06 21 2007 C of A AgendaCommittee of Adjustment Agenda
Thursday June 21, 2007, 9:30 a.m.
1. Communications and Correspondence
2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest
3. Hearings:
9:30 2007 -A -11 Ron & Barb Mitchell
Plan 709, Lot 48
1166 Line 5 South
(Former Township of Oro)
9:40 2007 -A -12 Daphne Laird
Plan 798, Part of lots 52 & 53
60 Lakeshore Road East
(Former Township of Oro)
9:50 2007 -A -13 Ronald Russell
Plan M112, Lot 31
(Former Township of Medonte)
10:00 2007 -B -15 Charles Ivey
Pt. Lot 6, Concession 5
2639 Line 4 North
(Former Township of Oro)
10:10 2007 -B -16 Moss Developments
Concession 2, Pt. Lot 11
95 Line 1 North
(Former Township of Oro)
10:20 2007 -B -17 Ron McCowan
Range 2, Lots 1 & 2
2243 Ridge Road West
(Former Township of Oro)
10:30 2006 -A -22 Jerome & Linda Cunningham
(Revised) Plan 535, Lot 11
2 Nevis Ridge Road
(Former Township of Medonte)
10:40 2007 -B -24 Cathy & Michael MacVittie
(Revised) Range 2, Part of Lot 3
978 Line 2 South
(Former Township of Oro)
4. Other business
i. Adoption of Minutes from May 17, 2007 meeting
5. Adjournment
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Ron and Barb Mitchell
2007 -A -11
1166 Line 5 South. Plan 709, Lot 48 (Former Twp. Of Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to construct a new dwelling with a ground floor area of
136.75m2 (1472 ft2) and a covered porch with an area of 160.93m2 (528 ft2). The applicant
is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95:
Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Required
Interior Side Yard Setback 3 m (9.8 ft)
Rear Yard Setback 7.5m (24.6ft)
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Shoreline
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone
Previous Applications — none
AGENCY COMMENTS
Public Works Department — No concerns
Building Department - Engineered lot grading
- Limiting distance re:
openings in walls
- Septic approval
Engineering Department — No concerns
Background
Proposed
1.6 m (5.2 ft)
3m (9.8 ft)
plan required
wall construction, maximum unprotected
The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 15.2 metres (49.8 feet), a lot
depth of approximately 38.7 metres (126.9 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.17
hectares (0.42 acres). The lands currently have a single- storey dwelling with an area of
approximately 85.8 m2 (924 ft2). The applicant is proposing to build a new two- storey
dwelling with an area of 222.5 m2 (2394 ft2) in generally the same location as the existing
dwelling. The rear wall of the proposed dwelling will not further encroach into the rear
yard. However, the proposed dwelling will encroach slightly into the interior side yards
due to the design of the proposed dwelling, and the addition of a cover porch, having an
area of 49 m2 (527 ft2) . The application is proposing to reduce the existing south interior
side yard from 2 metres (6.5 feet) to 1.6 metres (5.2 feet). The north interior side yard
will be not be further reduced; however, the applicant will be adding addition floor
volume in a required yard due to the construction of the covered porch.
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. A single detached dwelling
and covered porch are permitted uses in the Shoreline designation and are common
features found in residential neighbourhoods. Therefore, the proposal would conform
with the intent of the policies contained in 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 purpose for interior
side yard setbacks are to provide access to the rear yard of the property, and to provide
for a degree of separation between neighbouring dwellings. Committee should note that
the subject lot does not comply with the minimum required frontage and lot area
provisions of the SR Zone. As well, the existing dwelling does not comply with current
SR Zone standards. The application to place the existing dwelling with a proposed two
storey dwelling seeks only to slightly encroach and add additional floor volume in the
side yards. Aside from the side yard setbacks, the proposed dwelling otherwise meets
the required height, floor area and front yard setback provisions of the SR Zone.
On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to generally comply with the intent
of the Zoning By -law.
Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot?
Based on a site inspection the subject lands and surrounding properties were noted to
contain mature tree growth and significant foliage in the form of cedar hedges and large
shrubs. In addition, the existing dwelling was noted to be setback further into the lot
than the general building line along this particular section of Line 5 South. The site
inspection also revealed that the land to the north of the subject property is vacant, and
neighbouring dwellings to the west and south are buffered by existing cedar hedges and
mature tree growth. On this basis, the application to replace an existing single storey
dwelling with a two storey dwelling is considered to be desirable for the appropriate
development of the lot.
Is the variance minor?
On the basis that the proposed dwelling and covered porch is in keeping with the
character of the surrounding residential area, and otherwise conforms to the Official Plan
and Zoning By -law, the variance is considered to be minor in nature
CONCLUSION
The application to reduce the required interior side yard setback, to construct a two -
storey dwelling and a covered porch generally satisfies the tests of a variance.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the Committee grant Variance Application 2007 -A -11 subject to
the following conditions:
1. The proposed dwelling and covered porch shall be setback no closer than 1.6
metres (5.2 feet) from the interior side lot lines and 3.0 meters (9.8 feet) from the
rear lot line;
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the
application and sketches submitted with the application dated May 22, 2007 and
approved by the Committee;
3. 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;
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,
Steven quharson, B.URPL
Junior Planner
3
Reviewed by,
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
it
_________ __
F-- i I - wveav w M mm¢ mwv
i
I _�' 1 I ,xew W Opuwi rt LM,a w,a
TBM 2X6.81= «w�«
� w e0�aa ,irt�e �r
1 I
'Nk y tl C C
LOT 49Ap j 'y 5 x n.WS,xom.
� \ (UNDEVELOPED)
I 'p '. I 1 . '� I n b•M,�P,II Wm,.wo NO waft
f91[ avu rc Hn, <mmin xEW mw, p amuc
I '
I b � � �• tmu wa .. •. ". uw.0 ruifuua i..mvfm m amo ror W o-® x,.
w
�� L 1 g �!. pp' I wn ` � +Ti� LOT 48 I M • a P wxn
-r__ _
Jul
RZ
I • 1 R1mO1 y � nfmi mwl.`\,, � •y 1 � � '' O I
4 •II Pn.A ®e �" I� I n I
B II■ k
1 um mUU xous r L ,; R° i
IH I
I �
j LOT 47
1 (DLYELOPED)
■ oM
I ' I
I I
�IlYf GR�DII7GID�9Pf8 PLAl7
UK oumi
KWMTK
r.____________ ____ _ yOS a 9•. nw m9
y u wawt % P10 A D)MC 5
____________ 1
C
_ _________________ TO11COUN OF GRWCOZ NTE
� � I > COUNTY GP 38(C06
1 i w
I ii ; DNY■NN Ilm @21MON Lt0. 'N -IV98
LOT as Sam
® SHEEL "'
r.,= v ------------- ----------- -
--7 T
L J
4't
LZ k
1p - ------
FUTURE SECOND FLOOR PLAN
- - ----- -- ��Vl��A�N �F�AN
M T FLOOR PLAN `r
H
Man*
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Daphne Laird
2007 -A -13
60 Lakeshore Road East Plan 798, Pt. Lot 52 & Lot 53 (Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to construct a deck with an area of 15.6m' (167 fe). The
applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95:
Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Required Proposed
Exterior Side Yard Setback 7.5 m (24.6 ft) 4.6 m (15 ft)
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Shoreline
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Shoreline Residential (SR)
Previous Applications —
AGENCY COMMENTS
Public Works Department -
Building Department — Deck not allowed on septic, 1.5m from tank, 5m from tile bed.
Engineering Department— No concerns
PLANNING FRAMEWORK
Background
The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 23 metres (75 feet) along
Lakeshore Road East, and a lot area of approximately 0.12 hectares (0.29 acres). The
applicant is proposing to construct a deck in the exterior side yard of the lot to be located at
the front of an existing single family dwelling. The purpose for the variance application is to
permit the deck to be located in the exterior side yard, encroaching approximately 2.9 metres
(9.5 feet) into the required yard.
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated Shoreline by the Official Plan. A single detached dwelling is a
permitted uses in the Shoreline designation. Decks, balconies, etc are common features
associated with residential uses. Therefore, the proposal would conform with the intent of
the policies contained in the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply to the general intent of the Zoning By-law?
The property is a corner lot which fronts onto Lakeshore Road given Lakeshore Road is the
shorter of the frontages. The exterior side yard separates the dwelling from Barbara Avenue.
The purpose for the exterior side yard setback is to ensure that structures and accessory
buildings do not obstruct the sightlines of the intersection. The proposed deck is proposed to
be 12" high and does not depict railings nor enclosed or have other features that could impair
the visibility of Lakeshore Road and Barbara Avenue. As well, the proposed deck otherwise
meets with all other setbacks of Shoreline Residential zone.
The proposal is considered to maintain the general intent of the Zoning By -law.
Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the lot?
Based on the site inspection the dwelling and deck are located approximately 30m (98.4feet)
north of the intersection, and is likely not to have a negative effect on the sightlines to the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Barbara Avenue. The proposed deck would appear to be
desirable for the appropriate development on the lot.
Is the variance minor?
On the basis that the proposed deck is in keeping with the character of the surrounding
residential area, and otherwise conforms to the Official Plan and Zoning By -law, the variance
is considered to be minor in nature.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed application to construct a deck in the exterior side yard generally satisfies the
tests of a variance.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the Committee Approve Variance application 2007 -A -12 subject to
the following conditions:
1. 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;
2. That the proposed deck shall be no closer than 4.6 m (15 ft) from the exterior side lot
line;
1 That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application
and on the sketches submitted with the application dated May 31, 2007 and approved
by the Committee.
PA
All of w ' es ectfully submitted,
Stev quharson, B.URPL
Junior Planner
Reviewed by;
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
CORPORATION THE OF
of OX0-
•A TOWN 61111)
Minor Variance Review
Hearing Date:
Applicationt 7 -0'7
Owner:
MAS #: I t�� f3I ,Z` e
Lot #: S3 a5rr//,:jr S z Plan #: CI' Conc. #:
};! The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application.
❑ Site inspection required and completed.
❑ Proposal appears to meet minimum standards.
148 Line 7 5., Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
Phone (705) 487 -2171
Fax (705) 487 -0133
w .oro- medonte.ca
YApplicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks
as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code.
Comments: D F!�1L '1 (j (n 5i�prc.
l ° 5-� t 77t rx- S— j cwt j tc-F G
Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal
Respect f I
Michael D
4submit (6 7
Chief Building Official
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Ronald Russell
2007 -A -13
Plan M -112, Lot 31(Former Township ofMedonte)
1I� 1us '.uemol . 1J
The applicant is applying for a Minor Variance to recognize a non - conforming lot that was
created inadvertently through Consent Application 2005 -B -46. As a result of a boundary
adjustment, a small portion of the current subject property was conveyed to a neighbouring
lot, thereby leaving the retained lands deficient in lot area. The subject property currently
consists of 0.76 hectares, where the requirement of the RUR2 *5 Zone prescribes a minimum
lot area of 0.8 hectares.
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Rural Residential
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Rural Residential Two Exception 5 (RUR2 *5) Zone
Previous Applications — 2005 -B -46
AGENCY COMMENTS
Simcoe County-
Municipal Works and Roads -
Building Department -
Fire Department -
Engineering Department-
BACKGROUND
The applicant applied for a boundary adjustment (Consent application 2005 -B -46) and was
approved by the Committee of Adjustment on November 10, 2005. The land added to the
adjacent parcel of land, Lot 32, has a depth of approximately 132 metres (433 feet), a width
of approximately 14.3 metres and a land area of 0.13 hectares. The land retained, Lot 31, has
a lot frontage of 43.2 metres (142 feet), a lot depth of 131.9 metres (433 feet), and a lot area
of 0.76 hectares (1.8 acres). As discussed above, as a result of this consent application, the
retained lands were made not to comply with the minimum lot area standard for the
RUR2 *5 Zone.
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Ofcial Plan?
The subject property is designated Rural Residential in the Official Plan. This land use
designation recognizes lands developed in the "estate residential subdivision" style,
characterized by lots with large frontages and overall lot area that are located in existing
registered or draft- approved plans. The lot subject to the proposed variance is preexisting,
and located within a plan of subdivision that was registered in 1977. As such, the variance to
recognize a deficient lot area for Lot 31, Plan M112 generally conforms to the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By- -law.
The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two Exception 5 (RUR2 *5). The exception
reflects special standards for certain residential developments in the former Township of
Medonte, and requires larger lot frontage and lot area requirements. The exception #5
requires that lots within Plan M112 have a minimum lot area of 0.8 hectares; while the
subject property will have marginally less lot area (0.76 hectares) than the requirement for
the zone exception, the lands nonetheless will continue to meet and exceed the general lot
area required for the Rural Residential Two Zone, being 0.4 hectares. As such, the variance
is considered to generally comply with the intent of the Zoning By -law.
Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the lot?
While the subject lands consist of slightly less area than the RUR2 *5 Zone standard, the lot
is part of a registered, completely built -out subdivision. To determine if the variance is
desirable for the development of the lot, mapping was utilized to factor in all required
setbacks for the RUR *5 Zone, with intent of determining if a building envelope would exist
for the construction of a single detached dwelling. As a result of staff investigation, it has
been determined that a building envelope of 0.49 hectares (52700 square feet) would exist on
the subject lands after building setbacks have been calculated. Therefore, the variance to
recognize a reduced lot area for Lot 31 of Plan M112 from 0.8 hectares to 0.76 hectares will
still allow for the construction of a large single detached dwelling, where larger homes are
characteristic in the immediate area. As a result, the variance application is desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot.
Is the variance minor?
On the basis that the reduced lot size is located within a registered plan of subdivision, and
contains a generous building envelope despite the reduced lot area, the proposed variance is
considered to be minor.
CONCLUSION
This application to recognize a reduced lot area for Lot 31, Plan M112 satisfies the tests of
variance.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Committee grant Variance Application 2007 -A -13.
All of which is respectfully
;�zdam Kozlowski, B.URPL
Planner
Reviewed by,
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
may Z4, zUU i
corporation of the i ownsnip of uro mecionte
I�Imm;;U= U; tAuiu' u;;z;.;4
P.O. Box 100
Oraafb
LOL 2XO
i 0 the Go,-nmittee of Adjustment
Re: Hart Lot :3 1, rian m111
'e;O" Da i
1 A1 i7l
Minor Variance Request
Youm truly,
PLAN OF SURVEY
OF
LOT 31, REGISTERED PLAN M -112
(GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF MEDONTE)
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
SCALE - 1 1000
30' t0 0
010i IMr,a
GALBRAITH, EPLETT, WOROBEC SURVEYORS
A DIN51m of Epiett h WoroDec Surveying Ltd.
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
1 CERTIFY THAT :
(I) THIS SURVEY AND PLAN ARE CORRECT AND IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS ACT, THE SURVEYORS
ACT AND THE LAND TIRES ACT AND THE REGULATIONS
MADE UNDER THEM.
(2) THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETEQ ON THE 29TH DAY OF
SEPTEMBER, 2004, r y�
DCTOBER 207H. 2004.vi r'rt
DATE F. DAL EPLETT -Y
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR
LEGEND
DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN METRES AND
DECIMAL PARTS THEREOF.
■
DENOTES SURVEY MONUMENT FOUND.
❑
DENOTES SURVEY MONUMENT RANTED.
Sib
DENOTES STANDARD IRON BAR.
SSIB
DENOTES SHORT STANDARD IRON BAR.
III
DENOTES IRON BAR.
1255)
DENOTES R.C. RAKES. O.L.S.
Pi)
DENOTES REGISTERED RAN M -112.
WT)
DENOTES WITNESS.
(MS)
DENOTES MEASURED.
urmc
DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS RAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
7#i7,
BEARINGS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE ASTRONOMIC AND
ARE REFERRED TO THE WESTERLY LIMIT OF LOT 31,
REGISTERED PLAN M -112, SHOWN HEREON. HANNG
BEARING OF N15'59'2CE.
It
Ai
/Q
o ti4
hQ �h
h..r
LOT 11
N
IT R N TD ceros ED wo R
wDEn TxE iAw mlTS AcT.
wn: eeeeern mTn. zow.
PLAN 51R- 33'2L4
xEmsm Af0 DEVOnTEo
�(1
I. DKE EK17T
MTw ...
DAs KbJember 101"3 2C,
� CEPVTr LNM KOM'aw rfq M LAND DIES
".. o' SWM 51
CCHFfTl
11 F
LOT 12
401,
ST. ANTOINE
ORESOENT
I ��T
o R ) N8)0'40'W ) 78_86j
sse R_15l.app Aa AN
LOT
Pit, 58515_0,22 T, qm
N)71T'W
b
N665JY0 p189
.. ArN 42' AIj1 SqJTp7 v C
,J' -'`,,r 5g523�0j13 f3z0 6
32 w- Or,
4irvJg6p '`� 2 V
h GALBRAITH, EPLE9T, WOROBEC SURVEYORS
A DIHsim of Epletl h Worot, c Sorwylnq Ltd.
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS
>^ g P.O. BOX 113
COLDWATER, ONTARIO
Na / LOK 1EO
Ozss>� (705) 686 -7208 Tel. (705) 686 -7200 Fax
E -mail gew0survey4ucom
DRAWN BY CHECKED BY SCALE FILE
'V roc, of s. : LI FILL
Township of Oro- Medome
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Charles Ivey
2007-B-19
2479 Line 4 N. Concession 5, Part Lot 6 (Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The purpose of application 2007 -B -15 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot by
way of severance. The land to be severed is proposed to have a depth of 154 metres,
frontage along Line 4 North of 88.9 metres, a lot area of 1.3 hectares (3.2 acres), and
contains an existing single detached dwelling, barn and silo. The land to be retained is
proposed to have a lot area of approximately 40.86 hectares (100.9 acres) and is currently
vacant.
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Rural, Oro Moraine Core /Corridor Area,
Oro Moraine Enhancement Area
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /Rq & Mineral Aggregate Two (MAR2)
Previous Applications — 2005 -B -01 (Technical Severance)
AGENCY COMMENTS
Simcoe County -
Public Works -
Building Department -
Fire Department -
Engineering Department-
BACKGROUND
The subject lands presently exist as a 42.16 hectare (104.18 acre) parcel with approximately
623 metres fronting on Line 4 North and approximately 664 meters of frontage along Bass
Lake Sideroad. In 2005, the applicant applied for and obtained a technical severance to
recreate a 10 hectare (25 acre) lot that had subsequently merged in title in 1995. As such,
prior to 2005, the subject property existed as a 52.16 hectare (129 acre) agricultural property.
The current application seeks to sever an additional lot, containing a single detached dwelling
and agricultural buildings, from the existing 42.16 hectare parcel with the intention of
constructing a new single detached dwelling on the retained lands.
OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject property is designated Rural by the Official Plan (OP). General objectives for
lands designated Rural are listed in Section C2.1:
• To preserve and promote the rural character of the Township and the maintenance of the
open countryside.
• To prevent the intrusion of land uses which are incompatible with the rural character
and /or resource activities of the area.
More specifically, Section C2.3.1 of the OP provides specific criteria, and in particular two
tests, under which severances may be permitted:
02.3.1 The creation of new lots for residential purposes
In accordance with the intent of this Plan to maintain the rural character of the Township,
ony a limited number of new lots for residential purposes can be created in the Township.
In this regard, only one new lot can be severed from a lot in the Rural designation that has:
1) an area of at least 36 hectares or is the whole of an original Township lotprovided;
2) a lat has not been severed from the parcel after March 26, 1973.
While the subject lands would appear to meet the criteria for having a minimum lot size of
36 hectares, Consent Application 2005 -B -01, submitted by the same applicant, therefore
constitutes a previous severance after March 26, 1973.
DISCUSSION
As noted above, the primary objectives for lands within the Rural designation are to protect
and promote rural character, and to prevent intrusion of incompatible land uses. In
addition, while severances are generally permitted in the this land use designation, the criteria
to create a new lot are governed by the two tests listed above — these tests are vital to protect
the rural character of the Township from uncontrolled and excessive residential
development in the countryside. In this case, the applicant has already severed a 10 hectare
parcel of land in 2005, and now wishes to sever an existing dwelling unit and 1.3 hectares of
land, with the intention of constructing a new dwelling on the retained 40.8 hectare parcel.
As such, Application 2007 -B -15 is not in keeping with Section C2.3.1 of the Township
Official Plan.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above, the proposed consent application to sever a 1.3 hectare parcel of
land containing an existing dwelling and agricultural buildings fails the tests for severance, as
prescribed by Section C2.3.1 of the Official Plan.
,*
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Committee Refuse Consent Application 2007 -13-15 on the basis that
the application does not conform to the Township Official Plan.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
r
dam KoWBJU ,
Planner
Reviewed by,
l
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
0
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
P.O. BOX 100, ORO, ONTARIO, LOL 2X0
(705) 487 -2171
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
NOTICE OF DECISION
Application No. 2005 -13-01
IN THE MATTER OF Section 45 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13 as amended; and
IN THE MATTER OF the Official Plan of the Township of Oro - Medonte; and
IN THE MATTER OF Comprehensive Zoning By -law 97 -95, as it applies to the particular
application; and
IN THE MATTER OF Application 2005 -B -01 submitted by Charles Ivey, owner of Concession
5, Part Lot 6 (former Township of Oro); and
WHEREAS The applicant has applied for consent for a technical severance to create a new lot.
The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage of approximately 292 metres (958 ft), a
lot depth of approximately 304 metres (997 ft) and a lot area of approximately 10.1 hectares (25
acres). The lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 40.47 hectares (100 acres).
WHEREAS the subject property is designated "Rural & Environmental Protection Two
Overlay" in the Official Plan, and Zoned "Agri cultural/Rural (A /RU) Zone & Mineral Aggregate
Two (MAR2)" under By -law 97 -95; and
WHEREAS having had regard to those matters addressed by The Planning Act, in accordance
with the rules and procedures prescribed under Ontario Regulation 200/96, as amended, and
having considered all relevant information as presented at the public hearing on the I Oh day of
February, 2005.
0 0
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION 2005 -B -01
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby Grant Consent Application 2005 -13-01 subject to the following list
of conditions:
Al. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject lands indicating the severed parcel
be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer;
Z2. That the applicant prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel
severed, for review by the Municipality;
`° 3. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; and,
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year
from the date of the giving of the notice.
.....Carried."
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro- Medome Administration Centre, 148 Line 7 South in Oro Station, Ontario,
Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
0 r
PAGE #3
APPLICATION 2005 -B -01
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Section 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as
amended, the above decision and/or conditions may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal decisions in respect of applications
for consent to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an
unincorporated association or group. However, a notice of appeal may be filed in the name of an
individual who is a member of the association or group.
THE LAST DATE FOR FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL IS WEDNESDAY, THE 2nd
DAY OF MARCH, 2005.
A "NOTICE OF APPEAL" setting out in writing the supporting reasons for the appeal should be
received on or before the last date for "Appeal' accompanied by a cheque in the amount of ONE
HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS payable to the MINISTRY OF FINANCE. The
notice is to be submitted to the Secretary - Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, PO Box
100, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0.
Members concurring in this decision:
Allan 7olmsc n (Chairman)
Michelle Lynch
Garry Potter
DATED this I Orh day of February 2005,
Dave Edwards
Lynda Aiken
Andy Karaiskakis, Hens. B.A.
Acting Secretary- Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
0 !
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
February 10, 2005
Charles Ivey
2005 -B -01
2479 Line 4 N. Concession 5, Part Lot 6 (Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The applicant has applied for consent for a technical severance to create a new lot. The lands
proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage of approximately 292 metres (958 ft), a lot
depth of approximately 304 metres (997 ft) and a lot area of approximately 10.1 hectares (25
acres). The lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 40.47 hectares (100
acres).
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Rural & Environmental Protection Two Overlay
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone & Mineral Aggregate Two (MAR2)
Previous Applications —
AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes)
Simcoe County -
Public Works -
Building Department- The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application and make note
that the proposal appears to meet the minimum standards
Fire Department -
Engineering Department -No concerns
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Background
The subject lands presently exist as a single 49.77 hectare (123 acre) parcel with approximately
623 metres (2,043.9 feet) fronting on Line 4 North and approximately 957 meters (3,139.7 feet) of
frontage along Bass Lake Sideroad. In 1901, Mr. William Hutchinson claimed title to the 25 acres
legally described as the north -west quarter of the east half of lot 6, Concession 5. In 1917, Mr.
Hutchinson took possession of the 100 acres described as the west half of lot 6, Concession 5.
At the time of this transfer, the parcels merged. In 1987, a 2 acre lot was severed off from the
north -west quarter of the east half of lot 6. Later that year, Mr. Charles Ivey and Ms. Nancy
Williams took possession of the remaining 123 acre parcel, and in 1995 Mr. Ivey became the sole
owner of the parcel. The purpose of this technical severance is to sever the vacant north -west
quarter of the east half of lot 6.
OFFICIAL PLAN
Section D3.3.7 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow Committee to consider
applications to re- divide large parcels of agricultural land which have merged in title. The policy
states:
0 •
The creation of new lots to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title
may be permitted, provided the Committee of Adjustment is satisfied that the new lot:
• was once separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act;
• is of the same shape and size as the lot which once existed as a separate conveyable lot;
• can be adequately serviced by on -site sewage and water systems;
• fronts on a public road that is maintained year -round by a public authority,, and
• an entrance permit is available for the new driveway accessing the severed lot from the
appropriate authority, if required.
In order to confirm that the lot to be created was once a conveyable lot, the Committee of
Adjustment received registered deeds which indicate that the lots were once legally
conveyable. Based on the site inspection, it was determined that the severed lot, which
fronts on an assumed public road, Bass Lake Side Road, could be serviced with on -site
sewage and water systems.
ZONING BY -LAW 97 -95
If Committee approves the application, both the severed and retained lots would comply with the
minimum area and frontage requirements of Zoning By -law 97 -95.
ANALYSIS
The proposal appears to meet the criteria required by Section D3.3.7 of the Official Plan. By reviewing
the deeds provided by the applicants, they confirm the merger between the 100 acre and 25 acre
parcels. The Committee has, on previous applications (2004- 6-23), permitted the re- creation of the
lots being generally the same size and shape in accordance with the policy.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above, the proposed consent generally conforms with the policies of the Official
Plan as they pertain to lands which have merged on title.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Committee Grant Consent Application 2005 -B -01 subject to the following list of
conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject lands indicating the severed parcel be
prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer;
2. That the applicant prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel
severed, for review by the Municipality;
1 That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro- Medonte; and,
4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from
the date of the giving of the notice.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
Andy Karaiskakis
Junior Planner
Reviewed by,
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
11
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Moss Developments
2007 -B -16
95 Line 1 North, Concession 2, Lot 11 (Former Twp. of Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The purpose of application 2007 -B -16 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot by way of
severance. The land to be severed is proposed to have a depth of 100.54 metres, frontage along Line 1
North of 48 metres, and a lot area of 1.19 hectares. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area
of approximately 20.8 hectares (51.45 acres) and consists of a draft- approved plan of subdivision (File no.
P21/88), also owned by the applicant.
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Rural Residential
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Rural Residential One (RURI) Zone, Environmental Protection (EP) Zone
Previous Applications — P21/88 (Draft- Approved Plan OM -T- 91050)
AGENCY COMMENTS
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority —
Simcoe County —
Public Works —
Building Department —
Engineering & Environmental Services —
Fire Department -
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located in the former Township of Oro, just north of Highway 11 on the east side
of Line 1, and adjacent to the McDonald's restaurant and Go -Kart track. The lands are designated Rural
Residential in the Official Plan, and zoned Rural Residential One (RURl) Zone and Environmental
Protection (EP) Zone. The EP zoning exists at extreme eastern edge of the property, where Willow Creek
flows south - easterly under Highway 11 toward the City of Barrie. The EP component of the property is
not located on the proposed lands to be severed.
The subject property, now known as "Country Lane Estates ", received draft approval from the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs on June 24, 1993. The plan depicts 22 residential lots, averaging 0.5 hectares per lot, and
2 stormwater and /or parkland blocks. The residential lot that is the subject of the consent application
consists of lot 1, and is located in the extreme north -west corner of the draft - approved plan, fronting onto
Line 1 North. The applicant has indicated that `it is anticipated that the process to obtain all the necessary approvals
and clearances of the draft plan conditions could be lengthy. The applicant has a purchaser for Lot 1 lands and is tberefore
requesting a consent to sever there lands from the balance of the draft approved residential plan of subdivision in order to
permit the construction of a detached dwelling on the lands in advance of the registration of the draftplan ".
OFFICIAL PLAN
The Township Official Plan contains specific policies with respect to permitted land uses within the Rural
Residential designation. With respect to this application, a single detached dwelling is permitted on lands
designated Rural Residential. Section C4.3 - Form of Development states that `all development within the
Rural Residential designation shall occur by way of Plan of Subdivision [andl or] Condominium ". For the purpose of
this application, it is noted that the creation of new lots by way of severance is not the intended means by
which development is to occur in the Rural Residential land use designation. However, as the subject
property already consists of a draft- approved plan of subdivision, the creation of a new lot through
consent is deemed to be appropriate, as the principal means of development through a plan of subdivision
has been previously established. In addition, the proposed lot would front on a municipal road, is not
located within an environmentally sensitive area, and will not hinder the development of the Country Lane
Estates Subdivision. Therefore, the application to create a new residential lot through severance from an
existing subdivision is generally in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan.
ZONING BY -LAW
The subject property is zoned Rural Residential One (RURI) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP)
Zone by Zoning By -law 97 -95. The proposed lot will consist of 0.48 hectares (1.2 acres), and will have 48
metres of frontage on Line 1 North; the required frontage for a lot in the RUR1 Zone is 45 metres, and
the required minimum lot area for a residential use is 0.4 hectares (0.98 acres). The lot to be created does
not contain any of the EP zoning identified on the property, and is not shown to contain any proposed EP
Zoning as a result of the Zoning By -law update. The proposed retained lands would consist of
approximately 20.2 hectares (50 acres), and maintain 113 metres of frontage on Line 1 North. Therefore,
the proposed lot would meet with all requirements of lot area and frontage for the RURI Zone.
On the basis of the above, the application would appear to generally comply with the Zoning By -law.
CONCLUSION
The proposed consent application for the creation of a rural residential lot generally meets the intent of the
policies of the Official Plan, in that the proposed lot will not require any expansion to municipal services,
and can be developed without requiring a plan of subdivision. Further, the proposed lot complies with the
minimum lot provisions of the RURI Zone, as prescribed by the Zoning By -law.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2007 -B -16 subject to the
following conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor
be submitted to the Committee Secretary - Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel
severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the applicant pay 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution;
4. That the applicant pay a Development Charges Fee in the amount of $4,749.95 (By -law 2004 -082)
to the Township;
5. That the applicant submit a revised Draft Plan of Subdivision to reflect the necessary changes as a
result of this consent, to the satisfaction of the Township;
6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte;
7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
All of which is respectfully
Reviewed by,
L f,
Kozlowski, B.URPL Glenn White MCIP, RPP
:r Senior Planner
CORPORATE SERVICES Fax:705- 726 -9B32
The Corporation of the
County of
�� `v e��, Simcoe
W
CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
June 14, 2007
Adam Kozlowski
Secretary- Treasurer
Township of Oro - Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, ON LOL 2X0
Dear Mr. Kozlowski:
Jun 14 2007 13:50 P.01
(705) 735 -6901 Fax.- (705) 727 -4276
Toll Free (800) 263 -3199 ;
Email: rhamehn@county.simcoe.on.ca
1110 Highway 26
Administration Centre
Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1 Xo
Post-it' Fax Note 7671 E
Date T _ 'fifes ►
, A, . I<rn ow s
Preen
t2 .
Co✓DePu
Co.
Phone f
Phone s
Fax a 4 B4 '
Fax*
RE: Consent Application 2007 -B -16
Part of Lot 11, Concession 2 (95 Line 1 North)
Former Township of Oro
Now Township of Oro•Medonte
Thank you for circulating the County of Simcoe. This application is seeking to create a 1.19
hectare (2.94 acre) lot from an existing 22 hectare (54.4 acre) parcel. The proposed residential
lot is located within the local municipality's Rural Residential designation and is subject to the
Rural policies of the Simcoe County Official Plan (SCOP).
SCOP 3.6.11 states that lots may be created by consent an approximate maximum size of one
hectare, and the number of lots on the original surveyed concessions and side roads grid should
be restricted in order to maintain the rural character and road function and avoid strip
development. Strip development is defined as a linear configuration of more than three non farm
lots within 200 metres of the proposed lot line as measured along the frontage of one side of the
road. County planning staff believe that the proposed lot creation is indicative of strip
development.
Therefore, the County of Simcoe does not object to the proposed residential lot, provided that
the lot is a maximum of one hectare and the location does not contribute to strip development
and maintains conformity with the County Official Plan.
Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not
hesitate to contact the undersigned at 705- 726 -9300 Ext. 1315. Thank you very much.
Sicr
j
I!e Hamelin
Planner ll
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Ron McCowan
2007 -B -17
2243 Ridge Road West, Range 2, Lots 1 & 2 (Former Twp. of Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The purpose of application 2007 -B -17 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot by way of
severance. The land to be severed has an irregular shape, and is proposed to have a depth of 140.7 metres
(461 feet), frontage along Bay Street of 49.7 metres (163 feet), frontage along Lake Simcoe of 35 metres
(114.8 feet), and a lot area of 0.98 hectares (2.42 acres). The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot
area of approximately 1.44 hectares (3.56 acres).
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation — Rural, Rural Settlement Area
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Residential Limited Service - Hold (RLS[H]) Zone
Previous Applications —
AGENCY COMMENTS
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority —
Simcoe County —
Public Works —
Building Department —
Engineering & Environmental Services —
Fire Department -
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located in Shanty Bay, and has access directly from Ridge Road West via a lengthy
driveway that runs over private property via an easement to the north, and through a laneway that follows
the unopened portion of the Municipally -owned Bay Street road allowance to the east. The property
slopes gradually from north to south, where the bank drops off steeply to the surface of Lake Simcoe.
While the surrounding area is heavily vegetated, consisting of mature deciduous woods and underbrush,
the subject lands have been largely cleared of tree cover. The property currently contains a two storey
dwelling with a gross floor area of 3441 square feet, a detached garage with a floor area of 603 square feet,
and several other small structures that would remain with the proposed retained parcel. The proposed
parcel to be severed would effectively be vacant of any buildings or structures, with the intention of the
future construction of a single detached dwelling.
OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject property is partially contained within two land use designations: the proposed retained parcel
is wholly designated Rural, while the proposed severed lot is partially designated Rural, and partially
designated Rural Settlement Area (see attached sketch). For the purpose of this application, staff have
discussed the issue of the partial land use designation for the proposed severed lot, as the Rural
designation would not permit a severance due to insufficient lot size, where the minimum lot area for a
severance is 36 hectares. However, as the proposed severed lot and subsequent development of a
residential dwelling will occur largely within the Rural Settlement Area designation, where severances are
permitted, it is on this land use policy that the application is being considered. With respect to land use
designation boundary interpretation, the Official Plan provides for some flexibility when considering
development applications:
El. 8 — Interpretation ofland use designation boundaries
The boundaries between land uses designated on the schedules of /the) plan are approximate except where
they meet with roads railways ... lot lines or other clearly defznedphyrical features and in these cases are not
open to flexible interpretation. There the general intent of the document is maintained, minor adjustments
to boundaries will not require amendment to this plan... where a lot is within more than one
designation... each portion of the lot shall be used in accordance with the applicable policies of that
de ignation.
The proposed residential development, in the form of a single detached dwelling, will take place on lands
within the Rural Settlement Area designation, and constitutes a permitted and desirable use in accordance
with the Official Plan.
Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains policies with respect to the creation of new lots by way of
consent. In particular, the Committee shall be satisfied that the proposed lot:
a) f ants on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained on ayear -round basis;
b) does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Load, unless the Province or the County
supports the request;
c) will not cause a traffic hatiard;
d) has adequate sitie and frontage for the proposed use in accordance nritb the Comprehensive Zoning By -law
and is compatible with adjacent uses;
e) can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal;
fi will not bare a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area;
g) will not restrict the development of the retained lands or otherparcels of land particularly as it relates to
the provision of access, if they are desgnated for development by this Plan;
h) will not bane a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area;
i) will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity ofgroundwater available for other uses in the
area
Criteria a), b), and c) deal specifically with property access requirements and traffic. The applicant has
indicated that Bay Street, which at the present time exists as a road allowance only and is owned by the
Township, will be built on the allowance to municipal standard, up to the approximate mid point of the
proposed retained lot. This work will be at the applicant's expense, and it should be noted that the new
road extension will not continue to nor connect in any way with Ridge Road. As such, Bay Street would
provide road access for two additional single detached dwellings, while remaining a "dead end" street
owned and maintained as a public road by the Township. Therefore, road access requirements for the
creation of a new lot will be maintained, and nor will excessive traffic likely arise as a result of this
application.
Criteria e), f) and i) deal mainly with the future development of a residential use. The criteria relating to
sewage, water supply, and drainage would be addressed at the time of building permit, and said permit
issued only when the requirements of the Building Code and any other applicable are met to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. Criteria d) and h) will be discussed below.
ZONING BY -LAW
The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service - Hold (RLS[H]) Zone, which reflects that the
subject lands do not front on a municipal road. The proposed lot will consist of 0.98 hectares, and will
have 49.7 metres of frontage on Bay Street; the required frontage for a lot in the RLS Zone is 30 metres,
and the required minimum lot area for a residential use is 0.2 hectares (0.49 acres). The lot to be created
does not currently contain any EP zoning, and is not shown to contain any proposed EP Zoning as a
result of the Zoning By -law update. The proposed retained lands would consist of 1.44 hectares, and
maintain approximately 96 metres of frontage on Bay Street. Permitted uses in the RLS Zone include
single detached dwellings and accessory structures, both of which either exist currently or are being
proposed by this application.
On the basis of the above, the application would appear to comply with the requirements of the Zoning
By -law.
CONCLUSION
The proposed consent application for the creation of a new residential lot conforms to the policies of the
Official Plan, and complies with the minimum lot provisions of the RLS Zone, as prescribed by the
Zoning By -law.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2007 -B -17 subject to the
following conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor
be submitted to the Committee Secretary- Treasurer;
2. That the appropriate perrnit(s) and any other necessary approval(s) be obtained from the Lake
Simcoe Region Conservation Authority;
3. That the applicant bring Bay Street up to Municipal Standards to the satisfaction of the Township
Public Works Department;
4. That the applicant apply for and obtain a Driveway Entrance Permit from the Public Works
Department for the land to be severed;
5. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel
severed, for review by the Municipality;
6. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the subject lands to accurately reflect the
intended land use;
7. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution;
8. That the applicant pay a Development Charges Fee in the amount of $4,749.95 (By -law 2004 -082)
to the Township;
9. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte;
10. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
am Kozlowski, B.URPL
Planner
Reviewed by,
Glenn White MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Jerome & Linda Cunningham
2006- A- 22(Revised)
2 Nevis Ridge Road, Lot 11, Plan 535 (Oro)
BACKGROUND
On September 14, 2006, minor variance application 2006 -A -22 was approved by the
Committee of Adjustment which would permit the construction of a detached garage with an
area of 62.4 m'(672 ft� to be located in the front yard of the lot. The applicants informed the
planning department that while the sketch initially submitted with this variance application
showed a proposed setback of 17 metres to the road surface, the Notice of Decision
subsequently required the garage to be 17 metres from the lot line. The applicants have
subsequently had a surveyor investigate the actual distance from the previously approved
garage to the front line, and have determined the distance to be 11.4 metres. As such, the
location of the proposed garage will not deviate from Committee's previous approval; the
applicants are asking only for a change to the wording of Conditions #2 and #4, as listed
below, to reflect the actual distance to the front lot line as determined by the surveyor.
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation —Rural Residential
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Rural Residential One (RURl) Zone
Previous Applications — None
AGENCY COMMENTS
Public Works Department -
Building Department —
Engineering Department-
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Committee approve Revised Variance Application 2006 -A -22 as
subject to the conditions imposed by Committee on September 14, 2006, save and except
for the following REVISED conditions:
1. That the proposed detached garage be located no closer than 11.4 metres from the
front lot line, Jermey Lane, in accordance with the letter and sketch submitted by
Dearden & Stanton, OLS;
2. 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
closer than 11.4 metres from the front lot line and that the height of the detached
garage not exceed 5.2 metres;
All of which is res ecub ' ted,
1
dam Kozlowski B.URPL
Planner
Reviewed by,
Z
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Kozlowski, Adam
From: brocun @netscape.ca on behalf of brocun [brocun @netscape.cal
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 5:35 PM
To: Kozlowski, Adam
Subject: 2006 -A -22 variance revision
Adam
With respect to the above noted minor variance. It is necessary for us to apply for an
adjustment to the variance for the following reason;
The comittee of Adjustment decision moved by Alan Johnson "# 2 That the proposed detached
garage be located no closer than 17 metres (55 feet) from the front lot line, Jermey Lane,
in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application."
We cannot measure from the lot line the stated 17 metres without taking out more trees.
After speaking with Mr. Stanton of Deardon and Stanton, it was explained that even though
the above item says "in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application."
the measurement in fact is taken from the lot line and not from the edge of the roadway.
We need to revise the measurement from the lot line which will approximately be 10 metres
to the new structure. The building is not being moved, the point of measurement is.
Deardon and Stanton will be faxing /e- mailing you the revised measurement from the lot
line.
Jerry Cunningham and Linda Brookes
2 Nevis Ridge Dr.
R -2 Hawkestone, Ontario
LOL 1T0
Jerry Cunningham
brocun @netscape.ca
06/14/2007 09:09
MEMBER
7053250241 DEARDEN AND STANTON PAGE 01/04
Dearden and Stanton Limited
Ontario Land Surveyors /Consulting Engineers
Canada Lands Surveyors 9
ORILLIA, ONTARIO - 89 Coldwater Street East, L3V 1W8 Consulting
(705) 325 -9521, Fax (705) 325 -0241 Engineers
E -Mail: d.s @encode.com of Ontario
Visit our Website at www.deardenandstanton.com
FAX COMMUNICATIONS COVERING LETTER
Date: June 14, 2007
To: Township of Oro - Medonte
Fax: 487 -0133
Re: Jerry Cunningham, 2 Nevis Ridge Road
Hawkestone, Lot 11, 51M -535, Oro- Medonte
No. of Pages Including Cover Sheet: t-1
Please call (705) 325 -9521 if all pages are not received.
M ESSAG Ell N STRU CTI O N S:
From: J Chester Stanton BSc O.L.S. C.L.S. O.L.I.P.
Dearden and Stanton Limited
89 Coldwater Street East
Orillia, Ontario L3V 1W8
Original: To Fallow By Mail ❑
To Follow By Courier ❑
Not to be Forwarded IZ
J. Chester Stanton, 8. Sc., O.L,S., O.L.S., O.L.I.P.
J. J. hUmhall, MA.SC„ P. Eng., Designated Consulting EngNaOf No. 2851
Notes and Records of
Cavan and Walson O.L.S., 1877 -1949
E,L, Cavan, O.L.S. 1930.1961
C. P. O'Dale, O.L.S.
O'Dale and Pottage Ltd.
06/14/2007 09:09
4+►
i
7053250241
DEARDEN AND STANTON
Dearden and Stanton Limited
Ontario Land Surveyors /Consulting Engineers
Canada Lands Surveyors
ORILLIA, ONTARIO— 89 Coldwater Street East, L3V I W8
(705) 325 -9521, Fax (705) 325.0241
E -Mail d.seencode.com
Visit our Website at www.deardenandstanton.com
June 14, 2007
File No. 23899
Mr, Jerry Cunningham
2 Nevis Ridge Road
Hawkestone, ONT
LOL 1TO
Re: Sketch, Lot 11, Plan 51M -535, Township of Oro,
Now in the Township of Oro - Medonte
Dear Sir:
PAGE 02/04
9
Consulting
Engineers
of Ontario
Enclosed please find a copy of the sketch which we have prepared showing the
position of the existing dwelling relative to the street line as well as the position of the
proposed staked out garage relative to the street line and the side yard.
We have forwarded a copy of the sketch by fax to the Township of Oro - Medonte,
We look forward to hearing from you in this regard.
Yours truly,
JCS:km J. Chester Stanton, B.Sc., O.L.S., C.L.S., O.L.I.P.
Cunninghamle[im23899june 14
Nmea aon aecordo of
EL C and Wmeon OLS., 18rl -19A9
EL O'D ka , O.LS., 19ID -1961
1J accr411, M A a.Sc.,O LS. CLS.,d Lvm CP. O and O.LS.
1.1. MaMull, M.A Sc., PEng.. oeeignetM Gnmlune Eo6ini* Nn. 2951 O.U. a,M Pnuuge Lid.
06/14/2007 09:09 7053250241
N59.32'00 "E(REFERENCE BEARING)
31(M) 60.832(M)
11 (P1) 61.000(Pi)
i8(mm�
)9 1
� O a
O w
Z
P
Q
UtHKVtN NNU W AN, UN 1.11 -1-
JERMEY LANE
(BY PLAN 51M -535, 20.000 WIDE)
PlN 58540- 0104(LT)
S
STAKE STAKE
of �Q N
O
Qp00
11.16 -�-
STAKE
"J
STAKE
PlP
AND STANTON LTD. O.L.S. NO PERSON MAY COPY, REPRODUCE, DISTRIBUTE OR ALTER,
IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF DEARDEN AND STANTON LTD. O.L.S
NOTES:
LEGEND
GNOMIC REFERRED TO THE SOUTHERLY LIMIT OF
SIB
- DENOTES STANDARD IRON BAR
'TF
OWN ON PLAN 51M -535 HAVING A BEARING
18
- DENOTES IRON BAR
MHD
- DENOTES MONEICE HARVEY D'AMICO SURVEYORS LTD., O.L.S.
M
- DENOTES MEASURED
ILI
I ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND CAN
P1
- DENOTES PLAN 51M -535
An
) FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048.
■
— DENOTES MONUMENT FOUND
OR
TO FINISHED EXTERIOR CORNERS I I ISE
0
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
P.O. BOX 100, ORO, ONTARIO, LOL 2X0
(705) 487 -2171
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
NOTICE OF DECISION
Application No. 2006- A- 22(Revised)
IN THE MATTER OF Section 45 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13 as amended; and
IN THE MATTER OF the Official Plan of the Township of Oro- Medome; and
IN THE MATTER OF Comprehensive Zoning By -law 97 -95, as it applies to the particular
application; and
IN THE MATTER OF Application 2006 -A -22 submitted by Jerome & Linda Cunningham,
owners of Plan 535, Lot 11 (former Township of Oro); and
WHEREAS On August 10, 2006, minor variance application 2006 -A -22 was deferred by the
Committee of Adjustment which would permit the construction of a detached garage with an area
of 62.4 m2 (672 ft2) to be located in the front yard of the lot. The applicants have since submitted a
revised site plan showing the detached garage being relocated closer to the dwelling, being
setback 17.7 metres (58 feet) from Jermey Lane.
WHEREAS the subject property is designated "Rural Residential' in the Official Plan, and
Zoned "Rural Residential One (RUR1)" under By -law 97 -95; and
WHEREAS having had regard to those matters addressed by The Planning Act, in accordance
with the rules and procedures prescribed under Ontario Regulation 200/96, as amended, and
having considered all relevant information as presented at the public hearing on the 10th day of
August, 2006, and again on the 14th day of September, 2006.
PAGE # 2
APPLICATION 2006- A- 22(Revised)
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
Motion No. CA060914 -7
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby Refuse Minor Variance Application 2006 -A -22 for the proposal to
allow for a detached garage in the front yard on a corner lot as it would not be in keeping with the
Zoning By -law
...Defeated."
Moved by Allan Johnson, seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the Committee hereby Approve Minor Variance Application 2006 -A -22 as revised subject
to the following conditions:
1. That the height of the detached garage not exceed 5.2 metres (17 feet);
2. That the proposed detached garage be located no closer than 17 metres (55 feet) from the
front lot line, Jermey Lane, in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application;
3. That the sketch submitted with the application as revised indicating the proposed
landscaping be approved by the Committee;
4. 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 closer than 17
metres (55 feet) from the front lot line and that the height of the detached garage not
exceed 5.2 metres (17 feet); and
5. 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.
...Carried.,,
Additional information regarding this Application is available for public inspection at the
Township of Oro- Medonte Administration Centre, 148 Line 7 South in Oro Station, Ontario,
Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
! 0
PAGE # 3
APPLICATION 2006- A- 22(Revised)
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION
TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Section 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as
amended, the above decision and/or conditions may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal decisions in respect of applications
for consent to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an
unincorporated association or group. However, a notice of appeal may be filed in the name of an
individual who is a member of the association or group.
THE LAST DATE FOR FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL IS WEDNESDAY, THE 4th
DAY OF OCTOBER 2006.
A "NOTICE OF APPEAL" setting out in writing the supporting reasons for the appeal should be
received on or before the last date for "Appeal" accompanied by a cheque in the amount of ONE
HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS payable to the MINISTRY OF FINANCE. The
notice is to be submitted to the Secretary - Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, PO Box
100, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0.
Members concurring in this decision:
Lynda Aiken, Chairperson
Michelle Lynch
Garry Potter
DATED this 14a' day of September 2006
Andy Karaiskakis, ACST(A)
Secretary- Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
69 m
12.3 m
�20.7.m 10
14.6 m
Septic to k Existing
64 m Structure
" a
E..yi
-----------------
-
15.3
7.3 m
`' -" " "" "'- Existing
Septic 34.1 m Paved
weeping Drive
bed
NOT TO SCALE
x ,
R.�
t
7, m
78.5 m
I' 17.7
-----------------
-
15.3
7.3 m
`' -" " "" "'- Existing
Septic 34.1 m Paved
weeping Drive
bed
NOT TO SCALE
# 2 Nevis Ridge Dr.
Jermey
Lane
Edge of
Roadway
Proposed
Garage
Existing
Trees
Proposed < `�
Landscaping
0
•
R.�
y�
# 2 Nevis Ridge Dr.
Jermey
Lane
Edge of
Roadway
Proposed
Garage
Existing
Trees
Proposed < `�
Landscaping
0
•
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
September 14, 2006
Jerome & Linda Cunningham
2006- A- 22(Revised)
2 Nevis Ridge Road, Lot 11, Plan 535 (Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
On August 10, 2006, minor variance application 2006 -A -22 was deferred by the Committee
of Adjustment which would permit the construction of a detached garage with an area of 62.4
m2 (672 ft2) to be located in the front yard of the lot. The applicants have since submitted a
revised site plan showing the detached garage being relocated closer to the dwelling, being
setback 17.7 metres (58 feet) from Jermey Lane.
MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS
Official Plan Designation —Rural Residential
Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Rural Residential One (RUR1) Zone
Previous Applications — None
AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes)
Public Works Department- No road concerns
Building Department —
Engineering Department- No concerns
PLANNING FRAMEWORK
Background
The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 64 metres (210 feet) along Jermey
Lane, a depth of approximately 69 metres (226 feet) along Nevis Ridge Drive and a lot area
of approximately 0.44 hectares (1.1 acres) and is presently occupied by a single detached
dwelling and an attached garage. The Township's Zoning By -law provides the following
definition in determining yards for a corner lot:
LOT LINE, FRONT
Means the line which divides the lot from the public street, but, in the case of:
a) a corner lot, the shortest of the lot lines that divides the lot from the public street shall
be deemed to be the front lot line;
As the property line abutting Jermey Lane is shorter than the side abutting Nevis Ridge
Drive, for the purposes of establishing yards, the lot line abutting Jermey Lane would be
classified as the front lot line and the lot line abutting Nevis Ridge Drive would be classified
as the exterior side lot line.
0 •
The applicants are proposing to construct a 62.4 m2 (672 ft2) detached garage to be located
in the required front yard a distance of 17.7 metres (58 feet) from the front lot line, Jermey
Lane. Section 5.1.3 (a) of the Township's Zoning By -law states that detached garages are not
allowed in the front yard. The minor variance application is for the construction of a detached
garage to be located in the front yard and also for an increase in height from the required 4.5
metres (14.7 feet) to 5.2 metres (17 feet).
The Four Tests of the Minor Variance
Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated Rural Residential in the Official Plan. The main objective in the
Rural Residential designation is to recognize existing estate and country estate
developments in the Township. Permitted uses in the Rural Residential designation are
mainly single detached dwellings and accessory uses.
The applicant's proposal does not appear to offend these principles given that the variances
will accommodate development of a detached accessory building accessory to the permitted
residential use and would not appear to have a negative impact on the character of the
residential area.
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 Sy -law?
The subject property is zoned Rural Residential One (RURi). Based on site inspection, the
proposed building is situated which proves to be the most ideal location for a building. One
of the purposes of maintaining minimum front yards in the Rural Residential One Zone is to
maintain and protect the estate residential character of a single detached residential
community. However, it is also the intent of the By -law to permit accessory uses that are
reasonable and incidental to a residential use. Given that there will be adequate on site
parking and the garage will be setback 17.7 metres (58 feet) from the front lot line, Jermey
Lane and approximately 40 metres (131 feet) from Nevis Ridge Drive, and the proposal for the
increase in height is considered reasonable and minor in size, the proposed variances are
considered to conform with the general intent of the Zoning By -law. Notwithstanding the
front yard, the proposed detached garage will be located behind the existing dwelling as a
result of the orientation and placement of the dwelling facing towards Nevis Ridge.
Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot?
The applicant's lot is a relatively large rural residential property and the proposed building
appears generally compatible within a rural residential context. Based on the site inspection,
the detached garage with an increase in height would appear to be appropriate for the
desirable development of the lot and in keeping with the surrounding residential area. It also
should be noted that the applicants have submitted a revised sketch indicating proposed
landscaping in the front yard, adjacent to Jermey Lane and around the proposed garage,
buffering it from the street. On this basis the proposal is considered appropriate for the
desirable development of the subject lot.
Is the variance minor?
On the basis that the size of the garage in contrast with the proposed dwelling appears to be
reasonable, is set back from the front and exterior side lot lines and should not adversely
0 0
affect the character of the rural residential area, the proposed variances are considered to be
minor.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed variance generally satisfies the 4 tests of a minor variance as follows:
1. The proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Official Plan as the
proposal does not appear to offend the principles of the Rural Residential
Designation.
2. The proposed variances are considered to conform with the general intent of the
Zoning By -law.
3. The proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the subject
lot.
4. The proposed variances are considered to be minor.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Committee approve Minor Variance Application 2006 -A -22 as
revised subject to the following conditions:
1. That the height of the detached garage not exceed 5.2 metres (17 feet);
2. That the proposed detached garage be located no closer than 17 metres (55 feet) from
the front lot line, Jermey Lane, in accordance with the sketch submitted with the
application;
3. That the sketch submitted with the application as revised indicating the proposed
landscaping be approved by the Committee;
4. 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 closer
than 17 metres (55 feet) from the front lot line and that the height of the detached
garage not exceed 5.2 metres (17 feet); and
5. 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,
Andy Karaiskakis HBA, ACST(A)
Planner
Reviewed by,
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
3
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
Planning Report for
June 21, 2007
Michael MacVittie
2006 -B -24
978 Line 2 South, Range 2, Part Lot 3 (Oro)
THE PROPOSAL
The purpose of application 2006 -B -24 was to permit a lot addition /boundary adjustment. The
portion of lands to be severed and conveyed to the adjacent parcel of land to the north (892
Line 2 South) is proposed to have a depth of approximately 15.24 metres (50 feet), and a lot
area of approximately 0.03 hectares (0.07 acres). No new building lots are proposed to be
created as a result of the lot addition.
BACKGROUND
Committee approved the above boundary adjustment at its regular meeting on November 16,
2006. As part of provisional consent, the applicants were required to fulfill several standard
conditions, including rezoning the subject parcels, payment of municipal taxes, and in
particular, the following conditions related to merging of the conveyed parcel:
1. 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;
2. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the
lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
Through conversation with the applicant's lawyer, it has been determined that the retained
lands have in fact been subject to a previous Consent application in 1986. Under Section
50(12) of the Planning Act, when a parcel of land is conveyed through a consent, the land
parcel will not be eligible for further future consent. In addition, Section 50(12) further
stipulates that the "once a consent, always a consent" rule applies to identical parcels of land
that are the subject of a consent. The applicant's lawyer has informed this office that the
above conditions of consent cannot be achieved, as the lands will NOT merge in title, as per
Section 50(12).
In order to permit the applicant to proceed with the conveyance, it has been determined by
the applicant's lawyer that the lands to which the subject parcel are being conveyed must be
"altered" so as not to be "identical" to the parcel that was subject to a consent in 1986. As
such, it is suitable for the recipient of the conveyed parcel to dedicate a two metre road
widening along the frontage of the entire property, being 892 Line 2 South, to the Township
so as to adequately change the description of the recipient lands in order that the conveyed
parcel will merge in title.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Committee approve the inclusion of conditions 1 and 2 into the
previous approved conditions, 3 to 8, for provisional consent for Application 2006 -B -24:
1. That the Township receives a 2 metre (6.56 foot) conveyance of land, free and
clear of all and any encumbrances, along the entirety of the frontage along Line
2 South from the property being enlarged at Range 2, Part Lot 3, former
Township of Oro, also known as 892 Line 2 South. The applicant shall pay all
costs related to this condition, including any costs for surveying and /or any
costs related to the preparation and/ or registration of any required municipal
by -law related to the said conveyance;
2. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the enhanced lot, being 892 Line 2
South, including the 2 metre (6.56 foot) road widening to be conveyed to the
Township of Oro - Medonte, be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be
submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer;
3. 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;
4. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
5. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the
lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
6. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the severed and retained land
to accurately reflect the residential land use;
7. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte;
8. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one
year from the date of the giving of the notice.
?of hich is respec y s d; ozlowski, B.URPL
Reviewed by,
Glenn White MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
0
0
u�r
, -9a�r R J ffsll o
Professional Corporation
Barristers Solicitors & Trade Mark Agents
March 02, 2007
r
BY EMAIL ONLY: JACO gJACOBYLAW.CA
Barrister & Solicitor
34B Clapperton St.
Box 350
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Attn: Klaus Jacoby Solicitor
Dear Mr. Jacoby:
RE: MACVITTIE SEVERANCE
OUR FILE NO. 0799R03
Further to my phone messages of February 20 and 28, 200, I understand the Township of
Oro - Medonte is requesting that you consult with them with respect to my clients' (the
MaeVitties) Application to sever and convey a plot of land to their northerly adjoining
neighbours, the Hendersons.
One of the conditions of the severance is the provision of an undertaking from me that the
severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title. The lands to be enhanced
are owned by Coral Elizabeth Henderson. A review of the 1968 transfer to Ms.
Henderson reveals that the transfer was subject to a consent. As a result of section 50(12)
(once a consent always a consent) of the Planning Act 1 am not in a position state that the
lands in question will merge — they will not.
As you know, section 50(12) of the Planning Act only applies when one is dealing with
the "identical parcel of land ". I have spoken with the Township and they are open to the
Hendersons transferring a small portion of their property to the Township so as to create
a parcel of land that is not identical to the parcel that was subject to the original consent.
The lands will then merge in title. They have asked that you provide them with advice
with respect to what portion of land should be transferred by Ms. Henderson to the
Township.
I have attached a copy of the Committee of Adjustment decision No. 2006 -B -24, the PIN
parcel for the lands owned by Ms. Henderson, a copy of the 1986 transfer to Ms.
Ninety Mutcaster Street, P.O. Box 758, Barrie, Ontario, L4M 4Y5
Ph: 705 721 3377 Pax: 705 721 4025
continuing since 1870
www.burgarrowe.com
0
P
Henderson showing the original consent, and Plan 51R35157, which shows the severed
lot to be transferred to Ms. Henderson.
Your prompt attention to and consultation with the Township with respect to this matter
would be greatly appreciated as my clients require the severance to be completed prior to
the Spring planting.
Yours very truly,
Per: Zarah Walpole
/zw
email: zwalpolc &urgarrowe.com
cc: Cathy MacVittie
encl.:
tv
MOTION #!5
MAY 2 3 2007
MEETING: COUNCIL k°
C. OFW.D
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Thursday May 17 2007, 9:30 a.m.
'Isc - t
In Attendance: Chairperson Lynda Aiken, Member Rick Webster, Member Bruce
Chappell, Member Garry Potter, Member Michelle Lynch, Secretary- Treasurer
Adam Kozlowski
1. Communications and Correspondence
Correspondence to be addressed at the time of the specific hearing.
2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest
Chairperson Lynda Aiken declared a Pecuniary Interest with respect to
Variance Application 2007 -A -10 and existed the Council Chambers.
Committee voted to appoint a Chairperson to hear the first application:
Moved by Garry Potter, Seconded by Rick Webster that:
"Member Michelle Lynch be appointed to serve as acting Chairperson to
hear Variance Application 2007 -A -10
..Carried"
Committee of Adjustment -May 17, 2007
Page 1
3. Hearings:
I C
9:30 Michele & Richard Wainman 2007 -A -10
Lot 18, Concession 1
951 Penetanguishene Road
(Former Township of Oro)
In Attendance: Michele & Richard Wainman, applicants
Ted Snider made presentation to Committee, indicating no objection to the
application.
Motion No. CA070517- 1
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Rick Webster, seconded by Bruce Chappell
"Committee grant Variance Application 2007 -A -10 subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the applicant obtain the necessary permit(s) and approval(s) from the
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, if required;
2. That the applicant obtain the necessary permit(s) and approval(s) from the
County of Simcoe, if required;
3. 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.
4. That all work be completed according to Ontario Building Code
Requirements on or before May 17, 2008;
...Carried."
Committee of Adjustment -May 17, 2007
Page 2
9:40 Larry Tupling
31 Bards Beach Road
Plan 546, E Pt. Lot 6
(Former Township of Orillia)
In Attendance: Larry Tupling, applicant.
2004 -A -36 (Revised)
f�.
Secretary- Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read letter from C.T. Strongman
Surveying Ltd. dated May 16, 2007 verbatim to Committee and members of
the audience.
Motion No. CA070517- 2
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Garry Potter
"Committee grant an amendment to Condition No. 4, as originally approved by
Variance Application 2004 -A -36 as follows:
4. That the proposed enclosed structure be no closer than 1.31 metres (4.3
feet) from the westerly interior side lot line
...Carried"
Motion No. CA070517- 3
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken
"Committee grant Variance Application 2004 -A -36 (Revised) subject to the
following conditions:
1. 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;
2. 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 prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor;
3. That the structure be no closer than 10 metres (33 feet) from the average
high water mark of Bass Lake;
4. That the applicant obtains approval and a permit, if required, from the
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority.
.....Carried."
Committee of Adjustment -May 17, 2007
Page 3
9:50 Larry & Donna Jerry 2007 -B -09
6156 Line 4 North
Pt. Lot 21, Concession 4
(Former Township of Medonte) I'S C '
In Attendance: Larry & Donna Jerry, applicants.
Secretary- Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read letter from Deborah L. Wall -
Armstrong dated April 26, 2007 and; letter from Larry & Donna Jerry dated
March 22, 2007 and; letter from Ronald Devitt dated March 21, 2007
verbatim to Committee and members of the audience.
Motion No. CA070517- 4
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Garry Potter
"Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2007 -B -09 subject to the
following conditions:
1. 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;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the applicant provide verification to the Township Building
Department that septic requirements under Part 8 of the Ontario Building
Code are maintained;'
4. That the severed lands be merged in title with 6156 Line 4 North, and that
Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any
subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands;
5. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro- Medonte;
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 ".
Committee of Adjustment -May 17, 2007
Page 4
4. Other Business
Adoption of Minutes from April 19, 2007 Committee of Adjustment
Nearing
i�
Motion No. CA070517- 5
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Rick Webster, Seconded by Michelle Lynch
"That the minutes for the April 19, 2007 Committee of Adjustment Meeting be
adopted as printed and circulated
5. Adiournment
Motion No. CA070517- 6
BE IT RESOLVED that:
Moved by Bruce Chappell, Seconded by Garry Potter
"We do now adjourn at 12:30 pm
...Carried."
(NOTE: A digital recording of this meeting is available for review.)
Chairperson
Lynda Aiken
Secretary- Treasurer
Adam Kozlowski
Committee of Adjustment -May 17, 2007
Page 5