The URL can be used to link to this page

07 19 2007 C of A AgendaCommittee of Adjustment Agenda Thursday July 19, 2007, 9:30 a.m. 1. Communications and Correspondence 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest 3. Hearings: 9:30 2007 -B -10 972580 Ontario Inc. Plan 51 R- 27093, Parts 1 & 3 1555 Highway 11 North (Former Township of Oro) 9:45 2007 -B -11 Marisa Mascioli Plan 51 R- 27093, Part 4 56 Line 2 South (Former Township of Oro) 10:00 2007 -B -12 972580 Ontario Inc. Plan 51 R- 27093, Part 4 1555 Highway 11 North (Former Township of Oro) 10:15 2007 -B -19 Lester & Rosetta Parry Pt. Lot 8, Concession 3 2072 Line 3 North (Former Township of Oro) 10:30 2007 -B -20 May Family Holdings E. Pt. Lot 15, W. Pt. Lot 16, Con. 9 1052 Line 9 North (Former Township of Oro) 10:45 2007 -A -14 Tim Breen W. Pt. Lot 7, Con. 5 1156 Ingram Road (Former Township of Medonte) 11:00 2007 -A -15 Tim & Arlene Russell E % Lot 19, Con. 5 5718 Line 5 North (Former Township of Medonte) 11:15 2007 -A -17 Robert Butler Plan 1, Lot 15 67 Barrie Terrace (Former Township of Oro) 11:30 2007 -A -16 Resource Exchange Inc. Pt. Lots 27 & 28, Con. 3 12 Brooks Street (Former Township of Oro) 11:45 2007 -8 -18 Resource Exchange Inc. Pt. Lots 27 & 28 12 Brooks Street (Former Township of Oro) 4. Other business Adoption of Minutes from June 21, 2007 meeting 5. Adjournment Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 972580 Ontario Inc. 2007 -13-10, 2007 -B -11, 2007 -B -12 Plan 51R -27093 Parts 1, 3, 4; 1555 Highway 11; 56 Line 2 South (Oro) THE PROPOSAL The purpose of applications 2007 -13-10, B -11 and B -12 are as follows: 2007 -13-10: Sever new commercial lot at the north -east corner of Line 2 South and Highway 11, having a lot frontage on Highway 11 of 61 metres, a depth of 103 metres, and a lot area of 0.63 hectares. The proposed lot contains a gas station, convenience store, and accessory building. 2007 -B -11: Boundary adjustment, where 44 metres of frontage and 0.47 hectares of lot area is proposed to be conveyed from a residential lot, being 56 Line 2 South, to a commercial lot, being 1555 Highway 11. No new building tots are proposed as a result of this application. 2007 -B -12: Boundary adjustment, where 2.42 hectares of land is proposed to be severed from the subject lands, being Part 1 of Plan 51R- 27093, and conveyed to Part 3 of Plan 51R- 27093. As a result, the proposed enhanced lot will consist of 3.7 hectares, and the retained lands will consist of 4.82 hectares. No new building lots are proposed as a result of this application. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS Agricultural (B -11, B -12), Commercial 13-10, B -12) General Commercial (GC) Zone (B -10, B -12) Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone (B -12) Environmental Protection (EP) Zone (B -12) Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone (B -11) Ontario Ministry of Transportation — Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority - County of Simcoe - Public Works Department —No concerns Building Department - Engineering Department — (All applications) Approval required from N ottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and Ministry of Transportation required. BACKGROUND Applications 2007 -B -10, B -11 and B -12 propose to initiate a series of boundary adjustments for the purpose of future development of the lands subject to these applications. In particular, the applicant intends to apply for Official Plan and /or Zoning By -law Amendment(s) at a later time to develop the subject and adjacent lands for recreational purposes. As such, the consent applications at hand have been submitted to precede such development. Application B -11 seeks to sever a small parcel of an existing residential lot, being 56 Line 2 South, and convey to the adjacent parcel that is also subject to a boundary adjustment. Application B -12, in conjunction with B -11, seeks to then enhance an existing commercial lot that fronts onto Highway 11 by receiving an additional 2.42 hectares from the abutting lands to the south. In conjunction with Application B -12, B -10 proposes to sever a new lot for continued commercial use; the proposed lot would contain an existing gas station, convenience store, and incorporate a garage structure currently accessed off Line 2 South. The above applications were received on April 27, 2007, with the intention of proceeding to the May Committee of Adjustment meeting. As a result of the site inspection, it was determined that the sketches and drawings received with the application were unclear, and the applicant was notified that enhanced drawings were required prior to appearing before Committee. These drawings were subsequently received and circulated to internal Township Departments and external agencies. A preliminary review of applicable Township Zoning By -law and Official Plan policies relating to the applications as a whole was undertaken. DISCUSSION The lands subject to the three consent applications contain a variety of zone classifications. Application B -10 proposes to sever a new lot from a larger commercial land holding, where both the severed and retained parcels would continue to be zoned General Commercial (GC) Zone. Application B -11 seeks to sever lands from a lot zoned Rural Residential Two, and convey to adjacent lands zoned GC and Agricultural /Rural (A /RU). Application B -12 proposes to convey lands currently zoned A /RU and GC to an adjacent parcel entirely zoned GC, with the intention of eventually rezoning the proposed enhanced lot entirely to GC. Upon review of the Township Zoning By -law schedules, it was determined that the three properties subject to these applications are wholly or partially contained within the "Floodplain Overlay ". This overlay generally covers lands that have been identified to be within either the flood plain or flood fringe of a river drainage system. Section 2.5.2 of Zoning By -law 97 -95 identifies such lands as containing a "Floodplain -HOLD (FP -H)" provision, and as such would apply to the lands subject to this application. Policies and guidance with respect to development within a floodplain are listed in the Official Plan. Section B5.1.3 contains policies with respect to floodplain management, as the subject lands and surrounding area have been identified in the Zoning By -law as being contained within a floodplain. In particular, Section B5.1.3.1 states: it is the intent of this Plan that no development or site alteration be permitted within the floodway of a river or stream system. The follow ng policies shall apply to development j ropo,red on lands susceptible to flooding under regional storm conditions: a) Development will generally be directed to areas outside of ba%�ardous lands adjacent to a river or "'ream system that is impacted by flooding hazards; b) Development and site alteration will not be permitted within the floodway of a r ver or stream ystem ) Development and site alteration may be permitted witdrin the flood fringe of a river or stream ystem where flood depths and velocities would be less severe than those expeneuced witbin the floodway. Further to the above, the Official Plan policies with respect to floodplain management are implemented through the Zoning By -law, where lands identified to be within a floodplain contain the following implementation guidelines with respect to new development: Bg. Z 3.2 Implementation In order to implement the objectives of this Plan, all lands within an identified flaodpl in shall be subject to a Holding Provision in the implementing Zoning Bylaw... no new development is permitted ou lands subject to Abe Holding Prov sion arntil the Nottawasaga Malley Conservation Authority approves the development. Once the Nottawasaga Malley Conse nation Authority approval is given, the Holding Provision shall be removed by the Townsh p. At the time of writing this report, comments have not been received from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. However, through preliminary conversation with NVCA staff, it is apparent that there may be concerns with respect to the applications being considered, particularly in that a new lot is being proposed within a floodplain, and that portions of land subject to the boundary adjustments may be partially or wholly contained in areas at risk to flooding. Without expert comments from the NVCA, it is difficult to assess whether the applications at hand are appropriate at this time. With respect to application 2007 -B -10, the creation of a new commercial lot having frontage on Highway 11, Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan states: `prior to irsuingprovisional consentfr a new lot for any purpose, the Committee of Adus'ment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed... b) dons not have direct access to a Provincial Highway...uniess the Province...supports the request." The Ontario Ministry of Transportation was circulated the application and sketches, and at the time of writing this report, has not provided comments. As such, it is appropriate to defer the applications until such time that the MTO comments on the proposals. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee defer Applications 2007 -B -10, 2007 -13-11 and 2007 -B -12 until such time that comments are received from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and Ontario Ministry of Transportation. All of which is respectfully submitted, ti Jam Kozlowski, B.UR IL Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner or 0VOdel", gPQ �tt ci Qatt3 I? Proposed Land Parcels and Ownership Blue Outline Part is 972580 Ontario Inc. Red Outline Part 3: 972580 Ontario Inc. Orange Outline Part 4: Marisa Mascioli Boundary Changes Required as Follows: A) Boundary Adjustment between Parts 3 and 1 - follow new Red Outline B) Boundary Adjustment from Part 4 to Part 3 - follow new Green Outline C) New Lot Creation for Mortgage Security Purposes - Part 5 Planning Drawid,s for Diswseion Purposes of Zoning. Development and Servicing Subject Lands These drawings ere and to be sled tar epplirafion pwp sea. O-WRad end sealed drevnngs arang be submltle l separately for Wring, servicing or dev.bpment pandas., as required by the Township of Oro Med irds, Saabga C n, alma ave Tonak eh Ddve �'Iarl___I Toront ONMBW7S t'y-y=jOF 4185046551 V� www.atrabgecpnesltlng.ca °soled Righway k 11 East Side Shanty A3 Shanty gay Oro-Medonte Township Lawingr.la Scale: WS Proposed Land Parcels. Dawn: 8 . M.sdnll Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 Lester & Rosetta Parry 2007 -B -19 2072 Line 3 North, Concession 3, Part Lot 8 (Former Oro) THE PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2007 -B -19 is to permit a boundary adjustment. The subject property, being 2072 Line 3 North, is proposed to convey 48.1 hectares to an adjacent 1 hectare residential parcel, being 2105 Line 2 North. As a result of this application, the property at 2072 Line 3 North is proposed to retain 12.2 hectares of land, containing a kennel, and the lot to be enhanced, 2105 Line 2 North, would consist of 49.1 hectares, and is currently vacant. No new building lots are proposed as a result of this application. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /RL>) Zone (2072 Line 3 North) Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone (2105 Line 2 North) Previous Applications — 2006 -B -14 (Boundary adjustment to enhance 2105 Line 2 North from 0.25 hectares to 1 hectare). AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe - Public Works Department - Building Department - Engineering Department - BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to add approximately 48.1 hectares from the subject property to a neighbouring residential lot, also owned by the application. A previous consent (2006 -B -14) increased an existing residential property, being 2105 Line 2 North, from 0.27 hectares to 1 hectare. The current application would see the same property, 2105 Line 2 North, be increased in area from 1 hectare to approximately 49.1 hectares. The proposed retained lot, being 2072 Line 3 North, would consist of 12.2 hectares, and contains an existing single detached dwelling and kennel operation. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. OFFICIAL PLAN The subject lands are designated Agricultural by the Official Plan (OP). Section D2 of the OP contains policies with respect to subdivision of land. Specifically, Section D2.2.2 - "Boundary Adjustments ", provides the following guidance for Consent Applications in general: a consent may be permitted far the purpose of moding lot bounda ier, prov ded no new building lot is created... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment mill not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected... [and] sball be sari fled that the bounda y adjustment will not affect the viability of the agricultural parcels affected". With respect to the application at hand, no new building lots are proposed. Further, the boundary adjustment to convey lands from 2072 Line 3 North to 2105 Line 2 North will not constitute fragmentation of agricultural lands, nor hinder existing or potential farm operations on the subject property. A site inspection revealed that the lands to be conveyed, consisting of 48.1 hectares, is currently an active agricultural operation, and will continue to operate as such. As well, the applicants have indicated that they wish to retire to the proposed 49.1 hectare parcel and carry on hobby farm activities, including the keeping of horses. The proposed retained lands, consisting of 12.2 hectares, contains the `Royal Pets Hotel' kennel operation, and was observed to contain dense coniferous growth, and did not display evidence of past farming operations. With respect to the existing kennel operation, Section C1.2 of the Official Plan — Permitted uses, states that "permitted uses include single detached dwellings... [and] commercial dog kennels ". In addition, the same section also states "all existing commercial and industrial uses are also permitted ". Therefore, the retained lands would continue to operate with a permitted used as defined in the Official Plan. As such, the proposed boundary adjustment is generally in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan, as viable agricultural lands will not be removed from production, and otherwise conforms with the boundary adjustment policies contained in Section D.2.2.2. ZONING BY -LAW The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone by Zoning By -law 97 -95. The lot to be enhanced, 2105 Line 2 North, is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone. Pending approval of the application, the lot to be enhanced as well as the retained lands, would both conform with the minimum lot area, use and frontage provisions of the A /RU Zone. In addition, the existing dwelling, kennel, and accessory structures on the retained lands would also comply with the minimum lot area and setback requirements for such structures and uses in the A /RU Zone. The lot to be enhanced, while currently vacant, would be of ample size to accommodate a single detached dwelling, agricultural structures and uses as a result of the 49.1 hectare lot area. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By -law. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application for a boundary adjustment would appear to conform to the policies of the Official Plan, and maintains the use and setback provisions of the Zoning By -law. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2007 -B -19 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 severed lands be merged in title with 2105 Line 2 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; 4. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the subject lands to accurately reflect the proposed use; 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. All of which is respectfu sutted dam Kozlowski, B.URPL Planner Reviewed by �� Glenn White, MCIP RPP Senior Planner n m e� Ao7vSTeo. & 4q, I �, 1� REiAWED� 292 m A = iz��! t a 3 c� ac reS 375 ol 3 E _ 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 -B -14 IN THE MATTER OF Section 53 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 2006 -B -14 submitted by Rosetta & Lester Parry, owners of Concession 3, Part Lot 8 (former Township of Oro); and WHEREAS The purpose of application 2006 -13-14 is to permit a lot additioniboundary adjustment. The land to be severed and conveyed to the adjacent parcel of land also owned by the applicants, 2105 Line 2 North, is proposed to have a lot frontage along Line 2 North of approximately 93 metres (305 feet), a lot depth of approximately 239 metres (784 feet) and a lot area of approximately 3.7 hectares (9.3 acres). The land to be retained, 2072 Line 3 North, would have a lot frontage of approximately 239 metres (774 feet) and an area of approximately 54 hectares (135 acres). No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. The existing landholding at 2105 Line 2 North is approximately 0.24 ha (0.6 acres), therefore the resultant lot size is proposed to be 4.0 ha (9.9 acres). WHEREAS the subject property is designated "Agricultural' in the Official Plan, and Zoned "Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) & Environmental Protection (EP)" 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 IP day of July, 2006. PAGE # 2 APPLICATION 2006 -B -14 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION Motion No. CA060713 -1 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Michelle Lynch "That the Committee hereby Grant Provisional Consent regarding Application 2006 -13-14 as revised with a maximum total lot area for the new lot being no greater than 2 hectares (5 acres) and 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 severed lands be merged in title with 2105 Line 2 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; 4. That the maximum total lot area for the new lot be no greater than 2 ha (5 acres); 5. That the applicants 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 subject lands to accurately reflect the intended land use; 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. .....Defeated." Moved by Dave Edwards, seconded by Allan Johnson "That the Committee hereby Grant Provisional Consent regarding Application 2006 -B -14 as stated in the Planning Report with a maximum total lot area for the new lot being no greater than 1 hectare (2.5 acres) and subject to the following conditions: '11_�,. 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; That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; That the severed lands be merged in title with 2105 Line 2 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; That the maximum total lot area for the new lot be no greater than 1.0 ha (2.5 acres); That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; ii'e That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the subject lands to accurately reflect the intended land use; and, t.°` -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." PAGE # 3 APPLICATION 2006 -B -14 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 AUGUST, 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, LOU 2X0. Members concurring in this decision: Lynda Aiken (Chairperson) •••• Dave Edwards Mic elle Lynch Allan f, Garry Potter DATED this 13"' day of July 2006. Andy Karaiskakis, ACST(A) Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 13, 2006 Rosetta & Lester Parry 2006 -B -14 2072 Line 3 North, Concession 3, Part Lot 8 (Oro) THE PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2006 -B -14 is to permit a lot addition /boundary adjustment. The land to be severed and conveyed to the adjacent parcel of land also owned by the applicants, 2105 Line 2 North, is proposed to have a lot frontage along Line 2 North of approximately 93 metres (305 feet), a lot depth of approximately 239 metres (784 feet) and a lot area of approximately 3.7 hectares (9.3 acres). The land to be retained, 2072 Line 3 North, would have a lot frontage of approximately 239 metres (774 feet) and an area of approximately 54 hectares (135 acres). No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. The existing landholding at 2105 Line 2 North is approximately 0.24 ha (0.6 acres), therefore the resultant lot size is proposed to be 4.0 ha (9.9 acres). MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) & Environmental Protection (EP) Zones Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes) Simcoe County - Public Works Department - Building Department - Engineering Department- No concerns PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND The applicants are proposing a boundary adjustment to convey and add approximately 3.7 ha (9.3 acres) to a neighbouring lot also owned by the applicants which is currently vacant at 2105 Line 2 North. The purpose of the adjustment is to provide a larger agricultural lot for 2105 Line 2 North. The land to be retained by the applicant 2072 Line 3 North would have an area of approximately 135 acres, which is currently being used for a kennel operation and their private residence. OFFICIAL PLAN Section D2.3.4 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow Committee to consider applications for farm consolidations and boundary adjustments in the Agricultural designation. The policy states: Boundary line adjustments or farm consolidations may be considered where the effect of the boundary adjustment or consolidation is to improve the viability of the farm operation provided: a) no new lot is created; and, b) the viability of using the lands affected by the application for agricultural uses is not adversely impacted if the application is approved. In reviewing the application, no new building lots will be created, the existing kennel operation will continue to exist and given the relatively small amount of land to be conveyed, the viability of using the lands affected by the application would not adversely impact a farm operation. On this basis, the application would generally conform to the Official Plan. PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) which came into effect on March 1, 2005 provides for appropriate development while protecting resources or provincial interest, public health and the quality of the natural environment. The PPS also sets the policy foundation for regulating the development and use of land. Municipal decisions must be consistent with the PPS. Section 2.3 of the PPS provides policies related to agricultural lands. The main objective of this section is that prime agricultural areas shall be protected for long term use for agriculture. Section 2.3.4.2 states lot adjustments in prime agricultural areas may be permitted for legal or technical reasons. Furthermore, the PPS goes on to state that impacts from any new or expanding non - agricultural uses on surrounding agricultural operations and lands should be mitigated to the extent feasible. Based on site inspection and reviewing aerial photography of the lands subject to the lot addition, it appears that the expansion of the non - agricultural lot, 2105 Line 2 North, may impact the existing or future agricultural potential of the surrounding property. To this end, it is staff's position that the subject application should be reduced such that the maximum lot area for the lands to be augmented is 1.0 ha (2.5 acres) as opposed to 4.0 ha (9.9 acres). This smaller area would be consistent with the maximum lot area that was historically permitted under the Township's Official Plan policies for residential lots in the Agricultural designation. ZONING BY -LAW The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) & Environmental Protection (EP) in the Township's Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended. The lot to be enhanced, 2105 Line 2 North, is currently zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2). The land to be added to 2105 Line 2 North is zoned A/RU. If the application were approved, the new lot addition would conform with the provisions of the A/RU zone. It is recommended that the lands subject to the lot addition be rezoned to the A/RU zone to be consistent with the zoning fabric of the area. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application is for a lot addition that would generally comply with the principles of the Official Plan and the retained lands and the lands to be enhanced would comply with the requirements in the A/RU Zone once rezoned. In accordance with the PPS, the expansion should be limited to a size to retain as much of the agricultural potential on the subject lands as possible. Staff conclude that a maximum lot size of 1.0 he (2.5 acres) is reasonable as this would permit a more suitable area for a rural residential building lot while at the same time preserving the long -term agricultural potential of the remainder of the subject land. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent regarding Application 2006 -13-14 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 severed lands be merged in title with 2105 Line 2 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; 4. That the maximum total lot area for the new lot be no greater than 1.0 he (2.5 acres); 5. That the applicants 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 subject lands to accurately reflect the intended land use; 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. All of which is respectfully submitted, Andy Karaiskakis, HBA, ACST(A) Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 May Family Holdings Ltd- 2007-B-20 59015/16 Sideroad, East Pt. Lot 15, Concession 9, (Former Twp. Of Oro) THE PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2007 -B -20 is to permit a boundary adjustment. The land to be severed and conveyed, being 696 15/16 Sideroad, to the adjacent parcel of land, being 590 15/16 Sideroad, is proposed to have a lot depth of approximately 100 metres and a lot area of approximately 0.82 hectares. The resulting lot size as a result of this application is proposed to be 1.07 hectares. The land to be retained, 696 15/16 Sideroad, would have an area of approximately 39 hectares. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) & Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone Previous Applications — B -8/98 AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe - Public Works Department - Building Department - Engineering Department - No concerns BACKGROUND The applicants are proposing a boundary adjustment to convey and add approximately 0.82 hectares to a neighbouring lot also owned by the applicants, being 590 15/16 Sideroad, which contains a single detached dwelling and various accessory buildings. The purpose of the adjustment is to provide a larger residential lot for 590 15/16 Sideroad. The land to be retained by the applicant, 696 15/16 Sideroad, would have an area of approximately 39 hectares and currently contains a single detached dwelling and various structures accessory to the agricultural operation on the property. OFFICIAL PLAN Section D2.2.2 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow Committee to consider applications for boundary adjustments. The policy states: A consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries; provided no new building lot is created... in addition, the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the bounda y adjustment m ll not affect the v abil ty of the agricultural parcels affected. " In reviewing the application, no new building lots will be created, and given the relatively small amount of land to be conveyed, the viability of the overall agricultural operation would not likely experience an adverse impact. In addition, the County of Simcoe has historically required that residential lots in rural areas generally not exceed 1 hectare, with the intent of minimizing the fragmentation of farmland. On this basis, the application is considered to be appropriate and generally conforms to the Official Plan. ZONING BY -LAW The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) & Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law. The lot to be enhanced, 590 15/16 Sideroad, is currently zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2). The land to be added to 590 15/16 Sideroad is zoned A /RU. The minimum area for a lot in the RUR2 Zone is 0.4 hectares; as the subject property consists of 0.25 hectares, and therefore does not comply with the Zoning By -law. In effect, the application at hand would bring the present non- conforming lot into conformity, as the new lot area would exceed 0.4 hectares. With respect to the two zonings that would exist on the property at the time of approval, it is recommended that the lands subject to the conveyance be rezoned to the RUR2 Zone to maintain a consistent zoning fabric for the area. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application is for a lot addition generally conforms with the policies of the Official Plan and complies with the provisions of the Zoning By -law. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2007 -13-20 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 severed lands be merged in title with 590 15/16 Sideroad 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 maximum total lot area for the new lot be no greater than 1.07 ha; 5. That the applicants 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 subject lands to accurately reflect the intended land use; 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 submitted, dam Koz owski, B.URPL Planner Reviewed by Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner • 9- Committee of Adjustment Planning Report May 14,1998 May Family Holdings B-8198 Cone. 9, Part of Lot 15 (former Oro) The Proposal As a lot addition, the applicant is proposing to sever a vacant lot having approximately 11.76 metres (38.6 ft) of width, 129.98 metres (426.4 ft) of depth, and 1528.56 sq. metres (0.4 ac) of lot area leaving a residential parcel of land of approximately 2559.7 sq. metres (0.6 ac). The lot addition will be added to a parcel of land of approximately 39.5 hectares (97.5 ac). Policy Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning By -law: Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Comments Roads Superintendent: Driveway existing is ok Health Unit: Planning Department Comments Background The applicant owns 39.5 hectares (97.5 acres) in Concession 9, Part Lot 15, fronting on the 15/16 Sideroad. The intent of the application is to sever 0.4 hectares from an adjacent residential parcel and add it to the 39.5 hectare property. The purpose of the application is to transfer land from one property to another, not to create a new residential lot. Official Plan The Official Plan for the Township of Oro - Medonte places the subject property in the Agricultural designation. The purpose of the Agricultural designation is to recognize lands which must be protected for agricultural use in accordance with the guidelines established by the Provincial Policy Statement. Section D2.3.4 of the Official Plan is a policy concerning boundary adjustments which is deemed to generally apply to the subject application: n u • 1 Boundary line adjustments or farm consolidations may be considered where the effect of the boundary adjustment or consolidation is to improve the viability of the farm operation provided. a) no new lot is created; and, b) the viability of using the lands affected by the application for agricultural uses is not adversely impacted if the application is approved Although the specific purpose for the lot addition has not been disclosed in the application, it is clear the intent conforms with Section D.23.4 since it will not affect the viability of any farm operation. Zoning By -law The lands subject to the severance are zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) while the large acreage to which lands are to added are zoned Agncultural/Rural (A/RU). The portion of land to be added will maintain its RUR2 zoning pursuant to the lot addition, although it will serve no functional purpose as the lands cannot be used as a building lot. Rezoning is not deemed necessary unless the applicant wishes to have this parcel placed in the A/RU Zone. The survey submitted as a condition of consent must reference the retained RUR2 residential lot and its structures to confirm that the transfer has not created issues of non- compliance. As well, the Simcoe Health Unit should confirm that the lot addition will not adversely impact the septic system of the retained lot. Conclusion The subject application generally conforms with the Agricultural policy of the Official Plan regarding boundary adjustments. 2. The lot addition will merge an RUR2 zoned portion of land with a larger A/RU parcel. 3. A minor variance may be required if the lot addition creates areas of non- compliance on the retained lot Recommendation That application 138/98 be approved subject to the following conditions in addition to the standard conditions of approval: • That the Simcoe Health Unit confirm the septic system on the retained lot is not adversely impacted and does not cross a property boundary as a result of the lot addition. • That a minor variance be obtained for areas of non - compliance resulting from the lot addition, if required. Decision BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Roy Campbell, seconded by Allan Johnson " That the Committee hereby grant application B -8/98, subject to the following conditions. 1. That the Simcoe County District Health Unit confirm that the septic system on the retained lot is not adversely impacted and does not cross a property boundary as a result of the lot addition. 2. That a minor variance be obtained for areas of non - compliance resulting from the lot addition, if required. 3. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary. 4. That three copies of deeds be submitted to the Committee Secretary to be stamped as prescribed in the Planning Act. 5. That all Municipal taxes be paid to the Municipality. 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of this notice." .....carried. LOT 1 5 0 sl.fi. e { NOT TRAVELLED) x ONCE BETWEEN LDTS 15 81 167' 1� JN58 °58,05 "E 307.71— N.- N59011'20eE 61.79 x- -vr- -% x- Nnce1 \ Poet POST A WIRE FENCE OEFININS SOUTHERLY LIMIT OF AM ALLOWANCE x O M m U n z W i 4 a LOT m Y H A L F r 0 N C E O e+ e h 3 O M n c rW ... u r z � 4 z ;T a O 0 0 so - u _W W 0 a J ; e LL v Z T 1 61.79 -Nr- '6 -R 31.9. i x—x 7 ) 69011'20 "E O Yi l ¢.S7 INST ' \ � ♦Orz96) �\/ N L0. �W / a Tj(I3t0)0. ` r pwnn�ti� N t'0. D9oR13� m in get / DETAIL OH ` MOT TO Sr' OIL / N n 4 45 I N S T 7 6 5 5 8 0 rW� EAST a 3 v Otl g H � O 3 S ¢ Z OF ei z 0 F S n E O i it ~ m M Y♦ r ° in M S� POST a WIRE Z r O HALF LOT 0 N/ .EIKi�W �'WR 1641330) L0. 44.81 mr.. e07e96 0. eel S I N 600 0. 0 '00 � " E P A R TI >< I NIS TAE 14 Firstly CORNER t3r1338) 31.6. LU LOT � 15, CON 9 SAII. ��}-- N63 °261 ~leg 9( e) f 1390) 1) (N6e °oe',o•�ohe189.91-Me ---- N6S_— °q 5 "E (N 66 °30'30 "E, IeAe7 185.42m TRAVELLED PA, 'ey by PC. KIRK�RICK OL-S DATE MA , 1982. N1) UND SURVEY MONUMENT I ANTED SURVEY MONUMENT L Y ART L-le 2 '�+ e PLAN INST. 763181 QC. z P{- 24.38 — 15 9 WIT is. (1390) 00.1E PART I 1 51 R - 10901 3o.48 _ N 60° 00 00° E { Reference Bearing ) ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN ( 20.12 WIDE ) 15/11, SIDEROAD EAST HALF OF LOT 16 LO Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 Tim Breen 2007 -A -14 1156 Ingram Road. Conc. 5, Lot 7, ( Medonte) THE PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting permission from the Committee of Adjustment to expand a non- conforming use by allowing a 356.7 m2 (3840 W) single storey accessory building for the purpose of the saw mill operations taking place on the property. The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) by Zoning By -law 97 -95 as amended, and since a saw mill operation is not a permitted use in the A/RU Zone, therefore permission is needed to expand this non - conforming use (the saw mill). MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation —Rural Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS (space is provided for the Committee to make notes) Public Works- No concerns Building Department — Fire Department - Engineering Department- No concerns MTO- No concerns PLANNING FRAMEWORK Background The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 230 metres (754 feet) on Line 4 N, a lot depth of approximately 693 metres (2273 feet) and a lot area of approximately 15.7 hectares (39 acres) and is presently occupied by a single detached dwelling, and eight accessory buildings used to the operation of the saw mill. As noted, the existing saw mill operation is not a permitted use in the A/RU Zone. As a result, the applicant requires permission from the Committee of Adjustment to expand the use and construct the proposed accessory building. The property has adequate buffering surrounding the saw mill operations, which in turn conceal the proposed building. The purpose of the proposed building is to house equipment and employees during the winter months. The applicant also owns the adjacent lands to the east, which also provide an additional buffer to the nearest residential dwelling. The closest residential dwelling is approximately 800 metres (2624 feet) from the current saw mill operation. Due to the location of saw mill on the property, evidence of the operation is not evident from public roadways. This can be contributed to the extensive buffering of existing tree coverage and setback from public roadways and surrounding property owners. Official Plan Section E1.5.2 of the Township's Official Plan sets out the following policies to guide the Committee in considering extension to non - conforming uses: a) The size of the extension in relation to the existing operation; b) Whether the proposed extension is compatible with the character of the surrounding area; c) The characteristics of the existing use in relation to noise, vibration, fumes, dust.... and the degree to which any of these factors may be increased or decreased by the extension; and, d) The possibilities of reducing these nuisances through buffering, building setbacks, landscaping, site plan control and other means. The property is designated Rural in the Official Plan. The primary objection of this designation is to preserve and protect the rural character of the Township and the maintenance of the open countryside. The Rural designation permit's forestry uses. As the saw mill operation already exists, and the size of the proposed additional building is minor in comparison with the existing structures on the property, it would satisfy criteria (a). The proposed structure, maintains the character of the operations and the surrounding area, would not increase any nuisance factors and would therefore conform to criteria (b), (c) and (d). Therefore, the proposal appears to conform to the intent of the policies contained in the Official Plan. Zoning By -law The subject lot is currently zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) which the Zoning By -law does not permit a saw mill operation the A/RU Zone. Based on a site inspection, the addition should not adversely impact surrounding features as the addition is considered reasonable in size and are setback reasonably distant from property lines providing a buffering of the operations and the surrounding properties. Therefore the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the By -law. CONCLUSIONS 1. The requested permission to expand a non- conforming use represents a minor expansion that is compatible with the character of the surrounding area. 2. The requested expansion to a non - conforming use is considered to conform with Section E1.5.2 of the Official Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Committee approve Minor Variance application 2007 -A -14 as follows 1. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on the sketch dated June 11, 2007 and approved by the Committee; 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 so that the addition be no larger than 356.7 m2 (3840 ftz); and, 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; All of wh' r spectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson Junior Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning I Pagel of 2 Farquharson, Steven From: Hendrix, Janice (MTO) [Janice. Hendrix @ontario.ca] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 9:32 AM To: Farquharson, Steven Subject: RE: Variance Application 2007 -A -14 Hi Steven; MTO would have no concerns with the saw mill operation, and the proposed new building. All above and below ground structures must be set back a minimum distance of 14 in from the Highway 400 property limit. The sketch provided indicates that the proposed building is outside of our permit control area, and as such, a MTO Building Permit would not be required. And of course, access to Highway 400 would not be permitted under any circumstances. I trust this is sufficient to your requirements. If you need any further information, please do not hestiate to contact me. Regards, Janice Hendrix Permits Officer Corridor Management Section Ministry of Transportation 1201 Wilson Avenue 7th Floor, Building D Downsview, Ontario M3M 1J8 Tel. (416) 235 -5382 Fax.(416) 235 -4267 Email: janice.hendrix @ontario.ca - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Farquharson, Steven [mailto :sfarquharson @oro- medonte.ca] Sent: July 9, 2007 11:07 AM To: Hendrix, Janice (MTO) Subject: Variance Application 2007 -A -14 Hey Janice, This is just a follow up email with the notice of hearing attached. Please find the attached variance application for the expansion of a non - conforming use located at 1156 Ingram Rd, which abuts Highway 400 right way to the South. The property is currently zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU), and therefore the saw mill operation is not permitted. If you have any comments or concerns please let me know. Regards, Steven Farquharson, BURPI Junior Planner 7/13/2007 ti - — z, uc1 L PuRPoppSED NEW OK14.D�NC YO f�5 SNK WINWIK PLIMMM UN 1 1 1007 ORO- MF_LONTE t TOWNSHIP ISQC�,NiL-UM{c�' [b�tii�111J �i S��NGR• -r., :�0 (�k ��1�� r. xC'o E'uFa.0 t�jE jqw r„Li. �63{,�fl fr - �r. C>,�SE6 �- It =s>rFv �TUI1_GItir6 ti,.f'L -a. <:an� K(S";IN6 VYn�N GNIlOif -i; p. 3 i `i AZ V1 ; v m m'. El A: I, 1S. � o e {rl `c4 r' r 'o C �z "r i I i I` M �1� NO Toe VlFVj Ib�( I Ial� !_iY i�"Dz,)p _ n L n I� { Ise YI r I Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 21, 2007 Tim and Arlene Russell 2007 -A -15 5718 Line 5 North, Part Lot 19, Con 5 ( Medonte) THE PROPOSAL The applicants are requesting permission from the Committee of Adjustment to permit the construction of a 252.3 m2 (2715 ft2) two storey single family dwelling within the limits of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback from a water course. The proposed dwelling will be located approximately 10 metres (32.8 feet) from the water course. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) & Environmental Protection (EP) Zones AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department- No Concerns Building Department- The Township Building Dept has reviewed this application and note that the proposal appears to meet the minimum standards Engineering Department — C.A. Approval Required NVCA- Deem this to be a local drainage issue and therefore have no objection to the setback from a watercourse being reduced. Background The subject property has a street frontage of approximately 216 metres (708 feet) along Line 5 North and a lot area of approximately 34 hectares (86 acres). The property currently has a detached garage, swimming pool and a barn /dwelling. The applicants are proposing to construct a 252.3 mZ (2712.5 fe) single detached dwelling with an attached deck being located at the rear of the proposed dwelling. The proposed building will be located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and the 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback from a water course as noted in Zoning By -law 97 -95. As a result, permission is required from the Committee of Adjustment for the construction of the dwelling and deck. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Agricultural by the Official Plan. The primary function of the Agricultural designation is to protect land suitable for agricultural production from development and land uses unrelated to agricultural and to preserve and promote the agricultural character of the Township and the maintenance of the open countryside. Permitted uses in the Agricultural designation includes single detached dwellings as well as accessory uses. The proposed location for the dwelling and deck will be on lands which are currently not used for agricultural activity. Due to the proposed dwelling maintaining the agricultural character of the area, the proposal appears to 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? In assessing the issue of conformity with the Zoning By -law, the proposed dwelling and deck should not detract from the overall character of the lot and surrounding natural features being the watercourse which runs through the property and the mature trees located in the front yard. One of the purposes of regulating structures from being built within the Environmental Protection Zone and 30 metres setback from a watercourse is to maintain and enhance the ecological integrity of the natural heritage system, to ensure that development does not occur on lands that are unstable or susceptible to flooding and to ensure that development does not occur on hazardous slopes. The application has been circulated to the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and Hyrdo One for comments. Through the Township's GIS mapping system a watercourse is shown as running south through the proposed location of the dwelling and deck. However, when a site inspection was done by the Planning Department there was no evidence of a watercourse on the property. The NVCA have no objection to the approval of the application. They stated that this watercourse to be a local drainage issue, with no defined channel. The subject lands have a hydro easement to the south which prohibits the applicant from developing on the southern portion of the property. There is also an increase in the elevation of the lands to the north which limit the development possibilities on the property. Therefore the proposed dwelling and deck meets the general intent of the Zoning By -law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The proposed buildings should provide for a form of development that is suitable and consistent with the surrounding area. The proposed variance will provide for the construction of a dwelling with a deck and will continue to maintain the agricultural character of the area. On this basis the proposed variance would be appropriate for the development of the lot. Is the variance minor? On the basis that the proposal is reasonable and would not appear to adversely affect to the surrounding properties, the application is considered to be minor. CONCLUSIONS The proposed variance generally satisfies the tests of a variance. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2007 -A -15 subject to the following conditions: That the size and setbacks of the proposed dwelling be in conformity with the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 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 so that i) The dwelling including the attached deck be located no closer than 10 metres (32.8 feet) from the top of bank of the water course; 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 the applicants obtain a permit from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority under the Conservation Authorities Act. 5. That the applicants enter into the appropriate agreement with the Township to maintain the existing dwelling while construction of the proposed dwelling is taking place. All of which is respectfully submitted, Planner Reviewed by, � y- Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner JUL -12 -2007 08:03 FROM:NVCR July 12, 2007 7054242115 TO:17054870133 P.1 /1 Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of pro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0 Mona Based upon a site inspection, the watercourse has no defined channel, no M„ln,nr water in it and no riparian vegetation. As such, the NVCA would deem this New recumieth to be a local drainage issue and we therefore have no objection to the setback from a watercourse being reduced. We advise contour information Mid "n(` does indicate overland drainage is likely to flow towards the area of the "" "' hl „nds proposed dwelling. The purpose of the permit (or approval) is to ensure Sh?IburnP new development is not impacted by any local drainage issues, 5pungwofcl A:A ab B. Thank you for circulating this application and please advise us of any decision. Watershed Counties simcue Duflcnn Grey Member of "R1--. Conservation ONTARIO Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Conserving our Healthy Wa ters NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY - Centre tot Conservation luhn Flix Conicrvalioo Administration Centre Tiffin n Conservation Area - BPI-, Ath I ine Utopia: On LOM [TO Telephom: 705,424.1479 r-a,f 7(6,414,2115 Web: wwwavea.on.ca Email: adminprive:a oil ca Dear Mr. Kozlowski; Member Municipalities Application for Minor Variance 2007 -A -15 (Russell) Adiala Tosorontio Lot 19, Concession 5, 5718 Line 5 North Township of Oro - Medonte (Formerly Township of Medonte) Arear[inlh B4mt. The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this [he ehue Mounrnins minor variance application in accordance with regulations made under the Bradford West owtlhmh, y Conservation Authorities Act. The NVCA has no objection to the approval pproval of this application subject to hnR,ar -,<I the following condition: F >sa lnni9t;l • That the applicant obtain a permit (or approval) from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority under the Conservation Authorities Act. Mona Based upon a site inspection, the watercourse has no defined channel, no M„ln,nr water in it and no riparian vegetation. As such, the NVCA would deem this New recumieth to be a local drainage issue and we therefore have no objection to the setback from a watercourse being reduced. We advise contour information Mid "n(` does indicate overland drainage is likely to flow towards the area of the "" "' hl „nds proposed dwelling. The purpose of the permit (or approval) is to ensure Sh?IburnP new development is not impacted by any local drainage issues, 5pungwofcl A:A ab B. Thank you for circulating this application and please advise us of any decision. Watershed Counties simcue Duflcnn Grey Member of "R1--. Conservation ONTARIO Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Conserving our Healthy Wa ters NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY - Centre tot Conservation luhn Flix Conicrvalioo Administration Centre Tiffin n Conservation Area - BPI-, Ath I ine Utopia: On LOM [TO Telephom: 705,424.1479 r-a,f 7(6,414,2115 Web: wwwavea.on.ca Email: adminprive:a oil ca Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 Robert Butler 2007 -A -17 67 Barrie Terrace, Plan 1, Lot 1 (Former Twp. Of Oro THE PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to construct a 62.8 square metre attached garage in the front yard of the subject property, and is proposing to enclose an existing deck in the side yard of the property. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Section 4, Table Bl of Zoning By -law 97 -95: Required Proposed Minimum Front Yard Setback, RLS Zone: 7.5 metres 3.9 metres Minimum Side Yard Setback, RLS Zone: 3 metres 2 metres MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Shoreline Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Residential Limited Service *Hold (RLS *H) Zone Previous Applications — None AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — ensure that no building or construction occurs within the easement Building Department - Engineering Department - Background The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 15.5 metres on Barrie Terrace; however, access to the driveway of the property is provided by a 3.7 metre wide easement that serves as a laneway for the subject property, two residential lots to the west, and three residential lots to the east. The subject property has a depth of approximately 60 metres, and a lot area of approximately 0.08 hectares. The subject property contains a single detached dwelling and a boathouse. The applicants are proposing to construct a 62.8m' attached garage to be located at the front of the main dwelling, and to enclose an existing deck at the rear of the dwelling in order to increase functional interior living space. The dwelling is currently setback approximately 12 0 metres from the front lot line, and 2.18 metres from the west side lot line. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 7.5 metres to 3.9 metres to accommodate the proposed garage, and to reduce the required side yard setback from 3 metres to 2 metres for the proposed garage and enclosed deck. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.2 of the Plan states that "permitted uses on lands designated Shoreline... are single detached dwellings [and accessory buildings to such] ". Therefore an attached garage accessory to a dwelling 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 Limited Service *Hold (RLS *H) Zone. Permitted uses in the RLS *H Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. The property is zoned "limited service" to reflect that access is provided by Barrie Terrace, being an unassumed or private road. The *Hold provision ensures that further development on such properties will require a Site Plan Agreement, to be approved by the Township and registered on title. For the application at hand, it is appropriate that site plan approval be imposed as a condition of variance. With respect to the request for variance to reduce the side yard setbacks, the applicant has provided a survey indicating that the existing dwelling does not comply with current zone provisions of the RLS Zone; however, as the structure was built in approximately 1924, it would be considered a non - conforming structure. Therefore the addition of a garage and enclosed deck is not proposing to further reduce the existing side yard setback but to add additional floor volume in a required yard. Committee should note that the east side of the dwelling meets and exceeds the interior side yard setback of the RLS Zone, and therefore provides adequate access to the rear of the property. With respect to the reduced front yard setback, a site inspection revealed that the subject property does not access Barrie Terrace directly; according to the survey provided by the applicant, a 3.7 metre wide easement exists along the entire frontage of the property, and serves as a lane-way to provide access for the subject and neighbouring properties to Colbourne Street. As a result of the site inspection, concerns were raised by staff regarding the proposed garage potentially, being located partially on the easement. The applicant has subsequently had a surveyor verify that the proposed garage is in fact setback 4.1 metres from the front lot line, and will not encroach on the easement. While the Zoning By -law does not have a setback requirement to the easement boundary, the Public Works Department has indicated that structures are not permitted on this right-of-way, as it currently serves as an access route for properties along Barrie Terrace. 2 Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The application to add additional floor volume in a required yard is appropriate, as the existing dwelling does not comply with the side yard setback requirement of the RLS Zone; therefore, the application is not proposing to furrber reduce a deficient side yard setback. In addition, the property to the west of the subject lands is currently, and as such privacy issues for neighbouring dwellings are not anticipated. With respect to the reduced front yard setback reduction for the proposed attached garage, the traveled portion of Barrie Terrace itself runs along the old CN rail line right -of -way, and is located at the top of the old rail bed embankment which was viewed to contain mature trees and shrubs along the length of Barrie Terrace. As such, the proposed garage will be sheltered through the existing vegetation and by the differing topography between the raised rail bed and front yard of the subject lands. In addition, it has been confirmed through a surveyor that the proposed garage will not encroach onto the easement at the front of the subject property, and as such will not restrict or hinder vehicular and pedestrian access for neighbouring lands. Based on the above, the application to reduce the side and front yard setbacks for an enclosed deck addition and attached garage is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance minor? As this application maintains the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By -law, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. CONCLUSION The proposed variance generally satisfies the tests of a Variance as prescribed in the Planning Act. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2007 -A -17 subject to the following conditions: 1. 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; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the front yard setback of the attached garage not exceed 4.1 metres, and that the sideyard setback for the garage not exceed 2 metres; and that the side yard setback for the enclosed deck not exceed 2 metres; 3 3. That no part of any building or structure on the subject lands be constructed on the easement along the front of the property, identified as Part 3, Plan 51R- 15199, 8001217067; 4. That the applicant enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the Township; 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 madam Kozlowski, B.URPL Planner 51 Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner v` w° • eAl > °qi h uaumm �� aoc. -/1 Wt rus Pe t 5 CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY 6 R34]0,8]' "51 .16' h, C or Cart � 1 n410 wo-n '50 sa,m C.9.16' N86'40'06 "E R. 34]08'1' A: 50.91' ve "E Np9 / vp fP1 k Nero.l nN C -5091 N9E X9 '45 (RRw9 <RRw1 ff Meos.) — I. R Il1DPrrr %Y L � wt 1.3' Ea°I 2. s T YARD r- IS, ro �':9 �► v. ..... o n ! I e r o � I 1 . �G K � � Aa'd• �ir�7 ypn I 4V . < E.e PART 1 PLAN 51R -14996 a ` jw TID &*A ' Reldn q wM ':' ::. �A Y A floe of C'Mar 2.5' Wae\ RelaFF9 Wd1 V> En0 of Can Eno d n ' O� ' flsloFmg Wpl t9' Wn1 W „t dn 0.5' RslFq Ng OP' Ea°1 walw9 ERq (P �r.Po UweJ� ' ' do��4p1�)1 !! rofpj .. -- amna<t� SNO rrr v` w° • eAl > °qi h uaumm �� aoc. -/1 Wt t 5 q � h, C or Cart � 1 L � 1.3' Ea°I 2. v. ..... I 4V O� BAY OF SIMCOE SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT (PART 2) REPORT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF LAND: PART OF LOT 15 ON THE BAY AND PART (SOUTH SIDE OF DAVIS STREET) Ni OF LOT 15 STREET) REGISTERED PLAN 1 AND AND PART OF KEMPENFELT TOWN PLOT TOWNSHIP OF CRO— MEDONTE (GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF ORO) COUNTY OF SIMCOE REGISTERED EASEMENTS AND /OR RIGHT —OF —WAYS: Sab'pct to a Right -of -Way omr Port 3, 51R -15199 and together with a Right- of -WOY over Ports 4 and 5, Plan 51R- 15199. ENCROACHMENTS: Note location of wood dock and retaining walls COAPUANCE WITH MUNICIPAL ZONING BY -LAWS: Not certified by this Report. A TRONAL REMARKS: Note location of cedar hedge and fence along the West Limit. THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED FOR E. Pwko Sale AND THE UNDERSIGNED ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE USE BY OTHER PARTIES. Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 Resource Exchange Inc. 2007 -A -16 12 Brook Street, Part of Lots 27 & 28, Concession 3 (Former Oro Twp) THE PROPOSAL Variance application 2007 -A -16 is preceding consent application 2007 -B -18 that will be heard at this meeting. The applicants are requesting relief from the minimum lot frontage requirement for the Agricultural /Rural Zone, being 45 metres, to a proposed 20 metres and 42 metres as part of an application to create a new residential lot. The requested variance would also serve as a condition for approval to consent application 2007 -B -18. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Rural, Shoreline & Rural Settlement Area Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) and Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Previous applications — None AGENCY COMMENTS Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - County of Simcoe - Public Works Department - Building Department - Engineering Department - BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing to create a new residential lot by way of severance. The subject lands are bordered by Ridge Road West to the north and Lake Simcoe to the south. The subject property is a long, rectangular- shaped lot that contains 42 metres of frontage on Ridge Road West, 20 metres of frontage on Brook Street, and contains approximately 46 metres of frontage on Lake Simcoe. The lot consists of approximately 2 hectares (5 acres), and contains a single detached dwelling and detached accessory building. As a result of consent application 2007 -B -18, the applicant is proposing to sever the existing dwelling, which will be contained on a lot that will front on Brook Street, where the existing road allowance providing access to the severed lot is approximately 20 metres wide. The proposed retained lot would have 42 metres of frontage on Ridge Road West. The purpose for the variance application is to permit the proposed severed lot to have a reduced lot frontage, from 45 metres to 20 metres, and for the proposed retained lot to have a reduced frontage from 45 metres to 42 metres. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are split between the Rural, Shoreline, and Rural Settlement Area designations. Both the proposed severed and retained lots are partially contained within the Rural Designation, where the severed lot with the existing dwelling is partially within the Shoreline designation, and the retained lot is partially within the Rural Settlement Area Designation. Permitted uses in the Shoreline, Rural Settlement Area and Rural designations include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings to residential uses. As such, the request for a reduction in frontage for a proposed lot that has already been developed for a permitted use is deemed to conform with the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By -law? The subject property contains a "split zoning'; the northerly portion of the lot, extending from Ridge Road West southerly beyond Brook Street, is zoned A /RU. The remainder of the lot, extending from Lake Simcoe northerly for 85 metres, is zoned SR, and contains the dwelling unit and detached garage. The proposed severed lot has a depth of 216 metres and a lot area of 0.98 hectares, and is accessed via a private driveway at the end of the Brook Street road allowance. Both portions of the properties subject to the variance for reduced lot frontage he within the A /RU Zone, where new lots require 45 metres of frontage. However, as the proposed lot will intersect with the 20 metre wide Brook Street road allowance at a perpendicular angle, it would be impossible for the lot to meet with the frontage requirement of the A /RU Zone. The proposed retained lands have an existing frontage along Ridge Road West of 42 metres — upon review of mapping for the immediate area, it would appear that many lots along Ridge Road West within Shanty Bay have been historically developed with smaller lot frontages that do not comply with current zoning requirements. With respect to the proposed severed lot, the dwelling is accessed by an existing driveway off the 20 metre Brook Street road allowance, where the property will not require a new entrance, extension, widening or other improvements to Brook Street. With the exception of lot frontage, the proposed severed lands will utilize an existing access driveway, and will otherwise meet with the minimum required lot area for the SR Zone, being 0.2 hectares; the A /RU Zone does not contain a minimum lot area provision. In addition, the existing dwelling and accessory structure constitute permitted uses in both zones. Therefore, the request to reduce the rot frontage from 45 metres to 20 metres for the proposed severed lot generally complies with the intent of the Zoning By -law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The existing dwelling on the proposed severed lot is located at the south end of the property, setback approximately 45 metres from the shoreline of Lake Simcoe. It was noted that a communal driveway, extending from the end of the Brook Street road allowance, provides access for both the subject property and two neighbouring lots directly to the east (being 12 and 16 Brook Street). As such, the existing driveway has to date provided access to three residential properties. The variance application to recognize the existing 20 metre wide driveway entrance at the end of Brook Street for the creation of a new lot will otherwise not hinder the continued shared access function of this driveway. With respect to the retained lot, the subject lands and the majority of surrounding properties have historically been deficient in lot frontage. In addition, the intent of this variance application would appear to serve more as recognisance of the existing 20 metres of frontage on Brook Street and 42 metres of existing frontage on Ridge Road West than to seek reduction of a Zoning By -law standard. As such, the variance application to recognize an existing 20 metre frontage and 42 metres of frontage for the proposed severed and retained lots is desirable for the appropriate development of the lot. Is the variance minor. Based on Official Plan conformity and Zoning By -law compliance, and that the requested variance seeks to recognize existing deficient frontages as opposed to requesting further reduction of a Zoning By -law requirement, the variance is considered to be minor. CONCLUSION The application generally satisfies the tests of a Variance as prescribed by the Planning Act. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2007 -A -16. All of which is respectfully subrn tte , dam Kozlowski, B.URPL Planner Reviewed by, i Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Township of Oro- Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for July 19, 2007 Resource Exchange Inc. 2007 -B -18 12 Brook Street, Part of Lots 27, 28 (Former Twp. of Oro) THE PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2007 -B -18 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot by way of severance. The land to be severed contains an existing single detached dwelling, and is proposed to have a depth of 217.21 metres, frontage along Brook Street of 20 metres, and a lot area of 0.98 hectares. The land to be retained is vacant, and is proposed to have 42 metres of frontage on Ridge Road West, a lot depth of 271.33 metres, and a lot area of approximately 1.12 hectares. Variance application 2007 -A -16 to request a reduction in lot frontage from 45 metres to 20 metres for the severed lot is being heard concurrent to Consent application 2007 -B -18. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Rural, Shoreline & Rural Settlement Area Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) and Shoreline Residential (SR) Zones Previous Applications - None one AGENCY COMMENTS Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — County of Simcoe — Public Works Department — Building Department — Engineering Department - BACKGROUND The subject property is located in the former Township of Oro, south and east of the Shanty Bay Settlement Area. The lands are bounded by Ridge Road West to the north, and Lake Simcoe to the south. Brook Street is located approximately halfway between Ridge Road West and Lake Simcoe, and serves as the primary road access point for both the subject property and two additional properties immediately to the east. The subject lands are designation Rural Settlement Area, Rural, and Shoreline in the Official Plan, and zoned Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone and Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. The A /RU zoning extends from Ridge Road West southerly to just past Brook Street. The SR component of the property extends from Lake Simcoe northerly, having a depth of approximately 85 metres. A single detached dwelling and detached accessory garage are located within the portion of the property with the SR zoning. The application at hand proposes to sever the existing dwelling, to be contained on a lot having 217 metres of depth, 46.9 metres of frontage on Lake Simcoe, 20 metres of frontage on Brook Street, and a lot area of approximately 0.98 hectares. The proposed retained parcel would be vacant, and have 42 metres of frontage on Ridge Road West, an average depth of 268 metres, and a lot area of approximately 1.12 hectares. OFFICIAL PLAN The subject property is partially contained within three land use designations: the proposed retained parcel is partially designated Rural Settlement Area and Rural, while the proposed severed lot is partially designated Rural and partially designated Shoreline. The issue of partial land use designations must be addressed for both the proposed severed and retained lots, as the Rural designation would not generally permit a severance due to insufficient lot size, where the minimum area required is 36 hectares. However, as the proposed severed lot has already been developed with a residential dwelling within the portion of the property designated Shoreline, it is on this land use policy that the application for the severed lot is being considered; Section C5.2 lists single detached dwellings as being permitted in the Shoreline designation. The proposed retained lands are split- designated between the Rural and Rural Settlement Area designation. With respect to land use designation boundary interpretation, the Official Plan provides for some flexibility when considering development applications: EL8— Interpretation ofland use designation boundaries The boundaries between land uses designated on the scheduler of fthe) plan are approximate except where they meet with roads, railways, lot lines or other clearly dened physical features; and in these cases are not open to flexible interpretation. Where the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained, minor adjustments to boundaries will not require amendment to this plan... where a lot it within more than one de.agnation ... each portion of the lot shall be used in accordance with the applicable policies of that designation. The proposed future residential development, in the form of a single detached dwelling, is expected to take place on the portion of the lands within the Rural Settlement Area designation fronting onto Ridge Road West, and will require an entrance permit from the County of Simcoe if not previously issued. In addition, both the Rural and Rural Settlement Area designations permit the development of low- density residential uses, namely single detached dwellings. As such, the proposed severed and retained lands are intended to be developed with uses that conform to all designations found on the subject property, in accordance with the Official Plan. Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains tests with respect to the creation of new lots by way of consent. In particular, the Committee shall be satisfied that the proposed severed and retained lots: a) fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that it maintained on ayear -round basis; b) does not leave direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Prornnce or the Counfiy supports the request; c) will not cause a tra #ic hazard; d) has adequate side and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and it compatible with adjacent user, e) can be serviced with an appropriate water apply and means of sewage disposal; J) will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; g) will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access; h) will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; i) will not have a negative impact on the gnahty and quantity ofgroundwater available far other uses in the area Criteria a), b), and c) deal specifically with property access requirements and traffic. Currently, the subject property contains two access points, being from Ridge Road West and via the end of the Brook Street road allowance. However, the Brook Street access point also serves as a communal laneway and provides access to two additional properties, being 12 and 16 Brook Street. As such, the applicant should, as a condition of Consent, provide documentation ensuring the continued access for these two properties across the proposed severed lot, to the satisfaction of the Township. With respect to County Road access, the applicant will be required, as a condition of consent, to obtain the necessary, entrance permit(s) (if not already issued previously) from the County. Criteria e), 0 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), regarding Zoning By -law compliance, will be discussed below. Based on the above, the application to create a new residential lot through severance is generally in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan. ZONING BY -LAW The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone and Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone by Zoning By -law 97 -95. The proposed severed lot will consist of 0.98 hectares, and will have 20 metres of frontage on Brook Street, as permitted through approval of variance application 2007 -A -16. Aside from the approved reduced lot frontage, the required minimum lot area for a residential use in the A /RU zone is 0.4 hectares, and in the SR Zone, 0.2 hectares. The proposed retained lands are zoned A /RU, would consist of approximately 1.19 hectares, and maintain 42 metres of frontage on Ridge Road West. As noted above, the minimum lot size for a residential use in the A /RU Zone is 0.4 hectares. Therefore, both the proposed severed and retained lots would meet with all required lot area provisions for both the A /RU and SR Zones. It is recommended that as a condition of consent, the applicant apply to rezone the proposed severed lot to the SR Zone, and the proposed retained lot to the Residential One (R1) Zone to create a consistent zoning fabric in the area and avoid "split zoning ". In this case, both the severed and retained lands would comply with both the permitted use and lot area requirements of both the SR and R1 zones. In the case of the proposed severed lot, the existing dwelling and detached garage would also comply with all setback requirements for structures in the SR Zone. On the basis of the above, the application would appear to generally comply with the Zoning By -law. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application to sever and existing residence and creation of a new residential lot generally, meets the intent of the policies of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2007 -B -18 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant apply for and obtain a variance to recognize the deficient lot frontage on Brook Street for the proposed severed lot, and that said lot frontage on Brook Street be no less than 20 metres; 2. That the applicant apply for and obtain an entrance permit(s), if required, from the County of Simcoe, for the proposed retained lot; 3. That the applicant prepare a draft reference plan depicting a drainage easement, for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Township; 4. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor, and be submitted to the Secretary - Treasurer for review; 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 pay $2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 7. That the applicant pay a Development Charges Fee in the amount of $4,749.95 (By -law 2004 -082) to the Township; 8. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning on the subject lands to accurately reflect the intended land use; 9. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; 10. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. All of which is respectfully submitted, dam Kozlowski, B.URPL Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner 'u _ —T —g� NB — — 7 LOT 34, R.P. 702 PART 2,51R-116221 B LOT 34 LOT LTA PIN 58556.0033 O 23 :::::::;::6:::::;'; � o ro <12r a _ PIN 58556-0026 _ - -" --LOT 24 - - - -u M (1035) PIN 58556.0027 _ _ --�- a LOT 32 ; LAKE PIN 58556 -0034 sm (125 a LOT 33 Mom f M i LO-T- 3311 8 -7I I �c 8 W E� c, 0. I. BROOKS STREET r31V �O» MU (subject to Right of Way PART 1,51R -11622 in favow of PIN 58556-0054 and othm) po — — 7 amhy PART 2,51R-116221 B a LOT LTA PART 3,51R-1 1622 ° 23 :::::::;::6:::::;'; � o ro i W a N F^ N 1 F—(ov Roe) 56'30 "$ __ IR 003A 143.0tt' U M (1035) �.. 140.6' _ --�- a SIMCOE LAKE m(1255)1 1 ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 2( i LOT x .... j 27 i i i amhy 12.8' i i f i M i 1 i f f i i i 28 Z i LOT Feffie j 3.1' 16.1 23 :::::::;::6:::::;'; I i�lou� f H d h r i W N 53° 140.03' - F—(ov Roe) 56'30 "$ __ IR 003A 143.0tt' U M (1035) �.. 140.6' _ --�- SIMCOE LAKE x .... amhy 12.8' 43.1-�-Bgpd Feffie j 3.1' 16.1 23 :::::::;::6:::::;'; I i�lou� f H d N 53° 140.03' - F—(ov Roe) 56'30 "$ __ IR 003A 143.0tt' M (1035) �.. 140.6' _ --�- SIMCOE LAKE • May 22, 2007 Adam Kozlowski, B. URPL Planner — Secretary Treasurer Township of Oro - Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Mr. Kozlowski: i Re: Consent Application for 12 Brook Street, Part of Lots 27 and 28, Concession 3 Township of Oro- Medonte, County of Simcoe Please accept this letter as authorization for MHBC Planning to act as our agent, on our behalf, concerning all matters pertaining to planning and approvals for the above noted parcel. Yours Truly, Inc. Tascona Part of Lots 27 and 28 Concession 3 Geographic Township of (tr o Township of Oro-Medavite County of Simcoe TOM 8 I "'w" I I- MOTION# ___i3 JUN 2 7 2007 I ' Committee of Adjustment Minutes MEETING: COUNGIL[i� C. OF W.❑ Thursday June 21 2007, 9:30 a.m. 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. Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer advised Committee that the owners of the subject property concerning Consent Application 2006 -B -24 (Revised) had requested to have their hearing moved to the beginning of the meeting due to other obligations in the morning. Committee permitted said application to be heard first, at 9:30 am. 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest Chairperson Bruce Chappell declared a Pecuniary Interest with respect to Consent Application 2007 -B -16, and advised that he would exit the Council Chambers at the time of hearing. Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 1 3. Hearings: 9:30 2006 -B -24 Cathy & Michael MacVittie (Revised) Range 2, Part of Lot 3 978 Line 2 South (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Michael MacVittie Motion No. CA070621- 1 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Bruce Chappell !'),C_ "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 Carried ". Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 2 9:40 2007 -A -11 Ron &Barb Mitchell I i:� C Plan 709, Lot 48 1166 Line 5 South (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Deirdre Lennon, agent for applicants Motion No. CA070621- 2 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Michelle Lynch "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. ..Carried." Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 3 9:50 2007 -A -12 Daphne Laird Plan 798, Part of lots 52 & 53 C 60 Lakeshore Road East (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Daphne Laird, Jack Andrews, applicants Motion No. CA070621 -3 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Rick Webster "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; 3. 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. .....Carried." Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 4 10:00 2007 -A -13 Ronald Russell it Plan M112, Lot 31 (Former Township of Medonte) In Attendance: Ronald Russell Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer, read letter from Ron Russell dated May 24, 2007 verbatim to Committee and the audience. Motion No. CA070621- 4 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee grant Variance Application 2007 -A -13. Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 5 10:10 2007 -B -15 Charles Ivey 1 Pt. Lot 6, Concession 5 2639 Line 4 North (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Andria Leigh, MHBC Planning, agent for applicant Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer, read letter from Robert & Madeline Southorn, Marcy Gannon (objection to application) dated June 21, 2007 and; Joyce Bidwell (objection to application) dated June 20, 2007 and; Charles Sheardown (objection to application) dated June 20, 2007 verbatim to Committee and the audience. Bob Drury (objection to application) and; John Coleman (objection to application) and; Trish Coleman (objection to application) and; Jim Grey (objection to application) and; Dennis French (objection to application) made oral presentation to Committee. Motion No. CA070621- 5 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Garry Potter "Committee defer Consent Application 2007 -B -15 for the applicant to provide additional information with respect to the title and severance history of the subject property. Defeated ". Motion No. CA070621- 6 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Rick Webster, seconded by Michelle Lynch "Committee Refuse Consent Application 2007 -B -15 on the basis that the application does not conform to the Township Official Plan. Carried ". Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 6 10:20 2007 -B -16 Moss Developments t� 7 Concession 2, Pt. Lot 11 G ! 95 Line 1 North (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Andria Leigh, MHBC Planning, agent for applicant Member Bruce Chappell declared a Pecuniary Interest and exited the Council Chambers. Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer, read letter from Rachelle Hamelin, Planner II, County of Simcoe dated June 14, 2007 and; Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority dated June 19, 2007 verbatim to Committee and the audience. Motion No. CA070621- 7 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Rick Webster "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, and that the $2,000.00 cash -in -lieu be credited back to the owner at the time of Draft Plan Registration; 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 the applicant provide an undertaking that the Subdivision Agreement for "Country Lane Estates" be registered against the severed lot; 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. Carried ". Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 7 4n.In 7nn7 -R.17 Ron McCowan i -� C -,q Range 2, Lots 1 & 2 2243 Ridge Road West (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Andria Leigh, MHBC Planning, agent for applicant Adam Kozlowski, Secretary- Treasurer, received letter signed by Tim Crooks, Sue Benjafield, Stan & Brenda Glazer, Jim Swan, Suzanna Robillard & Peter Lamprey (objection to application). Tim Crooks (objection to application) and; Catherine Nixon (objection to application) and; Mary Jane Sargeant (objection to application) made oral presentation to Committee. Motion No. CA070621- 8 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Michelle Lynch "Committee defer Application 2007 -B -17 until such time that the applicant provides further information with respect to environmental and drainage concerns, and until such time that comments are received from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority with respect to the proposed severance. Carried ". Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 8 01 10:40 2006 -A -22 Jerome & Linda Cunningham (Revised) Plan 535, Lot 11 2 Nevis Ridge Road (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance: Jerome Cunningham, applicant Motion No, CA070621- 9 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Bruce Chappell "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: 9. 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; 10.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; Carried ". Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 9 4. Other Business Adoption of Minutes from May 17, 2007 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Motion No. CA070621- 10 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Rick Webster, Seconded by Michelle Lynch "That the minutes for the May 17, 2007 Committee of Adjustment Meeting be adopted as printed and circulated 5. Adjournment Motion No. CA070621 -11 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, Seconded by Michelle Lynch "We do now adjourn at 1:00 pm ...Carried." ... Carried." (NOTE: A digital recording of this meeting is available for review.) Chairperson Lynda Aiken Secretary- Treasurer Adam Kozlowski Committee of Adjustment -JUNE 21, 2007 Page 10