be repeating the same answer, I don’t have any details on the open space unless one of my colleagues here.

Okay, just want to make sure we got that clear. Other, that I’m mover or questions. Dr. Mayor Lewis, happy to move the staff recommendation.

Okay, I’ll look for a seconder, Councilor Hillier. Okay, I’ll look for comments or questions. Councilor Hopkins. Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair, for recognizing me. I just want to give my thanks to the committee for supporting staff’s recommendation. It’d be good to show that we can do what other municipalities are doing, protecting some of our heritage, as well as developing this area. So very much appreciate an opportunity to make these comments, thank you.

Thank you, other comments or questions? The committee would permit me from the chair. My two cents, I want to thank the speakers. That address us today, I want to thank you.

Our advisory committee for a very pragmatic approach to this, there’s nine buildings, I think, on this property, three residential, I think keeping one was a good way to come at this. For me personally, it is always subjective, right? So I know we have nine guidelines that we look at. It ticks two of those boxes.

Usually I’m pretty cautious on two of the boxes ticked, however, in this particular case, the cultural aspect was weighed heavily on my decision to support this. The history was fascinating to read. I would hope that somehow more of this information kind of gets out to the public, quite frankly. We don’t know the gems we have in our city until we have sometimes this type of application before us.

So I want to thank those that spoke to us today. And thank staff for arriving at the decision they did. So I’ll definitely support it. So I’ll look for any other comments or questions before I call the vote.

We got motion moved in second, and I’ll call the vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, thank you. We’re moving on to 3.4.

This is regarding 1958, the Louth Pressant, for a motion to open the public participation meeting. W.D. Mayor Lewis, seconded by Councillor Cudi, and I’ll call that vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

So I’ll go first to staff, and I understand the staff might go to the consultant that worked on this to kind of first in the public participation meeting. So please go ahead. Certainly in through you or to you, Mr. Chair, our consultant, Mr.

Maitland, is actually gonna make a couple of comments for us on behalf of the application. Please go ahead, Sir, you have five minutes. Thanks, all right. It is a bit awkward being a city application.

So my name is Life Maitland. I’m a senior housing development coordinator with municipal housing and industrial development. We are thankful to our colleagues in the planning and development, our planning development group that process this expeditiously. It is a bit of a complex situation here with an official plan in zone environment, applying broadly across the greater subdivision that is underway.

But for any questions that staff, or sorry that Council has, I do have our consulting planning colleagues from Monty Brown with me as well. And I believe Julian Novick of Wastel is online for questions that are more specific to that specific block, but I’ll otherwise let either the reviewing planners be further if necessary or take questions as they come. Thank you. Thank you.

I’ll look for members of the public that would like to address the committee on this item. I’ll ask Clerk if there’s anyone online. Okay, seeing none, I’ll look for motion to close PPM. Councillor Cudi, seconded by Councillor Hill here and I’ll call that vote.

Seeing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, I’ll open the, this item for committee members, Deputy Mayor Loz. Happy to move the staff recommendation and then I’ll speak to it once there’s a seconder for that. Okay, I’ll look for a seconder.

Councillor Hill here and I’ll go back to Deputy Mayor. Thank you, Chair. So this is going to be a development or redevelopment of a former school site in Ward 2. Very excited to see this process moving forward, hoping to see some shovels in the ground at some point in 2025.

Happy to see Mr. Felberg nodding his head in response to that. First of all, this brings an OPA in line with a minor variance that was granted by the Committee of Adjustment in December with respect to one of the blocks going to a five-story building, whereas before the plan had been for five, very supportive of this, or sorry, going from a four to a five, very supportive of this. I also think it’s worth taking the time to point out that the original design on these blocks we’re calling for L-shaped buildings that we’re going to see a portion of the building be closer to rear yards of neighboring single-family homes.

The change in design here alleviates that problem, and so the additional story is not a concern for me in terms of privacy issues with respect to the rear yards of neighbors because the alignment and placement of the building on the site now has changed and the physical design of the building has changed somewhat. So we’re actually going to be able to accommodate a few more affordable units by going to this extra story. And at the same time, the change in design has alleviated any concerns with rear yard setbacks for neighbors, so happy to support this and looking forward to seeing the shovels get in the ground this year. Thank you, other comments or questions from committee members or visiting counselors.

Okay, I’ll just, Committee won’t permit from the chair. I echo what the Deputy Mayor has said. I wanna thank staff for getting this expeditiously through ‘cause we mentioned 2025 and thrilled. This ticks a lot of boxes regarding affordable housing, infill, et cetera.

This is gonna add 20 more units with the extra story. So awesome traffic here. So good news story. And thank you, Deputy Mayor, for pointing out the improved design with the effect of surrounding neighborhoods.

That’s good to know. So I’ll look for any other comments or questions or a call to vote. We have a motion moved and seconded. I’ll call the vote.

Using the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you, that completes our scheduled items. We have no items for direction. We have a deferred matters list.

I’ll look for a motion on that. Councilor Cuddy wants to receive that and seconded by Councilor Hillier, any discussion. I’ll call that vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you, well, it was a very short meeting, a light schedule, which is our reward for the December meeting, where we initiated our committee members’ baptism by fire. Don’t get comfortable, it’s gonna come. So thank you, staff, and welcome back to 2025. I look forward to a great year.

Thanks all the promotion to adjourned. Councilor Cuddy, seconded by Councilor Hillier. Call the vote, hand vote.