Owen Sound Committee of Adjustment Meeting Transcript — July 7, 2026

00:00:10 Speaker 01: Good afternoon.

00:00:11 Speaker 01: It is three p.m., and I will call this meeting to order.

00:00:15 Speaker 01: I'd like to welcome everyone to these hearings today.

00:00:18 Speaker 01: The Committee of Adjustment is appointed by Council to consider consent applications and applications for minor variances to the Zoning Bylaw.

00:00:25 Speaker 01: Please be advised that any applicant agent that is in attendance at today's meeting. for a specific application may leave the meeting once the application has been considered by the committee.

00:00:37 Speaker 01: Any applicant, agent, or member of the public wishing to address the committee for a specific application is reminded that presentations are limited to ten minutes per person.

00:00:47 Speaker 01: Are there any additional items from the committee members or staff?

00:00:52 Speaker 01: Seeing none, do any committee member have an interest arising from the minutes of the last meeting or listed?

00:00:58 Speaker 01: on the agenda.

00:01:00 Speaker 01: If so, please state the general nature thereof.

00:01:05 Speaker 01: Do any clear?

00:01:07 Speaker 01: Do any committee members have any comments or motions regarding the June second and two hundred twenty twenty-six minutes to be adopted today?

00:01:18 Speaker 01: Yes, Chair.

00:01:18 Speaker 01: I'd like to make a motion to accept the minutes of the June second meeting.

00:01:26 Speaker 01: Thank you.

00:01:27 Speaker 01: I will call a vote.

00:01:33 Speaker 01: All those in favour, aye.

00:01:38 Speaker 01: The motion is carried.

00:01:43 Speaker 01: There are no correspondence items being presented for consideration.

00:01:56 Speaker 01: Please be advised that the Planning Act of Ontario indicates that any one other than the applicant agent wishing to receive a notice of a decision of the Committee of Adjustment,

00:02:11 Speaker 01: or in the event that the committee defers the decision or notice for further proceedings respecting the application,

00:02:43 Speaker 01: such person or persons may. leave their name and address in writing with the secretary of the committee prior to leaving the hearings by filling out the signing sheet located on the table outside council chambers.

00:02:58 Speaker 01: In addition, only the applicant, the minister,

00:03:13 Speaker 01: or specified person or public body that has an interest in the matter has the right to appeal the decision of the committee of adjustment within the defined appeal period.

00:03:39 Speaker 01: More information concerning how the appeal how to appeal a decision of the Committee of Adjustment to the Ontario Land Tribunal may be obtained from the Community Services Planning Division, City Hall.

00:03:59 Speaker 01: The Committee of Adjustment today will consider one consent and two minor variations applications scheduled under applications.

00:04:18 Speaker 02: The Planning Act requires a public hearing to be held before the Committee of Adjustment to decide whether to approve. a consent or a minor variance, the public hearing serves two purposes.

00:04:38 Speaker 02: First, to present the details and the background of the application to the committee of adjustment and the public, and the second to receive comments from the public and agencies before a decision is made.

00:04:58 Speaker 02: For each application, the secretary will summarise the proposal and correspondence on file.

00:05:10 Speaker 02: The planning staff will provide any further information. that is relevant to the application, from there, the application will be provided with the opportunity.

00:05:24 Speaker 02: Sorry, will be provided with the opportunity to make presentations, followed by questions or presentations from the public, either in favour or in opposition to the application.

00:05:34 Speaker 02: Any questions should go through me, the chair.

00:05:39 Speaker 02: And presentations, as I said, are limited to a maximum of ten minutes.

00:05:52 Speaker 02: Committee members will then have the opportunity to question. the applicant, the secretary treasurer, or the planning, or anyone giving presentations.

00:06:05 Speaker 01: The application will then be considered by the committee.

00:06:14 Speaker 03: Will the secretary treasurer please advise how and when, and to whom the notice of public hearings was circulated?

00:06:21 Speaker 03: Through you, Mr. Chair.

00:06:29 Speaker 03: Notice for these applications was posted on the subject properties on Monday, June twenty-two, being at least fourteen days prior to the hearing.

00:06:51 Speaker 03: Notice for these applications. was sent by mail to the assessed owners within sixteen meters of the subject properties, and was also circulated to those persons, departments,

00:07:01 Speaker 03: and agencies likely to have an interest in the applications, as legislated.

00:07:13 Speaker 03: Included with each notice was a legal description of the subject property and a description of the purpose of the proposed consent or minor variance.

00:07:32 Speaker 03: The circulations were provided in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, R.S.O. One thousand, nine hundred and ninety, Chapter P thirteen.

00:07:39 Speaker 03: Thank you.

00:07:47 Speaker 03: I now declare this. to be a public hearing for application A zero six twenty twenty six.

00:07:57 Speaker 03: Miss Lange, would you please summarise the application and any correspondence received to date?

00:08:02 Speaker 03: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:08:09 Speaker 03: This is a minor variance application that was put forward by Jackson Penner on behalf of Joe Watson.

00:08:19 Speaker 03: The official plan designation is residential, and it is zoned as medium density residential.

00:08:37 Speaker 03: The legal description of the land is Plan One eighty nine, Lot Thirty four, City of Owen Sound, County of Grey, and County of Gray,

00:08:52 Speaker 03: and it is not municipally as eight hundred and seventy-five Eighth Avenue East.

00:09:02 Speaker 03: The applicant is proposing to replace an existing covered front porch.

00:09:17 Speaker 03: A minor variance is requested to provide relief from zoning bylaw two thousand and ten zero seven eight as amended for a porch or deck located in a front yard that is greater than 0.75 meters

00:09:32 Speaker 03: above finished grade.

00:09:38 Speaker 03: One five meters [1.5m] is required for the minimum setback from the front lot line.

00:09:49 Speaker 03: One meter is proposed, resulting in a variance of 0.5 meters.

00:10:04 Speaker 03: Comments have been received without objection from the city's Building Division and Public Works and Engineering Division, Canada Post, Bell Canada, County of Grey, and Grey Conservation Authority.

00:10:15 Speaker 03: Thank you very much.

00:10:19 Speaker 03: Planning staff, will you please provide any additional information that may be relevant?

00:10:24 Speaker 03: Thank you, Chair.

00:10:27 Speaker 03: As noted, my variance application has been received for 875 Eighth Avenue East.

00:10:42 Speaker 03: The property is an interior lot located in the southeast quadrant of the city on Eighth Avenue East between Ninth Street and Eighth Street East;

00:11:00 Speaker 03: the lands have approximately 12 meters of frontage on the east side of Eighth Avenue East and are 371 square meters in size.

00:11:14 Speaker 03: The existing house on this lot has a similar setback to the front yard as other houses in the area.

00:11:27 Speaker 03: The subject property contains an existing single detached dwelling, detached garage, and storage shed.

00:11:36 Speaker 03: As mentioned, the applicant is proposing to replace the existing covered front porch.

00:11:54 Speaker 03: Section five eight permitted yard encroachments of the city zoning bylaw provides for certain features such as a porch greater than 0.75 meters above finished grade to project into the required yard.

00:12:16 Speaker 03: For the purpose of section five eight of the bylaw, a required yard shall be deemed to include any yard existing on the effective date of the bylaw which is less than the required yard.

00:12:43 Speaker 03: In this case, the existing dwelling has a front yard setback of 3.1 meters, whereas 6.5 meters is required.

00:12:53 Speaker 03: Six point five meters is required by the applicable zone.

00:13:21 Speaker 03: Section five point eight permits a porch to project three meters into the required front yard, however it must be set back a minimum of one point five meters from the front lot line.

00:13:41 Speaker 01: To facilitate the proposal, the application is requesting the variance of the minimum setback from the front line.

00:14:00 Speaker 01: From where the requirement is 1.5 meters, provided is 1 meter, and the variance is 0.5 meters.

00:14:17 Speaker 01: I just like to note that the notice for the subject minor variance was provided to the prescribed bodies and persons on June 22nd.

00:14:40 Speaker 01: The public notice included a clerical error that stated the setback of the front porch from the lot line is 1.2 meters and the request is 0.3 meters instead of it being the variance 0.5 meters.

00:15:23 Speaker 01: In the opinion of planning staff, the deviation between the numbers in the public notice and those considered in this recommendation is not significant enough to warrant additional notice.

00:15:39 Speaker 02: The proposal remains consistent with the notice given, which is to facilitate the reduced front yard setback for the proposed porch.

00:15:53 Speaker 02: Staff recommend that the committee proceed with hearing the subject application on this basis, and no new notice is warranted.

00:16:09 Speaker 02: In regards to the four tests of the minor variance, the subject property is designated residential, and the proposed and existing use of the property is permitted.

00:16:24 Speaker 02: The Section Eight of the OP provides urban design direction and supports relatively consistent streetscapes and compatible build form.

00:16:36 Speaker 02: Within a residential area, heights and setbacks should be consistent with the general form of the existing development.

00:16:50 Speaker 02: The subject property is located in a diverse neighborhood, which includes a range of building types, including one-and-a-half and two-story red brick dwellings, as well as split-level and single-story bungalows.

00:17:05 Speaker 02: This portion of Eighth Avenue East has a well-established front yard streetscape.

00:17:13 Speaker 02: In the existing front yard, the porch is similar to others in the area.

00:17:20 Speaker 02: The proposed covered front porch will not significantly change the established streetscape as it will be similarly sized and located to the existing structure.

00:17:39 Speaker 02: A recommended condition of approval will require that the boulevard tree, which is an English oak in excellent condition,

00:17:50 Speaker 03: have appropriate hoarding and protection at the time of construction to the satisfaction of the city's Manager of Parks and Open Spaces.

00:18:00 Speaker 03: In staff's opinion, the proposal conforms with the city's official plan.

00:18:18 Speaker 03: In regards to conformity with the intent and purpose of the zoning bylaw, the property zoned as medium density is four [R-4] under the zoning bylaw, and single detached dwellings are permitted uses in the zone.

00:18:35 Speaker 03: The applicant is proposing to replace the existing covered porch, and as noted, the requested variance is for 0.5 meters.

00:18:47 Speaker 03: The intent of the minimum front yard setback requirement is, in part,

00:19:02 Speaker 03: to maintain a relatively consistent streetscape and to ensure that there is sufficient room in the front yard for the lot to function without encroaching onto the road allowance.

00:19:19 Speaker 03: Functional attributes of a front yard may include snow and stormwater management, underground and above ground utilities, and parking.

00:19:35 Speaker 03: In this case, as the applicant is proposing the replacement of an existing structure in the same general location, there is no anticipated impact to the function of the technical front yard.

00:19:50 Speaker 03: The house has a detached garage and the driveway on the south side of the building, and therefore does not require the front yard for parking.

00:20:03 Speaker 03: The proposed development will not alter the existing situation regarding snow storage and stormwater management.

00:20:13 Speaker 03: An engineering services division has not requested a grading and drainage plan, and recommends approval of the application.

00:20:22 Speaker 03: The proposal maintains the intent and purpose of the city's zoning bylaw.

00:20:29 Speaker 03: Finally, is the request minor in nature?

00:20:43 Speaker 03: The request for relief can be considered minor in nature for a number of reasons, including that the proposal will maintain an existing permitted residential use of the lands and facilitate a renovation and replacement;

00:21:00 Speaker 03: the proposed replacement is in the same general location as the existing porch.

00:21:07 Speaker 03: The anticipated impact on adjacent properties in the surrounding neighborhood is extremely limited.

00:21:18 Speaker 03: The proposal does not compromise the function of the property.

00:21:26 Speaker 03: The subject property can continue to provide adequate parking access and snow and stormwater management.

00:21:34 Speaker 03: Finally, is the proposed variance desirable for the development and use of the lands?

00:21:45 Speaker 03: The proposed development represents redevelopment within a settlement area that is supported by the policies of the PPS and the city's OP.

00:22:01 Speaker 03: The request will provide relief; it provides improvements to an existing permitted residential use, and the proposal is deemed to be desirable for the appropriate development and use of the lands.

00:22:20 Speaker 03: So, in conclusion, having considered staff report respecting the minor variance A06-2026 by Jackson Penner on behalf of Joe Watson for the property known as 875 Eighth Avenue East:

00:22:41 Speaker 03: The Committee of Adjustment confirms no further notice of the application is required and approves the minor variance as the Committee concludes that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the city's official

00:22:54 Speaker 03: plan and zoning bylaw,

00:23:07 Speaker 03: is minor in nature and desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land, subject to the conditions outlined in Schedule E. Thank you very much.

00:23:18 Speaker 03: Does the applicant or agent for A06-2026 have a presentation they wish to make?

00:23:24 Speaker 03: Seeing none.

00:23:25 Speaker 03: Oh, sorry.

00:23:28 Speaker 03: I'm sorry; didn't see you move.

00:23:30 Speaker 03: There we go.

00:23:32 Speaker 03: Thank you.

00:23:34 Speaker 03: Through you, Mr. Chair.

00:23:39 Speaker 03: We agree with the report produced by the Planning Department of the City.

00:23:46 Speaker 03: We are here to just answer any questions that you may have.

00:23:50 Speaker 03: So, no further comments.

00:23:56 Speaker 03: No, the application seems fairly straightforward, and I've seen many, many similar ones in my time.

00:24:02 Speaker 03: So, committee, any comments?

00:24:06 Speaker 03: Sorry, members of the public.

00:24:09 Speaker 03: Okay, I'm sorry.

00:24:11 Speaker 03: I'm sorry.

00:24:12 Speaker 03: I'm sorry.

00:24:17 Speaker 03: Are there any questions or comments from members of the public for A-062-KT-26?

00:24:30 Speaker 03: If so, please state your name, the municipality in which you reside, and follow up with the secretary.

00:24:39 Speaker 03: She will follow up on your comments.

00:24:52 Speaker 03: Seeing no members from the public, are there any further questions from the committee to the applicant, Secretary of Planning Division, or any persons who made a presentation?

00:25:02 Speaker 03: Seeing none.

00:25:08 Speaker 03: Does any member of the committee wish to make a motion for A-062-KT-26?

00:25:18 Speaker 03: Just carry on through you, Chair.

00:25:25 Speaker 03: I'd like to make a motion to approve application A-062-KT-26, subject to the conditions of approval that have been presented.

00:25:43 Speaker 03: Thank you very much.

00:25:46 Speaker 03: I will call a vote.

00:25:50 Speaker 03: All those in favour: Aye.

00:25:54 Speaker 03: The motion is carried.

00:26:10 Speaker 03: Please be advised that there is a twenty-day appeal period; during this time, the applicant, the minister, or a specified person or public body that has an interest in the matter may appeal today's decision.

00:26:34 Speaker 03: During this appeal period, no building permit may be issued or earthwork commenced.

00:26:44 Speaker 03: I now declare the public hearing for A-062-KT-26 to be concluded.

00:26:53 Speaker 04: The applicant may leave the meeting if they wish to do so.

00:26:59 Speaker 04: Clear.

00:27:05 Speaker 04: I now declare this to be a public hearing for application B-092-KT-26 and A-072-TK-26.

00:27:18 Speaker 04: Ms. Lange, will you please summarise the application and any correspondence received to date?

00:27:25 Speaker 04: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:27:33 Speaker 01: These are consent minor variance applications that were put forward by J. Andrew L. Wilson.

00:27:52 Speaker 01: The official plan designation is residential, and it is zoned as General Residential R5 under Zoning Bylaw 2010-078 and Medium Density Residential R2 under Zoning Bylaw Amendment number 57.

00:28:17 Speaker 01: The legal description of the lands is Plan 21, Lot 2, West of Charlotte Street, City of Owen Sound, County of Grey, and it is now municipally known as 768 Third Avenue West.

00:28:47 Speaker 01: The applicant is proposing to sever the subject property for the purposes of creating one new residential building lot with 20 meters of frontage on Third Avenue A West, 18.4 meters of lot depth,

00:29:13 Speaker 05: and 368 square meters of lot area.

00:29:22 Speaker 05: A single detached dwelling is proposed to be constructed on the severed parcel.

00:29:42 Speaker 05: The retained parcels are proposed to have 20 meters of frontage on 3rd Avenue West, 21.8 meters of lot depth, and 436 square meters of lot area,

00:29:59 Speaker 05: and contains an existing single detached dwelling and a detached garage.

00:30:18 Speaker 05: The lands are also subject to minor variance A-07-TK-26, which requests relief from the lot area and front and rear yard setback provisions of the City Zoning Bylaw 2010-078 as amended,

00:30:42 Speaker 05: to facilitate the proposed lot creation and construction of a single detached dwelling on the severed parcel.

00:31:00 Speaker 05: The requested variance also serves to recognize the deficient northern interior side yard setback of the existing detached garage on the retained parcel and an existing shed on the severed parcel.

00:31:13 Speaker 05: The Manager of Planning and Heritage will provide additional details on the requested variances.

00:31:32 Speaker 05: Comments have been received without objection from the City's Building Division, Public Works and Engineering Division, Grey County, Canada Post, Bell Canada, and the Grey-Sable Conservation Authority.

00:31:59 Speaker 05: Comments were received after the agenda was published but prior to the deadline from neighbor Dr. Mary Lukating (the "OK team"), noting concerns with third-block foundation on sandy soil, water damage, traffic disruption during construction,

00:32:15 Speaker 05: snow clearing, fire separation, and noise.

00:32:27 Speaker 05: These comments were circulated to the committee, city staff, and the applicant prior to the meeting, and will be included in the agenda when it is republished.

00:32:37 Speaker 05: Thank you very much.

00:32:42 Speaker 05: Planning staff, please provide any additional information that may be relevant.

00:32:49 Speaker 05: Thank you, Chair.

00:33:08 Speaker 05: And through you: The lands subject to consent B-092-KT-26 and Minor Variance A-07-TK-26 are shown on Schedule A of the staff report in front of you.

00:33:35 Speaker 05: The lands are a through lot with approximately 20 meters of frontage on Third Avenue West and Third Avenue A West, 42 meters of lot depth, and 832 square meters of lot area.

00:34:02 Speaker 05: The lands currently contain an existing single detached dwelling, a detached garage, and two accessory sheds; three mature trees exist to the rear west of the property.

00:34:34 Speaker 05: The subject consent application is proposing to sever the property approximately in half to facilitate the creation of a new residential building lot fronting Third Avenue A West for the purposes of a single detached dwelling.

00:34:57 Speaker 05: The existing single detached dwelling, detached garage, and one accessory shed are proposed to be located on the retained parcel with access via Third Avenue West.

00:35:23 Speaker 05: As noted by the City's Secretary-Treasurer, the lands are designated Residential by the City's Official Plan and are zoned General Residential R5 by the City's Zoning Bylaw.

00:35:43 Speaker 05: Single detached dwellings are among the uses permitted in the residential designation and R5 zone.

00:36:12 Speaker 05: The proposal meets the requirements of Policy 31A2 of the City's Official Plan as it relates to residential intensification and infill development, as described on pages six and seven of the staff report before you.

00:36:34 Speaker 01: Further, Policy 93-04 (Policy Nine Three Two Four) of the Official Plan requires certain criteria when considering an application for consent.

00:36:51 Speaker 04: The subject application meets the required criteria, subject to the recommended conditions outlined in Schedule E of the staff report.

00:37:11 Speaker 04: Specifically, the lands front onto Third Avenue West and Third Avenue A West, both of which are existing assumed public roads maintained on a year-round basis.

00:37:30 Speaker 04: The consent has the effect of infilling within an existing established residential neighborhood in the City.

00:37:42 Speaker 04: Existing municipal services are available within the Third Avenue West and Third Avenue A West road allowances to service the severed and retained parcels.

00:38:05 Speaker 04: Conditions of approval will require that the applicant obtain a special services application and a temporary encroachment agreement from the City's Engineering Services Division to facilitate servicing to the lot line, restoration of the boulevard,

00:38:21 Speaker 04: and the installation of a driveway for the severed parcel.

00:38:38 Speaker 04: Recommended conditions of approval will also require the provision of a grading and drainage plan to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division to ensure suitable drainage conditions on the severed and retained parcels.

00:39:02 Speaker 04: The proposed retained parcel meets the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the R5 zone and is therefore appropriate for the long-term use of a single detached dwelling.

00:39:28 Speaker 04: The proposed severed parcel has 20 meters of frontage on Third Avenue A West, which meets the requirements for a single detached dwelling in the R5 zone.

00:39:44 Speaker 04: Through minor variance A-07 relief from the minimum lot area requirements for a single detached dwelling in the R5 zone is requested.

00:40:01 Speaker 04: The R5 zone requires a minimum lot area of 400 square meters, whereas 368 square meters is proposed, resulting in a variance of 32 square meters.

00:40:24 Speaker 04: The size of the proposed severed parcel remains sufficient for accommodating the proposed single detached dwelling, together with a driveway for required parking and amenity area within the front and rear yards,

00:40:47 Speaker 04: and is therefore appropriate for the long-term use of a single detached dwelling.

00:40:59 Speaker 04: Through minor variance A-07, additional variances to the minimum front yard and rear yard setback are being requested for:

00:41:13 Speaker 01: The proposed single detached dwelling with a front and rear yard deck on the severed parcel; and

00:41:25 Speaker 06: The existing single detached dwelling and detached garage on the retained parcel (specifically regarding the minimum rear yard setback).

00:41:42 Speaker 03: A full summary analysis of the requested variances is provided in staff report CS-26069 before you.

00:42:13 Speaker 03: In consideration of the four tests provided by the Planning Act, the requested variances satisfy the four tests, subject to the recommended conditions outlined in Schedule E of the staff report.

00:42:22 Speaker 03: Specifically:

00:42:35 Speaker 03: The requested reduction in the minimum front yard setback for the proposed single detached dwelling with a front yard deck on the severed parcel is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the streetscape of

00:42:53 Speaker 05: Third Avenue A West.

00:43:15 Speaker 05: Existing dwellings along the west side of Third Avenue A West are generally set back between four to six meters from the front lot line and have existing decks within the front yard providing access to

00:43:24 Speaker 01: the main entrance to the dwellings.

00:43:42 Speaker 01: The proposed single detached dwelling is cited to provide a relatively consistent streetscape on Third Avenue A West, defining the visual width of the street consistent with the urban design policies of the Official Plan.

00:44:13 Speaker 01: The proposed front yard setback of six meters is also sufficient for accommodating an off-street parking stall (minimum 6 meters in length) within the front yard and a portion of the northern interior side yard of

00:44:39 Speaker 01: the severed parcel to serve the proposed single detached dwelling,

00:44:46 Speaker 01: consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning bylaw.

00:45:11 Speaker 01: The requested reduction in the minimum rear yard setback for the proposed single detached dwelling and rear yard deck on the severed parcel, and existing single detached dwelling and detached garage on the retained parcel,

00:45:27 Speaker 01: is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the character of the area.

00:46:12 Speaker 06: The proposed rear yards, well reduced, continue to provide adequate amenity space within the rear yard, and adequate spatial separations are provided between rear lot lines, consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning bylaw.

00:46:39 Speaker 01: Recommended conditions of approval will require the installation of an 1.8-meter high solid board fence to appropriately delineate the proposed rear lot line.

00:46:52 Speaker 01: As noted, there are existing mature trees to the rear west of the property on the proposed severed parcel.

00:47:12 Speaker 01: Recommended conditions of approval will also require the retention of two existing mature trees and payment for cash-in-lieu or tree planting for one tree to be removed to accommodate the proposed single detached dwelling.

00:47:35 Speaker 01: This is in support of the policies of the Official Plan, which required that the location of mature trees be considered in new development.

00:47:59 Speaker 01: Finally, the existing detached garage proposed to be located on the retained parcel and the existing shed proposed to be located on the severed parcel have deficient northern interior side yard setbacks.

00:48:22 Speaker 01: Section 561 of the zoning bylaw permits these deficient interior side yard setbacks to continue as they existed on the effective date of the bylaw.

00:48:36 Speaker 01: However, in the case of the shed proposed on the severed parcel,

00:48:56 Speaker 01: recommended conditions of consent for B-092-KT-26 will require this accessory structure to be demolished or relocated to the retained parcel in a location compliant with the requirements of the zoning bylaw,

00:49:26 Speaker 01: as the proposed lot creation will result in an accessory building being located on a lot without a main building, which is not permitted by section 5.9 of the zoning bylaw.

00:49:44 Speaker 01: Comments were received from the City's Engineering Services and Building Division without objection to the requested consent or minor variances.

00:50:06 Speaker 01: Comments received have been addressed through recommended conditions of approval where applicable.

00:50:30 Speaker 02: Conditions of approval are as follows: Specifically,

00:50:47 Speaker 02: the City's Building Division will require that the existing garage on the retained parcel (with an existing northern interior side yard setback of 0.48 meters and a proposed rear yard setback of 0.6 meters) have one

00:51:11 Speaker 02: layer of 5/8-inch Type X drywall installed on the interior walls to provide a 45-minute fire separation,

00:51:24 Speaker 07: in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Building Code (not "the zoning").

00:51:45 Speaker 07: So the staff recommendation is that City Staff are recommending that, in consideration of staff report CS-26069 respecting consent for lot creation for property known as 768 Third Avenue West,

00:52:10 Speaker 07: the committee approve consent application B-092-KT-26 by Andrew Wilson subject to the conditions outlined in Schedule E of that staff report.

00:52:29 Speaker 07: And in consideration of staff report CS-26069 respecting minor variance A-07-TK-26 for property known as 768 Third Avenue West,

00:52:51 Speaker 07: you would approve the minor variance as it maintains the general intent and purpose of the City's Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw, is minor in nature,

00:53:10 Speaker 07: and desirable for the appropriate development and use of the lands, subject to the conditions outlined in Schedule E of that staff report.

00:53:31 Speaker 07: Sorry, there were public comments received after the publication of the report, so they were not addressed in the original report.

00:53:48 Speaker 07: I'd be happy to hear the public comments from the person, and then we can provide a response as required.

00:53:58 Speaker 07: Thank you very much.

00:54:05 Speaker 07: Does the applicant or agent for B-092-KT-26 and A-07-TK-26 have any questions?

00:54:20 Speaker 07: A-07-TK-26 has a presentation they wish to make: "I think at this time the planning review has been thorough enough that I can't really add to it.

00:55:07 Speaker 07: Other than my initial intent being to build an ARU (Accessory Residential Unit), but then in discovering that I would have to take services through the existing house,

00:55:29 Speaker 07: and one reason the ARU appealed to me was because it's a through property with access to another road.

00:55:40 Speaker 07: So I had assumed that I would be able to provide an ARU connecting to the services on Third Avenue A West.

00:55:59 Speaker 07: But because that wasn't possible, I then thought: well, we don't really want to be landlords,

00:56:15 Speaker 08: so let's see about trying to sever a lot in order to provide housing—the intent of which is to occupy it ourselves—and so the one that we've moved into recently."

00:56:29 Speaker 08: "There are also comments from my neighbor who is here.

00:56:36 Speaker 08: I can respond to some of those when she makes her presentation if you'd like."

00:56:42 Speaker 08: Okay, thank you.

00:56:50 Speaker 08: We'll quickly back up: Are there any questions or comments from members of the public for B-092-KT-26 and A-07-TK-26?

00:56:56 Speaker 08: If so, please stand.

00:57:02 Speaker 08: Give your name and address to the Secretary-Treasurer, followed by your comments.

00:57:10 Speaker 08: "Yes, I'm Dr. Mary Lukating, and I live next door at 764 Third Avenue West (not 'half west').

00:57:23 Speaker 08: I have several concerns with this which I did submit, but I guess I submitted it so late; I should go through them again."

00:57:35 Speaker 08: Should I just read?

00:57:37 Speaker 08: "It's five pages...

00:57:41 Speaker 08: You've all read it through.

00:57:42 Speaker 08: Okay."

00:57:50 Speaker 08: "So my main concerns then are: as I said, that because I'm on a block foundation on sandy soil, I expect to have serious cracks appearing in the whitewash and drywalls when all this construction starts,

00:58:06 Speaker 08: and I'm concerned that the weight of this new structure is going to cause the soil to shift dramatically, which is going to cause huge cracks."

00:58:13 Speaker 08: "Okay.

00:58:22 Speaker 08: So I'm a retired professor who has downsized, and basically, I'm going to have to hire a company like Paul Davis to prepare an insurance dossier ahead of time to ensure I'm safe and indemnified,

00:58:33 Speaker 08: and that's causing unnecessary stress because I'm already experiencing stress with cancer-related issues."

00:58:41 Speaker 08: "I also need information about grading and drainage, because it needs to be okay for those two properties.

00:58:49 Speaker 08: But it's going to impact me and the neighbor to the north (at number 772).

00:59:19 Speaker 08: So I didn't know if that information could be shared with me as it comes along, and I would like..."

00:59:38 Speaker 08: "Oh, you took away the diagram."

00:59:47 Speaker 08: Okay, so I'm at the bottom here.

01:00:01 Speaker 07: Mr. Wilson's house is already there; I'm more or less directly below him, and you see there's a fence between the two properties.

01:00:31 Speaker 07: "Okay, so I would prefer to see a swale downslope built not just where you see in the corner between the newly divided lots,

01:01:27 Speaker 07: but along that entire fence line to ensure that water stays on that side of the property line and doesn't end up flooding my basement."

01:01:51 Speaker 07: "And also, if snow unexpectedly thaws and there's a lot of water, I'm concerned about my basement."

01:02:30 Speaker 02: "I also raised questions about disruption during construction because it's two dead-end streets which join Eighth Avenue West.

01:02:48 Speaker 02: Depending on whether there's a traffic blockage on either street, we can't drive around; we're blocked until such time as the blockage is removed.

01:03:26 Speaker 02: And since people working in Third Ave are going to need to get out and they'll be parking on our street (Third Ave) because of construction crews that come at 7 am—well,

01:03:58 Speaker 02: they might start before 7 am because the bylaw says they can start at 7—they're all going to end up parking on our street.

01:04:22 Speaker 02: And because we're a dead-end street, this compounds the problem."

01:04:40 Speaker 02: "And I realize that's a short-term situation; when everything is completed, traffic will flow adequately, but for the length of construction, it's going to be seriously complicated for us."

01:05:08 Speaker 02: "And there's also going to be a problem with snow clearing on Third Avenue West because at the moment Mr. Wilson has his house and yard, and there's a back fence.

01:05:39 Speaker 02: Everybody puts their snow behind that back fence to keep it off the street; it's city property so you are allowed to stack your snow there."

01:06:11 Speaker 09: "When he removes that [the shed], it's going to be very complicated to get rid of all the snow,

01:06:36 Speaker 09: especially because we have a lot of people who work in construction that already have a lot of vehicles and require more space to get rid of theirs.

01:06:58 Speaker 09: More space is needed to clear their snow, so I'm hoping that won't end up being as big a problem as I think it is."

01:07:23 Speaker 07: "But if we get a winter like last year, you'll have to be removing truckloads of excess snow from the area, and that will in turn impact the snow clearing budget and infrastructure.

01:08:04 Speaker 07: And as a taxpayer, I'm unhappy at the thought that my city taxes would be increased to deal with this burden."

01:08:34 Speaker 09: "My final point is the variance for rear yard setbacks.

01:09:06 Speaker 09: So Mr. Wilson is proposing 3.7 meters (not 'three point three... seventy-three percent').

01:09:27 Speaker 09: That's 3.7 meters out of a required setback, meaning he's taking away about a quarter of the required space.

01:09:42 Speaker 09: There's also a fire safety issue here."

01:09:54 Speaker 09: "So you're proposing to put a wooden fence between the two properties.

01:10:12 Speaker 09: If there's a propane fire on the back porch (like from a barbecue) and it starts, it will run down the fence.

01:10:45 Speaker 07: There is a fence all along the property line between us; my house has a fence joining at a ninety-degree angle covering the back of my driveway,

01:11:08 Speaker 07: then another section for a gate to allow access to my backyard, and an additional piece connecting me to the house."

01:11:37 Speaker 07: "Sorry, I hate to cut you off.

01:11:51 Speaker 07: So I have concerns, but they're in the report.

01:11:54 Speaker 07: Okay...

01:12:27 Speaker 09: But what I would like is for this proposed new fence being constructed along the shared rear lot line to be replaced by cedar trees or a hedge that would be a green solution and alleviate

01:12:55 Speaker 07: my fire concerns."

01:13:11 Speaker 07: "And I'd also like, as I said earlier, that a swale would be created along the property/fence line between the two properties so that none of the water comes into my property.

01:13:24 Speaker 07: Okay."

01:13:31 Speaker 07: "So thank you very much.

01:13:40 Speaker 07: Are there any further comments from the public or any other persons?

01:13:51 Speaker 07: Seeing none..."

01:13:57 Speaker 07: Mary Lou, it's great to see you.

01:14:21 Speaker 07: And if we could have talked earlier, I could have addressed all your concerns.

01:14:35 Speaker 07: Okay, so for one, that's not a landscape plan or a grading and drainage plan.

01:14:48 Speaker 07: I am a registered landscape architect.

01:14:54 Speaker 07: I've done many grading and drainage plans.

01:15:04 Speaker 07: Can you bring up just the one image of the existing survey?

01:15:28 Speaker 07: It would be in my images.

01:15:32 Speaker 07: So yeah, I could.

01:15:36 Speaker 09: So yeah, good.

01:15:45 Speaker 09: That's the existing shed you want me to demolish, not those ones there.

01:15:56 Speaker 09: Okay.

01:16:09 Speaker 09: As you can see, this is an existing survey by Hewitt and Milne from this year.

01:16:36 Speaker 09: You can see that the grading does slope from Third Avenue East to Third Avenue West,

01:16:58 Speaker 09: but if you're used to looking at grading plans—and I apologize if you're not—the water isn't going into my neighbor's yard even currently.

01:17:29 Speaker 09: If it flows across—if it is flowing at all, which it doesn't—because it infiltrates.

01:17:58 Speaker 09: And as she suggested, and I don't know for sure, but if the soil is sandy, there will be adequate infiltration, even with a new building.

01:18:28 Speaker 09: However, I absolutely respect the idea of a swale along the edge because the intent was to actually create a swale between the two properties as well to pick up any overland drainage.

01:18:56 Speaker 09: The one reason again for the greater permeable surface as opposed to extending the driveway even further into the property on the new proposal is that...

01:19:13 Speaker 07: Actually, if you can just go forward.

01:19:29 Speaker 07: Oh, sorry—that explains why the variance was requested because had I created 240 square meter lots, which was possible, as you can see,

01:20:11 Speaker 07: the proposed property line would have gone right through the existing structure they call a frame shed.

01:20:34 Speaker 07: It is a garage; it's actually backed into the slope and has a stone sort of knee wall that comes up,

01:20:59 Speaker 09: and I'm pretty sure the stone is from the brewery that used to be on the site.

01:21:23 Speaker 09: So not easy either to destroy or I wouldn't want to anyway.

01:21:40 Speaker 09: It's probably more of a heritage structure than the house itself, frankly.

01:22:05 Speaker 09: So if you can just go to the next one—that explains why there was movement in that property line and also how we created an offset.

01:22:42 Speaker 09: It wasn't the full 9.9 meters; it was kind of a compromise to create some space from the existing garage while still creating two viable lots out of that.

01:23:22 Speaker 10: Also, frankly, moving the property line created greater separation between the new lot boundary and the existing house because if it had been placed where it could be to create two four-and-a-quarter-meter lots,

01:24:03 Speaker 09: it would actually end up being closer to the house.

01:24:12 Speaker 07: So that's the reason for that adjustment.

01:24:30 Speaker 09: I actually show three trees because it would have been possible to keep that third middle tree while constructing, although it takes a heck of a lot of effort.

01:25:30 Speaker 07: And in this case, I respect the planning idea to not include it because it is a Norway maple—a non-Indigenous species—and cities aren't as excited about them anymore, so it could be changed if needed.

01:25:53 Speaker 07: So that's the existing condition—you can see what's actually going to happen with the excavation and potential impact on her property.

01:26:18 Speaker 07: There really won't be any issue if the soil is sandy; you know, the zone of interference is only two or three meters, and that building is fifteen meters away.

01:26:39 Speaker 07: It isn't going down a full eight feet even though it will have an eight-foot basement.

01:26:49 Speaker 09: So there would be no impact on any of these surrounding houses, and our existing house will be closer anyway—that's what you can see we're dealing with.

01:27:05 Speaker 09: Of course drainage is an issue, and I did show a swale to pick up the drainage so it doesn't go through to the existing property.

01:27:14 Speaker 09: So I think that addresses her concerns.

01:27:16 Speaker 08: Thank you—certainly does.

01:27:23 Speaker 08: And I'm sure your offer to talk to this young lady about a grading plan to protect her property would be very useful.

01:27:43 Speaker 08: And I like that last one with the section through—that explains a lot to the committee here.

01:27:53 Speaker 08: Are there any further questions or comments from the committee, Planning Division staff, or anyone who made a presentation?

01:28:09 Speaker 08: Through you, Chair—I was just wondering if Planning had anything else to add after the neighbour's presentation.

01:28:19 Speaker 08: You said before they might have comments, and I think probably the applicant has answered most of them.

01:28:30 Speaker 08: But did you have anything further to say?

01:28:39 Speaker 08: Just quickly through you, Chair—one condition of approval is the requirement to have a grading and drainage plan prepared by a qualified professional in accordance with the City's Property Standards Bylaw,

01:28:57 Speaker 08: which doesn't allow water to flow on neighbouring properties.

01:29:04 Speaker 08: So I think that concern will be addressed through that grading and drainage plan.

01:29:29 Speaker 08: It'll need to be prepared in accordance with city standards and to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division.

01:29:51 Speaker 08: Just one quick note regarding traffic: as part of the temporary construction permit for putting in the driveway and installing services,

01:30:16 Speaker 08: the contractor is required to provide a traffic plan in accordance with provincial standards so that appropriate traffic flow—and protection—is ensured.

01:30:38 Speaker 08: Thank you very much—you certainly may proceed.

01:30:51 Speaker 08: Just don't take them... sorry, this is too tall.

01:30:56 Speaker 08: Okay—this is insurance-related, which I'm very concerned about.

01:31:05 Speaker 08: To take the photos as I mentioned would cause me a lot of problems; I'll probably have to use Paul Davis for that.

01:31:25 Speaker 08: So while it's impossible to ballpark exactly, could you give me any idea of the starting date of digging so that I can prepare?

01:31:35 Speaker 08: Do you see what I'm saying?

01:31:47 Speaker 08: The photos will be time-sensitive—if they're too old, they won't be accepted in an insurance claim.

01:31:57 Speaker 08: Thank you—I've had a lot of experience with insurance agents and engineers regarding building movement records about cracks.

01:32:11 Speaker 08: If photographs were taken today, that would constitute the record—or any time before construction starts—that would serve as a permanent record for evidence after or during construction.

01:32:33 Speaker 08: I'm not sure whether Paul Davis is familiar with recording cracks in buildings, but just to recap: you've seen those cards on police shows where it's an L-shape and a circle in the center?

01:32:50 Speaker 08: That allows them to compare gaps across breaks over time.

01:33:03 Speaker 08: And the reason for the circle is to make sure the camera is square to the item being photographed.

01:33:18 Speaker 08: And in larger projects where they're worried about concerns regarding building, they take the glass from a microscope and glue it over the crack.

01:33:30 Speaker 08: And if that glass either breaks or comes loose, the engineer knows there's movement there.

01:33:40 Speaker 08: So there are many, many ways to track it.

01:33:50 Speaker 08: It doesn't cost thousands of dollars just to take a few photographs prior to the construction.

01:34:00 Speaker 08: Okay, any time before the construction.

01:34:03 Speaker 08: Thank you.

01:34:16 Speaker 08: Any further questions or comments from the committee to the applicant, secretary of planning and survey, or the person's made presentations?

01:34:38 Speaker 08: Seeing none, does any member of the committee wish to make a motion for application B-092-26?

01:34:45 Speaker 08: Yes, sir, your chair.

01:35:15 Speaker 08: I'd like to make a motion to accept application B-092-26, subject to the conditions.

01:35:20 Speaker 08: I'll call a vote.

01:35:21 Speaker 08: All those in favour?

01:35:22 Speaker 08: The motion is carried.

01:35:26 Speaker 01: Does any member of the committee wish to make a motion on application A-072-26?

01:35:33 Speaker 07: Yes, through you, Chair.

01:35:49 Speaker 07: I'd like to make a motion to accept for acceptance of A-072-26, subject to the conditions.

01:36:16 Speaker 08: Thank you very much.

01:36:20 Speaker 08: I will call the vote.

01:36:26 Speaker 08: All those in favour.

01:36:28 Speaker 08: The motion is carried.

01:36:43 Speaker 08: Please be advised that there is a 20-day appeal period during which time the applicant, the minister, or specified person or public body that have an interest in the matter may appeal today's decision.

01:37:03 Speaker 08: During the appeal period, no building permit may be issued or other work commenced.

01:37:14 Speaker 01: I now declare the public hearing for B-092-26 and A-072-26 to be concluded.

01:37:25 Speaker 07: The applicant may leave the meeting if they wish to do so.

01:37:46 Speaker 07: The committee of adjustment is now sitting as the appeal board regarding regulations and control of dogs, bylaw number 24-13, being a bylaw licensed and regulate the control of dogs within the City of Owen Sound,

01:38:04 Speaker 07: gives the appeal board the power to reverse or uphold an officer's finding.

01:38:25 Speaker 07: The onus is on the appellant to provide evidence satisfactory to the appeal board that the relief being sought should be granted.

01:38:46 Speaker 07: Please be advised that if anyone other than the owner or their representative wishes to receive notice of the decision of the appeal board,

01:39:11 Speaker 07: or in the event the appeal board defers the decision respecting the appeal, such person must leave their name, address,

01:39:35 Speaker 07: and writing with the secretary treasurer of the appeal board prior to leaving or the hearing by filling out the signing sheet located on the table outside council chambers.

01:40:05 Speaker 07: In addition, where more than six months have elapsed since the matter was before the appeal board, and the owner believes that the behaviour of the dog has improved,

01:40:38 Speaker 07: the owner may apply to the appeal board by notifying the secretary treasurer in writing, setting out the grounds for the belief that the dog's behaviour has improved, and requesting that the order modified or rescinded.

01:41:02 Speaker 07: The order to muzzle, leash, or both.

01:41:04 Speaker 07: The appeal board today will consider one appeal of the leash and muzzle order.

01:41:14 Speaker 07: This is an in-person hearing.

01:41:18 Speaker 07: The city and the applicant may provide an opening statement.

01:41:26 Speaker 07: The city will present this case first, and will call witnesses, if any.

01:41:40 Speaker 07: In each witness sworn affirmed by the secretary, and the conclusions of testimony for each the city witness and the appellant, then the appeal board may ask questions of the witness.

01:42:03 Speaker 01: After the city has called their witness, the appellant may call their witness, if any, and the conclusion and the testimony of each of the appellant's witness, the city may then...

01:42:20 Speaker 08: The city and then the appeal board may ask their own questions of the witness.

01:42:27 Speaker 08: The city and the appellant may make closing statements.

01:42:43 Speaker 08: The closing statement should include what each party is requesting, and the appeal board with respect to reversing or upholding the animal controls officer's findings.

01:42:54 Speaker 08: The appeal board may then retire to deliberate in the absence of the public, the city, and the appellant.

01:43:06 Speaker 08: The secretary will retire with the appeal board to record the decision.

01:43:16 Speaker 08: The appeal board will render the decision in the presence of the public, the city, and/or the appellant or the appellant's representative.

01:43:23 Speaker 08: This is just me.

01:43:28 Speaker 08: Sorry, through you, Mr. Chair.

01:43:36 Speaker 08: So typically, with these types of hearings, we don't want to have an even number of committee members hearing the appeal.

01:43:46 Speaker 08: So we do have a procedure for this for the Property Standards Committee which we could follow,

01:43:58 Speaker 08: and so it would be wondering if one member would be willing to volunteer to not participate in this hearing.

01:44:10 Speaker 08: You can still remain in the public gallery and watch, but you wouldn't be part of the decision making.

01:44:15 Speaker 08: Okay, thanks.

01:44:22 Speaker 08: So Member Hopkins is going to volunteer to not participate in the hearing.

01:44:28 Speaker 08: So now we have an odd number of members.

01:44:36 Speaker 08: This is a public hearing for an appeal of the leash and muzzle order for Tawanda at 1855 Fifth Avenue East by Dylan McCullin.

01:44:39 Speaker 08: The city may now provide an opening statement.

01:44:39 Speaker 08: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: My name is Selina Vanderpluik, and I'm here on behalf of the City of Owen Sound in relation to the appeal for the leash and muzzle order, Order Number 26-01 concerning the dog known as Tawanda.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: The city's position is straightforward: this appeal should be dismissed and the leash and muzzle order should be confirmed and upheld in full.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: This is not a punishment proceeding; it's not an issue of whether the appellants love and care for their dog.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: This is about whether the order is reasonable and proportionate for the incidents and circumstances that happened.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: This order is reasonable and necessary for safety based on public measures, evidence will show that on March 15, 2026, Linda Baker was walking on the Stony Orchard Trail, a public trail in Owen Sound.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: When she encountered the appellant and his two dogs, which included Tawanda, the city's evidence is that the dog lunged towards Miss Baker, and the appellant lost control of his dogs,

01:44:40 Speaker 08: and Miss Baker was knocked down and bitten.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: The injuries were significant.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: The record includes photographs of the injuries to Miss Baker's finger, elbow, and leg, as well as medical and X-ray evidence thereof.

01:44:40 Speaker 08: She had a fractured finger which required surgical pinning.

01:44:41 Speaker 08: Grey Bruce Public Health also became involved because it issued a confinement order for Tawanda confirming that the incident was treated by public health authorities as a bite and scratch exposure requiring formal response.

01:44:41 Speaker 08: The city relies on the evidence as a whole, including the order, police records, public health records, injury photographs, witness statements, the appellant's own statement, and the evidence of animal control officer Todd Robbins.

01:44:41 Speaker 08: The city submits that the animal control officer had the authority under the City's bylaw to investigate and issue the leash and muzzle order.

01:44:41 Speaker 08: The officer also had the power and ability, and still has the power and ability to pursue charges under the City's bylaw and under the Dog Owners' Liability Act.

01:44:42 Speaker 08: The city could have pursued more serious charges and various remedies including removal or destruction of the dog but it did not do that.

01:44:42 Speaker 08: Instead the city chose measures appropriate for the response.

01:44:42 Speaker 08: The leash and muzzle order represents a compromise between the appellant's interest in keeping the dog and the City's obligation to protect the public.

01:44:43 Speaker 08: It does not remove Tawanda from the appellant; it does not require destruction of the dog.

01:44:43 Speaker 08: It simply requires effective leash, collar, and muzzle control when Tawanda is outside of the dwelling.

01:44:44 Speaker 08: The appellant appears to take issue with the order.

01:44:44 Speaker 08: However, the city's position is that it's not an excessive order.

01:44:44 Speaker 08: It's minimal.

01:44:44 Speaker 08: It's reasonable, and it has its reasonable public safety measures available in light of the incident, the injuries, and the demonstrated risk.

01:44:44 Speaker 08: The appellant bears the onus to satisfy the committee, and whether this order should be reversed, the city's position is that he has not met that onus based on the facts that he's represented.

01:44:45 Speaker 08: At the conclusion of the evidence, I ask the committee to dismiss the appeal and uphold the lease and mutual order number 2026-001 in full.

01:44:45 Speaker 08: Thank you very much.

01:44:46 Speaker 08: The appellant?

01:44:46 Speaker 08: Yes, the appellant may now provide an opening statement.

01:44:46 Speaker 08: Good afternoon.

01:44:47 Speaker 08: Thank you.

01:44:47 Speaker 08: My name is Dylan McMullen.

01:44:48 Speaker 08: I'm the appellant.

01:44:48 Speaker 08: So, if I could just say essentially what I'm hoping to get out of this hearing is I'm not even really seeking a complete reversal of this order,

01:44:48 Speaker 08: and especially with what I just heard earlier that in six months' time this could be revisited.

01:44:48 Speaker 08: That gives me a great deal of confidence.

01:44:49 Speaker 08: I didn't realize that when I got the order.

01:44:49 Speaker 08: I was of the understanding that the decision was final and this was my only shot.

01:44:49 Speaker 08: So I'm not denying that an incident occurred, but there were a lot of circumstances involved which are in my statement.

01:44:50 Speaker 08: The big thing is that since this happened, I have been complying with the bylaw.

01:44:50 Speaker 08: I went out and got a muzzle even before the order was issued.

01:44:50 Speaker 08: I have had trouble working with Tawanda to get her comfortable with it, but I also sought help from a professional, and I enrolled her in what I guess is basically a behavior dog specialist regime,

01:44:50 Speaker 08: and she does wonderful work.

01:44:51 Speaker 08: She's thirty-five years experienced.

01:44:51 Speaker 08: She wrote a letter as well, which is included in my disclosure.

01:44:52 Speaker 08: And basically, what I'm hoping to seek out of this are a couple points.

01:44:52 Speaker 08: One thing is any time when there has been a problem with Tawanda, and I don't deny that there has been reactivity, but it's been when she's been with another dog.

01:44:52 Speaker 08: I have more than one dog, and it's when those two dogs are together.

01:44:52 Speaker 08: Particularly her littermate Ursula.

01:44:53 Speaker 08: That's when this incident happened.

01:44:53 Speaker 08: I had her and Ursula, and what I have learned from this whole experience and from working with the professional is that this is a thing.

01:44:53 Speaker 08: This is a littermate syndrome.

01:44:53 Speaker 08: It is something.

01:44:54 Speaker 08: Her behavior is different.

01:44:54 Speaker 08: When I walk Tawanda just on her own, it's completely different situation.

01:44:54 Speaker 08: Slack leash.

01:44:55 Speaker 08: She responds very well, and she was responding very well with the education I'm getting from this trainer.

01:44:55 Speaker 08: And part of the training though,

01:44:55 Speaker 08: and getting her used to being comfortable with the muzzle—I'm seeking basically if there is any way to put some kind of caveat or a little wiggle room on the property I live on Fifth Avenue

01:44:56 Speaker 08: East,

01:44:56 Speaker 08: 1855, directly across the street.

01:44:56 Speaker 08: I can see like twenty acres or something.

01:44:57 Speaker 08: It's huge, big expanse that I can see for a mile in either direction, and that is normally the route that I would usually take to walk Tawanda,

01:44:57 Speaker 08: as opposed to this trail which has been causing all the consternation here.

01:44:57 Speaker 08: So if I could have a little bit of freedom to get her used to the muzzle within eyesight of my house, not anywhere near the trail where the problem is.

01:44:58 Speaker 08: That's kind of what I'm seeking or being able to still go to the dog park if I can work on this training there.

01:44:58 Speaker 08: I just need a bit of space that I can work with her.

01:44:58 Speaker 08: Ideally close to home.

01:44:59 Speaker 08: That's kind of what I'm after, and then possibly to review this in six months and see if we could get the whole thing lifted or whatever the case may be.

01:44:59 Speaker 08: But that is my position at the moment.

01:44:59 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:00 Speaker 08: Thank you very much.

01:45:00 Speaker 08: The city now may present its case.

01:45:00 Speaker 08: So Mr. Chair, through to the committee, I'd like to call Animal Control Officer Todd Robbins to provide us with his testimony.

01:45:00 Speaker 08: Well, did you print additional books?

01:45:00 Speaker 08: Could we have it on the screen?

01:45:00 Speaker 08: Could I have the respondent's appeal brief?

01:45:00 Speaker 08: Yeah, for sure.

01:45:01 Speaker 08: If so, yeah, perfect.

01:45:01 Speaker 08: Okay, of course.

01:45:01 Speaker 08: So as per procedures, a witness must be sworn or affirmed.

01:45:02 Speaker 08: Affirmed.

01:45:02 Speaker 08: Both options mean that you are making a solemn spoken promise or declaration to tell the truth.

01:45:02 Speaker 08: An oath is when you swear to a religious deity, and affirmation is when you promise on your personal honor with no reference to a higher power.

01:45:02 Speaker 08: Which do you prefer?

01:45:02 Speaker 08: There we go.

01:45:03 Speaker 08: I'll swear on the Bible.

01:45:03 Speaker 08: Do you, Todd Robbins, solemnly swear that you will tell the truth?

01:45:03 Speaker 08: So help me God.

01:45:03 Speaker 08: Yes.

01:45:03 Speaker 08: Can you tell me what your position is with the City of Owen Sound?

01:45:04 Speaker 08: Animal Control Officer.

01:45:04 Speaker 08: And how long have you held this position?

01:45:04 Speaker 08: April 1st, nineteen ninety-nine.

01:45:05 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:05 Speaker 08: And what are your duties as an animal control officer?

01:45:05 Speaker 08: Many duties including picking up stray animals, managing the animal shelter, as well as investigating incidents like this one.

01:45:05 Speaker 08: Now can you tell me what bylaw governs the duties in relation to dog control in the City of Owen Sound?

01:45:05 Speaker 08: Oh yes of course.

01:45:05 Speaker 08: Okay if you turn to page fifty-nine.

01:45:06 Speaker 08: That's two thousand and twenty-four 10-13.

01:45:06 Speaker 08: And what is it that we're looking at?

01:45:06 Speaker 08: It's the bylaw to regulate animals within or dogs within the City of Owen Sound.

01:45:06 Speaker 08: And can you tell me what was your role in relation to the dog Tawanda?

01:45:06 Speaker 08: I learned that it was Dylan McMullen's dog that had been involved in a bite incident with Linda Baker.

01:45:07 Speaker 08: Okay, can we turn to page thirty-three please?

01:45:07 Speaker 08: Can you tell me what this document is?

01:45:07 Speaker 08: That is my witness statement.

01:45:07 Speaker 08: When was this document prepared?

01:45:08 Speaker 08: I believe it was three or four weeks ago.

01:45:08 Speaker 08: Not exact on the date.

01:45:08 Speaker 08: What does this document summarize for you?

01:45:08 Speaker 08: Summarizes my investigation into the incident.

01:45:09 Speaker 08: And what particular parts of the investigation are summarized in this witness statement?

01:45:09 Speaker 08: On March 16th, I received a phone call from Constable Reed Canal of the Owen Sound Police Service.

01:45:09 Speaker 08: He let me know there was a dog incident involving Linda Baker and the dog Tawanda that belonged to Dylan McMullen at One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-Fifth Avenue East.

01:45:09 Speaker 08: Yeah thank you.

01:45:10 Speaker 08: As well I spoke to Mr. Jim Yo, which is Linda's partner.

01:45:10 Speaker 08: He explained what had happened as far as the incident was concerned, and that Linda had really hurt herself with her hand and elbow being involved, and also her leg.

01:45:10 Speaker 08: I asked him to provide a written statement or if she could provide a written statement at that point in time he said that he would have to do it because of the injuries that she

01:45:10 Speaker 08: had received.

01:45:10 Speaker 08: He also said that he would provide photographs of the injuries which he did.

01:45:11 Speaker 08: And then I spoke to Dylan and had him provide a written statement.

01:45:11 Speaker 08: I also verified the vaccine history of Tawanda with the Paisley Vet Clinic and confirmed that she was up to date on vaccines as well as reported it to the Grey Bruce Health Unit.

01:45:12 Speaker 08: Can I have you turn to page twelve for me, please?

01:45:13 Speaker 08: Can you tell me what this document is, please?

01:45:13 Speaker 08: This is a confinement order for Tawanda.

01:45:14 Speaker 08: Now, can you tell me what's the importance of this particular document in your investigation with Tawanda?

01:45:14 Speaker 08: It verifies that the health unit was under the understanding that there was a bite or a scratch to a person,

01:45:14 Speaker 08: and that they wanted to make sure that after ten days the dog was still alive.

01:45:15 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:15 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:15 Speaker 08: Can we turn to page fourteen, please?

01:45:15 Speaker 08: Okay, can you tell me what this document is?

01:45:16 Speaker 08: This is the release form from the health unit, saying that Tawanda was fine at the end of the bite confinement on March twenty-six, two thousand and twenty-six.

01:45:16 Speaker 08: Okay, now, what public safety issues remained for you to consider as the animal control officer after you received this letter?

01:45:16 Speaker 08: When there is a bite or a scratch, usually a bite, the animal control officer does an investigation to see how we can prevent it from happening again in the future.

01:45:16 Speaker 08: So during both statements and with the pictures, I was under the belief there was a bite, and that a leash muzzle should be imposed on Tawanda.

01:45:16 Speaker 08: I also discussed it with Renee Robbins, Animal Control Officer, as well as Riley Burgess, the bylaw enforcement officer for the City of Owen Sound; we all were under the same conclusion.

01:45:16 Speaker 08: Can you tell me if you were provided any pictures that you needed to consider in your investigation?

01:45:17 Speaker 08: Yes.

01:45:17 Speaker 08: I was.

01:45:17 Speaker 08: Now, if you—that's obviously a finger that has been damaged.

01:45:17 Speaker 08: If we can scroll to the elbow picture.

01:45:17 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:18 Speaker 08: Yes, I have.

01:45:18 Speaker 08: And what is your understanding of what we're looking at here?

01:45:18 Speaker 08: A broken finger.

01:45:18 Speaker 08: And whose broken finger would that be?

01:45:18 Speaker 08: Linda Baker's.

01:45:19 Speaker 08: Red light.

01:45:19 Speaker 08: So, can you tell us what we're looking at here, please?

01:45:20 Speaker 08: It's an X-ray.

01:45:20 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:20 Speaker 08: To the best of your knowledge, whose X-ray are we looking at?

01:45:21 Speaker 08: Linda Baker's.

01:45:21 Speaker 08: Can you read the name at the top of the X-ray just to confirm?

01:45:21 Speaker 08: Linda Lucille Baker.

01:45:21 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:22 Speaker 08: If we can turn the page to page nineteen, can you tell me what we're looking at here?

01:45:22 Speaker 08: Looks like two teeth marks.

01:45:22 Speaker 08: And who is being identified in this picture?

01:45:23 Speaker 08: Linda Baker.

01:45:23 Speaker 08: If we could turn the page.

01:45:23 Speaker 08: If we could turn to page twenty and can you tell me about this picture, please?

01:45:23 Speaker 08: That appears to be a bite on the elbow which was through a heavy jacket, which was explained to me in the statement of Linda Baker.

01:45:24 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:24 Speaker 08: Now, can you tell me why that is what you think this is—a bite or a bruise from a bite?

01:45:24 Speaker 08: I've received one before.

01:45:24 Speaker 08: In your investigation, can you tell us what the description was of what happened to the elbow?

01:45:24 Speaker 08: From my understanding, the dog had jumped up and took Linda down to the ground, and...

01:45:25 Speaker 08: If we can turn to page twenty-one, and then if you could tell me what this picture is trying to show us.

01:45:25 Speaker 08: This was the one I wasn't one hundred percent sure whether it was a scrape or whether it was an actual bite.

01:45:25 Speaker 08: And to the best of your knowledge, who is in this picture?

01:45:25 Speaker 08: Oh, Linda Baker.

01:45:26 Speaker 08: Can I have you turn to page fifty, please?

01:45:26 Speaker 08: And then can you tell me what this is?

01:45:27 Speaker 08: This is Dylan McMullen.

01:45:27 Speaker 08: statement of the incident.

01:45:27 Speaker 08: Can you without reading it summarize the facts that he had provided to you?

01:45:27 Speaker 08: The most important fact was that he lost control and fell to the ground; he didn't view an actual bite, which is what I got from the statement.

01:45:27 Speaker 08: Can you tell me if this statement was considered in your investigation?

01:45:27 Speaker 08: Both statements were...

01:45:27 Speaker 08: And did you put weight on this in the matter of issuing the order?

01:45:28 Speaker 08: I had to take both statements completely at face value and if I'm going to err, I'm going to err on the side of public safety.

01:45:28 Speaker 08: So, if we can turn to page fifty-three and if you could tell me what it is that we're looking at here; we're looking at Mr. McMullen and Ursula and Tawanda.

01:45:28 Speaker 08: To the best of your knowledge, can you tell me what breed of dog that is?

01:45:28 Speaker 08: Appears to be a Bull Mastiff mix.

01:45:28 Speaker 08: And do you know the approximate weight of the dog?

01:45:29 Speaker 08: I would say probably around one hundred pounds.

01:45:29 Speaker 08: Now we don't have Miss Baker here today but could you tell us approximately the size of Miss Baker?

01:45:29 Speaker 08: Actually, I've never met Miss Baker so no. Can you tell us a little bit about the Stony Orchard Trail?

01:45:29 Speaker 08: Do you know much about it?

01:45:30 Speaker 08: No not really; just that it's on the escarpment along Fifth Avenue East.

01:45:30 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:30 Speaker 08: Can you tell me if it is private or public?

01:45:30 Speaker 08: It is a public space.

01:45:31 Speaker 08: We do numerous patrols in that area but it's pretty tight in some spots.

01:45:32 Speaker 08: And can you tell me where it's located?

01:45:32 Speaker 08: Like, it would be at the end of Fifth Avenue East I believe all the way to Notre Dame School.

01:45:32 Speaker 08: Now is that within the City of Owen Sound?

01:45:32 Speaker 08: Yes it is.

01:45:33 Speaker 08: Can we turn to page fifty-nine please?

01:45:33 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:33 Speaker 08: Can you tell me what document this is please?

01:45:34 Speaker 08: This is the dog bylaw for the City of Owen Sound.

01:45:34 Speaker 08: And then how does this document specifically relate to this incident?

01:45:35 Speaker 08: This is the bylaw which allows me to impose a leash and muzzle order.

01:45:35 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:35 Speaker 08: Now, what factors did you specifically consider when you decided whether a dog should be leashed muzzled or both?

01:45:36 Speaker 08: Whatever makes it safe for the community.

01:45:36 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:36 Speaker 08: And what public safety considerations were the most important to you while making this order?

01:45:37 Speaker 08: Can you repeat?

01:45:37 Speaker 08: Sorry.

01:45:38 Speaker 08: Yeah so what public safety considerations were most important to you when you made this order?

01:45:38 Speaker 08: Most likely the fact that the dog had jumped up on a person close to their owner knocked them down as well as the bite that took place to the hand and also to the elbow.

01:45:39 Speaker 08: If we could turn to page ten.

01:45:39 Speaker 08: Okay can you tell me what this is please?

01:45:40 Speaker 08: This is the leash muzzle order document.

01:45:40 Speaker 08: And can you tell me when this was issued?

01:45:40 Speaker 08: March thirty-one two thousand and twenty-six.

01:45:40 Speaker 08: Okay which dog does it concern?

01:45:41 Speaker 08: Tawanda.

01:45:41 Speaker 08: And can you identify who the owner is responsible for the dog?

01:45:41 Speaker 08: Dylan McMullen and Lauren Jewel.

01:45:42 Speaker 08: Now what does this order require?

01:45:42 Speaker 08: What is this order requiring?

01:45:42 Speaker 08: It requires any time this dog Tawanda is outside of the dwelling unit at 1855 Fifth Avenue East she shall be leashed and muzzled within the city limits of the City of Owen Sound.

01:45:43 Speaker 08: Okay and then can you tell us what the purpose of issuing this order was?

01:45:43 Speaker 08: What were you achieving?

01:45:43 Speaker 08: Public safety.

01:45:43 Speaker 08: And what risk were you attempting to address?

01:45:44 Speaker 08: We always look at how we can prevent another incident from happening and having a leash and muzzle order on the dog hopefully will prevent anything from happening in the future.

01:45:44 Speaker 08: Now can you tell us what other options that you considered as a resolution?

01:45:44 Speaker 08: Well there certainly... we could have gone under the Dog Owner's Liability Act and asked for the animal to be removed from the household.

01:45:44 Speaker 08: Now tell us why you considered this order to be reasonable and proportionate.

01:45:44 Speaker 08: As far as I know it was the first at that point in time; it was the first time the dog had jumped up and bitten somebody.

01:45:45 Speaker 08: Upon further statements coming forward there has been another incident that I was made aware of same sort of incident where the dog just lunged at a passerby.

01:45:45 Speaker 08: Did you speak to these other people?

01:45:45 Speaker 08: I did speak to Ellie Sparney.

01:45:45 Speaker 08: If we can turn to page twenty-seven.

01:45:45 Speaker 08: Okay do you... can you tell me what this document is?

01:45:46 Speaker 08: This is the written statement from Ellie Sparney.

01:45:46 Speaker 08: And could you just summarize what Ellie is saying in this document?

01:45:47 Speaker 08: She's describing an incident that Dylan McMullen had while he was on his scooter like a snow scooter being pulled by the dogs.

01:45:47 Speaker 08: Okay can we turn to page twenty-nine please?

01:45:47 Speaker 08: Turn to page 29 please.

01:45:47 Speaker 08: And then can you tell me what this is?

01:45:47 Speaker 08: This appears to be a statement from Dan Curry.

01:45:47 Speaker 08: And if you could just give us a summary of what Dan is saying, please.

01:45:47 Speaker 08: Pretty much sounds the same.

01:45:47 Speaker 08: Took place on Stony Orchard Trail in the city, and the dog bit him through a winter mitten and prevented any bite injury from happening.

01:45:48 Speaker 08: Now, after seeing the appellant's document brief, knowing the facts of the case, has anything changed about your opinion on the order?

01:45:49 Speaker 08: No, it hasn't.

01:45:49 Speaker 08: Tell us what concerns that you would have if the order was rescinded.

01:45:49 Speaker 08: That there possibly could be another incident.

01:45:49 Speaker 08: Now we heard from the appellant that he is looking for a minor variance to allow the dog to run behind his property.

01:45:49 Speaker 08: Can you tell us your thoughts on that?

01:45:50 Speaker 08: I'm not sure.

01:45:50 Speaker 08: No, no, no. I don't think...

01:45:51 Speaker 08: Sorry, misunderstood.

01:45:51 Speaker 08: I thought during the opening statement it was that while he was training Tawanda with the leash, there was this big space in behind him, to allow a variance to the order for now,

01:45:52 Speaker 08: to allow that workable space with some flexibility.

01:45:52 Speaker 08: But I guess I misunderstood.

01:45:52 Speaker 08: I apologize.

01:45:53 Speaker 08: So, my apologies.

01:45:53 Speaker 08: So what are your thoughts on that?

01:45:53 Speaker 08: I wouldn't be comfortable with it because there possibly could be another incident.

01:45:53 Speaker 08: Okay.

01:45:54 Speaker 08: So, what recommendations are you going...

01:45:54 Speaker 08: Are you recommending in relation to this situation?

01:45:54 Speaker 08: I have told Dylan that if he does get dog training with the dog, it is a possibility that the leash and muzzle order he could appeal later on down the road.

01:45:56 Speaker 08: I guess it's six months.

01:45:56 Speaker 08: As long as Tawanda could pass a Canadian Good Citizenship test or something along those lines, it's a test where dogs go through great training to make sure there wouldn't be another incident.

01:45:56 Speaker 08: But at this point in time, I would not be comfortable lifting the leash and muzzle order.

01:45:57 Speaker 08: No, no. That concludes my questions for Mr. Roberts.

01:45:57 Speaker 08: Thank you very much.

01:45:57 Speaker 08: Does the appellant?

01:45:58 Speaker 08: The appellants have any questions for this witness?

01:45:58 Speaker 08: Hello, Mr. Robbins.

01:45:58 Speaker 08: Thanks for coming out today.

01:45:59 Speaker 08: So, if we can go back to the original statement from Linda Baker...

01:45:59 Speaker 08: I don't remember.

01:45:59 Speaker 08: It's in with my stuff too.

01:46:00 Speaker 08: But oh no, I guess it's not.

01:46:00 Speaker 08: But oh, sorry, not.

01:46:00 Speaker 08: I didn't mean that statement.

01:46:00 Speaker 08: I meant...

01:46:00 Speaker 08: Sorry, I meant my statement.

01:46:01 Speaker 08: Sorry, my statement to Mr. Robbins.

01:46:01 Speaker 08: Sorry, it's my first day.

01:46:02 Speaker 08: Sorry.

01:46:02 Speaker 08: Yeah, I sent it with my stuff.

01:46:03 Speaker 08: It was in one of the emails I forwarded to you.

01:46:03 Speaker 08: But he also...

01:46:03 Speaker 08: There we go.

01:46:04 Speaker 08: Okay, so we already were looking at this before.

01:46:04 Speaker 08: You just mentioned when you were asked about what your general takeaway from this or what the important points were is that an incident happened here.

01:46:04 Speaker 08: Do you notice?

01:46:05 Speaker 08: Would you not acknowledge that I had both dogs with me, right?

01:46:05 Speaker 08: That is correct.

01:46:05 Speaker 08: We go now.

01:46:05 Speaker 08: I'm doing it.

01:46:05 Speaker 08: Okay, I'll just say it's your serve.

01:46:06 Speaker 08: You will recognize that I had both dogs with me.

01:46:06 Speaker 08: I was on my kick sled, and as you already acknowledged, that this trail is Orchard Trail.

01:46:06 Speaker 08: I didn't before this whole thing happened.

01:46:06 Speaker 08: I didn't even know what that was called.

01:46:06 Speaker 08: I've been living there for fourteen years.

01:46:07 Speaker 08: I had no idea it was called Orchard Trail, but Stony Orchard Trail.

01:46:07 Speaker 08: But anyway, it is narrow in places, and so it is...

01:46:08 Speaker 08: I am in the habit of when I take my dogs whether I have them on the sled, which is a new thing, only from last Christmas present, so it's a new thing.

01:46:08 Speaker 08: But when I have them, when I'm walking them or on my bike or whatever,

01:46:09 Speaker 08: it is always my practice because it is a narrow trail and because I never know how other people are going to react to dogs.

01:46:09 Speaker 08: I always take them to the side and get them off the trail and I have them sit and wait.

01:46:09 Speaker 08: And that's been a thing that I've always been doing.

01:46:09 Speaker 08: Now, do you notice in my statement what I mentioned about that particular practice with the dogs?

01:46:10 Speaker 08: Yes, I did.

01:46:10 Speaker 08: And that I asked Mrs. Baker—I didn't know that was her name at the time—but when I was there with my dog and I saw a person approaching, I requested, "Just give me a minute."

01:46:11 Speaker 08: I was on the sled.

01:46:11 Speaker 08: I got off, dismounted off the sled.

01:46:11 Speaker 08: I had the dogs, and I said, "Just give me a moment.

01:46:13 Speaker 08: I'm going to get them to the side of the trail."

01:46:13 Speaker 08: Did you read that as well?

01:46:13 Speaker 08: Ah, yes, I did.

01:46:15 Speaker 08: And this individual didn't break her stride at all.

01:46:15 Speaker 08: Just kept walking right into my dogs as I was in the uneven snow wrestling—well, not even wrestling, but just trying to get them off the trail.

01:46:15 Speaker 08: She didn't break her stride.

01:46:15 Speaker 08: She didn't stop.

01:46:20 Speaker 08: Maybe she didn't hear me.

01:46:20 Speaker 08: I don't know.

01:46:20 Speaker 08: But she just charged past.

01:46:21 Speaker 08: It's not...

01:46:21 Speaker 08: I mean, she basically went charging right past my dogs, and then I lost control.

01:46:21 Speaker 08: I fell forward.

01:46:21 Speaker 08: I had them attached to me on a belt, and I had them by the leashes.

01:46:22 Speaker 08: I fell forward, and then this incident happened, which I'm not denying.

01:46:22 Speaker 08: It was an unfortunate, regrettable incident, and I feel sorry that Miss Baker has been so impacted by this, and that's why I've been taking steps to get training and to understand why this happened.

01:46:22 Speaker 08: Also, the other incident that was reported after the fact.

01:46:23 Speaker 08: It's a similar situation on that trail.

01:46:25 Speaker 08: If we went back to...

01:46:25 Speaker 08: That one I don't even remember the lady's name, but the other statement that happened.

01:46:26 Speaker 08: So okay.

01:46:26 Speaker 08: In this statement here, what is the common denominator, the common thread that we're seeing between these two incidents on this trail?

01:46:26 Speaker 01: This one wasn't actually on the trail, was it?

01:46:27 Speaker 01: Okay, sorry.

01:46:27 Speaker 01: So it wasn't on the trail.

01:46:28 Speaker 01: Sorry.

01:46:29 Speaker 01: It wasn't on the trail.

01:46:29 Speaker 01: Was trail adjacent, I guess.

01:46:30 Speaker 01: But once again... the sled is involved.

01:46:30 Speaker 01: Multiple dogs are involved, and the winter clothing, everything is involved.

01:56:20 Speaker 01: Also, so that's again the reason why that point.

01:56:20 Speaker 01: It's a similar situation though in encountering the dogs on the sled.

01:56:20 Speaker 01: And if we could just real quick go to the photograph that Linda took of me and the dogs.

01:56:21 Speaker 01: Okay, there we go.

01:56:21 Speaker 01: So when you look at these dogs, Tawanda is the one in the foreground there... the first one in the picture.

01:56:22 Speaker 01: You right?

01:56:22 Speaker 01: Yeah.

01:56:23 Speaker 01: Okay.

01:56:23 Speaker 01: Yep.

01:56:25 Speaker 01: Yep.

01:56:26 Speaker 01: Sorry.

01:56:26 Speaker 01: So I guess what I'm trying to say is, when you look at this photograph, how do these dogs look?

01:56:26 Speaker 01: And with all your experience: When you look at these dogs, she's not even looking.

01:56:27 Speaker 01: Linda's taking this photo after this whole thing happened.

01:56:27 Speaker 01: Tawanda isn't even looking at her.

01:56:27 Speaker 01: How does the...

01:56:27 Speaker 01: How do these dogs look?

01:56:27 Speaker 01: They do look relaxed at this point in time.

01:56:28 Speaker 01: Yes.

01:56:29 Speaker 01: So and I'm sure this is why you made the recommendation you did, which as you brought up, could have been a lot more severe.

01:56:29 Speaker 01: And I do appreciate your patience and understanding with this.

01:56:31 Speaker 01: But you can see these dogs are relaxed.

01:56:31 Speaker 01: An incident did happen.

01:56:33 Speaker 01: They don't appear to be out of control, even though there was all this confusion and everything.

01:56:33 Speaker 01: There... they're not talking about wild, out-of-control menaces to society, but when I have more than one of them, and when I've introduced this new thing with a sled,

01:56:33 Speaker 01: it's me just trying to have some fun in the snow.

01:56:34 Speaker 01: They're not necessarily sled dogs, and I accept that at this point.

01:56:34 Speaker 01: And so part of me seeking a little bit of wiggle room here to have a bit of freedom.

01:56:34 Speaker 01: And I'm not asking to be able to have the dog off...

01:56:35 Speaker 01: You have to have the dog on the leash anyway.

01:56:35 Speaker 01: I'm just saying to have a place where she could be.

01:56:36 Speaker 01: And oh, sorry.

01:56:36 Speaker 01: Oh, I'm sorry.

01:56:37 Speaker 01: I apologize.

01:56:37 Speaker 01: Okay, sorry.

01:56:37 Speaker 01: So okay.

01:56:37 Speaker 01: So I guess that's the main thing there.

01:56:38 Speaker 01: Yeah, I guess that's all I've really got to say.

01:56:38 Speaker 01: The dogs and...

01:56:39 Speaker 01: That the common thread is that...

01:56:39 Speaker 01: Oh, I guess one other thing too.

01:56:39 Speaker 01: You do have a bit of a history together, correct Ms. Robbins?

01:56:40 Speaker 01: Yes.

01:56:41 Speaker 01: And when you've met them, it was when they were running at large, when they were puppies, and they broke out of the backyard.

01:56:41 Speaker 01: It took a while to keep keeping them in.

01:56:42 Speaker 01: Correct.

01:56:42 Speaker 01: Yes.

01:56:42 Speaker 01: And in the past...

01:56:43 Speaker 01: So this was I was like what about a year and a half ago or so?

01:56:43 Speaker 01: Would you say approximately?

01:56:44 Speaker 01: It's been a little bit of time.

01:56:44 Speaker 01: It has, yeah, yeah.

01:56:45 Speaker 01: And since you had to get involved and return my dogs, and O'Wallen and I had to go pick them up from the shelter one time, bail them out.

01:56:46 Speaker 01: Since then, prior to this incident, in all that time, has there been any other problems with my dogs that you've had to report of or had to respond to?

01:56:46 Speaker 01: Not that I'm aware of.

01:56:47 Speaker 01: So you could say that there was a problem.

01:56:47 Speaker 01: You responded to it in your official capacity.

01:56:48 Speaker 01: I took advisement of your admonition, and then prior to this point, which the dogs were not off leash, they were not running at large.

01:56:48 Speaker 01: Other than this new isolated incident, I followed the direction, and we've had no other problems once I addressed the issue with some focused attention.

01:56:49 Speaker 01: I would say that would be correct.

01:56:49 Speaker 01: Okay, thank you.

01:56:49 Speaker 01: That's all.

01:56:50 Speaker 01: Thanks.

01:56:51 Speaker 01: Thank you very much.

01:56:51 Speaker 01: Does the excuse me put my glasses on here?

01:56:51 Speaker 01: Does the appeal board have any questions for this witness?

01:56:52 Speaker 01: I do not.

01:56:53 Speaker 01: Thank you.

01:56:53 Speaker 01: Are you done?

01:56:53 Speaker 01: The appellant may present.

01:56:53 Speaker 01: Oh, do you have any more witnesses?

01:56:53 Speaker 01: No, Mr. Chair, through to the committee.

01:56:54 Speaker 01: Mr. Robbins was our only witness for today.

01:56:54 Speaker 01: Thank you very much.

01:56:54 Speaker 01: The appellant may present their case.

01:56:54 Speaker 01: Because I'm doing both things, so I guess I'm my witness.

01:56:55 Speaker 01: But I've kind of said a bit of it.

01:56:55 Speaker 01: Is there anything that you need to hear that I should be addressing?

01:56:56 Speaker 01: Do you have anything you need to hear from me that I haven't already made in by way of statement?

01:56:56 Speaker 01: Like, I think when you questioned this witness, you made your case and your statements.

01:56:57 Speaker 01: So thank you.

01:56:57 Speaker 01: Okay.

01:56:57 Speaker 01: Well, any questions from the board to this witness?

01:56:59 Speaker 01: No. Okay.

01:56:59 Speaker 01: Thank you.

01:56:59 Speaker 01: The city may provide its closing statement.

01:56:59 Speaker 01: The city continues to ask this committee to uphold the lease order.

01:57:00 Speaker 01: The evidence establishes a serious incident on March fifteenth, twenty-twenty-six, on that Stony Orchard Trail, which is a public trail in the City of Owen Sound,

01:57:00 Speaker 01: and many people within the community use it and should be able to use it safely.

01:57:00 Speaker 01: The appellant was present with his two dogs, including Tawanda.

01:57:00 Speaker 01: By his own statements, the dogs were harnessed, leashed to his waist, while he was using a kick sled.

01:57:01 Speaker 01: He confirms that he moved off the trail, attempted to settle the dogs, and moved Tawanda further back into the trees and lost control.

01:57:01 Speaker 01: Those facts matter.

01:57:01 Speaker 01: This is not an ordinary controlled walk with one dog on a leash.

01:57:01 Speaker 01: This was a public trail encounter involving two dogs who attacked, attached to the appellant's waist while he was using a sled.

01:57:02 Speaker 01: During that encounter, Miss Baker was knocked down and injured.

01:57:02 Speaker 01: The incident was not minor in any means.

01:57:02 Speaker 01: The record includes the photographs of the injuries, which you saw: Miss Baker's finger, her elbow, and her leg,

01:57:02 Speaker 01: as well as medical X-rays showing that she required surgical pinning of her finger because of that incident.

01:57:02 Speaker 01: Grey Bruce Public Health also needed to become involved because it was deemed serious, specifically regarding a scratch or bite.

01:57:03 Speaker 01: The appellant says that he didn't see the bite; in his statement, he said he didn't see the dog bite.

01:57:03 Speaker 01: Not seeing a bite does not prove that it didn't happen.

01:57:03 Speaker 01: At the critical moment, he was managing two dogs on winter trail conditions while using a sled, and he lost control.

01:57:04 Speaker 01: His own evidence confirms that his ability to control the situation was compromised.

01:57:04 Speaker 01: The order is proportionate.

01:57:05 Speaker 01: It doesn't remove Tawanda from their care.

01:57:05 Speaker 01: It doesn't require destruction of the dog.

01:57:05 Speaker 01: It doesn't prevent the appellant from caring for, training, walking, loving it, and continuing behavior modifications.

01:57:06 Speaker 01: It doesn't change any of that.

01:57:07 Speaker 01: It simply requires a leash and muzzle when Tawanda is outside of the dwelling.

01:57:07 Speaker 01: The city also exercised restraint.

01:57:08 Speaker 01: The animal control officer had authority to investigate and issue that order; the city had the ability to pursue charges and seek harsher remedies.

01:57:08 Speaker 01: The city chose a measure of public safety response as the balance between the appellant's interest in keeping Wanda and the city's obligations to protect the public.

01:57:09 Speaker 01: The appellant's evidence regarding training does not justify removing the order.

01:57:09 Speaker 01: The trainer became involved after the incident.

01:57:10 Speaker 01: The trainer did not witness the incident and cannot guarantee that there won't be any further risk.

01:57:10 Speaker 01: At most, that evidence continued management; it does not remove the safety measure.

01:57:10 Speaker 01: The appellant's hardship is that Tawanda cannot attend leash-free dog parks or enjoy attending his neighbors while having the dog off-leash or muzzle-less.

01:57:10 Speaker 01: The city acknowledges that that's an inconvenience.

01:57:12 Speaker 01: However, that inconvenience to the appellant does not outweigh the safety of the members of the public in the City using the trails or within the City of Owen Sound.

01:57:12 Speaker 01: The bylaw exists to prevent harm.

01:57:12 Speaker 01: The committee does not need to wait for a second, third, fourth serious incident before maintaining a reasonable preventive order.

01:57:13 Speaker 01: For those reasons, the city respectfully asks that the appeal be dismissed, the order be confirmed, and remain in full force.

01:57:13 Speaker 01: Thank you.

01:57:14 Speaker 01: Thank you very much.

01:57:14 Speaker 01: The appellant may proceed.

01:57:16 Speaker 01: Do you have any closing statements?

01:57:16 Speaker 01: Thank you.

01:57:16 Speaker 01: So, with these closing statements, are you still able to put some things on there for the statement?

01:57:17 Speaker 01: Could we go to the photo montage of a couple of photos of the dogs?

01:57:17 Speaker 01: Yes.

01:57:17 Speaker 01: Thank you.

01:57:17 Speaker 01: There we go.

01:57:18 Speaker 01: So this is Tawanda and Ursula when they were wee pups.

01:57:18 Speaker 01: It wasn't too long after this; this was one of the first times that Todd would have gotten involved with them because they're little ragamuffins, getting into trouble, escaping,

01:57:18 Speaker 01: running at large—which has been an issue that's been curtailed ever since.

01:57:18 Speaker 01: That's them when they're little.

01:57:18 Speaker 01: And then, if you could skip ahead to the next one, that's Tawanda.

01:57:19 Speaker 01: That was around the time she had her first meeting with Mr. Robbins; I had to go bail her out of the slammer.

01:57:19 Speaker 01: If you scroll down, that's the two of them in the back of the car.

01:57:19 Speaker 01: This is more them now, right?

01:57:20 Speaker 01: And they are litter mates, and it is when those two are together: they are more rambunctious and a bit harder to control, especially obviously in winter conditions on a kick sled.

01:57:20 Speaker 01: So me seeking some relief with this order isn't to say "get out of my way."

01:57:20 Speaker 01: I have a right to go bombing down the hill.

01:57:21 Speaker 01: Clearly, this isn't going to work; these aren't sled dogs.

01:57:21 Speaker 01: I'm not in the country here; the sled will have to dismantle the sled team.

01:57:22 Speaker 01: Okay, I get that.

01:57:22 Speaker 01: That's not a safe place to be doing things.

01:57:23 Speaker 01: But when Tawanda is walked on her own, she is just a dog walking with her owner, and it's a completely different relationship.

01:57:23 Speaker 01: There aren't all these issues like I was learning in my training with Regine; we didn't even look at that.

01:57:23 Speaker 01: Well, hopefully you read that—that was included there.

01:57:24 Speaker 01: But you know she has high hopes for her development, and it's going well.

01:57:25 Speaker 01: But I'm learning about things like trigger stacking and emotional regulation with the dog.

01:57:27 Speaker 01: And the reality is, it is a very different situation.

01:57:27 Speaker 01: If I'm walking her on her own—not on that trail—when I'm applying what I'm then learning to teach her with positive reinforcement: you know, going with treats and having her do different things like sit,

01:57:27 Speaker 01: stay—and just building that trust and emotional regulation with me so that when she does get provoked in the future, she comes to me for emotional regulation.

01:57:29 Speaker 01: That's what we're already seeing start to happen.

01:57:29 Speaker 01: And one part of since I've got this order placed on me: I've had to get creative about where I take my dog for walks, which has meant going out of town.

01:57:30 Speaker 01: I'm very familiar with the grid of where city limits begin and end; I have places that I go.

01:57:30 Speaker 01: We hang out at Foodland a lot, stuff like that.

01:57:30 Speaker 01: But spending extra time with her, walking without a muzzle, means going on different trails to different places, and it's already started building that relationship.

01:57:30 Speaker 01: She responds very well when it's just her and me.

01:57:31 Speaker 01: And I've been trying to apply these things.

01:57:33 Speaker 01: Where it would be great is to get to the next level because when it comes to getting the muzzle on her and getting her out the door, this is where I run into problems:

01:57:33 Speaker 01: she still associates behaving a certain way; she has certain expectations about how what a walk is going to be like if it's in front of my house with that big opening.

01:57:33 Speaker 01: So if we could make some kind of caveat—only if I'm walking her and only if it's within sight of my house—I guess this gets complicated for how to write this out,

01:57:34 Speaker 01: but essentially this is what I'm looking for: a little bit of freedom where I don't have to worry about getting reported on or fined or whatever the penalties are for not following this order.

01:57:35 Speaker 01: If I can have my muzzle with me and walk her when I can see clearly in all directions that it's safe—and just build her confidence to be able to wear that muzzle so she might

01:57:35 Speaker 01: go out the front door—that's kind of what I'm looking for. And if there's one other picture here, don't mind skipping down: that's Tawanda right there; that's her. She's a big, beautiful dog. And then there should be one more of her with my wife. Now this is when my wife was in the hospital before my son was born. There were some complications with the pregnancy. You see she's got the wrist on her hand from... That's in London. Now that's not an out-of-control dog. This is me taking one dog all the way to London, Victoria Hospital, through all the busyness and craziness at a hospital with people coming and going, wheelchairs, and all kinds of things: calm, cool, no problems. Even though my wife was in a compromised state because her water broke early and we had to go there for observation, she was still able to come out and see her. This is a dog that if I have just her on her own and I'm doing the things I'm learning, the risk isn't the same as opposed to the dogs hitched up to a sled—which I'll admit maybe I didn't think through as well as I should—and they're harder to control. So that's essentially where I'm coming from with my plea here today. That's all. Thanks. Thank you very much. The appeal board will now retire to a separate room to deliberate, and the secretary please join us to record our decision. Thank you. Okay, the appeal board denies the appeal made by the appellant eight: Appeal made by the appellant David McMullen, Dillon's or McMullen, and upholds the finding of the Leash/muzzle order number 2026-001. The appeal board has considered the evidence and submissions before it. Finds that the Leash/muzzle order is reasonable to ensure public safety. The appeal board is willing to review any progress after six months. Please be advised that where more than six months have elapsed since the matter was before the appeal board, if the owner believes that the behaviour of the dog has improved: The owner may appeal to the board by notifying the secretary in writing on the grounds for the belief that the dog's behaviour has improved and requesting modification or rescission of the order to muzzle or leash or both. There is no correspondence being presented for information. No additional business was added at the beginning of the meeting, so we were moved to item eleven: 2011—which appears to be a typo in the transcript; likely refers to Item 11 regarding the next regular scheduled meeting on September 1st, 2026. It is now what time? 4:57. I declare this meeting adjourned. Thank you.