2410002 Ontario Inc. v. Town of Grimsby, 2024 CanLII 101441

2410002 Ontario Inc. v. Town of Grimsby

Issue Date: October 08, 2024 Case No(s).: OLT-24-000734

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant/Appellant: 2410002 Ontario Inc. Subject: Consent Description: To redevelop the site to accommodate three single-detached dwellings Reference Number: B01-24 Property Address: 260 Main Street West Municipality/UT: Grimsby/Niagara Region OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000734 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000734 OLT Case Name: 2410002 Ontario Inc. v. Town of Grimsby

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant/Appellant: 2410002 Ontario Inc. Subject: Consent Description: To redevelop the site to accommodate three single-detached dwellings Reference Number: B02-24 Property Address: 260 Main Street West Municipality/UT: Grimsby/Niagara Region OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000735 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000734

Proceeding Commenced Under subsection 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant/Appellant: 2410002 Ontario Inc. Subject: Minor Variance Description: To redevelop the site to accommodate three single-detached dwellings Reference Number: A12-24 Property Address: 260 Main Street West Municipality/UT: Grimsby/Niagara Region OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000736 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000734

Heard: September 20, 2024 by Video Hearing

Parties and Counsel

Parties	Counsel
2410002 Ontario Inc.	W. Liske
Town of Grimsby	T. Halinski

Memorandum of Oral Decision Delivered by S. deBoer on September 20, 2024 and Order of the Tribunal

Introduction

1The matter before the Tribunal was the Appeal by 2410002 Ontario Inc. (“Appellant”) due to the refusal of the Minor Variance Application and the Consent Applications (“Applications”) by the Town of Grimsby’s (“Town”) Committee of Adjustment (“COA”) for the property municipally known as 260 Main Street West (“Subject Lands”).

Site Description and Context

2The Subject Lands are located in the Town, on the north side of Main Street West between Linden Lane and Kerman Avenue. The Subject Lands have approximately 36.0 metres (“m”) of frontage and has an approximate area of 2,423 square metres (“m²”). Currently, the Subject Lands contain a one-storey residential dwelling with a detached garage. The dwelling and garage are proposed to be demolished if the Applications are approved. The Subject Lands are designated “Low Density Area” on Schedule B-1 of the Town’s Official Plan (“OP”).

3To the north of the Subject Lands are vacant lots, which have been proposed for residential development. To the east are current low rise residential dwellings. Adjacent to the west, is a heritage building, Nixon Hall, and further west are single detached residential dwellings. To the south are low rise, residential dwellings.

Planning Applications

4The Consent Applications propose to sever the Subject Lands into three parcels in order to permit the development of three single detached dwellings. The proposed Consent Lot 1 would have a lot frontage of 4.1 m and a proposed total lot area of approximately 809 m². Consent Lot 2 would have a lot frontage of 4.1 m and a proposed total lot area of approximately 861 m². Retained Lot 3 would have a proposed lot frontage of 22.4 m and a proposed lot area of approximately 755 m². Consent Lots 1 and 2 would be accessed by a private road easement running through the Retained Lot as shown in Figure 1 noted below.

Figure 1

5A Minor Variance Application is required in order for the proposed Consent Applications to facilitate the development of a single detached dwelling for each of the proposed lots. The requested variances for each lot are listed below:

Lot 1:

• Permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent;
• Permit a minimum lot frontage of 4.1 m;
• Permit a minimum front yard setback of 42.1 m and to remove the requirement for a maximum front yard setback;
• Permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m; and,
• Permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m.

Lot 2:

• Permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent;
• Permit a minimum lot frontage of 4.1 m;
• Permit a minimum front yard setback of 38.9 m and remove the requirement for a maximum front yard setback;
• Permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m; and,
• Permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m.

Lot 3:

• Permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent;
• Permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m; and,
• Permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m.

6The Subject Lands are located within a designated “Settlement Area” and are within a Delineated Built-Up Area in the Regional Municipality of Niagara’s (“Region”) Official Plan (“NOP”). The Subject Lands are designated as “Low Density Residential” in the OP. As the Applications do not change any designated uses, no amendments are required to both the NOP and the OP.

7The Applications were presented to the COA at the meeting of June 19, 2024. Town Planning Staff did not have any objection to the Applications, however, stipulated that a number of conditions be attached to the approval of the Applications. The COA ultimately refused the Applications at the June 19, 2024 meeting.

8The Appellant presented Dave Aston; a professional planner who had been involved with the Applications since 2023. Mr. Aston was qualified by the Tribunal to give expert opinion evidence in the area of land use planning pertaining to the Applications before the Tribunal.

[9] The Tribunal marked the following as Exhibits to the Hearing: Exhibit 1 – Witness Statement of Dave Aston

10Mr. Aston provided background to the Applications up to this hearing event, for which a synopsis is provided above.

[Planning Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html) (“Act”)

[Section 2](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html) of the [Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)

11It was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the Applications are of provincial interest as the Applications will make use of existing infrastructure, provide for an orderly development of the Subject Lands and provide for a range of housing in a planned area of growth. The Applications are within the Delineated Built-Up Area and are within proximity to existing community services and amenities.

[Section 51(24)](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html) of the [Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)

12Concerning s. 51(24) of the Act, it was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the Consent Applications have regard to this section of the Act. The Consent Applications are a matter of provincial interest as per s. 2 of the Act. The Consent Applications are located within a settlement area and make use of the permitted designation of the Subject Lands. The Consent Applications conform to the NOP and OP, and there are no adjacent plans of subdivision that would require consideration to these Applications. Furthermore, the Consent Applications are suitable for the proposed form of intensification, the shape of the proposed lots are appropriate to the area and will use existing municipal services. There is no proposed lands that need to be conveyed for public road purposes and the Consent Applications are not located in an area requiring site plan control. The Consent Applications meet the criteria of s. 51(24) of the Act. The conditions proposed by the Town Planning Staff are per s. 51(25) of the Act are considered reasonable and appropriate for the proposal before the Tribunal. Overall, the Applications have regard for matters of provincial interest as set out in s. 2 and s. 51(24) of the Act.

[Section 45(1)](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html) of the [Act](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-p13/latest/rso-1990-c-p13.html)

13Mr. Aston gave his opinion that the requested minor variances meet the four tests of a Minor Variance. The purpose of the requested variances is to create a lot configuration that is compatible and similar to the area. The requested variances will create a lot frontage that will maintain the existing street character while allowing for an efficient use of a large lot. The Subject Lands are currently designated and zoned for the proposed use and will permit additional intensity that is contemplated through the Town’s OP and will meet the development standards that are in the OP.

Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (“PPS”)

14It was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the PPS generally encourages residential intensification in the settlement area. The proposal allows for a form of intensification that meets the direction of the PPS while using existing municipal services. Mr. Aston continued to opine that the proposal is consistent with Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.3, 1.1.3.2 (a), 1.1.3.2 (b) and 1.4.3. These policies focus on the efficient use of land patterns, the efficient use of lands and growth in a settlement area, and the appropriate use of existing services. Overall, Mr. Aston opined that the proposal meets the applicable policies of the PPS.

A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019, as amended (“Growth Plan”)

15It was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the proposal conforms to the Growth Plan, specifically Policies 2.2.2.1, 2.2.6.1 and 2.2.6.2. These Polices focus on managing growth within a settlement area. The proposal helps meet the Growth Plan’s requirement of 50% of residential development within a built-up area. The proposal will encourage a diverse range of housing options while utilizing land that is within the built-up area. The proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.

Greenbelt Plan, 2017, as amended (“Greenbelt Plan”)

16Mr. Aston opined that the Subject Lands are located within the settlement area and is not located within the Niagara Escarpment Plan. The Subject Lands are not located within a designated natural heritage area and the proposal will not have any impact of any natural heritage systems. As such, the Greenbelt Plan does not apply to the proposal before the Tribunal.

Niagara Official Plan (“NOP”)

17In Mr. Aston’s opinion, the Subject Lands are designated within the Delineated Built-Up Area of the Town as per “Schedule B” of the NOP. The NOP encourages intensification within the built-up areas and that 60% of all new residential units be within the designated Built-Up Areas. The Proposal conforms to the NOP by providing a range of housing options while providing a range of mix and densities that are needed in the area. The proposal conforms to the following Policies of the NOP; 2.2.2.1, 2.2.2.5, 2.3.1.1 and 2.3.1.4, which focus on providing a range of housing and intensification within the Delineated Built-Up Areas.

Town of Grimsby OP (“OP”)

18Mr. Aston indicated that the Subject Lands are located within the “Urban Settlement Area” on “Schedule A” and are designated as “Low Density Residential Area” on Schedule B of the OP. The Subject Lands allow for a maximum density of 25 units per hectare and a maximum height of two-and-half storeys in a Low-Density Residential Area. The Proposal would have a density of 12.5 units per hectare and would have a maximum height of two-and-half storeys. The Proposal will establish lots for single detached dwellings, access to the arterial road network and will be compatible with the surrounding area.

19Mr. Aston continued with his opinion that the OP targets 80% of new residential dwelling units and will be provided by intensification with the built-up area. The proposal before the Tribunal will help the Town in reaching this target.

20In Mr. Aston’s opinion, the proposal conforms to Policies 2.4.4, 3.4.2.1, 3.4.2.2, 3.4.2.3, 3.4.2.4 and 3.4.7.4 of the OP. These Policies focus on residential intensification within the Built-Up Area, appropriate low-density housing forms and appropriate lot size for low-density housing forms. Mr. Aston opined that the proposal conforms to the Town’s OP.

Town Zoning By-law No. 14-45 (“ZBL”)

21It was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the proposal conforms to the ZBL as the proposal permits the current use of the Subject Lands. The Consent Applications would allow for three lots of a size that is similar to other lots in the area. The requested minor variances would allow for an appropriate intensification and development of the Subject Lands that would be compatible with the surrounding area. The proposal before the Tribunal would maintain the intent and purpose of the ZBL.

Overall Opinion

22In Mr. Aston’s opinion, the Consent Applications have regard to matters of provincial interest, have regard for s. 51(24) of the Act, are consistent with the PPS, conform to the Growth Plan, NOP, and OP.

23Mr. Aston gave his opinion that the Minor Variance Application maintains the general intent and purpose of the OP and ZBL. The Minor Variance Application is desirable and is an appropriate use of the Subject Lands and is minor in nature.

24Mr. Aston opined that the Consent Applications should be approved, subject to the requested conditions of approval, and the Minor Variance Application should be granted. These Applications represent good land use planning and are an appropriate development of the Subject Lands.

Analysis

Legislative Tests

25An appeal pursuant to s. 53(19) must have regard to the criteria for Plan of Subdivision as set out in s. 51(24) of the Act:

(a) the effect of development of the proposed subdivision on matters of provincial interest as referred to in section 2; (b) whether the proposed subdivision is premature or in the public interest; (c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any; (d) the suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided; (d.1) if any affordable housing units are being proposed, the suitability of the proposed units for affordable housing; (e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them; (f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots; (g) the restrictions or proposed restrictions, if any, on the land proposed to be subdivided or the buildings and structures proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land; (h) conservation of natural resources and flood control; (i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services; (j) the adequacy of school sites; (k) the area of land, if any, within the proposed subdivision that, exclusive of highways, is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes; (l) the extent to which the plan’s design optimizes the available supply, means of supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and, (m) the interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41(2) of this Act.

26An appeal pursuant to s. 45 of the Act is a hearing de novo and the Applicant bears the onus of demonstrating that the four tests as set out in s. 45(1) of the Act have been met, namely that the requested variances:

i) maintains the general intent and purpose of the OP; ii) maintains the general intent and purpose of the ZBL; iii) is minor in nature; and, iv) is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land building or structure.

27In addition, s. 3(5) of the Act requires that a Decision of the Tribunal affecting a planning matter, in this case the application for a variance, must be consistent with the PPS and must conform to the Growth Plan. The Tribunal must also have regard to matters of Provincial interest, as well as regard for the decision of the COA, and the information considered by it in the course of making that decision.

Findings

28The Tribunal only received the uncontroverted evidence of Mr. Aston pertaining to the Appeals. The Town was in agreement with the evidence provided by Mr. Aston and agreed with his opinions and conclusions brought before the Tribunal.

29Based upon the expert opinion evidence provided, the Tribunal finds that the Consent Applications meet the criteria as set out in s. 51(24) of the Act. The Consent Applications are not premature, will allow for an appropriate development to occur that is compatible with the surrounding area and will provide for a form of intensification that will provide for housing options within the Delineated Built-Up Area. The Tribunal finds that the Consent Applications will provide for three lots that are of an appropriate size and shape, while using the existing municipal infrastructure. The applications will not require a Plan of Subdivision and should be approved.

30The Tribunal finds that the Minor Variance Application will allow for the proposed development to occur in a fashion that is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding area. The Minor Variance Application does meet the four tests as set out in s. 45(1) of the Act.

31The Tribunal finds that the Applications before it meet the criteria as set out in s. 2 and as applicable, s. 51(24) of the Act. The Applications are consistent with the PPS, conforms to the Growth Plan, conforms to the NOP and the OP. The instruments before the Tribunal are considered to be good land use planning.

32The Tribunal finds that the requested conditions of the Consent Applications and the Minor Variance Application are appropriate and should be included in the approval of the applications.

33The Tribunal notes that it asked Mr. Aston about the soon to be in force 2024 Provincial Policy Statement and if this Decision would be affected by the implementation of the new Provincial Policy Statement. It was Mr. Aston’s opinion that the proposed settlement would not be affected by the implementation of the new Provincial Policy Statement.

Order

34THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeals are allowed, and provisional consent is to be given subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 to this Order.

35THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the appeal is allowed and the variances to Zoning By-law No. 14-45 listed in Attachment 3 are authorized subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 4 to this Order.

“S. deBoer”

S. deBOER MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: www.olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.

ATTACHMENT 1

Consent Conditions (B01-24)

Final Consent (Town File B01-24) is subject to the following conditions:

Reference #	Department / Agency Contact:	Condition:
1.	Planning Department: Bianca Verrecchia	The Applicant shall: 1. Ensure concurrent Consent application B02-24 is approved with conditions; 2. Submit a plan with dimensions for the proposed easement for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 3. Submit a Tree Preservation Plan as per Section 7.3.1 a) of the Official Plan for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 4. Require that Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3 provide adequate municipal services to serve the proposal, as per Section 3.4.1.4 of the Official Plan; 5. Adhere to Heritage comments in accordance with Section 8.18 and Section 9.12.4 of the Official Plan; and 6. Enter into an agreement with the Town that is registered on title to address the conditions provided by Public Works Staff and Heritage Planning Staff in accordance with the provisions of Section 50.1 (25) (d) and Section 50.1 (26) of the Planning Act.
2.	Public Works:	The Applicant shall: 1. Provide a Master Lot Grading and Drainage Plan for Lots 1, 2 and 3, demonstrating the existing drainage patterns for the lot and, at a minimum, 5m beyond property line. The location for all downspout discharge points and direction shall be shown on the plan with all necessary details. All storm water runoff shall be contained within the respective lot and shall not negatively impact nor rely upon neighbouring properties; 2. Provide a Master Site Servicing Plan for Lots 1, 2, and 3, showing both the existing and proposed site services for water, storm and sanitary. The plan is to include location, size, material, inverts, etc. from the municipal main to the building face for all services. Any abandoned services shall be decommissioned as per Town Standards; 3. Provide a comprehensive Master Stormwater Management Report for Lots 1, 2, and 3, is required, detailing the full stormwater management strategy. This report shall demonstrate how quality and quantity control will be handled on site; and 4. Apply for a Municipal Servicing Permit, through the Town’s Public Work’s Department, to obtain approvals for the proposed services for the new lot.
3.	Heritage Department: Bianca Verrecchia	The Applicant shall: 1. Ensure that the mature vegetation on the West side of the subject lands is maintained; 2. That the applicant provides a construction plan with the building permit; 3. That the construction plan include areas of potential impact from vibrations caused during construction and how the heritage resource’s structural stability will be taken into consideration during construction; 4. That the construction plan include hoarding to protect the trees on the West side of the subject lands; 5. That vibration monitoring devices be added to the subject property and that heritage staff be provided access to the monitoring devices throughout the duration of the construction; 6. That the final materials and colours be noted within the elevations submitted with the building permit and that those documents be reviewed and approved by heritage staff to ensure that the proposed dwelling designs are compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate to the heritage dwelling at 262 Main Street West; 7. That the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of the cultural heritage identified along Main Street; 8. That the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the tree protection plan be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of mature trees along the Main Street corridor; 9. That if the tree protection plan concludes that trees are in poor condition and require removal, that new vegetative screening be integrated within the west side of the subject lands to ensure that the new modern layer is appropriately integrated into the established corridor; and 10. That if required, the vegetative screening include trees found within the Carolinian forest in an effort to maintain and enhance the Carolinian forest species found throughout the Town of Grimsby.
4.	Niagara Region:	The Applicant/Owner shall: 1. Submit a Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment completed by a licensed archaeologist and receive acceptance from the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism (“MCM”) for the archaeological assessment. If the Ministry requires further archaeological work to be completed prior to acknowledging this report, these report(s) must also be submitted to and acknowledged by the Ministry, to the satisfaction of Niagara Region, prior to clearance of this condition. No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the issuance of a letter from MCM through Niagara Region, confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have met licensing and resource conservation requirements. 2. Be informed of the following advisory clause: “If deeply buried or previously undiscovered archaeological remains/resources are found during development activities on the subject lands, all activities must stop immediately. If the discovery is human remains, contact the police and coroner to secure the site. If the discovery is not human remains, the area must be secured to prevent site disturbance. The project proponent must then follow the steps outlined in the Niagara Region Archaeological Management Plan: Appendix C.” 3. Submit a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment including soil sampling, as well as a letter of reliance allowing the Niagara Region to rely on the findings of the ESA. 4. Complete any recommended mitigation outlined in the above requested Phase 1 ESA. 5. Be informed of the following advisory clause: “Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to traffic from Main Street West (Regional Road 81) may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling unit occupants as the sound level exceeds the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks’ noise criteria.”

ATTACHMENT 2

Consent Conditions (B02-24)

Final Consent (Town File B02-24) is subject to the following conditions:

Reference #	Department / Agency Contact:	Condition:
1.	Planning Department: Bianca Verrecchia	The Applicant shall: 1. Ensure that the concurrent Consent application B01-24 is approved with conditions; 2. Submit a plan with dimensions for the proposed easement for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 3. Submit a Tree Preservation Plan as per Section 7.3.1 a) of the Official Plan for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 4. Ensure that Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3 provide adequate municipal services to serve the proposal, as per Section 3.4.1.4 of the Official Plan; 5. Adhere to Heritage comments in accordance with Section 8.18 and Section 9.12.4 of the Official Plan; and 6. Enter into an agreement with the Town that is registered on title to address the conditions provided by Public Works Staff and Heritage Planning Staff in accordance with the provisions of Section 50.1 (25) (d) and Section 50.1 (26) of the Planning Act.
2.	Public Works:	The Applicant shall: 1. Provide a Master Lot Grading and Drainage Plan for Lots 1, 2 and 3, demonstrating the existing drainage patterns for the lot and, at a minimum, 5m beyond property line. The location for all downspout discharge points and direction shall be shown on the plan with all necessary details. All storm water runoff shall be contained within the respective lot and shall not negatively impact nor rely upon neighbouring properties; 2. Provide a Master Site Servicing Plan for Lots 1, 2, and 3, showing both the existing and proposed site services for water, storm and sanitary. The plan is to include location, size, material, inverts, etc. from the municipal main to the building face for all services. Any abandoned services shall be decommissioned as per Town Standards; 3. Provide a comprehensive Master Stormwater Management Report for Lots 1, 2, and 3, is required, detailing the full stormwater management strategy. This report shall demonstrate how quality and quantity control will be handled on site; and 4. Apply for a Municipal Servicing Permit, through the Town’s Public Work’s Department, to obtain approvals for the proposed services for the new lot.
3.	Heritage Department:	The Applicant shall: 1. Ensure that the mature vegetation on the West side of the subject lands is maintained; 2. Provide a construction plan with the building permit; 3. Ensure that the construction plan include areas of potential impact from vibrations caused during construction and how the heritage resource’s structural stability will be taken into consideration during construction; 4. That the construction plan include hoarding to protect the trees on the West side of the subject lands; 5. Ensure that vibration monitoring devices be added to the subject property and that heritage staff be provided access to the monitoring devices throughout the duration of the construction; 6. Ensure that the final materials and colours be noted within the elevations submitted with the building permit and that those documents be reviewed and approved by heritage staff to ensure that the proposed dwelling designs are compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate to the heritage dwelling at 262 Main Street West; 7. Ensure that the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of the cultural heritage identified along Main Street; 8. Ensure that the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the tree protection plan be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of mature trees along the Main Street corridor; 9. Ensure, if the tree protection plan concludes that trees are in poor condition and require removal, that new vegetative screening be integrated within the west side of the subject lands to ensure that the new modern layer is appropriately integrated into the established corridor; and 10. Ensure that, if required, the vegetative screening include trees found within the Carolinian forest in an effort to maintain and enhance the Carolinian forest species found throughout the Town of Grimsby.
4.	Niagara Region:	The Applicant/Owner shall: 1. Submit a Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment completed by a licensed archaeologist and receive acceptance from the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism (“MCM”) for the archaeological assessment. If the Ministry requires further archaeological work to be completed prior to acknowledging this report, these report(s) must also be submitted to and acknowledged by the Ministry, to the satisfaction of Niagara Region, prior to clearance of this condition. No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the issuance of a letter from MCM through Niagara Region, confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have met licensing and resource conservation requirements. 2. Be informed of the following advisory clause: “If deeply buried or previously undiscovered archaeological remains/resources are found during development activities on the subject lands, all activities must stop immediately. If the discovery is human remains, contact the police and coroner to secure the site. If the discovery is not human remains, the area must be secured to prevent site disturbance. The project proponent must then follow the steps outlined in the Niagara Region Archaeological Management Plan: Appendix C.” 3. Submit a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment including soil sampling, as well as a letter of reliance allowing the Niagara Region to rely on the findings of the ESA. 4. The Owner complete any recommended mitigation outlined in the above requested Phase 1 ESA. 5. Be informed of the following advisory clause: “Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to traffic from Main Street West (Regional Road 81) may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling unit occupants as the sound level exceeds the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks’ noise criteria.”

ATTACHMENT 3

Requested Minor Variances

Lot 1 (Severed Lands - Consent B01-24)

1. Maximum Lot Coverage To permit an increased maximum lot coverage of 45%, whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a requires a maximum lot coverage of 15 %.

2. Minimum Lot Frontage To permit a reduced minimum lot frontage of 4.1 m (13.45 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 m (59.05 ft).

3. Minimum Front Yard Setback To permit a reduced minimum front yard setback of 42.1 m (138.12 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum front yard setback of 12 m (39.37 ft). To remove the requirement for front yard setback maximums.

4. Minimum Interior Side Yard To permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m (3.93 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum interior side yard of 1.8 m (5.90 ft).

5. Minimum Rear Yard Setback To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m (24.60 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum rear yard setback of 20 m (65.61 ft) (25% of the depth of the lot).

Lot 2 (Severed Lands - Consent B02-24)

1. Maximum Lot Coverage To permit an increased maximum lot coverage of 45%, whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a requires a maximum lot coverage of 15 %.

2. Minimum Lot Frontage To permit a reduced minimum lot frontage of 4.1 m (13.45 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 m (59.05 ft).

3. Minimum Front Yard Setback To permit a reduced minimum front yard setback of 38.9 m (127.62 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum front yard setback of 12 m (39.37 ft). To remove the requirement for front yard setback maximums.

4. Minimum Interior Side Yard To permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m (3.93 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum interior side yard of 1.8 m (5.90 ft).

5. Minimum Rear Yard Setback To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m (24.60 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum rear yard setback of 20 m (65.61 ft) (25% of the depth of the lot).

Lot 3 (Retained Lands)

1. Maximum Lot Coverage To permit an increased maximum lot coverage of 45%, whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a requires a maximum lot coverage of 15 %.

2. Minimum Interior Side Yard To permit a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 m (3.93 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum interior side yard of 1.8 m (5.90 ft).

3. Minimum Rear Yard Setback To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 m (24.60 ft), whereas Zoning By-law 14-45 requires a minimum rear yard setback of 20 m (65.61 ft) (25% of the depth of the lot).

ATTACHMENT 4

Minor Variance Conditions (A12-24)

Final Minor Variances (Town File A12-24) are subject to the following conditions:

Reference #	Department / Agency Contact:	Condition:
1.	Planning Department: Bianca Verrecchia	The Applicant shall: 1. Obtain final approval of concurrent Consent applications, B01-24 and B02-24; 2. Submit a plan with dimensions for the proposed easement for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 3. Submit a Tree Preservation Plan as per Section 7.3.1 a) of the Official Plan for the review and approval of the Director of Planning; 4. Require that Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3 provide adequate municipal services to serve the proposal, as per Section 3.4.1.4 of the Official Plan; 5. Adhere to Heritage comments in accordance with Section 8.18 and Section 9.12.4 of the Official Plan; and 6. Enter into an agreement with the Town that is registered on title to address the conditions provided by Public Works Staff and Heritage Planning Staff in accordance with the provisions of Section 50.1 (25) (d) and Section 50.1 (26) of the Planning Act.
2.	Public Works:	The Applicant Shall provide a Master Lot Grading and Drainage Plan for Lots 1, 2, and 3, demonstrating the existing drainage patterns for the lot and at a minimum, 5m beyond property line. The location and direction for all proposed downspout discharge points shall be shown on the plan.
3.	Heritage Department: Bianca Verrecchia	The Applicant Shall: 1. Maintain the mature vegetation on the West side of the subject lands; 2. Provide a construction plan with the building permit; 3. Provide a construction plan which includes areas of potential impact from vibrations caused during construction and how the heritage resource’s structural stability (Plan to be taken into consideration during construction); 4. Provide construction plan which includes hoarding to protect the trees on the West side of the subject lands; 5. Ensure that vibration monitoring devices be added to the subject property and that heritage staff be provided access to the monitoring devices throughout the duration of the construction; 6. Ensure that the final materials and colours be noted within the elevations submitted with the building permit and that those documents be reviewed and approved by heritage staff to ensure that the proposed dwelling designs are compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate to the heritage dwelling at 262 Main Street West; 7. Ensure that the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of the cultural heritage identified along Main Street; 8. Ensure that the mitigative measures and recommendations included within the tree protection plan be integrated into the construction plan to ensure the preservation of mature trees along the Main Street corridor; 9. Ensure that if the tree protection plan concludes that trees are in poor condition and require removal, that new vegetative screening be integrated within the west side of the subject lands to ensure that the new modern layer is appropriately integrated into the established corridor; and 10. Ensure that, if required, the vegetative screening include trees found within the Carolinian forest in an effort to maintain and enhance the Carolinian forest species found throughout the Town of Grimsby.