Submission No.: A 2025-064 & A 2025-065
Applicant: Amy Brooke and Nigel Brooke
Property Location: 82 Brunswick Avenue
Legal Description: Lot 9, Plan 373
Appearances:
In Support:
A. Brooke
N. Brooke
Contra:
R. Miller
K. Targosz
Written Submissions:
R. Floris
P. Eckstein
J. Ditzend
K. Bester
K. Targosz Valdez
A. Valdez
C. Shantz
L. Charette
M. Wright
B. Magolon
Z. Schnarr
M. Jackett
M. Gambetti re-entered the meeting at this time.
The Committee was advised the applicant requested minor variances to permit the future severed lot to have a parking requirement of 1 parking space rather than the minimum required 2 parking spaces; and, to permit a rear yard setback of 5.6m rather than the minimum required 7.5m to facilitate the development of a detached dwelling with 3 dwelling units on the future severed lot; and, requested minor variances to permit the future severed lot to have a parking requirement of 1 parking space rather than the minimum required 2 parking spaces; and, to permit a rear yard setback of 7m rather than the minimum required 7.5m, to facilitate the development of a detached dwelling with 3 dwelling units on the future retained lot.
The Committee considered Development Services Department report DSD-2025-303, dated July 4, 2025, recommending approval subject to conditions as outlined in the report.
The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated June 24, 2025, advising they have no concerns with the subject application.
The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority Resource Planning Technician dated June 30, 2025, advising they have no concerns with the subject application.
A. Brooke and N. Brooke were in attendance in support of the staff recommendation.
R. Miller and K. Targosz were in attendance in opposition to the staff recommendation expressing concerns with insufficient parking in the subject neighbourhood which would be further exacerbated by the proposed parking reduction. Concerns were also raised regarding increased congestion on Brunswick Avenue as it is a narrow street and its' impact on safety and livability of the neighbourhood.
In response to questions from the Committee, A. Brooke noted parking will not be offered for all the proposed units; thus stating, in their opinion the parking reduction request is reasonable.
In response to additional questions from the Committee, T. Malone-Wright noted that, as of right, the applicant can construct a semi-detached dwelling or a semi-detached duplex dwelling; the parking requirement is 2 parking spaces.
In relation to the concerns raised regarding parking and congestion, M. Gambetti stated an opinion that the subject neighborhood is a few kilometers away from a Transit Station and seems accessible to other amenities.
A. Brennan noted support for the requested parking variance stating the applicant has worked with staff to refine their initial site plan in response concerns that were raised by the adjacent property owners.
A motion was brought forward by M. Gambetti, which was seconded by B. McColl, to approve the staff recommendation outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-2025-303.
It was requested that the variances be voted on separately.
B. Santos, B. McColl and M. Melo noted they would not be voting in support of the requested parking reduction as the variance is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property given the insufficient parking in the neighbourhood, and further, the proposed development is located on a narrow street where street parking is not permitted.
The minor variances related to the rear yard setbacks were then voted on and were Carried.
The minor variances related to the parking requirement of 1 parking space rather than the minimum required 2 parking spaces was then voted on and was LOST. It was noted, as a result of the parking variance being voted on LOST, the parking variance has effectively been refused.