PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL AGENDA JULY 18, Rezone Portions of Property from P to TP-2 and TP-2 to P

Transcription

1 PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL AGENDA JULY 18, 2018 A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting June 20, 2018 B. ZONING APPLICATIONS 1. City of Fredericton 215 & 299 Argyle Street Rezone Portions of Property from P to TP-2 and TP-2 to P 2. River Valley Therapeutic Treatment Clinic 512 George Street Zone Amendment to Permit a Fitness Centre and Parking Variance C. SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS 1. Hub Surveys 246 Claudie Road Subdivision to Create 1 Cell Tower Lot D. VARIANCE APPLICATIONS 1. Nathalie and Trent MacDonald 13 Duke Street Conditional Use Variance to Permit Backyard Hens 2. Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc Main Street Similar Use Variance to Replace Freestanding Sign 3. Gardiner Realty 25 and 45 Woodside Lane Office Floor Area Variance E. OLD BUSINESS F. NEW BUSINESS 1. Street Name Approval Holland Homes (off Clements Drive) G. BUILDING PERMITS To receive building permits for the month of June 2018 H. ADJOURNMENT

2

3

4

5

6

7 WRITTEN SUBMISSION by Mark DʼArcy, resident Ward 10: The Planning Department needs to address many serious issues about the Cross Town Trail in their Planning Report and during the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) public meeting of Wednesday, July 18, 2018 (see questions #1-9 below). Property: 215 and 219 Argyle Street Applicant: City of Fredericton ( is Date of Development Proposal: July 4, 2018 Proposal: Square off the parking lot at St. Charbelʼs Maronite Catholic Church by impacting the CrossTown Trail on one side and swapping this with a portion of the parking lost on the other side. This requires a rezoning from Park (P) to Residential Town Plat Two (TP-2) on the one side, and a rezoning from Residential Town Plat Two (TP-2) to Park (P) on the other side. City Councillors and the City of Fredericton have a duty of care to preserve the integrity and public safety of the CrossTown Trail. It must be direct, dedicated, and uninterrupted. It certainly must not be allowed to funnel bicycles from the major connector trails (Valley Trail and Lincoln Trail) onto our sidewalks. ʻCentre Median treatmentsʼ can be installed at mid-block crossings of the Cross Town Trail, i.e. Westmorland Street at the entrance of Rabbit Town Park and York Street in front of the Train Station. These centre medians have been installed on the Northside Trail in Fredericton as part of the Cityʼs new Active Transportation Connection Plan. In 2013, we had a homeowner on Northumberland Street struck by a bicycle racing down the sidewalk. She simply walked out from her home and was knocked down & hospitalized with a concussion. The bicyclist did not stop. If this had been a child, the impact of the collision would have been life-threatening. PHOTO 1: The Cross Town Trail has been clearly identified by this sign for more than 10 years at the corner of Northumberland Street and Argyle Street. (photo taken July 8, 2018) 1. Why is this major issue coming up during the months of July and August when citizens are trying to enjoy their summer? 2. When did the City start calling this trail the ʻRabbit Town Trailʼ and not the ʻCrossTown Trailʼ? 3. When did Fredericton City Council vote to change the use of Rabbit Town Park as part of the linear trail system, the Cross Town Trail? When was the public consultation for these changes? Fredericton City Council approved the purchase of this park for $156,000 on November 9, At that council meeting, Mike Hanusiak, Director of Development Services, City of Fredericton) stated that The acquisition of this property will lead to public consultation with the neighbourhood in the Smythe Street and through to York Street in the not too distant future to really update them on our efforts to bring forward the cross-town trail connection. 4. When did Fredericton City Council amend the Municipal Plan to discontinue the CrossTown Trail through our downtown community as outlined in the map Schedule D - LINEAR OPEN SPACE (dated April 1991 in the Capital City Municipal Plan) the shows the rail corridor through our community as the intented location for the trail system? When was the public consultation for these

8 5. Why would city planners allow for a piece of the linear trail in Rabbit Town Park to be taken away, effectively causing an obstruction to the otherwise uniform linear width of this trail? If this proposal is approved, the parking lot would be allowed to encroach into the trail space. 6. Does the City of Fredericton have future plans to remove the trail altogether and sell the Rabbit Town Park off as surplus land to townhouse and apartment building developers. 7. Why is the Cross Town Trail segment beside the York Street Train Station included in the land currently for sale? The Cross Town Trail portion beside the York Street Train Station was supposed to be given to the City of Fredericton as part of the 8% public land dedication by J. D. Irving Limited (The Fredericton Railway Company). The 8% land acquisition by the City was triggered by the plans to refurbish the train station and construct the adjoining liquor store, plans which required approval of a Municipal Plan Amendment to the Residential Town Plat and a Plan of Subdivision. 8. What has happened to the Municipal Plan statements for a Public Commons area in the center of these former Railway Lands between Regent Street and York Street? (see Section 3.5 Residential Town Plat, Municipal Plan for the City of Fredericton and Figure Railway Lands Development Scheme, Capital City Municipal Plan) 9. Are any of these actions the result of backroom decisions made with developers? This is a serious public safety issue because it will force bicyclists to continue using our sidewalks as de facto trail connections. PHOTO 2: This FOR SALE sign is currently erected on York Street beside the York Street Train Station. The property for sale is currently owned by Irving. The land for sale clearly includes the current Cross Town Trail. The path/orientation of this linear open space was constructed to pass beside the York Street Train Station and meet up with the abondoned rail corridor at York Street. Most of this land for sale is designated for higher residential development under our Municipal Plan. (see Section 3.5 Residential Town Plat, Municipal Plan for the City of Fredericton and Figure Railway Lands Development Scheme, Capital City Municipal Plan)

9 Our downtown community in Ward 10 has remained vigilant but waited patiently for more than 15 years while the different trail segments have been constructed (e.g. through Rabbit Town Park, between Westmorland Street and York Street, and beside the York Street Train Station) The vigilance and patience of this community has successfully prevented the destruction of the York Street Train Station, the Hartt Shoe Factory, and several heritage houses in our neighbourhood. Over the last 20 years, our community has been engaged with the City of Fredericton and other neighbourhood organizations to see the successful implementation of the Secondary Plan with downzoning of 20 residential blocks, Traffic Calming, and the construction of the Crosstown Trail along several portions of the 8-block former rail corridor, including the trail section built beside the York Street Train Station and through Rabbit Town Park. Why should citizens attend public information sessions and write down their input to City Staff and City Councillors if it will just be ignored? For example, a dutch bike expert from Ottawa was brought in by the City of Fredericton on Saturday, May 25, 2013 to give a lecture and brainstorming/public input exercise for citizens. The City Councillors who attended were all excited by changes "coming soon" to Fredericton with respect to bike infrastructure. A trail would not be compromised like this unless the City of Fredericton had future plans to removing the trail and sell the Rabbit Town Park off as surplus land to townhouse and apartment building developers. The Crosstown Trail is the connection between the Valley Trail (ending at Smythe Street beside the Atlantic Superstore) and the Lincoln Trail (ending near University Avenue). As these are two major Trails on the southside of Fredericton, and it is a major public safety issue that their connector trail be direct, dedicated. This is in the Municipal Plan and street crossings can be made safe through the use of One of the tools weʼll be using going forward is looking at ʻcentre median treatmentsʼ which the City of Fredericton has successfully installed on the Northside Trail. As explained by City of Fredericton traffic engineer Jon Lewis during the start of their Active Transportation Connection Plan, these centre medians would slow down traffic at trail crossings and provide two-stage crossing for trail users (see links to Global News, March 28, 2017 and CBC Information Morning, March 22, 2017). PHOTO 3 - The cityʼs public trail system will also be incorporated into the siteʼs design. NB Liquor, J.D. Irving, and the City of Fredericton announce the construction of the new NB Liquor store incorporating the refurbished York Street Train Station. (The Daily Gleaner, page 2, September 19, 2009)

10 This is also a prerequisite if our city is serious about improving Active Transportation infrastructure in our communities to promote commuting and exercise by walking and biking. Our sidewalks are not the trail system. Does a child have to die before we get our completed CrossTown Trail through the abandoned rail corridor? The following is a very important YouTube on the experience of The Netherlands to prevent deaths from vehicle-bicycle accidents: How the Dutch got their cycle paths (06:29) BicycleDutch 951,309 views Published on Oct 9, 2011 OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting on Wednesday, July 18, 7:00pm (Fredericton City Hall, Council Chambers) and City Council meeting for Hearing of Objections/Support on Monday, July 23, Submitted on July 12, 2018 by Mark DʼArcy, 379 Northumberland Street, Fredericton, N.B. 44

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33 PLANNING REPORT PAC - July 18, 2018 File No.: V ; PR: 57/18 To: From: Proposal: Planning Advisory Committee Alicia Brown, Planner Similar Non-Conforming Use Variance to permit the replacement of an existing sign. Sign face area variance required. Property: Main Street (PID ) OWNERS: APPLICANT: Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc. (c/o Brian Wall) 98 Main Street Fredericton, NB E3A 9N6 As above SITE INFORMATION: Location: Context: Ward No: Municipal Plan: Zoning: Existing Land Use: North side of Main Street, west of Wallace Avenue Vacant land to the west, low density residential to the north, and commercial uses to the south and east 2 Commercial (Main Street Planning Area) District Commercial Zone (DC) Commercial Shopping Centre Previous Applications: PR: 34/00; 24/11; Z-14-03; Z ; V ; PR 24/11; PR 88/14; PR 15/17 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 1. Plazacorp Property Management has made application for a similar non-conforming use variance in order to replace an existing directory sign with a freestanding sign for the A&W Restaurant beinfl constructed on the property. The property currently has a combination of four freestanding/directory signs, under the current Zoning By-law Z-5 only two signs are permitted. The signs are considered legal non-conforming as they existed with permits issued under the previous By-law Z-2 and when the property was four individual lots. 2. The new A & W freestanding sign will require a 1.0 square metre sign face area variance with respect to the sign face area permitted for the electronic static copy message board as well as an overall sign face area variance of 1.8 square metres. Staff have reviewed the proposal and are reluctant to support the requested sign face area variances but would be comfortable with allowing a new fourth sign on the property subject to meeting the required sign face area requirements of the Zoning By-law.

34 APPLICATION: Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc. has made application for the following: A similar non-conforming use variance to permit the replacement of an existing directory sign with a new freestanding sign for the A & W Restaurant; A 1.0 square metre sign face area variance to permit a readerboard as part of the freestanding sign; A 1.8 square metre sign area variance to permit the freestanding sign. PLANNING COMMENTS: Proposal The Applicant is proposing to remove the existing directory sign (identified as Sign #1 the attached Map II) and replace it with a freestanding sign advertising the A&W Restaurant. The existing directory sign measures 6m in height and has a sign face area of 7.96 square metres, the new freestanding sign will measure 7.62 metres in height with a sign face area of 9.8 square metres. In order to facilitate the removal and replacement of the sign, a similar non-conforming use variance is required as the current Zoning By-law does not permit more than a maximum of two signs on a property. Section 60(4) of the Community Planning Act permits the redevelopment of a property containing a non-conforming use with a similar non-conforming use with the consent of the Planning Advisory Committee. Historically, the site was four separate properties which allowed for each property to have its own freestanding or directory sign. In 2003, as part of the redevelopment of the site, the properties were consolidated to form one large parcel. Staff can confirm that all four existing signs were erected with the benefit of sign permits under Zoning By-Jaw Z-2. The A&W sign is comprised of 2 components: the main logo and the electronic reader board. Overall, the sign face area measures 9.8 square metres which is 1.8 square metres larger than the permitted sign face area in Sign District 'D'. The reader board component alone measures 3 square metres which is 1.0 square metres larger than the permitted area of an electronic reader board. The Applicant will require a sign area variance for the total sign (includes the readerboard) and a variance for the electronic readerboard area. Municipal Plan In terms of Municipal Plan policies, the proposal complies with the objectives for the upgrading and replacement of older advertising signage as per Section (6). Staff would also reference the Fredericton Main Street - Urban Design Plan which indicates that any new signage along this portion of Main Street not overwhelm the streetscape and should remain consistent with the contemporary character of Main Street. Zoning By-law The proposal complies with the standards of freestanding signs with a readerboard in the District Commercial Zone - Special Sign District D as follows:

35 Standard PrOQOSed Variance Maximum Sign Face of 8m 9.8 m2 1.8 m2* Maximum Sign Height of 11 m 7.62 m n/a Setback from property line 2m 2.0 m n/a *Electronic static copy area Permitted up to 2 sq. Metres 3 sq. m 1.0 sq. m The DC Zone is intended to accommodate a wide variety of commercial uses serving areas beyond the surrounding neighbourhood and is characterized by larger scale buildings usually containing an anchor tenant. The A&W is a new tenant to the site and is considered an anchor tenant. Other anchor tenants on the site are Shoppers Drug Mart and Subway, which also have their own freestanding sign. Sign District D refers to the Main Street Commercial Area which permits one freestanding sign having up to a maximum sign face area of 8 square metres. Further, the readerboard portion of the sign face area cannot exceed 2 square metres for electronic static copy. Electronic static copy refers to the sign displays that are changed electronically rather than manually. A readerboard may include the time and temperature as well as advertise menu items, but may not include animated copy. The 2.0 square metre maximum is a standard that has been in place since the adoption of the new signage regulations in 2013 and has been adhered to by other commercial business in the City. This is not a standard that Staff would be comfortable varying. Staff have no concerns with the removal and replacement of the sign but have some reservations with the fact that the proposed sign is larger than the existing sign and that the proposed sign will not meet the current regulations of Zoning By-law Z-5. Specifically Staf f are not comfortable with the proposed size of the readerboard. The height of the proposed sign is 7.62 metres and it will be in keeping with the other two freestanding signs already existing on the site. The height difference will be.32 metres taller than the other three signs with the shorter of the four signs is located between the taller signs (see Map II). The proposed sign is of a higher quality than the sign that is being replaced and will result in an overall improvement to the aesthetics of the site. The sign will not create any further visual clutter along this portion of Main Street and Staff have no concerns with the proposed height of the sign. Engineering and Operations have indicated that no portion of the proposed sign is to project onto or overhang over the City right -of-way. The sign face area regulations are put in place to ensure that signs neither overwhelm their immediate environment (neighbouring signs) nor cause an undue amount of visual clutter when viewed together. For this reason, it is Staffs opinion that adherence to the existing sign regulations is necessary to ensure that the scale and nature of large commercial signs does not overpower the Main Street streetscape. Further, staff would encourage the replacement signage along the Main Street streetscape to comply with the standards of the Zoning By-Law. Finally, Staff would note that the total sign face area of

36 the proposed new sign (9.8 square metres) would be slightly larger than the sign face area of the existing legal non-conforming sign (7.96 square metres). For the reasons noted above, Staff is reluctant to support the requested sign face area variances but would be comfortable with allowing a new fourth sign on the property subject to meeting the required sign face area requirements of Sign District D. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the application submitted by Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc. for the following as it relates to Main Street: A similar non-conforming use variance to permit the replacement of an existing directory sign with a new freestanding sign for the A & W Restaurant; be approved, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1) The site be developed generally in accordance with Map II attached to P.R. 57/18; 2) The sign face area of the readerboard portion of the freestanding sign not exceed 2 square metres; 3) The proposed sign meet the sign area requirements for a freestanding sign as per Zoning By-law Z-5. It is further recommended that the application submitted by Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc. for the following as it relates to Main Street: A 1.0 square metre sign face area variance to permit a readerboard as part of the freestanding sign; A 1.8 square metre sign area variance to permit the freestanding sign. be denied. Prepared by: Approved by: Alicia Brown, MCIP Planner, Community Planning arcello Battilana, MCIP Manager, Community Planning

37 "225 R-LF Bm Subject Property/ Terrain vise Similar Non Conforming Use Variance to permit the replacement of an existing freestanding sign/derogation d'usage similaire necessaire pour permettre le remplacement d'un enseigne autostable Sign face area variance required/ Derogation de superficie de face necessaire Community Planning Planification urbaine Map\ carte# I File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: rue Main Street Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc.

38 CIVIC #245 5,640 SQ. FT. r,, Ii l... :., i/.i';,.".'",. I c..: - :.:.. OTHER TENANT s,ooo sa. FT _.(._ r> SHOPPERS DRUG MART 15,997 SQ.FT. t'ntrf 'i Q ID...J.... ca. '.: ,., l:,/. -_---;-I :.: i r r' , :_..\ f1:' t --' _ ;i, Q 0 i J! 11,l 'I i,..,,, I "' I' I I'"},.'.) 0!r!.! ;. I.,,;iJ ' 3) SIGN/ PFl-'.lPERn LINE :},;:.;.- - " Height/hauteur - 6 m Area/superfcie sq. m. Height/hauteur - 6 m Area/superfcie sq. m. Height/hauteur- 7.3 m Area/superfcie sq. m. Height/hauteur- 7.3 m Area/superfcie sq. m. FredericteR Community Planning Planification urbaine Existing Site Plan 2018 / plan du site existante 2018 Map\ carte# II File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: rue Main Street Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc.

39 Total Sign FaceArea/superficie totale 9.8 sq. m., 5.0 sq. m., m Total 4.8 sq. m. R E Proposed Sig;n/enseigne propose 1.8 sq. metres sign face area variance required/ Derogation de superficie de face de 1.8 m2 necessaire Sign to be replaced/ enseigne a remplacer FredericteR Community Planning Planification urbaine Map\ carte# Ill File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: rue Main Street Plazacorp Property Holdings Inc.

40 Frederict n To: Planning Advisory Committee PLANNING REPORT PAC- July 18, 2018 File No.: V ; P.R. No.58/18 From: Proposal: Property: Tony Dakiv, Senior Planner Variance to allow more than 500m 2 of office space in a new commercial building. 25, 45 Woodside Lane (Pl D's and ) OWNER: APPLICA.NT: Cordova Realty Ltd Mapleton Road, Moncton, NB, E1 G ON3 Don Clancy - Gardiner Realty 457 Bishop Drive, Fredericton, NB, E3C 2M6 SITE INFORMATION: Location: Context: South corner of Woodside Lane and Hedley Street. Surrounded by a variety of commercial and auto oriented uses including gas bar, vehicle sales, retail, restaurant. Ward No: 9 Municipal Plan: Zoning: Existing Land Use: Previous Applications: Commercial Commercial Corridor Zone Two (COR-2) Retail store (cannabis) under construction None EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The proposal is to allow 1,097m 2 of office space within a new commercial building in the COR-2 zone. The COR-2 zone limits the floor area for office to 500m 2 therefore the proposal requires a substantial variance of 597m 2. The Municipal Plan states "Council shall provide for office development to primarily concentrate in the City Centre" and directs that "Zoning regulations shall be established to encourage City Centre office development." This policy direction was specifically addressed during the Zoning By-law review wherein a hierarchy of maximum office areas was established in all commercial zones permitting the largest office development in the City Centre and along Main Street. The remaining commercial zones had greater limits imposed on the amount of allowable office area in order to maintain an appropriate ratio for office development across the city. The COR-2 zone permits an appropriate amount of office space given the auto oriented nature and retail/commercial intent of the zone. As with any variance request, staff would consider reasonable requests for office proposals above 500m 2 on a case by case basis. However in this case the requested variance is more than double the maximum limit and staff feel it is excessive at 119% of the maximum allowed. The proposal is considered to be contrary to Municipal Plan policy that encourages larger scaled office proposals to locate in the City Centre and could have longer term residual impacts on how and where future larger office development takes place within the city. Given these reasons, staff recommend denial of the application.

41 APPLICATION: Don Clancy of Gardiner Realty has made application for a 597m 2 office floor area variance to allow a total of 1097m 2 of office space within a new proposed commercial building on property located at 25, 45 Woodside Lane. PLANNING COMMENTS: Proposal: The site is comprised of two lots on the corner of Woodside Lane and Hedley Street which slopes down toward Hedley Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a new 2, 194m 2 commercial building on two levels to the east of the cannabis retail building currently under construction. The proposed building would accommodate the slope that exists on the site through a "walk-out" design with separate access to the upper and lower levels of the building. The lower level would contain COR-2 commercial/retail uses and the upper level would be used as for office space for an engineering firm. The two existing lots would be consolidated to contain both the proposed building and the cannabis retail store under construction on a larger 0.922ha. corner site. Three driveway access points are proposed. An "upper" driveway from Woodside Lane which would be a shared access with the existing Ultramar/C-store on the corner of Woodside Lane and Hanwell Road, The second driveway would be located farther down Woodside Lane accessing the lower area of the site between the two buildings and the third would provide access from Hedley Street all as shown on the attached site plan (Map II). With regard to parking a total of 67 parking spaces are required for the new proposed building as well as for the cannabis retail store under construction. The site plan indicates a total of 135 spaces satisfying the parking requirement. The "walk-out" building layout is well suited to the slope of the site and the contemporary design incorporates curved roof elements and quality building finish materials. The upper level of the proposed building has a gross floor area of 1097m 2 and the applicant is proposing to use this entire floor as office space. The COR-2 zone does permit office but limits the area to a maximum of 500m 2 therefore a 597m 2 office floor area variance is required. The intent of the COR-2 zone is to provide primarily for commercial/retail services and auto oriented uses. The 500m 2 limit for office has been established in order to maintain the integrity of the zone's retail/auto/commercial service intent as well as to steer larger office development to more appropriate employment node areas. To this end, office space limits have been incorporated into all commercial zones where it is a permitted use to establish a hierarchy that focuses the largest office development to the City Centre, Main Street and some other employment nodes. Municipal Plan The Municipal Plan commercial section contains specific policy (Section 2.6(34)) for office development which states: "Council shall provide for office development to primarily concentrate in the City Centre" The proposal is considered to be contrary to this policy as larger office proposals locating in areas outside the major office employment nodes could adversely affect the viability of these areas to attract new office development over time. Section 2.6(34) goes on to state: "Zoning regulations shall be established to encourage City Centre office development." This policy direction was specifically addressed during the Zoning By-law review wherein a hierarchy of allowable office area was incorporated into all applicable commercial zones. The largest office development would be allowed in the City Centre and along Main Street and the remaining commercial zones had greater

42 limits imposed on the amount of allowable office space in order to maintain an appropriate hierarchy for office deve lopment across the city. The COR-2 zone permits an appropriate amount of office space given the auto oriented nature and retail/commercial intent of the zone. As with any variance request, staff would consider reasonable requests for office proposals above 500m 2 on a case by case basis. However in this case the variance is more than double the limit and staff feel it is excessive at 119% of the maximum allowed. The proposal is considered to be contrary to Municipal Plan policy that encourages larger scaled office proposals to locate in the City Centre. It could also have longer term residual impacts on how and where future larger office development takes place within the city given the amount of COR-2 zoned land that exists throughout the city. Engineering and Operations have no objections to this application and conditions will be applied with the building permit. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the application submitted by Gardiner Realty a 597m 2 office floor area variance on property located at 25,45 Woodside Lane be denied. Prepared by: Approved by: Tony Dakiv, RPP, MCIP Senior Planner, Community Planning arcello Battilana, MCI P Manager, Community Planning

43 Subject Property / Propriete Vise 597m 2 office floor area variance required. Derogation de l'aire de plancher de 597m 2 pour des bureaux Community Planning Planification urbaine Map\ carte# I File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: allee Woodside Lane Erik DeJong and Don Clancy, Gardiner Realt

44 HEDLEY STREET PID CORDOVA REALTY LID. 0 (/) ULTRAIIAR RRVICE STATllN T/C 1U.- z m Site Plan / Plan Du Site FredericteR Community Planning Planification urbaine Map carte# II File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: allee Woodside Lane Erik DeJong and Don Clancy, Gardiner Realt

45 -, I I I - I _, LEASE SPACE 2415SF leasespace 1IS2SF LEASE SPACE 1T11SF LEASESPACE 1Tl0SF II LEASESPACE 112!lSF II LEASESPACE 1811SF ::: - _9 == i ==1 :d MAIN FLOOR HEDLEY ST 132" 1'-0- Ground/ rez-de-chaussee office space/ espace de bureau Upper Level Floor Plan / Plan du niveau 2F (HANWELL RD) 597m 2 office floor area variance required. Derogation de l'aire de plancher de 597m 2 pour des bureaux Floor Plans/ Plans d'etage Community Planning Planification urbaine Map carte # 111 File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: allee Woodside Lane Erik DeJong and Don Clancy, Gardiner Realt

46 East Elevation / Elevation est West Elevation/ Elevation d'ouest Elevations / Elevations Community Planning Planification urbaine Map carte# IV File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: allee Woodside Lane Erik DeJong and Don Clancy, Gardiner Realt

47 North Elevation/ Elevation du Nord Elevations / Elevations Community Planning Planification urbaine Map carte #V File\ fiche: PR Date\ date: juillet/july 18, 2018 Subject\ sujet: allee Woodside Lane Erik DeJong and Don Clancy, Gardiner Realt

48

49