Loading...
01 18 2007 C of A AgendaCommittee of Adjustment Agenda . Thursday January 18, 2007, 9:30 a.m. 1. Communications and Correspondence -Appointment of Acting Chair for January 18, 2007 meeting -Appointment of Secretary-Treasurer 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest 3. Hearings: 9:30 2006-A-26 Margaret Dynes (Revised) Plan 626, Lot 72, 73 (Former Township of Oro) 24 Myrtle Road 9:40 2006-A-35 Kevin Beamish (Revised) Plan M9, Lot 153 (Former Township of Oro) 17 Huronwoods Drive 9:50 2006-A-37 Wayne Simpson Part Lot 11, Concession 3 (Former Township of Ora) 1689 Old Barrie Road 10:00 2006-A-38 Craig & Tania Goulding Plan 882, Part of Lots 7 & 8 (Former Township of Oro) 1053 Lakeshore Road E. 4. Decisions 5. Other business -Adoption of minutes for December 16, 2006 Meeting -OACA Newsletter 6. Adjournment ~1 U Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for January 18, 2007 Margaret Dynes 2006-A-26 (Revised) 24 Myrtle Ave Re fstered Plan 626, Lot 72, 73 (Former Oro) THE PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to construct a balcony, enclosed stairwell, and second storey addition to an existing single detached dwelling. The balcony, enclosed stairwell, and second storey have a total area of 98.9 m2 (1065.2 ftz). The applicant has previously appeared before the Committee of Adjustment, and was granted a reduction to the front yard setback, being 4.52 metres (14.8 feet) from the front property line to the south-west corner of the balcony addition. A surveyors report has subsequently determined that the actual distance from the front lot line to the south-west corner of the balcony footing is in fact 3.26 metres (10.7 feet). The applicant is now requesting the following variance in accordance with the surveyor's report: Required Front Revised Front Yard Zone Yard Setback Setback (to proposed balcony) Shoreline Residential (SR) 7.5 metres 3.26 metres MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation -Shoreline Zoning By-law 97-95 -Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Previous Applications -none AGENCY COMMENTS {space is provided for the Committee to make notes) Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority -Construction Permit issued August 29, 2046 Public Works Department - Building Department - Engineering Department - ~o concerns ackground The applicant has proposed to construct a second storey addition and balcony on an existing dwelling: The addition is to be located approximately 6 metres (20 feet) from the front property line, and the balcony footings have been constructed approximately 3.2C metres (10.7 feet) from the front property line. The purpose of the initial minor variance application was due to the location of the existing house, which encroached into .the required 7.5 metre (24.6 foot) front yard setback as required in the Shoreline Residential Zone. As such, any addition onto the front of the dwelling would in turn require a Minor Variance. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The revised variance for the balcony addition would appear to maintain the character of the shoreline residential area, as balconies and decks are common architectural features in residential neighbourhoods. Further, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority has subsequently reviewed and issued a permit for the proposed addition. Therefore the variance would appear to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the genera! intent of the Zoning By-law? With respect to the reduced front yard setback, the proposed second storey addition and. balcony will not to be constructed in any area of the driveway, and specifically, the balcony addition has been proposed over a portion of the front lawn, to the immediate east of the driveway. As such, no parking space(s) will be lost. As the existing driveway is approximately 12 metres (40 feet) long, adequate parking space for passenger vehicles will continue to exist at the front of the proposed dwelling. Therefore the resulting variance for the balcony will not likely create a situation where road maintenance activities are impeded or hindered on Myrtle Avenue. As well, the revised distance from the balcony addition to the front property line, being just over 4 feet, would also appear to generally maintain the "building line" on this particular section of Myrtle Avenue. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is fhe variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The proposed balcony addition would appear to be appropriate for .the desirable development of the lot, and would be in keeping with the general characteristics of the surrounding residential area. Further, the proposed dwelling constitutes a form.. of development that is permitted within the Shoreline Residential Zone, and is compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. is the variance minor? On the basis that reducing the distance of the balcony addition to the front property line would not adversely affect the character of the Shoreline Residential area, nor have impact on traffic and Township maintenance operations on Myrtle Avenue, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. CONCLUSION The application to permit an addition to an existing dwelling on the subject property generally satisfies the four tests of a minor variance. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Committee grant Minor Variance 2006-A-26 (Revised) subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed "balcony addition" at the front of the proposed dwelling shall be setback no closer than 3.62 metres (10.7 feet) from the front property line, measured from the south-west corner of the "balcony"; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the revised application and sketches submitted with the revised application, and approved by the Committee. All of which is respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, ~ - '~ Edam Kozlowski, B.URPL Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Planner Senior Planner THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE PO Box 100, Oro, ON, LOL 2X0, (705)-4&7-2171 NOTICE OF HEARING IN THE MATTER OF Section 45 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P. 13 -and- IN THE MATTER of an application for a minor variance, Submission No. 2006-A-26 (revised) AN APPLICATION BY: Margaret Dynes LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Plan 626, Lots 72, 73 (Former Township of Oro) 24 Myrtle Ave. PURPOSE OF APPLICATION: The applicant is proposing to construct a deck, enclosed stairwell, and second storey addition to an existing single detached dwelling. The deck, enclosed stairwell, and second storey have a total area of 98.9 mz (1065.2 ftZ). The applicant has previously appeared before the Committee of Adjustment, and was granted a reduction to the front yard setback, being 4.52 metres (14.8 feet). A surveyors report has subsequently determined that the actual distance from the front lot line to the south-west comer of the deck footing is in fact 3.26 metres (10.7 feet). The applicant is now requesting the following variance in accordance with the surveyor's report: Required Front Proposed Front Yard Yard Setback Setback (to proposed deck) Shoreline Residential (SR) 7.5 metres 3.26 metres THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT HEREBY APPOINTS Thursday the 18`h day of January, 2007, at the hour of 9:40 a.m. in the Oro-Medonte Township Municipal Building in the Council Chambers, for the hearing of all persons who desire to be heard in support of or in opposition to the application. You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your views about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you are aware of any person interested in or affected by this application who has not received a copy of this notice you aze requested to inform that person of this hearing. If you wish to make written comments on this application they maybe forwarded to the Secretary of the Committee at the address shown above. If a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of the proposed minor variance does not make written submissions to the Committee of Adjustment before it gives or refuses to give an approval, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss the appeal. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. The applicant(s) must attend this hearing or be represented by an authorized agent. NOTICE OF DECISION - If you wish to be notifaed of the decision of the Township of Oro-Medonte in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Township of Oro-Medonte. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Township of Oro- Medonte decision maybe appealed to the Ontaria Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. Dated at the Township of Oro-Medonte this 4th day of 3anuary 2007. C7lenn White, Secretary-Treasurer (Actifzg) ,~... t ~w~ ~I r~j` ~~\ \~ _7` i' \ /. ~ \ i' \ /.. ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ °~~" ~' \ _~~ ~„ \ 4~ ~ =a ~ ~ z z r ~ ~ oJzy~ czi m - ~- s ~ ~ z T i z O ~ m ~ 0 o a .'C v r~i < R p o z m o m Z t~o~ A O-~ O O m ~ Z H A ~' o a z ~~ cn 1 v ir' ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ \` / \ / _ ~ ~ ~' f ~ \ _ ~ ~ti vyZ N I'. p0~~ ~ z ~ i ~ `~ ~ W I ' ~ i ~~`~ ~ ~ ~..a " ~ \ t" I '. ~o ~~, a ~ - ~ m \ °o..~ z i m` w ~ ° ~ o p `~ +~= (~- ~, OOO~CO! x x m m m ~ ~ ~ t~ -I tv -I ?~ ~ I O D ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ! ~ O D z O I c ~ a .-~ ~ D ~ ~ D ~ j ~ D -~ D ~, O ~ ~ C - m ~ z -; -- ~ z z , m 11/2312066 12a45 765329042 J I R4JI `147i `7A1 ~ .7LJIT~ HG T ~ 1'il7 P~6E 61 C.T, Stroanginaa Surveying Ltd Ontario Lamd Surveyors 4145 Burnside Lane, R.R. # 4, Orillia; Ontario L3V bH4. November 23, 2006 Township o P.O. $ox 1( Oro, Ontarj LOL 2X0 Attentiorx: Dear Mr. (Oro-Medozxte Dunsmore Re: Footing Location 72 ~ '73 aid Part of Myrtle Avenue, Registered Play 626 n of Arn_MwAn~t4~e _ 71Ag. Mgrrraret Dvntes -- Permit No. 31406 This 1 tter shall serve to confirm that we have attended at the subject property to I care the three proposed footings with respect to the southerly boundary of a subject lands and I wish to advise as follows. The s bject lands are. composed of f~,rstly, Lots 72 8s 73, Registexed Plan 526 as more parueularly set out in Property Identifiex No. 58561.-0158 {LT) and secondly, P t of Myrtle Avenue being all of Part 1, 51 R-34040, as more particularly et out ixx Property Identifier No. 58561-0233 {LTj and is further known muni ipally as 24 Myrtle ,Avenue. My fie d crew attended at the property on November 22, 2006, during which tune ey located the forms for the three, 2 fool: by 2 foot square proposed foo ' gs at the front of the existing dwelling in relation to the southerly ~ 't of said Part 1, plan 51R-34040, being the northerly limit of Myrtle Aven e. The cl east corner {south-west cornea of the rn~st westezly footing is located 10.7 ~eet nozth of the southerly boundary of Part 1, plan 51R-3444th. The cI east corner {south-west comer} of the middle footing is located 1.2.q feet rao of the southerly bound ofi :~' lg plaza. 51R-34~4t~. TuL~F'1~C3~~: t7t~5) s29-C17E.5 ~ _~ •: Z'i2~~ 1_-~pQ-?~7-2bE~~ i~~~;C ('7fl~; 3~~3~~i~<".~ ~ ~'-p~3tL_ ~"CI:O?~G1vIrnN(a~C7FZIi~:,~s"-RC3~:~?`.CO~~i. 1112312006. 12:45 7053290424 STRONGMAN SURVEYING PAGE 02 Page 2 The osest corner (south-west corner) of the easterly footing is located 15.2 feet n of the southerly boundary of Part 1, flan S1R-34040. l tru that the above I the information that you require with respect to the location of the proposed footings, however, should you have any questions, please don t hesitate to contact me and Z would be pleased to discuss these with you at our convenience. Yours very truly, ~~ C:T. Stxongmarx, B.Tech., OLS CTS/ksd File: Dynes Encls. c. Ma1'garet (S9'7?)Nov2006-locate Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282, Newmarket, Ont. L3Y 4X1 Telephone: (905) 895-1281 Website: www.lsrca.on.ca Fax: (905) 853-5881 Email: info@lsrca.on.ca PERMIT No. OP.2006.019 Date: August 29, 2006 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ONTARIO REGULATION 179/06. Permission has been granted to: Owner: MARK FERGUSSON Applicant: MARK FERGUSSON 24 MYRTLE AVE 24 MYRTLE AVE HAWKESTONE LOL 1T0 HAWKESTONE LOL 1T0 Location: LOT 24, CONCESSION 11, PLAN LOT 72 & 73, PLAN 62b, TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE 24 MYRTLE AVE, ORO-MEDONTE RE~~1VE SEP 0 7 2008 ORO-ME,DONTE F'or the: construction of asecond-storey addition on an existing house as shown on plans submitted and marked "approved'°. on the above property during the period of August 29, 2006 to August 29, 2008 subject to the following conditions: a) All development subject to provincial, federal and municipal statutes, regulations and by-laws. b) This permit does not confer upon you any right to occupy, develop or flood lands owned by other persons or agencies. ~) The applicant must maintain and comply with the local drainage requirements of the municipality. *NO'rE: The approved plans submitted with the application for this permit are hereby incorporated into and constitute part of this permit. Any construction, placement of fill or interference with a watercourse or body of water othernise than in accordance with such plans, constitutes a breach of this permit which may then be revoked at the option off the Authority. In addition, any person responsible for such activity is liable to prosecution. ~ Owner Applicant - Engineering Dept., By-law Dept. '' File OP.2006.019 Health Unit, Township of Oro-Medonte d {~I MNR, Midhurst, Ref. # DFO, Peterborough, Ref. # Other - ~~~ ( Ja ' ie Burkart nv~ronmental Planner Page 1 of 3 stars e for Life - ~ . , ~.~~ i L ~ ~ `.Y.- ~ ~_ _ ~ ~f, 9 „.m-- a~ ~H O Z L n • ,~ T a ~, r_ T~ ~, JP :ib% r;; .;.ice =;'-: n-~; c ~,,, cti- t c ~ ~` t .:t- 3 f ~'• i'Y ~f 3 .-- ~l __ ~~ ~`~ ~---- ~~ ~/ ~: ~~ ..•. ~- :Y Pp Affi^JE=tN¢ k T 4-i E ~^ ~'^ 3o e~.~+a~rac u..,.....~... ,.CHECK OPi4WRQ8 AGRIYST ®GEG F+CffiT qtS. .RFDD4T qA'RBGAE PAML1B.6tRCTE OR Ow55RN6 ~~jj pp^^ssq g ~y/~ ~~SE'taS~~aT4"d~y B ~YF'S~3.~ .,. { p y ~ ~ 3r.~~i.~ T600~iRtPCi~8t30RE PI~CEEVNG aa41.C„Og119t7C1tpY gVDT CCRRPLT ttRtt tiE'f1. YTnPoO q'~ 5"s~_ VSS P.E: ~fg,~ ° ~'-~ ~~'. _ u ~§ ~ ~ ~ - .(L"Cfiltd4tlL°®I ~ELf! b ~!9$t~ - :9ti4D~ CDDE' "L+.'tEBf E9lM!"'. S.NLOMH+aEE K1U SP+t~FGaTid+9RNE TlR: PROPFRTV pCr RP9ION~Fbtl~'Nip 51'Kti PK7P' 3E '' ar". u. AO. TE- ~U~s. ElSSE YIE ~DIJG~ ~?LlfltE61H~ NAY t&tf.S '. ~3 ~'s~ ~7 ~.. vi''4£+i ~.~~R'tN 9Y- NEC><=.p 3` .4~ ~ rdrr- wx~.®E~r3'fDt158HT4h.u er ~ <sa%5+^e~ s. ~y ~~~?~ _ :~~~`?~ ~- ,ter. __, ~~~ _ ~;~ -1 ~~ ~ AK ~N .Ck'! a- r- csfi ~- FR~M~ ~~ci~osE~ fMb 1T~btJ QY e • p~ ZrJb STo ~ oP~ `e ~. .: '~s ti s =~ cR i ~~ r: ::; c."~ { '' _. --, ~`~~; ~~ ~ _ j;-; ~4! ~ ' ~' 4~, ~~~` _. ~' ~:~, - ~.-``-. _ ..~ ~~ ~~ P~~~~~~~~~a !2/39'"! E'4 s - C'xiSttK~ ,,4 - F12,AME ~~. Nc: +_T N B~qg.~ -~ ~~ ;eta 3.dtEOC7aAV1lMB6IAN~itaa~~~+~~...... ~. AEPO~T fNYOgC<wMQE&ERROltlOfl 4W3Sr~M£ i+oc~*~-roascroaezuoc T ~ 3e9F6t333 s . '° ~ m~mevvcuac w .. su ~srrucnea ~EtaT caE~ ~ _ ° -~ d-'~ ~ ~ .`•3 ~ - ;Y~1~ ~~710MS LRET iE -4 9.8°e'I ~nitxt,eap6~ign~SCrvkE< raoPaan'avnreo~:a+PO.ne.ra~sxa~.ier~*r~ ~ _ Cm a~xn:a6 to ANY wa*Wgs° ' ' 8tfl6 ~iDds y11 gE ngp av¢+~c~as~ i»wamvicer-+e~a o~^s+o~' . c .. ~e=Cn?D?`' -'.~ rersr 7~~7'."aC7c r .,F~ai'.7e3(A@£4: T$'14U898TC1E .^,O(f - - "^v 7us @nvm Nast-:99: __.~-- B. Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for January 18, 2007 Kevin & Kathy Beamish 2006-A-35 (Revised) 17 Huronwoods Drive, Lot 153, Plan M9 (Former Oro) THE PROPOSAL The applicants are proposing to construct a detached garage with an area of 58 m2 (624 ft2). The applicant was previously granted a variance to increase the permitted height of a detached garage, and for the garage to be located 12.19. metres (40 feet) in front of the single detached dwelling. The applicant has subsequently determined that the garage location is inadequate with respect to the Ontario Building Code requirement for setbacks to septic systems. The applicant is now requesting that the detached garage be located approximately 30.4 metres (100 feet). in front of the single detached dwelling in order to meet Building Code requirements. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation -Residential (Horseshoe Valley Road Special Policy Area} Zoning By-law 97-95 -Residential One Exception 113 (R1*113) Zone Previous Applications -None AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes} Public Works Department- No concerns Building Department - Engineering Department- No concerns Background The subject property has an irregular shape, having a lot frontage of approximately 30 metres (98.4 feet) on Huronwoods Drive, a depth of approximately 111.5 metres (366 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.3 hectares (0.74 acres). The subject property contains a single detached dwelling and a small woodshed. The applicants are proposing to construct a 58 m2 (624 ft2) detached garage to be located in the required front yard a distance of 30.4 metres {100 feet) in firont of the main dwelling. Section 5.1.3 (a) of the Township's Zoning By-law states that detached garages are not permitted in the front yard of a lot. The revised Minor Variance application is for the construction of the detached garage in the front yard, at a greater distance than originally permitted by Committee. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Residential -Horseshoe Valley Road Special Policy Area in the Official Plan. Section E2.4 of the Plan states that "permitted uses on lands designated Residential...are single detached dwellings [and accessory buildings to such], therefore a detached garage constitutes a permitted use. On this basis the proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject property is zoned Residential One Exception 11.3 (R1*113). The applicant has proposed to relocate the detached garage further into the front yard of the subject property, closer to the front lot line than the existing dwelling. However, as the main dwelling unit is setback approximately 54 metres (175 feet) from Huronwoods Drive, and due to the slope of the property and the location of the septic system, the proposed new location of the detached garage has been revised to be approximately 30.4 metres (100.. feet) in front of the dwelling, while otherwise meeting the 7.5 metre front yard setback for the R1 Zone. In addition, the applicant has proposed the garage to be located approximately 6.7 metres (22 feet} from the southerly interior side lot line which meets the By-law requirement. Based on the character of the lot and the surrounding residential area, and that the garage will otherwise meet and exceed the required .side yard and front yard setbacks for the R1 *113 Zone, the revised variance is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. /s the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? As discussed. above, the variance requested to construct the proposed garage in the front yard maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. A site inspection revealed that the lot is heavily treed, and that neighbouring dwellings would have good separation and buffering from the proposed new location of the garage. In addition, the proposed new garage location will likely continue to be shielded from view from Huronwoods Drive by the berm at the front of the property. On this basis the proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the subject lot. /s the variance minor? As this application should not adversely affect the character of the residential area, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. NCLl1SlO The propased variance generally satisfies the tests of a Variance as prescribed in the Planning Act. v RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2006-A-35 (Revised} subject to the following conditions: 1. That the proposed detached garage be located no further than 30.4 metres (100 feet) in front of the single detached dwelling unit, measured from the south-east corner of the dwelling to the south-east corner of the proposed detached garage, on a line. parallel to the rear property line; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on the sketch submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the detached garage be no further than 30.4 metres (100 feet) in front of the single detached dwelling unit; 4. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. All of which is respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, .-~ ~%` BtiBam Kozlowski, B.URPL Glenhite, MCiP, RPP Planner Senior Planner ("~ F: ,~ m _~ 3 r ~-• s. ~ v' -1 E C ...~ ti '-~~ .~_ G p~ G ~~ Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for January 18, 2007 Wayne Simpson 2006-A-37 1689 Ofd Barrie Road, East Part Lot 11, Concession 3 (Formerly Township of Oro) THE PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to construct an enclosed sunroom and basement addition at the rear of an existing single detached dwelling. The addition consists of approximately 35.6 square metres (384 square feet). The north-west portion of the property contains lands zoned "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone", while the remainder of the lands are zoned "Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone". The applicant is requesting the following relief from Section 5.28 of Zoning By-law 97-95: Setback to EP Zone Setback to EP Zane Re uired~, tProposed) 30 Metres (98.4 feet) 15 Metres (49.2 feet) MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation -Agricultural Zoning By-law 97-95 -Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zones AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes) Public Works Department- Building Department- Engineering Department - No concerns Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority -Permit for construction in proposed location issued November 17, 2006. Site works to be carried out in accordance with the Site Plan prepared by applicant. PLANNING PRAMEWORI{ Background The subject property is located at the south-west corner of Oid Barrie Road and Line 3 North, having a road frontage of approximately 655 metres (2150 feet} on Old Barrie Road, and approximately 600 metres (1970 feet) on Line 3 North. The lot has an area of approximately 40 hectares (100 acres). The property currently contains a single detached dwelling with a gross floor area of 220 m2 (2440 fitZ) and numerous agricultural L buildings, including silos, barns, and dairy milking facilities. The applicant is proposing to construct an enclosed sunroom and additional finished basement space at the rear of the dwelling, where the total area of the renovation is approximately 36.5m2 (384ftz). The variance application is necessary due to the proposed addition being located within the 30 metre (98 foot) setback to the Environmental Protection Zone, as noted on map A12 in Zoning By-law 97-95. As a result, permission is required from the Committee of Adjustment for the new construction. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Agricultural in the Official Plan. Two relevant objectives for lands with this designation are listed in Section D2.1: ® To protect land suitable for agricultural production from development and land uses unrelated to agriculture. ® To preserve and promote the agricultural character of the Township and the maintenance of the open countryside. The primary function of this designation is to presence lands with agricultural potential, and to protect the rural character of the immediate and surrounding areas. Permitted uses in the Agricultural designation include single detached dwellings, and accessory buildings to dwelling units and agricultural uses. As the proposed sunroom and basement construction constitutes an addition or renovation to a permitted use within the Agricultural designation, this application will maintain the character of the rural community. Further, as the construction is not proposed on lands that are currently being used far farming activities, the proposal appears to conform with the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance comply to the general intent of the Zoning By-!aw? With respect to the Zoning By-law, the primary purpose of controlling development within the limits of the Environmental Protection Zone is to maintain and enhance the ecological integrity of the natural heritage system, and to ensure that development does not occur on lands that contain hazardous slopes or are susceptible to flooding. Based on a site inspection, the dwelling and other agricultural buildings are located well above and away from the edge of the embankment from the creek to the west. In addition, while the existing dwelling unit is located approximately 5 metres (16.4 feet) east of the EP Zone boundary, the watercourse itself is located 62 metres (200 feet) west of the location of the proposed construction. Therefore, the EP Zone is providing a 57 metre (187 foot} buffer from the dwelling to the watercourse. Therefore, this application does not propose new construction that will further reduce the required setback from the dwelling to the EP Zone boundary. On the basis of the above, the proposed sunroom and basement construction would therefore comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The small scale of development proposed appears to be appropriate, as the sunroom and basement additions will be located at the rear of the dwelling, and will not further reduce the setback to the EP Zone boundary. The granting of this variance would not lead to the overdevelopment of the lot, and would be in keeping with the agricultural character of the area. Further, the applicant has sought and received approval from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (Permit dated November 17, 2006) as the location of construction falls within the "regulated area" as defined under Ontario Regulation 172/06. On this basis, the variance proposed is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. is the variance minor? On the basis that the proposal is small in scale, and would not appear to adversely affect the integrity of the Environmental Protection Zone, the proposed variance is considered to be appropriate and minor. CONCLUSION The application generally satisfies the tests of a variance. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2006-A-37 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed addition be in conformity with the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 2. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. All of which is respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, , ; ,~i ,-,; ~J am Koz owski, B.URPL Clenn White, MCIP, RPP Planner Senior. Planner ~. t ~' s .- * ~`'~ kite 'ti..~ ~~ _.• _. _._.. r, -~ ~ _ Proposed Sunroom and '~ ~~~ ~k ~ ~ ~rl 7 ~a~ _ ~~ 7 fF f- I~R~ ~`~ Basement Addition location ~. ~{, ~ r .L{~ ~ ~- ~ .~, - ~ from EP Zone 15 metres t ~: j~;~~ ~ ~~, , }`~ 1 } ~` ~ ` ~: ~`" '~ ~ ,Required Setback to EP Zone = 30m .r;~,41.= ay .~ ~ r - 'i. I^ F 3 {.A.- M ~ ~-° ' ' ~. 1- r, e i.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,t i~ I~ i ~` t y z~ ~ rte' ~. ~~ I~i ~ ; ~ ,~.- v ~ P i ~~ '~ ~.- 'tee ~ ~~ *-~~' a ~ S f1 . r t.~ ~ ri } ha ! ~'~ ~ ~;~ * ~ t~ Std -~ `~~ ~ ~~ # ~i ~ x- ~ x . E ~~ s {z ' ,. •~ F. x K~ Y ~ ^; ar ~ ~ s~ '~~; t a ~ d to • i ~+ q.' 9,y x ? $- ~~r1~~11~ ~ '~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~\ ~. 1 ~~ ~ ~. '"~ __ ti: - ,~ November 17, 2006 ~ pSAGq ~,~>~ ~~9~ Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority PERMIT Centre for Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre #2006-7630 Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 Concession Line 8, Utopia, Ontario t_OM 1T0 `~2, '~~ Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Email:. admin @ nvca.on.ca gnoN P In accordance with Section 28 (1) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990 and Ontario Regulation 172/06, permission has been granted to the applicant, subject to the conditions below. If you do not agree with these conditions, you have a right to a Hearing under the Conservation Authorities Act. Please notify the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) within 30 days of receipt of this permit to exercise your right to a Hearing. Should you fail to notify the NVCA within 30 days of receipt of this permit, you will agree to the conditions as set out below. APPLICANT: Wayne & Elaine Simpson .1689 Old Barrie Rd. West, R.R. #2 Shanty Bay, Ontario LOL 2L0 LOCATION: Part Lot 11, Concession 3, Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe Property Assessment Roll #:4346010002047000000 UTM Coordinates: Fasting 608191, Northing 4928158 PROPOSAL: for the removal of an existing sunroom and construction of a new addition with a basement in the same approximate location, as indicated on the attached drawing, subject to the following conditions: This Brit is valid from November 1 ~, 2006 to November ~ ~. 2008 SPECIAL PERMIT CONDITIONS 1) That consent is given to NVCA, its employees and other persons as required by NVCA, to access the property for the purpose of inspection, obtaining information, and or monitoring any and all works, activities and or construction pertaining to the .property in addition to the works as approved under cover of any permit issued by NVCA. 2) That the works be carried out in accordance with the following submissions: ® S/te Plan drawing prepared by applicant ..1 ge2of2 ANDARD PERMIT CONDITIONS That all development and site alteration is subject to all other applicable federal, provincial and municipal statutes, regulations and by-laws, such as the Municipal Act, Zoning and Tree-Cutting By- laws, the Federal Fisheries Act, Navigable Waters Act, Public Lands Act, Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, Drainage Act, Environmental Protection Act and the Ontario Water Resources Act. That this permit does not confer upon you any right to occupy, develop or flood lands owned by other persons or agencies. That appropriate erosion and sediment control measures are installed prior to construction and maintained until all disturbed areas are stabilized, to ensure that sediments do not enter any water- course, wetland, lake, pond or sensitive area within the development or adjacent properties. When an erosion and sediment control plan appears to be inadequate, the deficiencies must be addressed and additional measures or practices implemented as needed. It is the responsibility of the owner and the owner's representative (if contracted) to implement, monitor and maintain all erosion/sedimentation control structures and practices until vegetative cover has been successfully established. i That any excess excavated material must be placed at least 30 metres from any slope, lake, pond, wetland, watercourse, floodplain, fill regulated area or adjacent property. ~ The natural drainage patterns beyond the immediate work site area are to remain in their natura state and existing vegetation shall not be removed. p) That any fill material stock piled for longer than 30 days must be stabilized and re-vegetated t~ prevent erosion. i1) The soils disturbed during construction and access should be stabilized as soon as possible upon completion of work and restored to apre-disturbed state or better. Disturbed areas should be re- vegetated/seeded when the growing season permits. From September 15th to April 30`h, structural stabilization techniques (e.g. application of erosion control blankets) should be utilized. 12) That the owner provides copies of this permit to any contracting or construction supervisor(s) wh® must have a copy of the permit available on-site for inspection by an officer when requested and that the owner ensure that all of the contractors and site supervisors are aware of the obligations under this permit including any obligations assigned by the owner to the contractors and supervisors. A~~ contractors and site supervisors must be aware that they may also be held responsible for anY violations in relation to the obligations outlined under this permit. Notem It is the responsibility of the applicant to carry out the works in accordance with the above conditions - Failure to due so may result in cancellation of the permit and possible action in accordance with tl'~ e Conservation Authorities Act. ~ C®pye Township of Oro-Medonte - BuildinglPlanning Department File (1) Attachment Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for January 18, 2007 Craig & Tania Goulding 2006-A-38 1053 Lakeshore Road E Plan 882, Part of Lots 7, 8 (Former Twp. Of Oro) THE PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to construct atwo-storey addition onto an existing dwelling, where the addition is proposed to have a ground floor area of 112.36 m2 {1209.5 ft2). The existing dwelling- has a ground floor area of approximately 204.5 square metres (2201 square feet). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Required Proposed Interior Side Yard Setback 3.0 m (9.84 ft) 2.33 m (7.64 ft) MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation -Shoreline Zoning By-law 97-95 -Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Previous Applications -none AGENCY COMMENTS {space is provided for the Committee to make notes) Public Works Department - No concerns Building Department - Engineering Department - No concerns Background The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 22.8 metres (75 feet), a lot depth of approximately 73.8 metres {242 feet), a shoreline frontage of approximately 23.1 metres (76 feet) and a lot area of approximately 0.17 hectares (0.42 acres). The lands currently have atwo-storey dwelling with an area of approximately 204.5 square metres (2201 square feet). The applicant is proposing to build a new two-storey addition onto the existing dwelling. The ground floor area of the addition is proposed to be 112.36 m2 (1209.5 ft2), bringing the total size of the dwelling unit to 316 square metres (3401 square feet). Due to the placement of the addition, the applicant proposes to encroach into the west interior side yard setback, to be located 2.33 metres (7.6 feet) from the lot line. The Township Zoning By-law requires a 3 metre (9.8 foot) interior side yard setback for the dwelling in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section D10.1 which contains the Shoreline policies in the Township's Official Plan sets out the following. objectives: • To maintain the existing character of this predominantly residential area. ® To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. The requested variance for the addition would appear to maintain the character of the shoreline residential area, as the addition will meet the minimum required setback from Lake Simcoe. Rs well, a mature cedar hedge exists along the west lot line of the subject property, which will serve as an effective buffer between the proposed addition and the neighbouring property. Therefore, the variance would appear to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject lot is currently zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The primary purpose for maintaining side yard setbacks in residential areas is to ensure that privacy between properties is maintained. As noted earlier, the existing hedge on the west property line will provide a form of buffering to ensure privacy for the subject and neighbouring lands. The site inspection revealed that the proposed dwelling should not adversely impact the residential neighbourhood, as the addition to the dwelling unit is set back quite far from the. front property line, but otherwise will maintain the "building line" for this particular section of Lakeshore Road. As well, the renovation will not encroach into the required 20 metre {65.6 foot) setback from Lake Simcoe, and will also comply with the required 7.5 metre front yard setback and 3 metre side yard setback on the east property line, where the maintenance of the side yard setback is prescribed to provide. access to the rear of the property for emergency vehicles and personnel. Further, the addition design meets all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height) for dwelling units in the Shoreline Residential Zone. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? Based on the site inspection, the proposed addition would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and would be in keeping with the general characteristics of the surrounding residential area. Further, the proposed addition constitutes a form of development that is permitted within the Shoreline Residential Zone. /s the variance minor? On the basis that the addition to the dwelling would not adversely affect the character of the Shoreline Residential area, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. n CONCLUSION The application to reduce the required interior side yard setback to permit the construction of atwo-storey addition to an existing dwelling generally satisfies the tests of a variance. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Committee grant Variance Application 2006-A-38 subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed addition shall be setback no closer than 2.33 metres (7.64 feet) from the west interior side lot line; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtain approval from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if required; 4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1} pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real property report; 5. That a lot grading and drainage plan be prepared, for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Township; 6. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township°s Chief Building Official only after the Committee°s decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. All of which is respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, .~' `Adam Kozlowski, B.URPL Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Planner Senior Planner 211: C€~3:~~~j~"r~2~.t:?11 {}~ ~~1:' ; ~:k31-~E~~aE^a7 [t~ ~~#~~.9_jy'~ ;~~.{)Jl~l: January 10, 2fl07. Attention Mr. Glenn White, /~. t, ~~ ~ ~ .: ,- I have no objection to the application of Craig and Tania Goulding for a minor variance on the condition that an inspected and approved swale is constructed between our two properties. Sincerely, ~ ~ 1,, Margaret Anne Sheridan • ~. Application 200=A- ~ ~ , Roll No. 1. Location of Subject Lands: Concession No. Lot(s) Regd. Plan No. ~j= ~~ot(s) Municipal Address C ~ 3 ~~ k (' S ~o (~ f~- ~ ~ 2. Name of Registered Owner(s). C ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~~4L-' ~'~ ~Y-'C A L ~ 1 n~ ~ Address ,_~ ~ .~ 3 ~` A f~ 1. S'J-1 d f r ~' ~ Postal Code Telephone and Fax Numbers 7 G ~ y ~ 7 G ~L-~-- ~~~ '~ 1 ~ 7 `~ E-mail Address 3. Names and addresses of all mortgages, holder of charges or other encumbrances {if any): 4. Nature of relief being requested (interior side yard to be reduced from 4.5 to 3.8 metres): .1~.,~_~ ~ ~~ a ~ 5. Reasons for variance(s) requested: •~~ 6. I)i ensions o lands affected: (attac survey if available) Street Frontage ~ ~ o ~=~~' Areat ~ ~-~ ~ SCE ~ a ~~ ~~ ~~~~ Shoreline Frontage -2 ~ '"'` ~-' r"2'.S' ' Lot Depth ~ 7 ~ ~ ~' "'`~ 7. Particulars of all building and structures on or proposed for the subject lands: (Specify ground floor area, gross floor area, number of storeys, width, length, height, etc.): Existing SF~ ~r~-~S Proposed ~~Gl~ ~~`~r`s` 8. i~ocation of all buildings and structures on or proposed for the subject lands: (Specify distance from side, rear and front lot lines and/or from the high water mark of the shoreline) Existing 5 ~ Fz S t,, (t Z Proposed S ~ ~ S ~ ~ +~ ~ ~' 9. Date of acquisition of the subject lands: 10. Date of construction of all buildings and structures on subject lands: ~t~- w~) c--51 V c....~ i1t,t--1 .JG- 11. Existing use of the subject property: Ot It 12. Existing use of abutting properties: 13. Length of time the existing use of the property has continued: 14. star and Sewage Infor ation: well and private sewage system [ ]municipal water and sewage ~ ]municipal water and private sewage system [ ]other (specify} 4 15. If the owner previously applied for a minor variance on the subject property, please provide details: ~d 16. If the subject property is currently subject to another application under the Planning Act, please provide details: d ~yU~~~ 1','. Present Official Plan designation applicable to subject lands: ~ ~~ 18. Present Zoning By-law category applicable to subject lands: 19. Name of owner's solicitor or agent: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N `{ ~ r/~i S ~ j (~-1~ Address Postal Code 1 ~~- ~ / ~' 7~~ `7~~7 _ 2z~~ 7 Telephone and Fax Numbers E-mail Address AUTHORIZATION Declaration of an Authorized Agent (to be completed where an agent is acting on behalf of the owner): '- s the owner of 1G' ~~ ~~-~S~nx~ ~,p, in the Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe hereby authorize ~~/i1~ ~~~ r~`~ to act as my/our agent with respect to this application. `^ i ~ Signature of owner Dated at the fYz' /'~ r this .,~ C'~ day of ~.~t~ c r~Kt; ~~ , 200 Signature of applicant or authorized agent 5 Declaration of Owner or Authorized Agent: I/We `,~~"~ li-/ ~~T~~~ S'i of the ~~.-s ~ s 1 ~c,~;,~ of .~i ihcv ~ , Of ~? `~`' ` ~f ~~~ n i -E..'' in the solemnly declare that all the statements contained in this application are true and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath and by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act. DECLARED before me at the in the --~-~' ~" ~~ . of s-m-.,...~-- _ } this Q day of - - , 200 } } } } } (Sig f applicant or authorized a ~ent) The personal information on this form is being collected pursuant to the Planning Act R.S.O 1990 an a Sell be used in relation to the processing of this Minor Variance application. If you have any questions, p ask at the Township of Oro-Medonte Municipal Office. (Signature of a Commissioner, eic) ~~.~- "~ ~ ~~ " _ ,~ :_ ~..." ,= -.~ _ ~.~_ METRIC DISTANCES SHOWN ON TH15 PLAN ARE .~.. ',L~"'.t~ •~ r .~7„ - -i, ~ i, IN METRES AND CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY x ~" DIVIDING BY 0.3048. ? ^ tf , n~ 1- :!tom;'. :'. vt'.u HYDRO ;'~~, r v. POI.f (7813) (REFERENCE BEAPoHG LPG "S.S.LB. ) CT~T k (7546),.. ~,.~5..6g~i-..-..~. S.S.LB. ,_„~.~ _ti~~.~ -y._ i ..E pD R ~'~'4^'"'- M£Dl',E J ~ {1613) i£DAR c s d 1` 3 IIitII _.~_~e G i~ ( ` S GA ~L ° N.E CORNER LOT 9. ~ ~ i t ~ S ~Qs~t~ ~D~ R.P. ~2 r ~ S ~ r' ' < N i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! 1 t,~``. o ~ X 9.95 ,Y, °'J ~..^ ~ i { r ~\ v n T' ~' R L~ V~i~ a{' ~ )~ I N~\ !y; O ~ ,I` ~ ~ 3.05 ~~ ,'O:B7 WEST t ~ ~ . :z: ~~~ ~(.. ~~ 19..Ci'~ ~. .., l+ ~ Q „ [;t l Sit ~ - •, " eL1 iJv1 ~~ e~ . 3~~^1 r ~ • 7 ~01. fn . 3 ~~ <ro N 3 :~ Lam. ii POURED (o - ~ w~ --'~~" C3 ~, CONCRETE m ~;: FOUNDATION = ~ a ,,,,,~~yy{''' m POURED 5.32 -• J^"OJ'• ~^ ya ~~ t CONCRETE _ ~ _ ~ ~I ~ ~ + FOUNDAT1pN '^ ~ m •T .L 1 r' ~` ~ 3.7 ~ { n ,~ I ~ I`I ;,Q 2 Yt)R z ( \ ~ ~~~ ~~ 9.96 9.68 jt 1~ ti. 3,04 i 37 _ :, (. ~ ~ ~~ i~ ~HYORO-POLE :.~ ;-: ~ J I.~~ :, ,< <~ 7 ~-, Awn ~ ~~ 9+nvac HOUSE ~> ~ ~ \~ sso ,.T_~_~ tzas , , ~ ty.` I t.n-~ , - o ~ ~ -~ CONCRETE ~., ~} ~ RETAING WALL I a SSI.B. ---e%•~ ^,.,~ (142B) (1546) - \` L- y?318 .- 12.61.--..-- ~RO~J~ BASE 6.31 ~ ...---+-I 7.6~- ~ ' j - \ 1~ !rD.ZC" ~ N4T} (NeT) ~ ~-°--- 15.40__ --..._~mE-" ~ f: ~ ^ Sau.) (1673) r) --~ CONCRETE 1N43°10 2 o C ~' M ~ - - ~ 3 srPS 11 ! Al?EP.~t~ _ \ iD "~T. SHORE-LINE j ° r ~ O ~ _ .. t c0 0.55 t rt ~ ~ ^ ' ttt ALTERED ~~ ~ z i ~ ~ ~ ¢ ( ASSQCIP,'tION OF {iNTAR10 LAND SURUE'fORS 1 7 Z ~ CHORE-UNE V I ~ ~ 23_2-±' ~ c~ SUBM1SSi0N FORM f \ 1`` #- ~'" \ ~ . ~ 1477606 r ~ ~' 1 1 EDGE Or` ''NAitR JULY 77TH, 2003. ~ d- O °E5' ,=,vAiLPBLE EVIDENCE 0= NP.TJP.AL vVATER'S EDGE ; - ~ ~ - I UNALitREp SHORE-L{tiE Tti3c p~ !S HOT VA?_it~ " UNLESS ~, i IS AN E~RBOSSED ^~ QRIGINHL CCFY ISSUEC BY ~E SURVEYOR „` ~-- ,~,,.. ~. /__ in OC_ daxa xiYh ._. ...,_ Rtgv§at~on 1025. 6eciio~. 29(3,. d 1 11 ~- 3z-3 61 00 t' W V ~Z Q '`~ !: _ ...~,_ --cT, 2^ x ee' pressuie 3.2'X8' 3.7X8° i'-0" o ~ m healed ledger scrip -0~ ~ ~ lagged to wall ® 7'-7112° ~ 7'•7112" _--.-@-~ ;o d o "o.c. max _ Lb•-U- -.rt- 7', 1T-3'~"`' - 7'-9" 3'-10112° '5-101(2° 8'-7112' 8'-71YL° - m d ~ }q'~ E~neered Nr~ by oNers _ _ _ _ ° ,j, - ' ..~.~.. .mow-~-• ____ ______ ,y ' Q _ _ _ O ~c~e~ ____-___._-~ I r 10' Paco door I ¢aF el ~ 4'-25 Mpa Conc Slab On ~~ ~ c _ I '0 EXISTING DECK y¢e~ I ~I 6'Wel~Camp~ledG+ar.Fd ~~~ .~,~ R OVER °g~~ a ~ ` _ w ~ o~~ S~ 2 ~ EXISTING ADDITION I - v, ~ N~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~ - l5 J 2-2'x10' 2-2'x10' `~ ~ I) I ~ - - m -_ - Gas FP ® ~ •: I ~' x -- - 60X48 v '~, I N z I 2"x4' @ 16" o.c. Bearing WaII s~ ~ I . 1 ~' i On 6" x 20" Conc Footing b ~ ~ I •; ~ , a 2A'-4" 1 8 I a N I ..: ~edy~ e~ ~Sh'~a¢a 2~Ox33 Dropped yta,.iF' ~¢ "+".~' ~~h} ~tja~ Smake/COO I x~ c I I l4 P ,~ ,oa, ~ Alarm 6\o%SCO~z UNFINISHED "ard`Mred e~ ~ h`~s`~ BASEMENT 5 ~ ~ ~ I y a AREA ~ .• I :; I R-12 2°x4" @ 16° o.c. Bearing Wall wry IasWaSOa ~ 'i I On 6° x 20' Conc Footing _ _ I n°xr vwaosr - - - - - - - - - - - - ~~ I on rXrx6' ~ 's 1 } I 1 udckeaed Naar slab -I ~,~~ I :~ I 7-7 . 2-z°X1o~ - - k ~ I :: ~ O ~~- o _ plaer Va ~ 1 I '• ' N _, s,9,ke~i~rr I ; I a ~ - - - eiQg W200x27 Dm •. }-Qd7. L4 .o COLD I ~' 1 I •: I CELLAR o ®'t~ks-~ ~ I ~ 6' - az klPa conc. slab Q - ° 3 ~ I ~: over with 15M re6ar @ C •: I 16' o.c. bosh ways I .. I -N~ - - - J •: I - - - - - - ZZZ .., ..}.m - - -- - - - - - - _ y' - - - CaMievered rkxx joists 4-8° - -K 81-0° - ~~ 7,-9" ~ 1T-3" u ~J 8'XiT3' DECK ~,L~~~~ 25'-0" ~ CONSTRUCTION TO _ 1T 3" / CIONFORM 70 08C ~.9° SG7 ~ 8'•71(2° / 8'-7112" Fre-a~rrenaa -__~_ EXISTING r~~"~1xrood`°°` DECK ~ Gas FP NEW EXISTING ADDITION MASTER _°? BEDROOM ~~ Solid bearing Girder truss by others _ baarinq ~J NOTES EXISTING GREAT ROOM ' '- "? CV I Nign ibors _ _ _ _ _ _ - - ~ C ~I GREAT ~' ' ROOM W.I.C. q ~I EXTENSION `° Gas FP 3'-p° o -------' ---- q ~ff ~ A aonE O o L1 w ~I B ® ~ N - 1 --r= n ~'2 a ~ ENSUITE~ `K ~ 6~A^ ^ 4 b '4 tV 1 }I a ~ ~ SmokelCO Alarm Q Exhaust I X Fan 0 oaker ° `" Lt ~ ~ m Hero Weed oD ~. m °~ _ ff ~ ______ ~ Fbor S\er*en J f'rr LAUNDRY © ~- 4 ~ `~ FOYER ~ ~ - ~ '.q" 13'-11" ... L2 m 0VERED ~ PORCH ' STUDY ~ ~ L3 3-7x10' ~ ' ......... . - - . .. ... 72X60 CaMgevaretl Fbw joisk -10112' 3-101i2 4'-8" B~_--$--4-7 "n 17'-3" • Smoke detectors to be IdlfraOfirKQed on ~ levels ~ Vamty layout & type to Owaefs-GOahaGtars agreement " Shelving in closets io awrets-comfxtofs ygreencent °aN t vt voe. 3(16"=. - rS*tn ~,. L'vl~kc II l Tna uatlersigrwd nap r viewed eM lake6 reaponsW~rY ra fNs de¢gn arM hea the W ~ lions aM rteeW work stwwn on feat 1 oal m the Onlaeb aoaa Cafe b tlesign t e0eonetl do<uine^le. QUAI.IFiCATION WFORMATION ReWhed uNes¢ desgn Is exempt under 2.t1.5.r of Ne buddMny mde EXISTING I ADDITION Im ~"° ~~__ssan --------eCIN NA SIGNATURE i ~0te. I REGISTRATION INFORMATION Faxed copies must be Reaakeden•®ss ae~yn is a:omwea ~maer 2.tl a.tof me a,lwk+9 was enlarged 121 ! to ~ wc.e or®nmp _ ________ aeCtiN attain designated scale ~ - - - - - - - ' - - - - " FIRM IVlartin i/eer~stra ®esign/ wild Inc® L~c~~ ~~ ~ 9i Monique Cre=_. 5arrie Ontario L4m b'!5 lei ,' Fax 705-726 Oa05 Remove existing wall & make ga Z O --i m r m C D O z d(p mZ o',dmm wnn 0 dNN m aoc m N i. S 8 m~ a 8 y3'a'c o pa' ~ £ $ - a~n~ $~~a' s i - ~~ -- i %. ' >~ ~.D `^ ~n.~. g C ~z ~= ~z m' ~a ~~' _ o ~a 3a m~ ~ J~ i ~« _ ~o nz - No _- i imp ~$' 4~0 z~ X Z G) D O O H O Z m<Z nC Z ~ZO ~tn0 N zzm rnmim 'n~77 DOx nvni0 o0a ~Tp DZ~ !'n9m G)mC aOZ~ mNZo mDn ~n0 ~~_ ZO`~ 00 '{A< ., nm Onj z p N 1~,4'~~ s, t~o~~q~a ~r.; ~- Barrie On_tar:..an ` .. Fe! I Pax _ 65-~?- .. -.__J J n (~ y D ~yyOm ? p -1C -~ yZ> p yX2N S tZ*r Sm ZF' ""r~o~ m mD m-~ O On~d G1 Z x t7 ti= Z A T O V ~ m n ~ Z ~ ~~ O m' 9 ~ N ! 7 m O y~~ ~ -1 -i ti T. ~ ~ Z ti O O n ~ m w^ TO N z O'Oyo D~ ~ C ~ y n c ;n Zo = OO Sr Sm S ~ ~ ~ °m~°T' cmi ° o yz vx', ~' tii cmp ScnO ~Z' zmzo F~ ~ ° ~ 3m x -a c> ~o tia ' Z -iz czi ~z-i zZrn ON-+ m r o ~ "~ p m p ~ ., i c ~ ~ 'n L79 m~ DOX m ti z r [~ O ~ y -1 O Cry 0 oO a ~ y o Z n D $ z m i~~ "n omp 9 a - i 9 ~ ~ _ _ o r > y0 9 mNz O C _ Z ~Dn mn0 Z ~y ZOO I m 0 ~~ 0 v o -1 1 _ z O cn '/Y' _ _..~ i1~1 ~II - ~ r r ~ ~7~ ~~ 1 ~ I I ~Ii, ~. ~l . ~. --,--- ---- 1N t I li ~~ ~i !U !G ~~~- II ~ ~ II _ t~ _~ II II 11 II 11 ~i ~~ ~'~i t9 TZ II II t'~ ~B ' 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 p i w 5m n.. m66 na ~~ iv-~ ~ a m NN ~t ~ d m~~ noc ,,, w ~ L _ Q co 0 ~ . , n z i~ ~ ~, m' 3 a ~gm yea-~ i~- l '~~ ~ im ~ ' ~~~~ p 9 ~~ y' ND G~CN ~'y ~ ~m m ~ ~ ~% L ~ 8~ ~y ~ ~~~ 2 ~ Mm ~ a ~ no a m f~~ ~ ~ ~ 'e g=s v~ ~i ~i & ~ ~~ g i~ ~ - ., S - ~ i ~i r _ r~~- r rn >c -.~ z C Z G7 r arti a sa es~ ~.~ ~ cLEVAT1flN8 ~~~ a o~ r 1211 1;05 ;~ '"i0 O6~ 24? PROPOSED R4DITSON 1 _ ~ 3480 S4 FT. ~'~~~L~~~~ ~~~~'~.. `"~"° WurS t~s cxs~ ~n ^r 15.~ a.~. F?. __ v v ~' ~~'I~, ~~In m - - LUCAS ~ _ ~ RAFTIN a BCIN ~ 97 Monique Cre_<<- ~g40 Q ~ ~ 6arrie Ontanc l4m 6Ys e --- Tel t Fax 705 i26 Oa0° X Ow' z N ~ O ti Ov p ti g O z 3 a yC m 2 ~~ -ni '~ ^' > > X 2 o S 0 0 m ~ 00 Z m y 2= O O(a7D ~ O Oar Z =p, x n ~ ~N n 'OTZ~ '~ ~ m m -V~ .v X~ w0 y ~- -ai = -~Z O ~ D.~ ~ GIN Om ~ y~0 m0 ~m O ~ Ni n Z ~ O ~ I m 2 A Z ~ i ~ O G7 C V y p 4'-0" 0 ff ~ f~~--'- _ ( `-_--- rn II r r {1 C ~ ~~ --- z I~L---- ii it ~I~---- 1 i -; ~- II r O 2 g~.p^ 111!2" 9'-~' 1 I _ `~ r ~N 0 0 z m x -N_i ~I l ~~ ~~ I~ wmC~NZ i ~.N%~ (1 m m na.. ' y' ~ I i ~~N I noN ' ~~~-- ~ p LI m c a 3 ~ _ ~$> ~.9'•a c ~ c 8 ~L 8 ~aS m ~ i o ~~'~~ 9 ~.~ g ~i ~~~ _ %a z~ >~ ~=;~ a e~ m ~$ ~~5 s; ~~ ~g~ axm 30 ~ b Em° ag i g ~3e ~i ~ ~ ' _=g C~jl u L N o '. vna ,^,. LUCAw ~~~ SD<Z C~~Z i=Z~ O~~ N zz~ mom ~~~ aOX O~~ o~cai ono az-+ IT~~m ~m~ ~Oa..i m~z min 3n0 Ni ~_ ZOO G~ ~ ~ < a am O `~ _ ~ N pp~~ gyVg p~v~vgp ~~qpg pp®~ B1T10 ®'0®4A 51 Monique Cros. Bartle Ontario! 4m oY5 ?ei !Fax 7L~5~72E G4G9 ~~ Z ZO n ~ Z NO ~ O N m zz~ 00~ ma aOx C!1 --~ nN0 oSOga o~IO ~mf r rQa ~z~ m9z mr!'O m C Nn~ m00 ~ 00 tea{ v Q =i cai m Z °z ~ O m D ~ O~' Z x N N~GN to T W ~ ~ m 2 n A09.0~ p W O F'a O ~~m m ~ -ro ~ z m ~ .r--' ~~ ,i ,r ,~ ~~ „ X ~~ - i Z ~' Z ' ~~_ D ~~ O r' ~ f ' ~ `L , ,~ ,~ wm~Z fi'.m~m m Rio n" m°n^ r9 ~~N N m Y nOC ~i n. m m ODO < z r~lr ~"i .. D_ Oz A ~_ ~? b o~ N ~ n 3 a i, L«' 8. c. DI ~ dg~~ $344n ~ c i ~ ~ ~ , c , c ' ~ ~ a. ~ &8$ fifi ~ ~ ~' N c~ a ~g ~ ~a g m ~~~ ~° sa m aim ; ;~ =~ ~ ~a a- e~ a~ . a m$ z a- _ = g ~~s m m' ~ ~ n~ ~ _ ~ Z i I r~NNI rXNm~ i, ON-IO ~O 9~Z~ Z N Z D 'n a ~ y '~ O N ', O_< rN ~ i Ut Z W A ~" -~ rn `i i , r' II ,~~ I~( ~~ I~ Gh ~ ~ ~ (i I I i~ i~ i i kLt---- r~z = r z H ~ ~ O >c 2 T cn ~? y D O m yy S D y s Z ~ rn ~o r ,. O `t ~ N -J r ~ - - IVlari e~ stra Design/ D it oar. _. srat~ E Of 12t111G5 ~ 3t8. ; ~ w QE »e~r _--- ~ .,m> JGS,6 ~~ ._ ~ ~L~v,~~~o~s ~ - ~. ~ 1.tJC~~ _ ~RAFTIR` }j PRDP05EDADDITIQNTC BCIN ,~ a~Moniq~eCte ~i.{e7i~~~~~~~~~~{i~ ~ 29414 ~ Baeri F O't0~ dr ,~..' ART .-...... ~-- _ ~.~~ . __....:::~~ ....:... ~. . METRIC DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE - .1~".ci •- ' IN METRES AND CAN 8E CONVERTED TO FEET BY _ F • t._i_ -,7 „ r, DIVIDING 8Y 0.3048. "~~ = _ '!`~ _ .• ~l~%'•- '~~~' ~`~ ' HYDRO POLE I.B. (REr'ERENCE BEAPoNC~) t~ 5.5.1.8. Q (1613) _ --~.:~tdfr~'iJ%8d%E.f-~ { ~\.. . (1546}- ,--v-r•~.i-~~-..-..•-d5~$"r':•-v^~---"'. 'I S:TS--` .-x.-22: &4,.~ti. s.sl.6. ---~-~~"-' `~-~ »~`~T" v CEDAk HEDGE ~ ~ {7613} ,,~ CEDAR ~H D • ~ _.~_~ ~ N.E CORNER t `t Stilt ~ifL LOT 9. R.P. 662 ~ ~ ) 1 I t ~ 5 , ti ~ < ~` ;' ~~ N I Ci /~ l t° `" at < Nil ~ ~ Q o ~ `D I/I ~ rl I ~z~ cX, ::~ ~~,t.`i 1 t i r ~ ~ O 9.95 '' , ~ I 3.05 ~ ryYDRO-POLE ~' ~ ~ ~ ~., `0.67 WEST ACT, I ~ ~' ~ O POURED (~ 1 = w' P THEM. /~ --"""-'--- q ( CONCRETE ¢ f o:. ~^ FOUNDATION xI ( ~ ~~ ,,,~ m (~ ~ ~_) POURED 5.32 _, ~3. o a 111 - CONCRETE iq ~ z~ .~ ' ' `~' ¢ FOUNDATION o~ < ~ qj ~ci i / ~ ~a 3.78,11 W < Q t I ,.. / ,~ U 1l,, ~! \ ~ ~'~ _ ~~ C~ Y~'L / "l-- 1\ ... ... ~ .. 5.30 / 9.96 ^ i~ ' S 304 _ ~ ~ ~ :, ~ ~ ~ ~ HYDRO-POLE _,~ ~~ ~ ~+ ~, ~~ - .ry a75 WEST O ,~ ~~ , -~ VINYL SIDED //''~ M I 11 CONCRE ~ 2 7 ADDITION I 2 '_I t t 5.50 STEPS I `~ \~ ~l ~~-° 12.86 _ t. ~.~ Y J.~ ~ 07~~~ ~ : , I W ~ 1 ~~~ CONCRETE _ P1 ~ II J RETAtNG WALL C ~ S.S.1.6. i o .(-1 + 5.5.1.6. 'ri1'1~ ~. ~. y z 18- _, ............_ . _... .r r,, ({1426) (546} L _ 2"'- 12.81 IRON TU6E 6.17 ~~ ~ -- 7.68 _ ~ _I t - "-""'~~ ~ ~ 46.28 SENT. USED BASE _ ~ ~`MT) LB. ss .-.---- l 5.40_ ......_ - . - ~I[ iO.U.) (vaT) 1 CONCRETE N43°10'2UPE` 3 ~ (1673) ;! - '-~_=--_-`` ~ ia~ AL-FRED ~ ~ o,c"t.' ~--z 3 ~ STEPS I co +`t { SHORE-LINE j •- ~ { 1 0 - --- ~ m , N) t! ~ 0.55 'a ~ /--------'-. ~ f ~ `~ J ` 1 ~' ~' I ~ ~ ` Z ~ q$$OCIATI4N Of ONiAR10 ~ n ;- z / 1 ~ f 1 ~ t~~~, SHOR REDNE ~~ ~ ~ I r' 2.5.2 ~ ¢ pL4ND~ N~ ~ -°--~- ~~~ zs.T~ ~` ~~ 1~47760~ ------,-' `~ I `' ~t- EGGE Of WATcR JULY 11 TH, 200. ~ - Li!~fiL?EREG SHORE-LINE BEST AVAILABLE EVIDENCE OF NAl'JRAL WATER'S EDGE 7 _' ~ ;c NOT 'dAL(G -~ THSS LAN UNLESS ;T i5 AN E>ASflSSEt? ORIGINAL COPY i5SUE0 BY TFiE SURVEYOR - _,,. ,. ., ., ._ c sioxe ~~ih „". ' ' in cc or ... ~_®~~~~ R¢9ubi,anq i(0~2fiq. >ectioa '_9(3'1. L ~'. _ . _. __ ~ ." 5 V"4~ FROM THE PRESIDENT'S DESK, Anne- Marie Cunningham, OACA President The elections are finally over and we are all starting to get things up and ~g with some or all new members of council andjor committees! The good news. is that the on- site training sessions. are ready to go and I know many of you are eagerly awaiting your turn for this fabulous new learning experience. The brochures have been sent to all of the municipalities in Ontario and are also included in this newsletter for your use. Don't miss out on this unique training opportunity! • ~ ~ Plans are well under way for our 2007 events - not to be misse ! Our annual conference and general meeting will be held May 27th - i 30th, 2007 hosted by the Town of Richmond Hill and our Vice- President Sharon Beverly. Please see Sharon's article on page 6 for { ~ more information on what to look forward to. The first ever fall seminar will be held here in the City of Quinte West ~, on September 28th, 2007 co-hosted by Quince West and our neighbouring municipality the Municipality of Brighton. Pat Johnston of Brighton is my partner in planning this premiere fall OACA event. You may want to plan on staying in the area an extra night or two to ~ enjoy all this area has to offer. We will be providing information on ~ points of interest for anyone who wants to go exploring! Bill S 1 meetin s with the Cathy MacMunn, Director and 1 attended the g ~ Ministry. of Municipal Affairs onbehalf of OACA and a summary is provided on Pages ~ 2- 5. ~ ~ I It looks like 2007 will be another busy and productive year for OACA and we encourage you all to submit any comments or suggestions you may have. i ~Vashang aCCo~our ACA ~le6ers a safe and,~ppy hoCulay season! ~~ ~a „ Anne-~lan'e Cunningtuarra, A9vIC°T; ~CS'`I' ~ ~ ~ -, .._ `"`~- OAC~ 1t'resident ` JAh~ Q ~ 20Ci ~ ; - . __._ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~~~~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ _... October 19, 2006, Bill 51, an Act to amend the Planning Act and the endments to other Acts received d am Conservation Land Act and to make relate Royal Assent. As part of the public consultation on the proposed Pla~:iriing and Conservation 2006 (Bill 51) the Government outlined its Land Statute Law Amendment Act, w or modified regulations through Environmental Bill of Rights intention far ne Committee which di i ng {EBR) postings. Bill 51 was also considered by the Stan resulted in recommended changes to the bill. ents from the public during the Environmental Bill of Together with the comet ~ d recommendations from the Standing Committee, Anne- Rights postings an Marie Cunningham, President and Cathy MacMunn, Director. along with other I ited to meet with the staff of the Ministry of Municipal i i nv stakeholders, were Affairs and Housing, on October 27, 2006 to further discuss the content of the ~ proposed regulations. The proposed regulations are as follows: • zoning with conditions local appeal bodies (CABs) eriod for consideration of new information/material, and e ri p m • • enhanced public record Some of the regulations such. as zoning with conditions are not a concern for t to those individuals who have committees of adjustment but will be of interes dual roles within their municipality. ~ The Ministry elaborated on each of the proposed regulations and opened it up made comments and suggestions.. for discussion by the group who in turn The following is only a brief summary on the proposed regulations. ii ~.(~~?IhC; ~N~iT'H ~='CINI~ITIOI~S; ~ - The proposed regulation would establish conditions that could be imposed by a municipality as part of zoning approval. tool for municipalities and is optional, but if they wish to go - This is a new this route their official plans would have to contain relevant policies. i ed d nditions would need to be fulfilled an C o o - f a buildi g permit for the agreement on title prior to the issuan development. - General categories for conditions would be things like noise attenuation, highway widening, easements for ditches and watercourses to name a few, L(JCAL APPEAL BODIES; ' - The proposed regulation would set out requirements for establishment, I constitution and operation of local appeal bodies. ` - Planning documents (official plans and zoning by-laws) required to be u - to- date and conform to any applicable provincial plans, and be P i consistent with provincial policy statements. - Proposed term and qualification of members: S - Length of term for appointment (maximum 5 years -staggered appointment terms if multiple members); rocess, - Demonstrated understanding of the provincial land use planning p the Planr~in.g Act and local planning and development matters; - Demonstrated problem solving and writing skills; '~i - Ability to listen and communicate clearly and effectively; and understanding of the role and function of quasi- judicial tribunals. - Requirement to submit a summary of qualifications; - Must be of voting age; - Must be a resident of the municipality; and must be a ratepayer of the municipality. I ~ In addition to the Statutory Powers and Procedures Act the following rules of ~ practice and procedure are proposed to be prescribed for a Local Appeal Bo y: E - Authorization for a representative to act on behalf of a party to a hearing; - Time extensions or reductions, and commencement of oral hearing; ~; - The format of an application for an appeal, and application fee; - Notices and format for notices of a hearing; i - Requirements related to the submission and distribution of documents and visual exhibits for evidence, filing reports and statements, and format for serving (delivering) - Terms relating to making a motion, providing notice of a motion, and serving a motion; _ - Procedure for settlement prior to the app th bmatter will p oceed in (e.g. - Decision by Local Appeal Body as to ho '~,~ mediation, apre- hearing conference, or a combination thereof); - Hearing dates, and requests for adjournments; - Procedures at the hearing; - Requests for compensation and costs awarded by the Local Appeal Body; and - Local Appeal Body decisions and orders and notice requirements. ~i~iT~~E~`R_~~1i= ~C3P ~1=~~' i?~~C~PI~~~~jiOh i3~'i't::~:~1~ TEL BOARD: - B° 51 would 1° ~t information and materi nd mate al ~ ~ ~ad at ® hearing to generally that information a provided to a municipality before the council made a decision for official plan, zo g by- law and pl of subdivision matters. - New information would only be permitted if the OMB were of the opinion that it was not reasonably possible to provide the information and material to the municipality prior to council's decision, or the information and material was introduced into evidence by a public body. - If the OMB determines that the new information and material could have materially affected the council's decision, then it is required to provide council with an opporr ~ an~ m~~ sl~~~enrecomm ndation tohhe information and mate Board. - The proposed regulation would give municipal council 30 days to reconsider its decision on a plan of subdivision, official plan or zoning by-law application, based on new information and material, and provide a recommendation to the OMB. Proposed amendments to matters included in the regulations would address proposed new requirements for: notice of a public meeting for proposed OPs, OPAs, ZBs, ZBAs, plans of subdivision, minor variances and consent applications requirements; notice of an open house for official plan updates, development permit system OPA and bylaws, and 3 year zoning by-1ZBA sand subdivisionscand notice of refusal for the proposed OPAs, adoption of OPAs and refusal to pass ZBAs. How notice maybe given for public meeting: - Currently, the existing regulations allow notice of a public meeting to be given by giving notice by mail accompanied by posting signage on the applicable property or properties or by publishing the notice in a newspaper. In addition to each of the two existing notification options noted above, the proposed changes would require notice of a public meeting to be given through an Internet web posting on the website of the municipality or planning board if there is one. Who shall receive notice? - In addition to those persons and public bodies currently listed, it is proposed that the regulation also include Parks Canada and companies operating a railway line. For plans of subdivision only, notice of a public meeting would also be required to be given to those companies operating as a telecommunication infrastructure provider in the area covered by the proposed plan of subdivision. f,,~~ ~, 1;t':t ~~a~i' i n ~J ------ 4 'E ' Information that would be required in the notice: - In addition to existing requirements, it is proposed that notice of public d j any meeting also include statements that clarify: Who may appeal; an dded as a party to an appeal before the OMB, b I ' e a restrictions on who may ~ Notice of an open house for proposed official plan updates, development lan and by-law amendments, and 3 year zoning by- fficial p permit system o law updates: Bill 51 would require at least one open house be held a rrLnimum of 7 ~ ~ - days before the required public meeting for the: adoption of an official lan update; adoption of a development permit system OPA; passing of a p development permit system by- law; and passing of a 3 year zoning by- I law updates. - The purpose of the open house is to allow the public an opportunity to review and ask questions about the information and material before council makes a decision. This would allow the public to be involved and have more information up front in the planning process. Therefore, requirements for how notice maybe given, who shall receive notice and information that would be required in the notice is the same for an open house as is for a public meeting: Complete application: - It is proposed that the notice of "complete application" requirements be ~ the same as those for notice of public meetings and open houses. 1 Notice of Refusal: - Bill S 1 would require a notice of refusal to adopt a requested OPA an a '~ notice of refusal to amend a zoning by- law be given no later 15 days after a decision to refuse has been made. Currently, there is no requirement in the ~ Planning Act to send a notice of refusal to adopt an OPA or a refusal of a ZBA. ~ i We will keep you informed as the regulations unfold. ~I Cathy MacMunn, ,, ~' Legislation Chair 5 Here it is, December already! All of us are busy preparing for the holidays and most of us do not have much time to think about anything else right now. But along with thinking of snow flakes and warm fires, and scrumptious dinners, and what gift to ~vmAo a memorablevevent Th~ducational to make the 2007 OACA Conferen component of the conference is shaping up nicely with quite a few workshop presenters already confirmed. The lighter side of the conference (the part where we network and have some fun with each other) is looking good, too. We are going to try something different this year but I don't want to give away the whole secret just yet. Watch for more details in the Conference Package coming in February. The Conference dates are May 27 to 30, 2007. The conference hotel is the Sheraton Parkway Toronto North Hotel, ~uiltne ~chmond Hill c The hot 1 isavery t the corner of Leslie Street and I-3~ghway close to the 401, 404 and 407 highways. The conference is only five months away -PLAN NOW TO ATTEND! If you are wondering what "TT" is, please look for the white envelope inside this Newsletter. It contains information about the training sessions being offered by OACA. The response has been very positive and OACA is ready to put the show on the road, so to speak. If your municipality is interested in scheduling a training session, please submit your request as soon as possible. We intend to schedule the sessions by geographic areas so that travel expenses can be kept to a minimum and time away from the office can be °mized far the presenter. 6 O~ n-M ED~~T~T~~Il~l t~10TI0~ f~ DEC 2 0 2006 FETING: COUNCIL G. OF W. Committee of Adjustment Minutes Thursday December 14, 2006, 9:30 a.m. 1 Chairperson Lynda Aiken, Member Allan Johnson, Member Michelle Lynch, Member Dave Edwards, Member Garry Potter, Acting Secretary- Treasurer Glenn White 1. Communications and Correspondence Correspondence to be addressed at the time of the specific hearing. 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest None declared 3. Hearings• 9:30 Cynthia Lee & Randy Ostojic Lot 92, Plan M-780 (Former Oro) 197 Eight Mile Point Road In Attendance: Lorenzo Wallace, Agent Motion No. CA061214-1 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by David Edwards, seconded by Allan Johnson 2006-A-36 "It is recommended that Committee approve Minor Variance Application 2006-A- 36 subject to the following conditions: 1. Notwithstanding Section 5.6 g) of Zoning By-law 97-95, that the maximum height of the proposed boathouse shall not exceed 5.63 metres (18.5 feet} above the high water mark elevation of 219.15 metres; 2. That an ®ntario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of ,compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing by way of surveylreal property report that the height of the boathouse not exceed 5.63 metres (18.5 feet; 3. otwitstanding Section 5.7 bj of Zoning By-law 97-95, that the maximum size of the attached deck e no larger than 60.4 square metres {650 square feet)9 Committee of Adjustment-C7eoember 14, 20(76 Page 1 4. That the boathouse not be used for human habitation, and comply with all other boathouse provisions as contained in Section 5.6 of Zoning By-law • 97-95; 5. That the setbacks be in conformity with the .dimensions as set out in the application and on the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 6. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. 7. That the appropriate permit(s) and any other necessary approval(s) be obtained from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority only after the Committee°s decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. ...Carried." CommitteA o~ ~djustmeni-~J~cerrab~r 94, 2{06 ~ag~ 2 ~~~ - 9:40 Michael MacVittie 2006-B-24 Range 2, Pt. Lot 3 (Former Oro) 978 Line 2 South In Attendance: Cathy MacVittie, Applicant,. Ronald Henderson, Neighbour Motion No. CA061214-2 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Allan Johnson "It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent regarding Application 2006-B-24 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the severed and retained land to accurately reflect the residential land use; 2. That the severed lands be merged in title with 892 Line 2 South and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and, 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. .....Carried." Gor~rnitt~e of Adjustrrienf-[~eces~at~er 14, 20fl6 4~ag~ 3 1~~ -~ . 9:50 Craig McKenney 8~ Christa Maddock 2006-B-22 Conc. 7 North Pt. Lot 3 (Former Medonte) 116 MiII Pond Sideroad In Attendance: Andria Leigh, MHBC Planning representing applicants, Craig McKenney, Applicant Motion No. CA061214-3 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Michelle Lynch "It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent regarding Application 2006-B-22 (REVISED) subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum total lot area for the severed lot be no greater than 1.08 hectares (2.67 acres); 2. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed • conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the severed lands be merged in title with 3766 Line 7 North, and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and, ~. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. .,..Carried." Commif~~~ of ~dj~stment-D~cemb~r 14, 20fl6 gage 4 -5 5. Other Business i. Adoption of minutes for the November 16, 2006 Meeting Motion No. CA461214-4 Moved by Dave Edwards, Seconded by Allan Johnson "That the minutes for the November 16, 2006 Meeting be adopted as printed and circulated ...Carried." 6. Adjournment Motion No. CA061214-5 Moved by Allan Johnson, Seconded by Michelle Lynch "We do now adjourn at 11:15 a.m." .. Carried." (NOTE: A digital recording of this meeting is available for review.) ~~ ~, ~ _ c~ C airperson, Lynda Aiken /' ~--~ ~~~~ Se~etary-Tr~u ~'(A g) Glenn White, Senior Planner co~,~„ft~~ at ad~us~~,~~t-~~~~~~~r ~~9 zoos P~~e s