I will also be referring to the City of Windsor Official Plan as well as the Provincial Policy Statement.

The developer, as you know, is also asking that the buildings height be some 65.61 feet, some 6.54 feet higher than the current City allowance for a three-storey building. While we do not want these buildings built at all in this area, we definitely oppose an increase in height as requested in the application.

Certainly the Planner refers, on page 195 of the package,

“…that the infill development will be designed to function as an integral and complimentary part of the area’s existing development pattern by having regard for massin g, building height, architectural proportion, volumes of defined space, lot size, position relative to the road, building area to site ratios, overall massing, orientation, setback and exterior design the pattern, scale and character of existing developmen t; and the exterior building appearance.”

We take specific note to the words “scale and character of existing development”. Certainly, this proposed building does not fit into the City of Windsor Official Plan requirements in this regard.

It concerns us that on page 196 of the package under Zoning By-Law, it states:

“While the proposed use and minimum lot area can be supported, the original conceptual site plan reveals a lack of sensitivity to the context in which the development is placed. Because this is an area contains some low profile single detached dwellings, the location of the buildings close to the interior side yards of the adjacent single detached dwellings may cause concern. The application has chosen to submit a conceptual site plan that appears to have massing that is incompatible with the adjacent detached residential dwellings. Other orientations of development are possible that would have less impact on the abutting landowners. To provide guidance to the applicant, administration will require a greater interior side yard setback to reduce the impact of the proposed structures on the abutting land use as follows: Side yard width- where a habitable room window of any dwelling unit faces a side lot side – 20m.

The proposed building height regulation of 20m appears excessive for the development proposed. The proposed 20 m building height would result in a building approximately twice the height of the buildings shown on the concept plan presented. The maximum height of 18m permitted in the RD2.5 zone category is sufficient for the development proposed and therefore being recommended.”

While that statement assumes this to be double the height of adjacent housing, I would actually suggest this is over TRIPLE the height of adjacent housing. While a single level home height is 5.5 metres (18 feet), this building is proposing 20 metres (65.62 feet). That is actually 3.63 times higher than the adjacent homes.