05 15 1989 Public Min 7:15
,/.}
J
II
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO
...
SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING
MONDAY, MAY 15, 1989 @ 7:15 P.M. - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TWENTY-SIXTH MEETING 1988-1991 COUNCIL
The following members of Council were present:
Reeve Robert E. Drury
Deputy-Reeve David Caldwell
Councillor David Burton
Councillor Alastair Crawford
Councillor Allan Johnson
Also present were:
Naomi Ball, Todd stocks, Bob James, Tony Cooksley, Robert
Swerdon, Chris Staring, Paul Warnar, Luke Heffren,
Lou Heffren, Henk Warnar, David Allen, Rick Allen, Nathan
Cassell, Barry Richardson, Joe Groot, Paul France, Jeff
Ball, Elizabeth Agostan, Steve Agostan, Fran Hanney, Donald
Hanney, Paul Kelland, Gail Robinson, Howard Campbell,
Thelma Halfacre, Stephen Woodrow, Earl Robertson, Jim
Langman, Keith Lees, W.R. Daniel, A. Ritchie, Joe Jolie,
David O'Brien, Be~ Nicolson, and one member of the press.
Reeve Robert E. Drury chaired the meeting.
Reeve Robert E. Drury opened the meeting by explaining to
those present that the purpose of the public meeting was
to present a proposed zoning by-law amendment that would
change the zoning on Part Lot 27, Concession 4, from Natural
Area to Natural Area-Exception.
Notice of the Public Meeting was mailed out on April 19, 1989
to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject lands.
Notice of the public meeting was also advertised in both
the Barrie Examiner and Orillia Packet and Times on
April 25th, 1989.
The Reeve then asked the Deputy-Clerk if there had been any
correspondence received on this matter. The Deputy-Clerk
responded by indicating that there had been two letters
received, one from the Barrie Automotive Flea Market
Association and one from Dr. Joel Andersen, which stated
their objections to the proposed zoning amendment.
í
II
II
II
II
.
II
II
II
¡I ,.1
I
¡
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
Ii
[I
'I
II
II
II
II
I[
II
¡,
II
II
II
The Reeve then stated that those persons present would be
afforded the opportunity of asking questions with respect
to the proposed zoning by-law amendment. Reeve Robert E.
Drury then turned the meeting over to the Township Planner
Ms. Beverly Nicolson to explain the purpose and effect
of the amendment.
The Reeve then asked those present if they had any questions
or comments with regards to the proposal.
Robert Swerdon:
The section that was referred to was
legal non-conforming use which should
have been illegal non-conforming use.
When a home occupation is defined, it
refers to a percentage of the square
footage of the residential buildings,
not the out buildings. This business
did not exist prior to the Official Plan
and therefore cannot be classified as a
legal non-conforming use. This is an
industrial form of business being
operated in a Natural Area zone. The
Lakeshore Study between Ridge Road and
the lake had a definite purpose, and that
was to reduce the amount of development
in that area for fear of septic saturation.
~
~;
Robert Swerdon:
Bev Nicolson:
Robert Swerdon:
Reeve Drury:
Don Hanney:
Bev Nicolson:
Don Hanney:
David O'Brien:
Bev Nicolson:
- 2 -
To proceed with an exception to Natural
Area, makes a mockery of the original
intent of the zoning in the first place.
Rather than create an exception, why not
offer it to us as an Industrial zoning.
I believe this business started as a home
occupation not as an industrial use.
The major use on the property at that
time was storage, and still is. There
will be no additional impact on the septic
system. The Agostan's are very highly
regulated as to what they can do on that
property. It's a minor expansion to the
existing use that is there and is the
only use which is being permitted. Any
other use would require further public
meetings and approval through Council and
give adjacent property owners the opportunity
of making comments.
I believe the questions have been touched
on but I am afraid that I still would have
to disagree.
It's all right to disagree but we cannot
allow a debate here as the Council is here
to listen to the public and their concerns
in order that Council may make a decision
on this matter.
The zoning on that property is residential,
so does that mean that any residence can
start an industry. The permitted uses
of Natural Area are agricultural, conservation
forestry and open area recreational.
This has been in place prior to 1979, has
there been a change in the zoning on this
particular piece of property?
The property is not zoned residential.
It is still zoned and designated Natural
Area. A home occupation is permitted
within a residential use but it is limited.
There are provisions to restrict the
extent and type of home occupation.
I live on the Shanty Bay Road and have
operated a business out of my house since
1959. At that time I was told that I
could have a business as long as it was
contained within the house. In this
case, we're talking about operating a
garage door service business out of a
separate building because he certainly
can't do that in his livingroom. I think
Council are wrong in entertaining this
idea.
I am here with a student project and therefore
am not directly involved. How did this
property get this far already. If it
was designated Natural Area how has it
come this far - to industrial.
The residence and garage structure has been
there for a number of years. The storage
building was allowed within the Natural
Area as an agricultural or storage use.
)
, ..
,.
...
David O'Brien:
Bev Nicolson:
David O'Brien:
Bev Nicolson:
- 3 -
In this Official Plan was it not stipulated
that there were to be no businesses on
this road. It seems that maybe Council
over the years has changed their philosophy
of what is a business and what can be
done on a property. Is this a reflection
of the change in times or just a misunder-
standing?
As an existing use, any business that was
currently operating since then has been
allowed. There are certain areas along
the Ridge Road declared a scenic route
which the Township would review for
additional commercial or industrial type
of uses. Primarily, commercial uses stay
in the villages. Under the existing
buildings and uses that are there the
Township and current Council have to deal
with on an individual basis when they
come forward. It is very difficult for
a Municipality to take away something that
people feel they have.
At what point should this Council have
known about the expansion before this date.
I drove by this business this evening
and the one outside building does not
look like a natural garage.
This is a relatively new term of Council
which just started their term of office
and therefore I cannot speak for the
previous Council.
The Reeve in closing the meeting, thanked those in attendance
for their participation and advised that Council would
consider all matters before reaching a decision. He
also advised those present that if they wished to be
notified of the passing of the proposed by~law, they
should leave their name and address with the Deputy-Clerk.
Motion No.1
Moved by Johnson, seconded by Burton
Be it resolved that we do now adjourn @ 7:37 p.m.
Carried.
/2.¡~z;z¡;
Ree~e Robert E. ry
D