159 Chisholm Avenue

My house with it’s unusual lack of interior walls definitely requires some structural engineering work. My architect told me that he talked with a structural engineer close to where I live – K. H. Davis Consulting. I looked them up and they seemed fine. Apparently they did do some work on HGTV‘s “Leave it to Bryan” and “Income Property“, two shows that I have watched frequently in the past. My architect had a brief talk with Ken Davis of K. H. Davis Consulting, sent him the current draft drawing of the project and Ken replied very prompted, telling us that they would charge $1400 + HST to provide structural markup for this type of project and site visits during construction are extra at $450 + HST. He also indicated to my architect that they have done a lot of residents like this. Seeing how he so proudly put the “Leave it to Bryan” and “Income Property” badge on this email, I figure we’ll give him a try. That’s where things start to fall apart.

On April 11th, we said yes let’s go ahead with the structural engineering work. Ken of K. H. Davis indicated that he will send us the contract form so he can get the work started. We waited, then we called, Ken promised the form will be emailed out, then we emailed, we waited, we called, we emailed. And a full week later, on April 18th, we still did not get any forms from Ken. Maybe Ken is very busy? Sure. I would like to imagine there’s are good reasons for Ken to make us to wait for a week sitting there waiting for forms. But that’s not now a professional should work. I have my guesses at why Ken suddenly no longer replies to his emails. He never really took a look at the files my architect have sent him, and he just throw that $1400 out. By the time we said let’s go head, he finally took a look at the files and realized that $1400 is just not doable.

Now let me say this, please all engineers (I am a computer engineer), please NEVER be like Mr. Ken Davis here. Engineers should always:

• Look at all the materials on hand carefully and make accurate estimates.
• And if the estimates are incorrect, then you should admit that it is your fault.
• And to correct that mistake, you can either do the work as is, or tell your client your estimate is incorrect and here’s the revised number.

Mr. Ken Davis here is not doing either. He refuses to acknowledge that it is his fault that he didn’t correctly estimate the cost of doing the project, and he refuses to admit that to his client. Instead he chooses to bury his head in the sand and pretend he does not hear our calls or see our emails.

So lesson of the day is, never hire a contractor who likes to talk big about whatever his has done in the past, likes to tell you he has done a lot of similar things (even though my house design is clearly a rare breed here), and likes to give out quick cheap quotes.

Even though the Committee of Adjustment has approved my variance application. There is a appealing process where parties can still appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board with in 14 days. My application is approved on April 2, 2013, so the last day of appeal is April 16, 2013. And I have received a letter from the City Planning Division dated April 17, 2013 that no appeal was filed and the decision of the Committee of Adjustment is now final and binding.

Good news, now that the variances are all handled, we can finally get down to the business of getting this house designed and applies for building permit.

The Committee of Adjustment letters have went out, and then the Community Planning for Toronto and East York district recommended the following conditions to be imposed to my variance application:

• The variance to building height of 10 metres apply only to the roof access portion of the building as whon in the drawings received by the Committee of Adjustment on January 23, 2013; and,

• The proposed utility/roof access be limited to 4.8 metres by 2.98 metres in size as shown on Roof Plan drawing received by the Committee of Adjustment on Janunary 23, 2013.

Their comments are:

The subject property is located on the east side of Chisholm Avenue between Lumsden Avenue and Doncaster Avenue just west of Main Street. The property is designated “Neighbourhoods” in the Official Plan, which requires new development in the established residential areas to have regard for existing physical character of the surrounding neighbourhood, including sales and massing of the buildings. The property is zoned R1C Residential in Zoning By-law 6752 of the former Borough of East York. The purpose of the Zoning By-law is to respect and reinforce a stable built form and to limit the impact of new development on adjacent residential properties.

Planning Staff identified concerns with the height variance. A building with a height of 10 metres would not be in keeping with the buildings in the area where buildings have complied with the Zoning By-law.

The proposed plans show that the height is only for the roof access room and is set back from the front of the house. This should mitigate the impact of the increased height from the street.

As such, should the Committee of Adjustment approve this application, Planning Staff recommend that the variance for building height only apply to the roof access portion of the building as shown in the plans that have been submitted to the Committee of Adjustment dated January 22, 2013. The roof access room should also be limited to 4.8 metres by 2.98 metres in size as shown on the Roof Plan drawing in the above set of drawings.

So I am hoping that this means that planning division has no issue with my roof top access room and now it’s really up to the Committee of Adjustment to approve my variance request with the added conditions. Wednesday, March 27, 2013 is the date of my hearing, and I’m hoping for the best.