HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2025-330 - A 2025-079 and 080 - 706 Frederick StreetStaff Report
xi _NI .fi
Development Services Department www.kitchener.co
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: August 19, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Evan Wittmann, Senior Planner, 519-783-8523
WARD(S) INVOLVED: 1
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORT NO.:
August 12, 2025
DSD -2025-330
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-079 — 706 Frederick Street
(Future Severed Parcel)
Minor Variance Application A2025-080 — 706 Frederick Street
(Future Retained Parcel)
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Minor Variance Application A2025-079 — 706 Frederick Street (Future Severed)
That Minor Variance Application A2025-079 for 706 Frederick Street (Future Severed
Parcel) requesting relief from Section 4.12.2 g) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit
a lot width of 7.6 metres instead of the minimum required 10.5 metres, to facilitate
the construction of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with 3 Additional Dwelling Units
(ADUs)(Attached) in each half of a proposed Semi -Detached Dwelling, 4 dwelling
units in each half, for a total of 8 dwelling units, as shown on drawings prepared by
GRIT Engineering, dated May 9, 2025, BE REFUSED.
B. Minor Variance Application A2025-080 — 706 Frederick Street (Future Retained)
That Minor Variance Application A2025-080 for 706 Frederick Street (Future
Retained Parcel) requesting relief from Section 4.12.2 g) of Zoning By-law 2019-051
to permit a lot width of 7.6 metres instead of the minimum required 10.5 metres, to
facilitate the construction of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with 3 Additional Dwelling
Units (ADUs)(Attached) in each half of a proposed Semi -Detached Dwelling, 4
dwelling units in each half, for a total of 8 dwelling units, as shown on drawings
prepared by GRIT Engineering, dated May 9, 2025, BE REFUSED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review and make recommendations on Minor Variance
Applications A2025-079 and A2025-080 for the future Severed and Retained Parcels
proposed at 706 Frederick Street. The applications propose a Semi -Detached
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 104 of 303
Dwelling with three Additional Dwelling Units (ADU)(Attached), 4 dwelling units in each
half, for a total of eight dwelling units on the subject property.
• The key finding of this report is that the applications do not meet all `Four Tests' of the
Planning Act.
• There are no financial implications.
• Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising
that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the
application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property
and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
Committee of Adjustment meeting.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located on the north side of Frederick Street, in between the
intersections of Lois Street and River Road East. The subject property currently features a
triplex with a detached rear garage. The subject property is approximately 15.2 metres
wide, with a depth of approximately 45 metres, and size of 684 square metres.
Figure 1 - Site Aerial (Subject Property Outlined In Red)
Page 105 of 303
Figure 2 - Subject Property, View From Street (Taken August 5t", 2025)
Staff completed a site visit on August 5th, 2025.
The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is
designated `Low -Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan.
The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-
051.
Page 106 of 303
Figure 3 - Zoning By -Law 2019-051 (Subject Property In Red)
The purpose of the applications are to reduce the minimum lot width requirement to
facilitate the construction of a new Semi -Detached Dwelling, with 3 Additional Dwelling
Units (AD U)(Attached), each half having 4 dwelling units (i.e. Fourplex), for a total of 8
dwelling units on the subject property. The existing `Triplex' Building on the subject
property is intended to be demolished.
The applicant is requesting minor variances to both the future severed and retained
parcels to permit a minimum lot width of 7.6 metres where 10.5 metres is required. Semi-
detached lots require a lot width of 7.5 metres; however, where two or more Additional
Dwelling Units are proposed and a property is outside both the Central Neighbourhood
Area and 800 metres from an LRT station, 10.5 metres is required as four units are
requested for each side of the semi-detached building. Both the future severed and
retained lots will have a lot frontage of 7.6 metres, depth of 45 metres, and area of 342
square metres. A Consent Application is not being considered at this time but will be
required to implement the proposed site plan.
A Zoning Occupancy Certificate (ZOC) application was received on May 29, 2025, for the
proposed use of the Semi -Detached Dwelling, each side to have four (4) dwelling units. At
the time of this report, the ZOC process has flagged a number of potential issues that may
require further variances based on elevations submitted as part of a separate Building
Permit Application. These potential additional variances were not submitted for nor are
they considered as part of Minor Variance Applications A2025-079 and A2025-080.
The basement floors have multiple windows requiring window wells along the side
yard, and the depth of these windows is not stated. The walkway running along the
sides of the building would need to be adjusted to accommodate the window wells.
The side yards are 1.52 metres so at most these wells can be 0.42 metres deep. This
Page 107 of 303
needs to be confirmed as possible or else an additional variance for the walkway may
be required.
2. Confirmation is required if steps to the entrance doors are required and their
associated setback to the side lot lines.
3. The covered front porch also functions as a balcony. The porch itself complies to the
Zoning By-law, but as a balcony it does not. A balcony cannot be supported by the
ground when it projects into the required front yard. The balcony either needs to be
removed or another variance would be required.
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the
Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following
comments. As the two applications are identical, they will be considered jointly:
General Intent of the Official Plan
The Official Plan provides several policies regarding the intensification of low rise
residential areas. Of particular relevance to this application is Policy 4.C.1.8, which
provides specific policy direction for minor variance applications proposing residential
intensification:
4. C.1.8. Where a special zoning regulation(s) or minor variance(s) is/are requested,
proposed or required to facilitate residential intensification or a
redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the special zoning regulation(s)
or minor variance(s) will be reviewed, but not limited to the following to
ensure, that.-
a)
hat:
a) Any new buildings and any additions and/or modifications to existing
buildings are appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible
with the built form and the community character of the established
neighbourhood and will have regard to Section 11 of this Plan, the
City's Urban Design Manual, and any site-specific Urban Design Brief
or Urban Design Report and Urban Design Scorecard.
e) The lands can function appropriately and not create unacceptable
adverse impacts for adjacent properties by providing both an
appropriate number of parking spaces and an appropriate
landscaped/amenity area on the site.
f) The impact of each special zoning regulation or variance will be
reviewed prior to formulating a recommendation to ensure that a
deficiency in the one zoning requirement does not compromise the
site in achieving objectives of compatible and appropriate site and
neighbourhood design and does not create further zoning
deficiencies.
Page 108 of 303
Although the Semi -Detached Dwelling would be on a narrower lot than otherwise required,
the scale and massing of the building itself is compatible with the built form of the
surrounding area. Regarding Policy 4.C.1.8.e), the requested variances would reduce the
amenity area available on the site by reducing the size of the front yard and force the
parking arrangement to be in tandem rather than side-by-side. The Zoning By-law
requirement for landscaped area is maintained, and the large rear yard provides further
amenity area for the dwellings; therefore, appropriate landscaped areas are provided. The
single -wide driveway can be long enough to accommodate the required parking spaces.
The Official Plan provides policy direction on the compatibility of residential intensification
with the existing character of the neighbourhood. Policy 4.C.1.9 states:
4. C.1.9. Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing
neighbourhoods will be designed to respect existing character. A high
degree of sensitivity to surrounding context is important in considering
compatibility.
Examining the existing context of Frederick Street, the predominant built form is single
detached dwellings in primarily bungalow form, with occasional low-rise apartment and
semi-detached buildings. Compatibility, as defined in the Official Plan, should not be
interpreted as meaning "the same as". Generally, a semi-detached dwelling is compatible
with the surrounding area.
Additional policy direction regarding compatibility is provided in the Low Rise Residential
land use designation policies, specifically 15.D.3.3:
15. D.3.3. To support the successful integration of different housing types, specifically
multiple residential developments, through new development/redevelopment
and/or residential intensification, within lands designated Low Rise
Residential, Medium Rise Residential or High Rise Residential, the City will
apply design principles in accordance with the Urban Design Policies in
Section 11. An emphasis will be placed on.-
a)
n:
a) compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale, design,
b) the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior
areas,
c) adequate and appropriate parking areas are provided on site, and,
d) adequate and appropriate amenity areas and landscaped areas are
provided on site.
Policy 15.D.3.3 further emphasizes the appropriateness of parking areas, amenity areas,
and landscaped areas in Low Rise Residential areas. The combined area of the front and
rear yards is sufficient landscaped and amenity area, and the appropriate number of
parking spaces can be accommodated.
It is staff's opinion that the proposed variances meet the intent of the Official Plan.
Page 109 of 303
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The subject property is located outside the Central Neighborhood Area (Appendix `C' of
Zoning By-law 2019-051) of the City and is not within 800 metres of a Light Rail Transit
Station (Appendix `E' of Zoning By-law 2019-051). Where a proposal outside Appendix `C'
and Appendix `E' includes two or more Additional Dwelling Units, Section 4.12.2 will apply.
Section 4.12.2 g) requires the minimum lot width to be 10.5 metres, rather than the 7.5
metres typically attributed to semi-detached dwellings in the `RES -4' Zone. The primary
intent of this larger lot width requirement is to ensure sufficient parking can be provided as
transit connectivity and walkability is generally weaker in the non -central areas and
beyond the typical walking range to higher order transit.
Beyond the intent to provide enough parking spaces, the function of the parking spaces
and driveway is integral to the 10.5 metre width. The requested variance to a minimum lot
width of 7.6 metres does not allow for side-by-side parking, resulting in the required
parking needing to be in tandem.
The Zoning By-law requirement for parking is three (3) parking spaces for the four (4)
dwelling units, which can be met by the reduced lot width in the form of three -long tandem
spaces. Zoning By-law 2019-051 allows up to three required parking to be in a tandem
arrangement. Although required parking spaces are permitted to be in a tandem
arrangement, the intent of the 10.5 metre width is to provide space for side-by-side parking
which is a more functional arrangement, in areas outside the Central Neighbourhood Area,
especially considering that the future residents will live in different units rather than the
same household.
To further highlight the intent of the zoning requirement for a 10.5 metre lot width is the
existing parking arrangement, directly across the road from the subject property at 707-
709 and 711-713 Frederick Street, two semi-detached buildings, each duplexed (only two
(2) dwelling units in each half of a Semi -Detached Dwelling, four dwelling units 4 per lot
across four (4) lots for a total of eight (8) dwelling units; rather than 8 dwelling units on two
(2) lots per the subject proposal). As demonstrated in the aerial in Figure 4, the sites
provide side-by-side parking (which was legally permitted at the time of their construction;
this design is no longer permitted in Zoning By-law 2019-051) allowing for each of the
duplexed units their own "lane" in the side-by-side arrangement. A single, three -long
tandem parking arrangement is not an appropriate use for a fourplex; for lots outside the
800 metre radius of an LRT Station and outside the Central Neighbourhood Area.
Environmental Planning staff note that there appears to be several large trees along the
shared property lines. Environmental Planning requires more details on the construction
details/footprint. A Tree Management and Enhancement Plan is required to assess the
impacts of demolition and new construction. Having the required lot width would provide
the opportunity to not negatively impact boundary or shared trees with adjacent properties.
It is staff's opinion that the proposed variances do not meet the intent of the Zoning
By-law.
Page 110 of 303
Figure 4 - 707-709 and 711-713 Frederick Street Aerial
Page 111 of 303
Appendix C: Central Nelahboufftood Area
= Central MeighhourhaodArea
Figure 5 - Appendix `C' - Central Neighbourhood Areas
Page 112 of 303
Anyendix i=: Properties within $00 metres of a Light Rag Transit (LRT) Staten
FArea vrtn`n 84G m of Light
MQ Rail Transit (LRT) Station
Light Rail Transit (LRT)
Station
Lands zoned RES -1 thnwgh RES -5 located within 800 met=es of an LRT Station are subjeGtto reduced parking requirements
far Additional dwelling Unit (Detachec). T`nese regulatiors are irc uded in Section 5_
Figure 6 - Appendix `E' - Properties Within 800 metres of LRT Station
Page 113 of 303
Are the Effects of the Variances Minor?
In considering if the effect of a variance is minor, a common method of assessment is to
consider the potential impacts on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.
Frederick Street is noted as a "City Arterial Street" on Official Plan Map 11, Integrated
Transportation System. Section 13.C.4.1.c) of the Official Plan states that "Generally, City
Arterial Streets distribute large volumes of traffic (people and goods) between other
Regional Roads and City Arterial Streets and Major Community Collector Streets."
The proposed reduced lot widths force a triple -tandem parking scheme, which will require
vehicles to be "juggled" (i.e. temporarily move vehicles to allow blocked -in vehicles parked
further up the driveway to exit the property). As the Official Plan notes that Frederick
Street distributes large volumes of traffic, the constant need to "juggle" vehicles will
negatively impact the use the safe use and function of the subject property.
Although it is common for households to park their vehicles in tandem, parking
requirements of the Zoning By-law allocate one space to the primary dwelling, with
additional spaces being required based on the number of Additional Dwelling Units. In
assessing the parking arrangement, staff cannot assume that one household will be
allocated all three parking spaces with the Additional Dwelling Units having zero.
Although the Zoning By-law permits three tandem spaces to meet parking requirements,
the requested variances would force the three tandem arrangement. Less units being
proposed or a different built form could be considered that provides for a more functional
parking arrangement.
There appears to be several large trees along the shared property lines. Environmental
Planning requires more details on the construction details/footprint. A Tree Management
and Enhancement Plan is required to assess the impacts of demolition and new
construction. Having the required lot width would provide the opportunity to not negatively
impact boundary or shared trees with adjacent properties.
It is staff's opinion that the proposed variances are not minor in nature.
Are the Variances Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building
and/or Structure?
Similar to the assessment above, the three long tandem parking arrangement is not a
desirable or appropriate outcome for the redevelopment of the subject property. While no
parking variance is directly being sought, the reduced minimum lot width results in a single
wide driveway as the only parking option for the subject property. Alternative design
schemes could be considered for the subject property, such as a lower number of units
and therefore lower parking requirement, or a different built form that provides for a more
functional parking arrangement.
To further highlight the concerns with the proposed parking arrangement, directly across
the road from the subject property are 707-709 and 711-713 Frederick Street, two semi-
detached buildings, each duplexed (two units per lot across four lots for a total of eight
units). As demonstrated in Figure 4, the sites provide side-by-side parking (which was
legally permitted at the time of their construction; this design is no longer permitted in
Page 114 of 303
Zoning By-law 2019-051) allowing for each of the duplexed units their own "lane" in the
side-by-side arrangement. A single, three -long tandem parking arrangement is not an
appropriate use for a fourplex; nevertheless two beside each other.
Additionally, the Zoning Occupancy Certificate Application (ZOC) has flagged a number of
potential future variances, pending information confirmation or potential site plan revisions,
and as such it would be inappropriate to recommend approval of variances where it is
known that others made still be required.
It has not been demonstrated that a Semi -Detached Dwelling, with 4 dwelling units in each
half, can function appropriately on a lot of 7.6 metres in width instead of the required 10.5
metres.
Also, there appears to be several large trees along the shared property lines.
Environmental Planning requires more details on the construction details/footprint. A Tree
Management and Enhancement Plan is required to assess the impacts of demolition and
new construction. Having the required lot width would provide the opportunity to not
negatively impact boundary or shared trees with adjacent properties.
It is staff's opinion that the proposed variances are not desirable for the appropriate
development or use of the land.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Environmental Planning require more details on the construction details/footprint. It is
expected that there are no concerns if construction/site works are away from property
lines.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No heritage comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit
for the new semi with 3 attached ADU's is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the
Building Division at building(a)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
At the time of a future consent application, the following will need to be considered:
• Severance of any blocks within the subject lands will require separate, individual
service connections for sanitary, storm, and water, in accordance with City policies.
• The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the
Engineering Division for the installation of new service connections that may be
required to service this property, all prior to severance approval. Our records indicate
sanitary and water municipal services are currently available to service this property.
• Any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards. All works are at the
owner's expense and all work needs to be completed prior to occupancy of the
building.
• A servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system will be required to
the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval.
Page 115 of 303
• A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the new site
infrastructure with corresponding layer names and asset information to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval.
• The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the building can be drained by
gravity to the municipal sanitary sewer. If basement finished floor elevations do not
allow for gravity drainage to the existing municipal sanitary system, the owner will
have to pump the sewage to achieve gravity drainage from the property line to the
municipal sanitary sewer in the right of way.
• The Owner shall implement a suitable design solution for a sump pump outlet to the
satisfaction of the Director of Engineering. Here is the OBC standard: This is the
requirement in the code: 9.14.5.1. Drainage Disposal
o Foundation drains shall drain to a sewer, drainage ditch or dry well.
o A side yard swale is not considered a drainage ditch.
• The side yard currently accommodates overland stormwater flows from the rear yard.
The final grading of this property shall not adversely affect the drainage of adjacent
properties or the overall grading control plan. The Owner is responsible to address
storm water drainage at the Building Permit stage.
Until the time of severance, the developer is only permitted to have one set of services for
the lot. This must be shown on the plans.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
At the time of severance, cash -in -lieu of park land dedication will be required on the
severed parcel.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with these applications.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance
of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property
advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises
interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the
Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30
metres of the subject property.
Page 116 of 303
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act
• Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Site Plan
Page 117 of 303
Attachment A — Site Plan
4 YRR C
L
IL`
�j
r
rYr RRYr! 1[R
F � Rid*M
RM►/i1TLC 4r1AG/G `�F �
L'1
°�' TC1�1 411
....T Riii �I I 7a
I �
yrt
obrMcxis TcvR+rI y cr--- 1�
G Ma livers TrwcMaMm
�f .. •-'nF7YtiCIR/RMM MItaYC
I 7 -Y
am riyllpKA
E
6TYfine
Ir
-
�umR.0-.m eaelle+lfr , hcV*wM%
!M�'-+a- TS M! ur wa•+.I _ -.
rri �; ale. *, '�.Etrra C1sfT'wa w[rl.•
W A-
Y LECA -06
i L?J1dG _
L Co.
M.0,,Pk
_ . a�_'FRY IILL'1{"'tC �I OTY v7T
V a r KTI-
fri®M'i NI*LZAI 'WM
fR i a vel .lu:if.
11"i.1�/144.:.d,TRIiCR TS48rA=R'iMr1r
HIM 0 1q,
�•� lJn
N�.al.�n .k•—ll �.M.a.�. r•. -._!rte -/1_
e.
- �r.—fl, ,. .. •v—�—i,. k.�r•.—!e,
'
I �
� • �� � 7el"C K
7
d
'
�T i•� Cee�ps'. allnw�8� y
�
�[.f.`.:: M ]T5[IIV
MTI+XI�A 7uf7 VIK �I�Iit;(f�lYt
-..-_- I _- _-._-...
FREOERIGK STREET
Page 118 of 303
Region of Waterloo
August 5th, 2025
Connie Owen
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
File No.: D20-20/
VAR KIT GEN
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8th Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4449
www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting August 19, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
071 —
99 College Street — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
072 —
413 Zeller Drive — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
073 —
112 Admiral Road — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
074 —
288 Forest Creek Drive — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
075 —
15 Eby Street South — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
076 —
221 Sydney Street South — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
077 —
3 Ivy Lane Court — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
078 —
667 Victoria Street South — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
079 —
706 Frederick Street — No Concerns
10) A 2025
— 080
— 706 Frederick Street — No Concerns
11) A 2025
— 081
— 942 Audrey Place — No Concerns
12) A 2025
— 082
— 133 Bloomingdale Road North — No Concerns
13) A 2025
— 083
— 103 Joseph Street — No Concerns
14) A 2025
— 084
— 27 Turner Avenue — No Concerns
15) A 2025
— 085
— 236 Guelph Street — No Concerns
16) A 2025
— 086
— 250 Mill Street — No Concerns
17) A 2025
— 087
— 980 & 1018 Hidden Valley Road — No Concerns
18) A 2025
— 088
— 670 King Street West — No Concerns
Document Number: 5041192
Page 119 of 303
Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the
provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor
thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these
developments prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site
is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply.
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 5041192
Page 120 of 303
August 1, 2025
Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6
Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca
Marilyn Mills
Secretary -Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7
Dear Marilyn Mills,
Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting —August 19, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-071 99 College Street
A 2025-072 413 Zeller Drive
A 2025-073 112 Admiral Road
A 2025-074 288 Forest Creek Drive
A 2025-075 15 Eby Street South
A 2025-077 3 Ivy Lane Court
A 2025-078 667 Victoria Street South
A 2025-079 706 Frederick Street
A 2025-080 706 Frederick Street
A 2025-081 942 Audrey Place
A 2025-082 133 Bloomingdale Road North
A 2025-083 103 Joseph Street
A 2025-084 27 Turner Avenue
A 2025-085 236 Guelph Street
A 2025-086 250 Mill Street
A 2025-087 980 & 1018 Hidden Valley Road
A 2025-088 670 King Street West
Applications for Consent
B 2024-039 & B 2024-040 120 Keewatin Avenue
B 2025-022 825 Stirling Avenue South
B 2025-023 220 Heiman Street
B 2025-024 17 Downey Street
B 2025-025 17 Downey Street
via email
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have reviewed the above -noted
applications.
GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do
not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River
Page 121 of 303
valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 41/24 and, therefore, a
permission from GRCA is not required.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-g- randriver.ca or 519-
621-2763 ext. 2228.
Sincerely,
Andrew Herreman, CPT
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority
Page 122 of 303