Planning Committee Meeting

the City of Greater Sudbury moves to Closed Session to deal with one (1) Proposed or Pending Acquisition or Disposition of Land Matter regarding Highway 17 West, Worthington in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001, par.239(2)(c).

the resolution be amended to increase the parking standard to 1.25 per unit. Rules of Prodecure A Recorded Vote was held: YEAS: (3) Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann NAYS: (2) Councillor McCausland, and Councillor Kirwan

the resolution be amended to remove "within 50 metres of the lot line", paragraph 1 (i). Rules of Procedure A Recorded Vote was held: YEAS: (3) Councillor Kirwan, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann NAYS: (2) Councillor McCausland, and Councillor Lapierre

Amended: THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by 2375423 Ontario Inc. & Bancroft Property Holdings Inc. to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “I”, Institutional and “FD”, Future Development to “R3-1.D30 Special”, Medium Density Residential Special on lands described as PINs 73575-0374, 73575-0408 & 73575-0430 , Parcels 18885 & 4435 S.E.S., Parts 2 & 3, Plan 53R-11221 in Lot 9, Concession 3, Township of Neelon, as outlined in the report entitled “95 Estelle Street, Sudbury”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022, subject to the following conditions: 1.That the amending by-law includes the following site-specific provisions: (i)The maximum building height of any building shall be 11 metres; (ii)Planting strips shall be provided as follows: (a)A minimum ten (10) metre-wide natural vegetative buffer shall be provided where the subject land abuts a Low Density Residential Zone excluding any clearance of land required for the servicing corridor to Bancroft Drive; and, (b)Notwithstanding the above, a minimum three (3) metre-wide planting strip with a minimum 1.5 metre-high opaque fence is required where the subject land abuts the southerly limit of Part 2, Plan 53R-13471 and the northerly limit of Part 1, Plan SR-140; (iii)Notwithstanding Table 5.5 of Section 5.5, the following alternative parking standards shall be permitted: (a)1.25 spaces per

the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by the City of Greater Sudbury to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “M1(33)”, Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special, to an amended “M1(33)”, Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special on lands described as PINs 73501-2249 & 73501-2247, Parts 1-3, Plan 53R-21683, Part of Lot 8, Concession 5, Township of Blezard, as outlined in the report entitled “0 Belisle Drive, Val Caron”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022, subject to the following condition: That the amending zoning by-law for the M1(33), Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special Zone include the following site-specific provision: i. On Parts 1-3, Plan 53R-21683, a business office shall also be permitted. YEAS: (5) Councillor McCausland, Councillor Kirwan, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann

the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by 749459 Ontario Limited to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “R1-5”, Low Density Residential One to “R3”, Medium Density Residential on lands described as Part of PIN 73503-1217 SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1, Part of Parcel 20955 S.E.S., in Lot 2, Concession 2, Township of Hanmer, as outlined in the report entitled “5887 Highway 69 North, Hanmer” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022 subject to the following conditions: That prior to the enactment of the amending by-law, the owner shall address the following conditions: Submit a revised parking plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services; Enter into a paving agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure; Submit an application for consent in order to sever the westerly lands subject to the rezoning; and, Provide the Development Approvals Section with a final plan of survey in order to enact the amending by-law. YEAS: (5) Councillor McCausland, Councillor Kirwan, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann

That the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by Marc & Louise Menard to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z with respect to lands described as PIN 73506-0067, Parcel 49847 S.E.S., Part 2, Plan 53R-12627 in Lot 5, Concession 4, Township of Hanmer in order to extend the use of a garden suite in accordance with Section 39.1(4) of the Planning Act for a temporary period of three (3) years, as outlined in the report entitled “1236 Gravel Drive, Hanmer” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022. YEAS: (5) Councillor McCausland, Councillor Kirwan, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann

That the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by Gloria Prevost to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z with respect to lands described as PIN 73479-0066, Parcel 50488 S.E.S., Parts 2 to 7, Plan 53R-14439 in Lot 11, Concession 5, Township of Dill in order to extend the use of a garden suite in accordance with Section 39.1(4) of the Planning Act for a temporary period of three (3) years, as outlined in the report entitled “1799 Potvin Crescent, Sudbury” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022. YEAS: (5) Councillor McCausland, Councillor Kirwan, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, and Councillor Landry-Altmann

the City of Greater Sudbury authorize a grant by way of lease with Beaver Lake Fire & Services for the Beaver Lake Welcome Centre located at 7535 Highway 17 West, Worthington, legally described as part of PIN 73395-0279 (LT), part of Lot 4, Concession 5, Township of Lorne; AND THAT a by-law be presented authorizing the grant and execution of the lease agreement.

the City of Greater Sudbury approves Consent Agenda item 10.1.1.

the City of Greater Sudbury approves the request by Roland Joseph Duguay to allow Consent Application B0077/2022 on those lands described as PIN 73367-0477, Parcel 11561 SRO SWS as in LT83065, Parts 5 and 6, Plan SR-2735, except LT217844, Parts 13 to 15 on Plan SR-2401, Parts 2 & 4, Plan SR-2711, Parts 1 to 3, Plan SR-3400, Part 1, Plan 53R-6656, Part 1, Plan 53R-10991 and Part 3, Plan 53R-18719, Part of Lot 2, Concession 6, Township of Fairbank, to proceed by way of the consent process, as outlined in the report entitled “0 Vermilion Lake Road, Chelmsford” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting of October 3, 2022.

The City of Greater Sudbury continues the Application for 212 Minto Street under the Strategic Core Areas Community Improvement Plan; AND THAT The City of Greater Sudbury approves the Application for 212 Minto Street, Sudbury, and directs staff to prepare a by-law to authorize staff to enter into the required agreement, as outlined in the report entitled “Downtown Sudbury Community Improvement Plan Application – 212 Minto Street”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee Meeting of October 3, 2022.

the City of Greater Sudbury continues the Application for 497-509 Notre Dame Ave under the Strategic Core Areas Community Improvement Plan; THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approved the Application at 497-509 Notre Dame Ave, Sudbury, and directs staff to prepare a by-law to authorize staff to enter into the required agreement, as outlined in the report entitled “Town Centre Community Improvement Plan Application – 497-509 Notre Dame Ave”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee Meeting of October 3, 2022.

there are several properties across the City of Greater Sudbury which were slated for renovations/construction and were issued building permits, but have been left in a state of disrepair or abandoned for extended periods of time with open permits; AND WHEREAS the Building Code Act, 1992, stipulates at Section 8(10) that: (10) Subject to section 25, the chief building official may revoke a permit issued under this Act, (a) if it was issued on mistaken, false or incorrect information; (b) if, after six months after its issuance, the construction or demolition in respect of which it was issued has not, in the opinion of the chief building official, been seriously commenced; (c) if the construction or demolition of the building is, in the opinion of the chief building official, substantially suspended or discontinued for a period of more than one year; (d) if it was issued in error; (e) if the holder requests in writing that it be revoked; or (f) if a term of the agreement under clause (3) (c) has not been complied with. 1992, c. 23, s. 8 (10). AND WHEREAS property owners adjacent to or near the properties which have been abandoned or left in a state of disrepair are frustrated by the lack of action to have these properties complete the required construction or be demolished; AND WHEREAS the terms "seriously commenced" in Section 8(10)(b) and "substantially suspended or discontinued" in Section 8(10)(c) are vague and subject to interpretation, and do not provide definitive direc

the motion be amended to remove the following portions: “AND WHEREAS the Building Code Act, 1992, stipulates at Section 8(10) that: (10) Subject to section 25, the chief building official may revoke a permit issued under this Act, (a) if it was issued on mistaken, false or incorrect information; (b) if, after six months after its issuance, the construction or demolition in respect of which it was issued has not, in the opinion of the chief building official, been seriously commenced; (c) if the construction or demolition of the building is, in the opinion of the chief building official, substantially suspended or discontinued for a period of more than one year; (d) if it was issued in error; (e) if the holder requests in writing that it be revoked; or (f) if a term of the agreement under clause (3) (c) has not been complied with. 1992, c. 23, s. 8 (10).” As well as: "AND WHEREAS the terms "seriously commenced" in Section 8(10)(b) and "substantially suspended or discontinued" in Section 8(10)(c) are vague and subject to interpretation, and do not provide definitive direction to the Chief Building Official;” And that the following paragraphs be added immediately before the operative clause: “AND WHEREAS some of these properties may be designated heritage structures it would be important to modify the existing property standards by-law to address these buildings specifically; AND WHEREAS as in creating by-laws to reduce these potential unsafe conditions and practices it is impor

Amended: WHEREAS there are several properties across the City of Greater Sudbury which were slated for renovations/construction and were issued building permits, but have been left in a state of disrepair or abandoned for extended periods of time with open permits; AND WHEREAS property owners adjacent to or near the properties which have been abandoned or left in a state of disrepair are frustrated by the lack of action to have these properties complete the required construction or be demolished; AND WHEREAS some of these properties may be designated heritage structures it would be important to modify the existing property standards by-law to address these buildings specifically; AND WHEREAS as in creating by-laws to reduce these potential unsafe conditions and practices it is important to continue to maintain any “open for business” environment for the vast majority of our responsible development stakeholders; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City of Greater Sudbury directs that staff to present a report to City Council in the second quarter of 2023 which would provide information on what other municipalities are doing to address the problems with abandoned or derelict properties, to address the maintenance of heritage properties in the property standards by-law, as well as options/suggestions to lobby the Province to have the language in the Building Code Act amended to provide to The Chief Building Officials with clear direction regarding the revocation of building permits.

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury moves to Closed Session to deal with one (1) Proposed or Pending Acquisition or Disposition of Land Matter regarding Highway 17 West, Worthington in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001, par.239(2)(c).

THAT the resolution be amended to increase the parking standard to 1.25 per unit. Rules of Prodecure A

THAT the resolution be amended to remove "within 50 metres of the lot line", paragraph 1 (i). Rules of Procedure A

As Amended: THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by 2375423 Ontario Inc. & Bancroft Property Holdings Inc. to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “I”, Institutional and “FD”, Future Development to “R3-1.D30 Special”, Medium Density Residential Special on lands described as PINs 73575-0374, 73575-0408 & 73575-0430 , Parcels 18885 & 4435 S.E.S., Parts 2 & 3, Plan 53R- 11221 in Lot 9, Concession 3, Township of Neelon, as outlined in the report entitled “95 Estelle Street, Sudbury”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022, subject to the following conditions: 1.That the amending by-law includes the following site-specific provisions: (i)The maximum building height of any building shall be 11 metres; (ii)Planting strips shall be provided as follows: (a)A minimum ten (10) metre-wide natural vegetative buffer shall be provided where the subject land abuts a Low Density Residential Zone excluding any clearance of land required for the servicing corridor to Bancroft Drive; and, (b)Notwithstanding the above, a minimum three (3) metre-wide planting strip with a minimum 1.5 metre-high opaque fence is required where the subject land abuts the southerly limit of Part 2, Plan 53R-13471 and the northerly limit of Part 1, Plan SR-140; (iii)Notwithstanding Table 5.5 of Section 5.5, the following alternative parking standards shall be permitted: (a)1.25 spaces

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by the City of Greater Sudbury to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “M1(33)”, Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special, to an amended “M1(33)”, Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special on lands described as PINs 73501- 2249 & 73501-2247, Parts 1-3, Plan 53R-21683, Part of Lot 8, Concession 5, Township of Blezard, as outlined in the report entitled “0 Belisle Drive, Val Caron”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022, subject to the following condition: 1. That the amending zoning by-law for the M1(33), Mixed Light Industrial/Service Commercial Special Zone include the following site-specific provision: i. On Parts 1-3, Plan 53R-21683, a business office shall also be permitted. YEAS: (5): Councillor McCausland, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, Councillor Landry-Altmann, and Councillor Kirwan

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by 749459 Ontario Limited to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z by changing the zoning classification from “R1-5”, Low Density Residential One to “R3”, Medium Density Residential on lands described as Part of PIN 73503- 1217 SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1, Part of Parcel 20955 S.E.S., in Lot 2, Concession 2, Township of Hanmer, as outlined in the report entitled “5887 Highway 69 North, Hanmer” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022 subject to the following conditions: 1. That prior to the enactment of the amending by-law, the owner shall address the following conditions: i. Submit a revised parking plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services; ii. Enter into a paving agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure; iii. Submit an application for consent in order to sever the westerly lands subject to the rezoning; and, iv. Provide the Development Approvals Section with a final plan of survey in order to enact the amending by-law. YEAS: (5): Councillor McCausland, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, Councillor Landry-Altmann, and Councillor Kirwan

That the City of Greater Sudbury approves the application by Marc & Louise Menard to amend Zoning By-law 2010-100Z with respect to lands described as PIN 73506-0067, Parcel 49847 S.E.S., Part 2, Plan 53R- 12627 in Lot 5, Concession 4, Township of Hanmer in order to extend the use of a garden suite in accordance with Section 39.1(4) of the Planning Act for a temporary period of three (3) years, as outlined in the report entitled “1236 Gravel Drive, Hanmer” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3, 2022. YEAS: (5): Councillor McCausland, Councillor Lapierre, Councillor Leduc, Councillor Landry-Altmann, and Councillor Kirwan

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury authorize a grant by way of lease with Beaver Lake Fire & Services for the Beaver Lake Welcome Centre located at 7535 Highway 17 West, Worthington, legally described as part of PIN 73395-0279 (LT), part of Lot 4, Concession 5, Township of Lorne; AND THAT a by-law be presented authorizing the grant and execution of the lease agreement.

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves Consent Agenda item 10.1.1.

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approves the request by Roland Joseph Duguay to allow Consent Application B0077/2022 on those lands described as PIN 73367-0477, Parcel 11561 SRO SWS as in LT83065, Parts 5 and 6, Plan SR-2735, except LT217844, Parts 13 to 15 on Plan SR-2401, Parts 2 & 4, Plan SR-2711, Parts 1 to 3, Plan SR-3400, Part 1, Plan 53R-6656, Part 1, Plan 53R-10991 and Part 3, Plan 53R-18719, Part of Lot 2, Concession 6, Township of Fairbank, to proceed by way of the consent process, as outlined in the report entitled “0 Vermilion Lake Road, Chelmsford” from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee meeting of October 3, 2022.

THAT The City of Greater Sudbury continues the Application for 212 Minto Street under the Strategic Core Areas Community Improvement Plan; AND THAT The City of Greater Sudbury approves the Application for 212 Minto Street, Sudbury, and directs staff to prepare a by-law to authorize staff to enter into the required agreement, as outlined in the report entitled “Downtown Sudbury Community Improvement Plan Application – 212 Minto Street”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee Meeting of October 3, 2022.

THAT the City of Greater Sudbury continues the Application for 497-509 Notre Dame Ave under the Strategic Core Areas Community Improvement Plan; THAT the City of Greater Sudbury approved the Application at 497-509 Notre Dame Ave, Sudbury, and directs staff to prepare a by-law to authorize staff to enter into the required agreement, as outlined in the report entitled “Town Centre Community Improvement Plan Application – 497-509 Notre Dame Ave”, from the General Manager of Growth and Infrastructure, presented at the Planning Committee Meeting of October 3, 2022.

WHEREAS there are several properties across the City of Greater Sudbury which were slated for renovations/construction and were issued building permits, but have been left in a state of disrepair or abandoned for extended periods of time with open permits; AND WHEREAS the Building Code Act, 1992, stipulates at Section 8(10) that: (10) Subject to section 25, the chief building official may revoke a permit issued under this Act, (a) if it was issued on mistaken, false or incorrect information; (b) if, after six months after its issuance, the construction or demolition in respect of which it was issued has not, in the opinion of the chief building official, been seriously commenced; (c) if the construction or demolition of the building is, in the opinion of the chief building official, substantially suspended or discontinued for a period of more than one year; (d) if it was issued in error; (e) if the holder requests in writing that it be revoked; or (f) if a term of the agreement under clause (3) (c) has not been complied with. 1992, c. 23, s. 8 (10). AND WHEREAS property owners adjacent to or near the properties which have been abandoned or left in a state of disrepair are frustrated by the lack of action to have these properties complete the required construction or be demolished; AND WHEREAS the terms "seriously commenced" in Section 8(10)(b) and "substantially suspended or discontinued" in Section 8(10)(c) are vague and subject to interpretation, and do not provide definiti

THAT the motion be amended to remove the following portions: “AND WHEREAS the Building Code Act, 1992, stipulates at Section 8(10) that: (10) Subject to section 25, the chief building official may revoke a permit issued under this Act, (a) if it was issued on mistaken, false or incorrect information; (b) if, after six months after its issuance, the construction or demolition in respect of which it was issued has not, in the opinion of the chief building official, been seriously commenced; (c) if the construction or demolition of the building is, in the opinion of the chief building official, substantially suspended or discontinued for a period of more than one year; (d) if it was issued in error; (e) if the holder requests in writing that it be revoked; or (f) if a term of the agreement under clause (3) (c) has not been complied with. 1992, c. 23, s. 8 (10).” As well as: "AND WHEREAS the terms "seriously commenced" in Section 8(10)(b) and "substantially suspended or discontinued" in Section 8(10)(c) are vague and subject to interpretation, and do not provide definitive direction to the Chief Building Official;” And that the following paragraphs be added immediately before the operative clause: “AND WHEREAS some of these properties may be designated heritage structures it would be important to modify the existing property standards by-law to address these buildings specifically; AND WHEREAS as in creating by-laws to reduce these potential unsafe conditions and practices it is

As Amended: WHEREAS there are several properties across the City of Greater Sudbury which were slated for renovations/construction and were issued building permits, but have been left in a state of disrepair or abandoned for extended periods of time with open permits; AND WHEREAS property owners adjacent to or near the properties which have been abandoned or left in a state of disrepair are frustrated by the lack of action to have these properties complete the required construction or be demolished; AND WHEREAS some of these properties may be designated heritage structures it would be important to modify the existing property standards by-law to address these buildings specifically; AND WHEREAS as in creating by-laws to reduce these potential unsafe conditions and practices it is important to continue to maintain any “open for business” environment for the vast majority of our responsible development stakeholders; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City of Greater Sudbury directs that staff to present a report to City Council in the second quarter of 2023 which would provide information on what other municipalities are doing to address the problems with abandoned or derelict properties, to address the maintenance of heritage properties in the property standards by-law, as well as options/suggestions to lobby the Province to have the language in the Building Code Act amended to provide to The Chief Building Officials with clear direction regarding the revocation of building permits.