MINUTES OF HEARING OF THE CITY OF WELLAND COMMITTEE ...

Re: Minutes of Committee of Adjustment Hearing – September 16, 2015
Page 3
Crystal Mammoliti (98 Montgomery Road) advised that the owner is her son and that he would like her to
address the Committee on his behalf. She indicated proposal is to create 2 building lots: one for her son,
one for his sister; and retain the existing house as her son's primary house until new house completed. She
noted the lots will not meet the By-law, variance applications submitted, proposals are in compliance with the
Official Plan, use is permitted in the By-law, houses will meet height, adequate lots, will not impact, past
practice of City allowing 18 consents in the area, she is resident of area for 32 years, existing services, no
conflict with Smart Growth Provincial Polices, will allow additional tax revenue and will enhance the
neighbourhood.
Chair Zakraysek advised that she viewed the property on more than one occasion and reviewed most of the
agenda before the meeting (as new items were received at the meeting). She noted that the Committee's
Procedural By-law does not state a time limit for speakers from the public. The Committee agreed on a 10
minute time limit per speaker from the public.
Callum Shedden, lawyer from Daniel & Partners LLP on behalf of Christa Fraser, provided aerial images of
the subdivision and excerpts from the Planning Act and from the City's Official Plan (all attached). Brief
summary of Mr. Shedden's comments are noted below:
• Aerial photo shows consistent large lots and single residences in the subdivision;
• Applications will make smaller lots from the large lot, such smaller lots are not consistent to the area
and the evidence is not there to support the applications;
• The letter from Mr. Leigh Whyte (Planning Consultant) (read aloud previously by the Secretary-
Treasurer) indicated that the City's report is sparse, lacks analysis and does not properly focus on
the intensification policies in the Official Plan (OP);
• The detailed OP intensification policy is to be taken seriously and the Committee must take it into
consideration.
• Sections 51(24) (c), (d) and (f) of Planning Act (attached, highlighted) are 3 of the criteria to be
considered - Committee must be satisfied with conformity with the OP and with the suitability of the
proposed lots to support dwellings;
• Zoning By-law Amendments to Council are separate and distinct from a Minor Variance Application.
A Minor Variance has the mandatory 4 tests, one of the tests being conformity with the OP.
• Section 3.4.4.1.C of the OP is Intensification Strategy and the Plan/Schedule does not show this
area as an intensification area;
• Sections 3.4.4.1.E (i), (ii) and (iii) of the OP indicates that intensification must be appropriate and
Low Density Residential lands are not listed in this Section;
• Proposals have to meet these policies;
• Section 3.4.4.F (iv), (v) and (vi) of the OP indicates design policy for neighbourhoods and references
the character of the neighbourhood. The proposals do not meet the neighbourhood character
compatibility and these policies;
• Section 3.4.4.H of the OP speaks to implementation. This Section is crucial and indicates
amendments to the Zoning By-law are to be considered for intensification sites. Therefore, a Zoning
By-law Amendment is required and not a Minor Variance. It is clear in the Planning Act legislation
what is required and approving the applications is a contravention of the Planning Act legislation and
of the OP because the OP requires a Zoning By-law Amendment; and
• His submission is that the Applications can not be supported.
Christa Fraser (3 Crerar Avenue) advised that she had submitted a letter to the Committee (read aloud
previously by the Secretary-Treasurer). She referenced Mr. Mammoliti's letter (read aloud previously by the
Secretary-Treasurer) and advised of a correction to his letter. Specifically, she advised that 3 Crerar Avenue
and 11 Crerar Avenue were created in the mid 1970s by severance so the subject lot had already been
severed and Mr. Mammoliti did not include that information in his submission. She provided an invitation that
the Mayor received from the Welland Heritage Committee to recognize this Veteran's Neighbourhood
(attached). Ms Fraser advised that the Mayor (who attended on the weekend) talked about this area as
being unique, different and that it was created for World War 2 veterans. She stated that the proposal is
aggressive and is not minor. She spoke to Mr. Mammoliti's comment in his letter that she notified others in
the neighbourhood about the proposal. Ms Fraser said that she notified others because only 10-12 people