The URL can be used to link to this page

03 20 2008 PAC AgendaCommittee of Adjustment Agenda-z Thursday March 20,2008,9:30 a.m. 1. Communications and Correspondence 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest 3. Hearings: 9:30 2007-A-31 Gus N r.('-jrqth (Revised) Plan 702, Lot 9 1197 Line 2 South (Former Township of Oro) 9:45 2008-A-07 Dale McEachern Plan 104, Lot 8 41 Church Street -r,-.,,wnship of Oro) (Former , 10:00 2008 -A -10 Keith Kitchen Concession 13, East Part of Lot 4 3890 Line 13 North (Former Township of Medonte) 10:15 2008 -A -11 Lynn Taylor Plan 486, Lots 2 & 3 17 Bay Street (Former Township of Oro) 10:30 2008-A-09 Cameron & Katherine Gausby Concession 3, Lot 23 475 Line 2 South (Former Township of Oro) 10:45 2008-B-06 Peter & Jean Hoffman Concession 3, Lot 9 4641 Line 2 North (Former Township of Medonte) 11:00 2008-B-07 Raymar Investments Ltd. Concession 13, Lot 10 (Former Township of Medonte) 11:15 2008-A-06 Raymond Dumont Concession 1, East Pt. Lot 10 2109 Gore Road (Former Township of Oro) 4. Other business i. Adoption of Minutes from February 21, 2008 meeting 5. Adjournment Variance - Garage floor area & locate in front yard Variance - reduce front yard setback Variance - Garage floor area Variance - boat house height Variance - home business # of employees Boundary Adjustment Boundary Adjustment Variance - increase —I floor volume in yard Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for March 20, 2008 ........... Gus & Kim McGrath 1197 Line 2 South,, Plan . 702, Lot 9 (Former Twp. of Oro) 2007-A-31 (REVISED) THE PROPOSAL I The applicant had originally appeared before the ComiTnttee of Adjustment on November 17, ?007,1 seeking to construct a detached acres so-ry structure (being a 3 car garage), having a floor area of 86.95 square metres, and to be located in front of the dwelling currently= under construction. The applicant required variance for increased floor area increased lot coverage, and perIT113sion for the garage to be located in the front yard. Committee subsequently deferred the application, requesting the applicant to revise the garage plans. As a result, the applicant has reduced the size of the proposed structure, and is now proposing to construct a detached accessory building (2 car garage), to have an area of 58 square metres and be located m front of the dwelling currently under construct-ton. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: 1. Section 5.1.3 Permitted locations for detached accessmT buildings and structures in all zones a) Not be located in the front yard to be located in front of the dwelling currently under construction. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Rural Settlement Area Zoning By -law 97-95 — Residential One (R1) Zone W Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works and Roads- No road concerns Building Department-The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application and comment that the proposal appears to meet the rrlini-mu rn standards. Engineering Department- No concerns BACKGROUND The subject property is located within the Shanty Bay settlement area, having 32,6 metres of frontage on Line 2 South, a depth of 57 metres, and a lot area of 0.18 hectares. The applicant is currently budding a 183.4 square metre single detached dwelling on the subject lands. A, 39 square metre detached accessory building is located in the southeast corner of the subject property. The applicant is proposing to build a detached 2 car garage with an area of 58 square metres, and proposed to be located 7.5 metres from the front lot line, which is in front of the dwelling currently under construction. The application involves variance to per M *t the 1 construction of a garage in the front yard of the property. .woes the va ri an cc conform to the genera] in ten t of th c OM cM Plan ? The property is designated Rural Settlement Area. Permitted uses within this land use designation are listed in Section C3.2 of the Official Plan: 'Vemlitled uses in Me Rural Settlement Area designafio n. . . are low density residen lial uses, small scale cofilm enial uses ele ". As the ap p li c a ti o n to construct a detached garage accessory to a residential dwelling constitutes a Permitted use,, the proposed variance is deemed to conform to the 'intent of the Official Plan. .woes the variance m ain tain th c genera. in ten t of t-h e Zoning By4a w? With respect to the request to locate the garage in front of the dwelling, the intent of the Zonin ' g By-law to prohibit accessory structures from being located in the front yard is to ensure that the residence remains predominant. For the application at hand, while the proposed garage will be located in front of the dwelling that is currently under construction, the garage win otherwise meet the required 7.5 metre front yard setback for the R1 Zone. The purpose of the front yard setback is to ensure that adequate distance exists between the traveled portion of the roadway and structures, and for the purpose of ensuring space for adequate on-site parking. In addition, the applicant has reduced the size of the garage from the original 86.95 square metres down to 58 square metres; the maximum size of any one detached accessory building in the R1 Zone is 70 square metres. In addition, the reduced garage size would also now comply with the 5% overall lot coverage provision for accessory structures. As such, the variance to permit the garage to be located in front of the residence under construction would therefore maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law. V Is the trirhqn cc desiry ble for the approp-ria te de velopm en t of Mc .ant? The subject property is a relatively small residential lot in comparison to neighbouring properties. The character of this section of the Shanty Bay settlement area is predonninantly residential, compact, and contains modest and large homes. As a result of the site inspection, it was noted that most surrounding accessory structures were located at the side of ' or behind the dwelling unit. For this application, however, the location of the garage is suitable, as the size and shape of the lot, location of the septic system, as well as the size of the dwelling under construction will, limit the placement of the garage. In addition, the applicant intends to utilize the front yard area for driveway access and vehicle parking, and as such the location of the garage is ideal. A buffer of trees exists between the neighbouring residence to the south and the rear wall of the proposed garage, and as such there will not likely be a negative impact on privacy or concerns over aesthetics. In addition, the applicant has significantly scaled-down the size of the proposed garage, modifying the plans to depict a 2- car garage, and decreasing the overall floor area from 86.95 square metres to 58 square metres, bringing the structure into compliance with the maximum floor area provision. -41 The proposed variance to permit the garage to be located in front of the dwelling is deemed to be appropriate, as the garage will remain, visually, secondary to the primary residential use of the lot. In addition, the garage is in an ideal location with respect to vehicle parking and the orientation of the driveway. The garage location will also not obstruct access to the rear of the property, nor require removal of existing tree cover that provides buffering between the subject and neighbouring property. As such, the variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the lot. Is the V-qrlance minor? On the basis that the proposed garage constitutes a permitted use, will otherwise maintain the required front and side yard setbacks and setback to the dwelling, along with maximum Poor area and lot coverage provisilor-1-1s, t Yc -.questtr--d v-,.riance is lleemed to be rcdnor. CONCLUSION The proposed variance generally satisfies the tests of variance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Committee approve Revised Variance Application 2007-A-31, for the construction of a detached garage having an area of 58 square metres, to be located 7.5 metres from the front property line, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the size of the detached accessory building be no larger than 58 square metres; 2. That the detached accessory building be located no closer than 7.5 metres from the front property line; 3. That the detached accessory building, notwithstanding Section 5.1.3 a), otherwise meet with all other provisions for detached accessory buildings; 4. That an Ontario Land StmTeyor provide verification to the Toxvnsl-, p of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the detached garage be located no closer than 7.5 metres from the front property line; and that the detached garage be no larger than 58 square metres; 5. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building 0 fficial only, after the Comrfflittee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13; All of xvJiich is r�5pest y S. mitted, Reviewed by . ..... Or A*m Ko. ws S Glenn White, MCIP,1 RPP /]�fanner Senior Planner I� , All L LINE 2 SOUTH" 24.53 32�61 . . . . . . . . . . . 44, fol Z24: J z z 1-4 . .. . ........ ............ W18W. ■ THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE 1.48 LINE 7 SOUTH, P.O. BOX 100, ORO, ONTARIO, LOL 2X0 (705) 487-2171 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT NOTICE OF DECISION Application No. 2007-A-31 IN THE MATTER OF Section 45 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1.990, 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 2007-A-31. submitted by Gus & Kim McGrath, owners of 1197 Line 2 South, Plan 702, Lot 9 (Former Twp. of Oro); and WHEREAS The applicants are proposing to construct a detached accessory building (3 car .garage), to have an area of 86.95 square metres, and to be located in front of a dwelling currently under construction. The applicants are requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95,- 1. Section 5.1.3 Permitted locations for detached accessory buildings and structures in all zones a) Not be located in the front yard, to be located 4.87 metres in front of the dwelling currently under construction. 2. Section 5.1.6 Maximum Floor Area The maximum floor area of any one detached accessory building or structure is 70 square metres, be in-creased from the required 70 square metres. to 86.95 square metres. 3. Section 5.1.5 Maximum lot cover The maximum lot coverage of all detached accessory buildings and structures on a lot is 5 percent, be increased from the required 5% to 7% WHEREAS the subject property is designated "Rural Settlement Area" in the Official Plan, and Zoned "Residential One (RI) Zone" 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 15th day of 4:� November., 2007. 0 PAGE # 2 APPLICATION 2007-A-31 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION Motion No. CA071115-8 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Rick Webster "Committee refuse Variance Application 2007-A-3 I., as the application is not deemed to be minor Defeated ", . Motion No. CA071115-9 BE IT RESOLVED that.- Moved by Michelle Lynch, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee defer Variance Application 2007-A-31 until such time that the applicant submits a revised application Carried". PAGE # 3 APPLICATION 2007-A-31 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Section 45(1.2) 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 5th DAY OF DECEMBER 20071, A 44NOTICE 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 certified 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 1. do, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2XO. Members concurring in this decision: A Lynda Aiken, Chairperson DATED this 15'h day of November 2007 e Bruce Chappell Rick Webster AdamK7ozlowski Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment r� ME PATH : \ \aWW l \Cadt[''r ftM CADD \Pmstb\07 -96 - Gus UcC+at "ro"\Cw tic Mkh 40*► A "q iAYOUT : A-2 Lei L* WE : Od 12 2007 - MOW w 1 6r>r . ....................... .., w,....,...�.....,.� ..�. MOTU, The wdnrWp"d dw nhi.wed MW "M F - I % tv ilria d*.ig SCALL. PIigOM NAME. PftDXCT NO ...+.�, o...,,..o..... •». aae 1m so r r+d Nrrb !r wqir+*rft t"M aide in to Vol.: "000 +ar IV I A . 07 -96 r+X- soar "it I "ft DATE: UAL EUSTOMI am**,.om ftftn z w. "ft amb 10.11.07 C 14 C] ❑ ��'►+►+�+ eY: a+wrr*ic TmE n►ira pro. R,.,KTH�O ..«. . w�rnuw7'loit iN o1�A:loM C.L MUIiDrli'MaN PUN CUwrcw "01-M Ocoee.. CHECKM A--2 ALNTQC^o CLl.Tp"12*40¢ 30 weramcwewa C UFTOMCAoo PL Township of Oro-Mcdonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for Match 20, 2008 Dale McEachern 2008-A-07 41 Church Street, Plan 104, Lot 8 (Former Ta. Of Orol ............ ............................ THE PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing 83.6 square metre 1.5 storey dwelling and replace with a 171 square metre 1.5 storey dwelling, also containing a deck and covered porch. The applicant is -requesting the following rehef from Section 4, Table B1 of Zoning By-law 97- 95: W Reouired PrWosed Minimum Front Yard Setback, R1 Zone: 7.5 metres 3.65 metres MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Rural Settlement Area Zoning By-law 97-95 — Residential One (R1) Zone Previous Applications — None AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — Building Department - Engineering Department - BACKGROUND The subject property is located in the southern portion of the Shanty Bay Settlement Area, having direct driveway access from Church Street. The subject lot has a frontage of approximately 442 metres on Church Street, 39.6 1-netres of flankage on Bell bane, a depth of approximately 39.6 metres, and a lot area of approximately 0.18 hectares. The subject property contains a single detached dwelling and a 66.8 square metre detached accessor�T structure. The applicant is proposing to construct a new 171 square tnetre, 1.5 storey single detached dwelling,, also containing a deck and covered porch. The existing 83.6 square metre 1.5 storey dwelling is currently setback approxff'natelv 1.63 metres from the front lot line; however, the dwelling was constructed in 1933, and as such pre-dates applicable zoning provisions. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 7.5 metres to 3.65 11 metres to accommodate the new dwelling, which is proposed 'in approximately the same location as the existing dwelling. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Ofic .1 ial plan? `fhe property is, designated Rural Settlement Area in the Official Plan. Section C3.2 of the V 1 Plan states that "permitted uses... are low density residential uses" , such as single detached dwellings. I'herefore the demolition and replacement of a single detached dwelhng on the subject lands., and subsequent variance application to reduce the required front vard setback for a permitted use is considered to conform to the intent of the Official Plan. ' Does the VIRTIa'"Ce comp n4th the general intent of the Zoning By4a w? The subject property is zoned Residential One (1�1) Zone. Permitted uses in the R1 Zone include single detached dwellings and accesson7 buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. With respect to front yard setbacks, the primary purpose for maintaining a minimum distance from roadways is to ensure that adequate buffering exists between structures and from the traveled. portion of the road. As well, the front yard setback also ensures that adequate vehicle parking exists for the dwelling, and in some cases provides for lot area for components of septic systems. For the application at hand, the existing dwelling to be demolished is noted to be located 1.63 metres at its closest point from the front property .one. "I'he proposed new dwelling will not further reduce an existing deficient front vard; in fact, the new dwelhng is proposed to be located deeper into the lot, the closest point to the front property line being 3 ).65 metres, measure from the northeast corner of the proposed dwelling. With respect to parking, an existing driveway and parking area is located in the easterly portion of the property, and will not be adversely affected or require relocation as a -result of this variance application.. The existing septic system is located toward the rear of property, and as well is not proposed to be relocated. Aside from the reduced front yard setback, the proposed dwelling would otherwise comply with height, floor area, and all other setback requirements. As such, the variance is deemed to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. a Is die va - ria i 7ce desirable .fog- the appropriate development of the lot? The subject property is located on Church Street, approximately 130 metres west off of I '..ine 2 South. Church Street is considered a "dead end" road, where Bell Lane, being a private laneway, provides limited vehicle and pedestrian access south to Bay Street. However, for the purpose of this application, the required exterior side yard setbacks would not appIv to this application, as the subject lands abut one Municipal road, and. therefore is not considered to be a corner lot. The site inspection revealed that Church Street is a quiet residential street, and provides road access to 5 dwellings. As a result, Church Street is not considered to be a thoroughfare, and is limited to minimal local vehicular and pedestrian traffic. For the purpose of this application, as discussed above, the purpose of the front yard setback is to maintain separation between the traveled portion of the roadway and residential K structures, and to allow for vehicle parking. The application to reduce the required 7.5 metre setback to 3.65 i-netres is appropriate in this case., as Church Street generates rriinit-nal traffic, and is not considered a thoroughfare. The existing driveway and vehicle parking space on the subject lands will also not be affected by the nature of this application, as the proposed dwelling would be located in approximately the same location as the existing dwelling, albeit setback further into the lot. In addition, while the existing dwelling is located 1.6 metres from the front property, line, the applicant is proposing to relocate the new dwelling further back into the lot, which in effect will not further increase a situation of non-compliance; in fact, the application -seeks to improve the setback deficiencv. However, the propused new dwelling could not be located any further back from the front property, line due to required setbacks to existing septic system components. For these reasons the application is deemed desirable for the appropriate development of the lot. Is the variancein_i'nor? As this application maintains, the intent of the (Official Plan and Zoni`ng By-law, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. CONCLUSION The application to reduce the front yard setback satisfies the tests of a variance. RECOMMENDATION mince Application 2008-1z�-07, being for the construction of It is recommended that the Committee approve Va i a new 171 square metre, 1.5 storey single detached dwelling containing a covered porch and deck, and for the frontal setback to be reduced from the required _�) 7.' , metres to 3.89 metres, measured from the northwest Corner of the proposed dwelling to the front property line, and 3.65 metres, measured from the northeast corner of the proposed dwelling to the front propertx:, line, subject to the folloxV-ing conditions: 1. That the setbacks be in conformiq, X1.71ith the dimensions as set out in the application and on the sketch "Ind construction drawings sub mfitted. VVIth the application and approved by the Committee; That an Ontario Land Survcyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the new dwelling be setback no closer than 3.89 metres,- measured from the northwest corner of the proposed dwelling to the front property line, and 3.65 metres, measured from the northeast corner of the proposed dwelling to the front prop-A, er line; I 3, That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the To-,vnship's Chief Building Official only after the Comi-nittee's decision becomes final. and binding, as pro'Vided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. All of w submitted,, 3 Reviewed by, W Glenn W1 Inte, MCIP, RPP Sem'or Planner itXAkliT KLdC'F 9.EtiATi7M LEFT (ENTRY) SIDE ELEVATION i i FRONT ELEVATION Wl IvEOIN DEREK Ix ill 6rarg��Ja1�n=0 Rd �rxainp Drr LCL 1 TO ptw). r: 7e5.M -49" i mtawrw. scdv 1/4" r 11-0' dcxt o V-n- a drawn by DA-L &t eCiKed by reAvy onv NEW 4.4r2 STOREY RESIDENCE THSAW TW "A" U*rF�KAS *N ,� �s nTK � -rF OF W- -E� � l4v_ AHo 11;0 L WT Qf LGWEP. Cri'r�*1 OR ems. M1THOul THS t]WifLssm wRSmlf COFIS[Ht x T)4: N }' ' LL EL 0 �-0 CL [v O W U) � T r vojecl no A -05 WE ImIOIN HSIGNEDO Ix i 683 10* 3oFwntc+ Ft& ►tine $iPV bnk LOL sra Ptwnr 785.7914994 En%m k ronkpdo l WsivrAbF ,cs Doslw w wornwbGil; ecw : DEsMWR: 5cak: NOTED dole 27 -►2-M d-vrwm try D A-L checkrd by •erviesvm 77.42-00 ExWnd Width 4r h1EW 1 -112 STAY RMDENCE THS amp Tw. �xs 'Iola AS ► W STW MAErr ar rr i sage apop"rry or MlST...Exx »EWA Sn)m a.w. oc 10-� PCT K a_aAP� , Cltb- o OR +LPROQuQM, "T,gMf 'rK DTIRESSLD wRa7c"t CiYl Kr or IK AESCtCR, -ILL R04M AESEWfM. CD w- d CD co LL. Q � L.. 4.... to CL W w- pra}.ct no A -06 Wl ImEOIN DED 5010 1%, 1663 Gem Jar nston Rd. wnesing nt. Lill, IYO Phone: 705-792,4999 Emall: Westedendesign@beqnet-ea Desiqtw Infamistion: BCIN FIRM- DESIGNER- 114" I%el 27-02-08 D,A-L O,C-6,,ed by `Q,vWons 27-02-08 Extend Width NEW 1-1/2 STOREY RESIDENCE -�-IS DVAW!f4� M,) Nr OrrWS 02NTlkNM 4-WRFN, AS " 0,457�;UN- nT %:Rvam. Is 11-F M-r P"-w OT wts" M" MM MO 9r1k-[, WT 5� La"u. wli �iQV �AE TK 6isl("KEA, AU. We,IMS LU 0 z LU 0 -,Z:r LU U) C) 0 co — ui Ix :v LU 0 z UJ 00- to r UJ U) LU F- Q� Q Cr LU :;, 30: LU LU LL' z A-02 0 0 0 0 SETMCK OF RIGHT OF WAY CHURCH STREET =i EXISTING 1-1f2 b: STOREY FRAMED U'� HOUSE Lu 76d 3 E 0 Ul Lo u) ......... E Lu 44.196m (145.00') 0 . .... ZI a' „[1.21 91 14 4.4321A. z EXISTING DRIVEWAY I OUTLINE OF I EXISTING 1-1/2 w y s' STOREYFRAMED EXISTING CONC. SIDEWALK HOUSE MAIN FLR. AREA = 900 Sq. Ft, (81.6 m r.) 2nd FLR, AREA,;, 400 Sq. FL (37,� m rj uz PQ z GROSS EXISTING AREA: 1300 Sq. Ft a I 024ft2) cc. ....... C) CL, i 'NEVV 1-112 STOREY �5L[z 31 F_..___ RESIDENCE a �9 I um Lu 'k MAIN FLR. AREA- 1849 Sq. Ft (1 2 t us t}” 3, 000 2nd FLR- AREA= 154 Sq. (d, 1) uj 0 GROSS Sq. FN, AREA: 3 Sq�qF, 2 > 0 L) r------------------------- 17'-1C�/V [5-4$31 21'-6- [6.5531 on EkSTING SEiHA EXIS NG 1 II3 H < Lu I I wo AREA OF EXISTING 24'-0- x 30'-0' STORAGE GARAGE 30'[9,144 8' 2. 81 11 OPEN DECK �0 304 Sq• Ft, (28.2m') sp L -.. -- ..» - - -- -- ..»..»_.- - - - N %"EWO PLAN of SURVEY CIO PQ E 3 AREA OF EXISTING TILE BED of Pa ft of 3 LOT 8 Existing Wire Fence PQ —X— REGISTERED PLAN 104 0 N 74d 56' E 43.38m (1 2. 2") TOWNSHIP OF ORO Scale: N.T *S X I Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for Match 201 2008 .............. Keith Kitchen 3890 Line 13 North, Concession 13, East Pt. Lot 4 ante 2008-A-10 . .. .. .............. . . . _(Former Med THE PROPOSAL "I'he applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory, garage, proposed to have a floor area of 124.9 square metres. The applicant is requesting the followm*g relief from Zoning By- law 97-95: Section 5.l .6 Maximum floor Area The maximum floor area of any, one detached accesson, building or structure *n the A./RU I - 1 Zone is 100 square metres, be increased from the required 100 square metres to 124.9 square metres, MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official. Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By-law 97-95 — Agricultural/Rural ( Zone Previous -Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — No concerns Building Department — Engineering Department — No concerns BACKGROUND "I -,he subject property has a lot frontage of 54.8 metres on Line 13 North, a depth of 73 metres, and a lot area of 0.4 hectares. The sub' in -Ject property contains a s* gle detached dwelling, built app-roxi-Matelv 5 years ago. The propemT is located ' just south of the Warminster settlement area, and is bounded on all sides by agricultural parcels. The W applicant is proposing to construct a 124.9 square metre detached garage, to be located in the southwest corner of the property, approximately 25 metres behind the existing dwelling. The applicant has 'indicated that the increased garage floor area is needed to accommodate parking for passenger vehicles, and as well serve as a workshop. I 10 Does the variance conform to the general i1_1tent of the 0fr Icial plan? property is designated Agricultural by the Official Plan. Section C1.2 of the Plan states I that "permitted uses on lands designated _,J�y_1'(71111u1-a1 are single detached dwellings [and accessory buildings to such,]". Therefore a detached garage accesson7 to a dwelling constitutes a permitted use. On this basis, the proposal conforms to the intent of the Official Plan. a 10 ..woes Me varian Ce -1-72 din ta.1n th C gen eral -I'D ten t of Me Zoning By4a w? `111e subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural. (A /R ? one. "Fhe purpose for regulating the size, height and location of detached accessory! structures is to ensure that such build' remain clearlv secondary to the p ings primary use of the lot in this case be' residential. ing resi ti Provisions for the maxiniurn floor area for accessory structures in the A/RU Zone are slightly- larger; while in residential zones the max' imum floor area is 70 square metres, the A/ R-1 tnaximum is 100 square metres. This difference in Boor areas reflects that acccssonT . structures in the rural areas of the 'rownship may be geared more to the storage of recreational, agricultural, and other large vehicles and machm'ery. As weR the purpose for restricting the floor area of accessory structures is to ensure that such structures remain cleariv secondary to the primary permitted use of the subject lands. In this case while the garage is proposed to have an area of 124.9 square metres, the existing dwelling has a floor area of 165 ).9 square metres. As such, the garage will remain secondary to the dwelling. Aside from the maximum floor area provision, the proposed garage Will otherwise meet with the required height, interior side and rear yard setbacks, setback to the dwelling, and will not exceed the maximum 5 percent lot coverage provision. Therefore, the variance is considered to Maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the lot? A site inspection revealed that the proposed garage will be located over 50 metres from the front property boundary, and an additional 25 metres behind the existing dwellin in n the extreme scud- west corner of the lot. As such, the existing dwelling will be well in front of the garage, and thus remain visually predominant. The site inspection also revealed that the subject lands are located in a fairly remote part of the Township, where surrounding lands consist of large agricultural parcels. It was also noted that the closest neighbouring dwelling is located 40 metres to the south of the boundary of the subject property, where another dwelling lies 100 metres to the north. Aside from these two dwelhngs, there are no other immediate residential structures in proximity to the subject lands. As such,, the variance for an increase in floor area will not likely have a negative visual or aesthetic impact for the few neighbouring residences based on spatial separation. On this basis the proposal is considered desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lot. PIA, Is the varianccM1'D'or? AS this application is deemed to conform with the Official Plan, maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law and constitutes appropriate development, the variance is considered to be minor. CONCLUSION The application generally satisfies the tests of variance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application "1008-A-10, being for the construction of a 124.9 square metre detached accessory building, subject to the following conditions: W 1. That notwithstanding Section 5.1.6 of Zoning Bv-1aw 97-95, the structure shall. otbeiAvise comply W11th all. other provisions for W detached accessolT, buildings, as required under Section 5 of the Zoning By-law; 2. That the floor area of the detached garage not exceed 124.9 square metres; 3. 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 Con-irm'ttee; W 11 4. 'chat an Ontario 1,and Sunrevor provide verification .1 tion to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by veriAdng in writing that the floor area of the detached accessory, structure not exceed 124.9 square metres; 'l'hat the appropriate building perillit be obtained from the Townshi 's Chief p Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. All of which is respectfully submitted. 3 Reviewed by, . 4.. Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner cam • �`"""� w N-31 46*35V 54.W4 LTf ' 8R*2K..3 lf� SYME 0 l.ft 0 ► t 0 + c l U=t cn �. f\ pm I cn 47 It f ` f, 1 �y ' i r % { + +• ` ' + ♦ 4 D 1 � • V✓ pp i t S i f f L I f EXISTING DWELLING 1 MNLY CLAD ' # 3890 LINE 13 NORTH DOOR SILL 29= 0 N Co El. S 1 1 , ' ~ , + ► 1 1 , ♦ .� ,* 5 t W x T 1 + • 00 + L + CD � t 1 • _ r + 1 w� . t �wr .rr ♦ , � � , �41`NW or Mm cow E DW QF ASPHALT scop EDGE OF A MALT ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN CONCESSIONS 13 AND 14 L 6_1� 0 C� Mom 54.W4 �z CU Z W iG 0 0 - fl rrfL C V W W r W 0 0 Wednesday, February 20, 2008 To Whom It May Concern: This is a letter to express there is no opposition to the building in question on Keith Kitchen's property. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact me at (705) 325-37199 Sincerely, Patricia Robbins J A Township of Oro- Med.onte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for March 20, 2008 Lynn Taylor 2008-A-11 17 Bay Street, Plan 486, Lot 2 and 3 (Formerly fro) THE PROPOSAL The applicants are proposing to construct a t\vo- storey boathouse with a deck, where the boathouse is proposed to have a total footprint area of 104 m (1125 ft)). The applicants are requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: 1. Section 5.1.4 Maximum hei ht for the boathouse from the required 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to a proposed 7.18 metres (23'7" feet). MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS Official Tian Designation — Dural Settlement Area Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Pre,kious Applications —None AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works - Building Department — Engineering, Department -- Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority -- BACKGROUND The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 46 metres (150 feet), a shoreline frontage of approximately 47 metres (154 feet), and average depth of 76 metres (249 feet) and a lot area of approximately 0.38 hectares (0.94 acres). The property currently contains a two store dwelling and two accessory structures. A smaller boathouse currently exists where the proposed boathouse is to be constructed. The boathouse is proposed to have a "footprint" area of 104 square metres (1125 square feet), where the lover level is proposed to have a bay for boat storage. The upper level is proposed to consist of a "storage room ", accessed by double doors from the east side of the structure. The boathouse is proposed to have a maxis' num height of 7.18 metres (?3'7" feet), calculated from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe to the mean of the eves and peak of the roof. 1 woes the va-rian ce conform to the general in tem of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Settlement Area by the Official Plan. The primary function of the Rural Settlement Area designation is to maintain and create attractive communities with suitable amenities. Permitted uses in the Rural Residential Area designation primarily consist of low density residential uses and accessory uses to such. The application therefore constitutes a permitted use in the Rural Residential Area designation, and as such conforms to the Official Plan. Does the variance comply with the general in ten t of the Zoning By4aw? The Township Zoning By-law regulates the location and height of boathouses to prevent such structures from being constructed and located in ways that may lead to the over-development of properties that front on water bodies, and ultimately contribute to the degradation of the natural character and features of the shoreline as a whole. Section 5.6 of By-law 97-95 establishes specific setback, height, percentage of lakefront lot width, and use regulations for boathouses. T he . proposed boathouse meets, aside from the maximum height provision, all other requirements of Section 5.6 of the Zoning By -law. Boathouse height is calculated not from the average finished grade (as it is with all other detached accessory structures in the Township), but from the "average high water mark". The intent of this provision is to ensure that a boathouse will remain clearly a secondary use to the dwelling unit, does not dominate the development of the subject property, and does not negatively impact the natural characteristics of the shoreline for the subject or neighbouring properties, Due to the topography of the site,, consisting of a gradual slope from Bay Street to Lake Sn''ncoe, this limits where the applicant can locate the proposed boathouse on the shoreline. The slope ends very briefly forming a plateau, which is where the proposed boathouse will be constructed. As a result of this topography, the proposed boathouse cannot be built at the high water mark, thus requiring the applicant to seek a variance for .increase height of a boathouse; A wrap around deck is also proposed on the boathouse, which will project a further 4.2 metres (14 feet) into Lake Simcoe, and will be located approx_t'matelv 3.65 metres above the surface of the lake. W Due to the width of the subject property, the boathouse will, not "dominate" the character of the shoreline. In addition,, the proposed structure meets with all, other provisions for boathouses, as listed in Section 5.6 of Zoning By-law 97-95. As a result of a site inspection, it was determined that the boathouse on neighbouring east lot, appears to be approximately 7.6 metres (25 feet) which exceeds the 4.5 metre (14.7 foot) maximum height provision. It can therefore be determined that the proposed boathouse will blend in with other boathouses along the shoreline. Additionally, a high, dense cedar hedge exists on the east side of the subject property, and will provide a good privacy buffer for neighbouring lots. On this basis the variance is deemed to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. ff Is the variance desirable for the approprlate development of the lot? Based on the site inspection, the proposed boathouse height and size of the attached deck would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and is in keeping with the character of the surrounding shoreline area. K On this basis the variance for height is considered appropriate for the development of the lot. Is the v,,',ariance minor? On the basis that the proposed boathouse height would not adversely, affect the character of the shoreline residential area, with the neighboring boathouse exceeding the maximum 4.5 metres height limit. Although the requested relief represents close to a doubling of the Zoning Bv-haxv standard, in recognition of the unique site topography and character of the shoreline in this section of the lakefront, the variance is deemed appropriate and therefore minor. CONCLUSION Minor Variance Application 2008 - A-11. generally satisfies the test for a minor variance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Minor Variance 2008-A-1 1 subject to the following conditions*. No txvitbstanding Section 5.6 g) of Zoning By-law 97-95, that the maximum height of the proposed boathouse shall not exceed 7.18 metres above the average high water mark elevation of 219.15 metres for bake Sli-n-coe; and that the location of the boathouse be in confortffl'tv with the site plan submitted with the application and approved by Committee; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the "l'ownsllip of compliance with the Commi'ttee's decision by veilf�7m'g in writing by way of survey/real property report that the height of the boathouse not exceed 7/ .18 metres; 3. That the boathouse not be used for human habitation and comply with all other boathouse provisions as contained in Section 5.6 of Zoning By-law 97-95; 4. '1-'hat the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Budding Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for in within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c-P. 13. 5. That the appropriate permi't(s) and any other necessary approval(s) be obtained from. the 1_,ake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, as required. W All of which. is respectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson, B.URPL junior Planner 3 Reviewed by, W Bruce ppe, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning and Building LAKE SIMCG ASP"AL,T SH04CLES PER :. ...... ..... tHER'S n......... = °° w�.... . S©.ECTX)N .. -. -. SKMG PER DINNER'S SELECT" _ TOP PLATE 42" HIGH GLAAW ------ - iTAiL STYLE PER SELECTION. f, r. .� DUST cc BOAT f Cd Ate? HOUSE EXtSTWG BOAT / HOUSE AND ['+1 DOCK, r, ' ., /. DOCK :•i` WATER — SOUTH ELEVATION A —� SCAa : 1 /s- — 1'-v- 5 DOT ED LINE MDICATES 3 I EXISTING TREE TO FMA". S�Ip.ESPER i DECK Ti7 ACCQIu4QDATE OWNM,s S wo, POD STDIN4 PER - OWNER'S SELECTION _ - -- - - TOP Qw Hm GUARD ... -- TE RAIL STYLE PER _ e �S ECTKK ry NEW DECK j i F r � r E Ci ICE LEVEL AS OF 02-W48 U NORTH ELEVATION A-�2 SCALE 1/8" t' -4" � f co �- _ KATE_ /F E7[fi,T€NG f. •. �;:; %';f.,� � F- , -� /`� BOVIT ;�fF ..• : ��` �!' � f" : � • v HOUSE NO XI/ /l r • f.' . Fr rf r . i 'Jf :' ✓ :'F � ✓:' i •`rr ;� r•r .�� 2 WEST ELEVATION � �w2 SCAI E 1 /8" i' —Q" 77, 77,7777; 4 t 4 � t � t � LJ \ \ y9 M\\�Hill HOUSE DOCK � �- �,, •:y �.... all Ell 2 EAST ELEVATION ,,,L2� ScALE Township of Oro- Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning deport for March 20, 2008 Cameron and Katherine Gausby 2008-A-09 475 Line 2 South, Lot 23, Concession. 3 ors THE PROPOSAL The applicants are proposing to operate a home occupation business in an existing detached accessory building having a total area of 167n-i2(1801 ft2). The applicants licants are requesting the l�l' q g following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Section 5.1 Shall not employ more than one em to ree who is not a resident of a dwellin unit; MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Flan Designation --- Agricultural Zoning By-law 97-95 -- a gricultural /Rural (A/RU,) Zone Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS Nottawasaga Val ey Conservation Authority — No Objections Public Works - Building Department — No objections Engineering Department- BACKGROUND The subject property has a lot frontage on Line 2 South of approximately 142 metres, a lot depth of 142metres, and a lot area of 2.0 hectares. The lot is presently occupied by a single two storey dwelling, which was constructed in 1890. The applicants are renovating the existing accessory building, in which the home occupation is proposed to be located. The applicant has indicated that the company is an International Search Firm specializing in recruiting professionals from around the world, who work in the Life Sciences, lab ser"'ces, medical devices, mobile co nmunications, imaging technology and Mining. With the applicant's hiring two additional employees for the home occupation a variance is required for relief from Section 5.122. Does the varlanee ma- inrain the general Intent ofthe ofNc al ,Flan P The property is designated .� 'cultural in the official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings, accessory buildings, home occupations, and home industries. Hone occupations are permitted uses within the agricultural designation, the application would therefore maintain the intent of the official Plan. .woes the variance rnalntain the general * -in ofthe ZonlDg By-law? With respect to the Zoning By -law, the primary purpose of restricting the number of employees of a home occupation is to ensure that the residential use remains the primary use and that the commercial use remains as a secondary use and that it will not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighbours. Based on a site inspection, the proposed business will be located in an accessory building that will be located behind the existing dwelling. Due to the nature of the business as described, business will be conducted exclusively through the Internet and telecommunications. The applicant has indicated that there will be no signage, no customers coming on site and no deliveries of merchandise, goods or equipment. Therefore, given these factors, and given that the property is located in a rural area, there would be no impact on the enjoyment of any adjacent residential properties. On the basis of the above, the proposed variance would therefore maintain the general intent of the Agricultural/ Rural ( -,-k/RU) Lone, as prescribed by the Zoning By-law with respect to home occupation use. Is the variancc desirable for the appropriate develop rent ofthe lot? Upon a site inspection the location of the accessory building appears to be appropriate. The structure is located to the rear of the dwelling, which is hidden from view along Dine ? South. In addition, there would appear to be a good buffer between structure and surroundi of the above, the recognizance of the existing dwelling and accessory building is deemed to be appropriate for the lot. 0 Is the va-riance minor? As the proposed variance maintains the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and has not raised objection from the NVCA and due to the home occupation remaining secondary use to the dwelling; the proposed variance is deemed to be minor in nature. It is recommended that Corr n-iittee approve Variance Application 2008-A-09, being to allow a home occupation business to operate out of an accessory building, which will, have two additional employees who are not residents of the dwelling unit. Reviewed by Bruce Hoppe, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning and Building ss.wum. — EXtSTI*G !FATED MU 04EATED � mains oaor� STORAGE TO RHili acn M sm"M 11 Ir'�TA I b TpiWVN 'T PAM Nrrr It "I 'x TO 14" NWi r �rrma iiw x IlpT+!Ri!'i EMTING 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHMG NEW A71C SPACE AND STAIRWELL #WALLS TION ' 4 T� R71�IG- i To KAK ,i; I kill I X11 K � V �I E; xr �7CfSTINCr_ FLOOR PLAN � t V --I-u I i i 1 , i + i I i � i 1 i I i 7 i b i 3 4 { i i j i i ' i 1 1 WEST L SOUTH ELEVATION mmm�1 III I III 1111119i1q I ! 1 ! 1 I I 1 ; . .... . ....... ______ I i i i i I 1 I 1 I i i I 1 i i i 1 I RT L ATE EAST ELEVATION 3c 11-f- vr= COPYRIGHT &L CM TM, Ariz > wNA my WEOzrATM AW VWW r. Alo TNc PIIO "Ty of Tw L9E 04 Mn ITf CCKLKTM VfMt Trf WCM pqlWr WW OF 9" AfHAWi 8AEHW oR A-" oR COW01AMN FM *0 PJFM wtATVX e t Wgmur wWrfai aF TW W" CPFCE iAM" McNrvm M192i ►110 DIvir- N i NOTES T!( VAWr SAL aww Au 00mm oc WnFrATm PAM m TK CTA1rt OF AWr WM A00 47WY THE DEWS F nE MA"M t a ;M W WT a ffMMT 00 To ALLOW H TNLD6!' Tn sAWY OUT T4 WM K Aia� TO Ti# rx r.'nf Aut_d ❑DOE ACT, *0 M OWAN} & LMG CUM Trf TiiXDVr iW ►ter 40 0-M ALL dZ ENaOGD,&L MAMMA MIAU 0011°MATM OW RTE >* P&M AMY EWM OAS"SWDZI�TOT�f00300 WEROC'MrH AMY WOFK Xtf is 7 W N➢l a3.DER 9 K.L Cfl W 0 ii-a Or THE ON rmo Katy G ou ACT. XLE OF THE ~4vm 94ALL O TO "tlF !FE O AR01ALOM CXE ACT. TFE XLDar 91 L CKY►WO: WA04DM NOT WFU Omo' 4Y WTh TNf iLkL pme *0 C![TAi1O U Ow OME ALL N£ATK RECTWA, RLL&C AAA NI-ptL 0OW7 WITH ALL Arlr..rA" OZO a Kou.ATM alz rA~ PCA912NiwAftlicrAlkwsx iwcoro rrtx A�5'p'$f.4717hF�["1J1G�'CI RT' 1� +1El1RiEL7 N lM5CJ1,PF aw+sa+r�rxrs a+os�nar�rx�+esnarr vt .+u�+,w irlhArlli IYJt �y AVA W"yn C1EyC71PT[N I DA-M REVISM sm "p9w VA-M ULU we PW>G ONLY DATE; sRRARwY Dom owf ove A N 1) R L ►r M Cl N T Y R k DESIGN & DRAFTING 4wuxRxapr bmi F*W h awksgo lr onwk>, Lot -1 To T�{ _ Fu RPMw CAMERON I KATHERINE GAUSSY SRO -AM" r PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM FARM BUILDING TO STUDIO f5 2W 1W SCM EXISTING FLOOR PLAN EXISTING SECTIONS EXISTING ELEVATIONS I AIMS 8'r: Al ppovED 6Y: KALE 1141 - , To, DATE 1t y" NO. fflatCT Na Aw0l DQVATCN R)OT10 I fOLWAT04 w U" A ItAv" to mqWT oAhva Tr A0040' fnIn $IWXI�ftS OWU pw Ac Aft"5 AT Ia. 87ACAS 0� 2W -"ZAvktm Wul im klep, ME OP TTAKA WV-9 -WTt%M OF UWAXY $ W- WIt �� W'1�' �WOAAX� TW LX7-W w0m�c" pFwa 44 TOM& no wul'Q�'s MIT" N kt u ASKCkWllm AM" WXL BE wwlym. RXMTJON DWAM AW4� N SW- cwo" 70 SECMN �"A. 0 � AZ- Op X100 WI. WaR CN s7cw 7op I "Qm -mpss "I CAM 1W %IM To v joacsalwy Mk* AA $aaU W PWYM Al PICT; M YX nU7 PMOATCA 4ALL 'WA I COC AX� -0CAIIATIM mac U A" WIM To 1KW%W—m WL -W" OEM tit F*XCATA" S"a tw%-" Ti 10 ARME o1st. M;Xv" SiAU COXAM TO V WcTox Iml, 4AWU 944L n T�A= TO AYtV WAUK 1�-T mmx-rck U4�L T�4 DRARAU LATR Ex7m. kill 3a ''D WOM fW� A4 sk"FROD m, AM T4a NAWA.'A &4AU M f-m 0* -XaTRxxa omws AW Baum IAWA* r-s" C, -A okk wu 417 V OF mJOAMk Tw sxm�' VSZM F04AN7'C3;1. 4Aa MAINIM$ 5t� cs � 10 Ad n"U tmlL oac W"*u ni tom" 10 &SsEcrxx CA.I. ' 3'c. DRAW nX I PrE �AW FO FXKDATO QR"4�,W 5AAU N P" SOT LM T*A9,f'X DA- -�*AVZA W 00 S�ALL ft AM ok 0=1�mc x *U4� corrAM so T"T " TV m 11w TIE OR Me Is MCI Tsf k ""01 OF T4 hbOR UM Ot CQAA VACE -Up- 7OF go xe$ OF " pm OR 7u $KAU, ME COVtM 11'14 W7 LEM tUAX 9' m ME" cv1sw STOW te�UAR MJ61AGE �ATR E�Wl -7a szM:Tvt AMA�Vkc' -�AAW.kq MAT Q1 am ;0 WE 4e WTm- -eAm*u WALL at LaAm TO mynT MOAUIOLAPM FOOOAIM -ucmL ALL U CUM hmE UR� co-UW 00, A PM*n*TM SWR L 7 56 J24: A ZWKW LAIVR � ckswz Vm OR On -V MAX 01AN CRAMLA KAT"Ai, cchlgm wt mw Tx" 01 OF urwk' T"T ML A 3,'W SEA. STAM WIS, WW&S� " GJM Mc ALL $1A swunj.�wmaj OD uAem I b" To rwN 4.& 'naL wow OIETAVO A4 0-IM Mlqv M61MICTIN WIL UW111" 0279A. 'k4A TO &x"o 1z. Up- NWTM ki V4.4xo pRomcm WAU fA M�v4vm fN ArMA0 Sk"MA lka T WAUZZ A;5 lw�' mt. ALt WAz ' �A* UMAO�- A)W 7 CDWO" co"M &4a t To io.j'onc, - IV( I "� TWX KJL � A� IN mWn • 0,4 O 6 " nx. v xAL V'r Z5'c J w" 4*1 C1 *c-c-x R410 I MAU kL 57.x, 9AMWA *&kvXAL5 w ti *om qW1 on*m To -fcmW u OA-c. CORSTRUC� P-W SAT7 SA"T44 f i LAT" *-a ; 1440 bi- W" it I c m FW VAPMR SA;W9 V21 ZIVVAI� Y4051A smu t4"m "o FLOOW RXM A" ADC**4 v ZN7*w IaAlaw� Uts 'AM " VCOP y WWW *"Ws OR vw.�F 70 -" SA FA ` MARLV ma m V.kw V TAW BwLom =E 11A"$ Wka. M .°", RM"AAJ A)o �ktl 59 OWE* tM7 ma vwk"r To 13Z ZAVM;�=4 WAM S&M com ft. TO r 1M.A. MAW tw-om CME om 0ulyls I%kL ft �Lgm W� W U0 7 PIM M �,k'R O� 1�a_ M7X W LM',siM 1z Wr EMIL tutl ajUw• —=& NAM MAIWIns., 'VL I A4 PER S4 P 4c"?3 i . %p of &ME4. 41CL^ V21 CIWAAC� Aws �-vi iai EmEvz� To aw. kris mm AgAU i* xAw WN vr "lm X Z*nml. oir 1W)OW �Im Sk* kAlf W,14 �- Vr ak ��ao " M04M ;T= CA STEEL COL" t CONCRETE PAD lj lck.E 0:111-T 1121 . . . ........ MAIN FLOOR PLAN Aye, 2Ls K % X7 v O'C' KAU V411 -C' VU� vr lrl� x OWVIX.14 CONCRETE FAD SCHEDULE gfWa. OONOFETE ?AD WE CAPACP PAD A t VQ Aw 1-4 FAD 8 L p C k*90NRY STEEL LNTELS 0279A. 'k4A P 0 .................. n I � •x32' 3 V2' x 4 71Er . .................... p .. . ......... ma- H _4 444 Fr Tx X 1440 bi- Q �V V,414 PAQ L 1 20 V'2 0646' MN MJKIN WE 5 V4x5 V4* 21 uhWORCED Co'Nan FooTw. 15 f*� I UZG'o& ps 41 W BEANG 75 Kh ALL MAS, MWK AWAWWWS� DPAWN.S AND ,WY"TM AM OWW 5Y, AW Tl+ PRUIERT, UP nv OFFK , AM WERE a"TEU, FVOLVE3 AND OFViIOPED FCA L% (K AND N Oal, MTV4 WTh Ttf %IECM PWX-ci Nlyf OF 3" MAS, OMM, AWkNMW+RS OR PLANS SHN-) - BE USM by OR tX5CL0SEO TO ANY PERn%L FW OR COWWrON FOR ANY AAPOSE MtAMXVER WIK)OI WRTTWPff&#3" V THS DEMN OFFU L AN X" At llrryW X-SM ANC DW:'(M I NOTES 7Ff'kt" SKI WV.WW ALL DRAWNW MO 97C M-MM P" TO 14 MAP OF ANY WOW AND �07Y K, TERM f4f WWWGS A 37-CFCATM AK NOT WM� T OUMM TO ALLOW IKRI-OW 10 C4W Wr TW WOW N ACMT&fa TO RE XWt TH: $XW OODE ACT, AW 14 CNIMO KkOK CCU- Trf "-DW W-ST Vim W CIECK ALL J% MeOM. 3"W�� WTMA ","MCA7M (NVf AW %'C*7 ANY FffM MaMC AW, 06WMM TO Df CESI x " 8TiauE PRXEV%C WTH ANY WOK AIE OF Ttf &&DO %WL tOk E 10 " OF fit CNTAFIO &LW OME ACT. KLE Uc 1i f W%fACPJ" WWI. CWOW 10 7 ,* OF TFt ON TARO RAIV% M K7. Tif L 00 MW OiANM W" DXS MT #FMT . ....... UNTEL LE O(WANCE WV'HRf &UNG POW AND ONtAW M.W = &L iEATW 8,r-�WL. PLLtM W SSNM " L 0%#Ly "I ft ALL MkrWLE CayS 4 iFQA-A770W YV= LJNTELS VAD9rW4W 7hrA92MMY9MM &WZ 49canw" L-1 2,-2'x8'gqJCE L-4 2-2'x)O' 9K)CE "W&t FM NW 4ZM,&CWV 01 7Wo9�71V *jrN rW L-2 3-2'x8' SpR)CE L-5 3-2xV SPRjCE r, -2'xg' SPRXE L-6 4-210' SPRUCE alRpig rAlAon'tDo RN RwAw1r Wkw 7�F"Zpw 62YA77 k*90NRY STEEL LNTELS T�o mdame �m N i r mi N ft qAflcflx" 4nd melt ft �aq.+a"MN 01 , mi r fm "?b " krdvi" Kh 2w 3 V2' x 4 71Er . .................... Fk $Ch 2M ISMOKE ALARMS ma- %M &"C W.S. W SE WTAUfD M F,�A RUIR ""4 ck%ON RAX*VE omcTOR waiND . .... ..... EMMENCT UCsHTWG o'cWper Loffm Dowow To "t oc NO. ITSCWTm I r7 t� REVISIONS mn FOR FVW VA7E, MW FOR P` VG ohty DATE! FFCA&4MYtt3XWONLY DATE . . ............ A, N D R E W M C I Iq T Y R Ei .DESIGN &DRAYnNG 156 tudhope blvd. RR42 hawkwaw* OrAmo' LOO -ITO 7 4a7_1618 FAX 705-467-79$7 CAMERON t KATHERINE GAUSBY 43 W LW 5WH OW-NEXRTE PROJECT, PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM FARM BUILDING TO STUDIO 4'W ZO UW- SDM DRAWM FLOOR PLAN RAW4 RY: APPAOmm R-r: -A--MCIN,IYRF- DATE bAWM,Na PFAMECT NO A=02 0744 i1 � � I 3 1 3 J 3 � r r I ff� � E i6 -MAi_ . �. . -C�Fr ACL ova Xasw ApRg4cwEw& D7RAWMZ All? 9TCF0TCW AM DxW ft, P),C THE rROPWY OF TM CFFE AFC WEFE MATM EVOLVM KWO DE+8.0PER FGA { BE CK AND N a NJjC`T rq wmi THE WfrM rRO,EC r OF Sr of=1s. OM04E AMANG igM OR f L." ?W.L su LMD EY OR 1C A. W P9"]1l FFM1 WWrF84 9AWN CAF IM OE" offer i 4MWW WCNrYW OMN 1117 DRAFTM ! NOTES Rf NJUff *W-L #EVEN AL OM "0 hW WWA7[1lii MCA T4 T* STMT CF *1 WW 00 WWY Ti£ [E'er f T1f W*y =i i60WA -T e W NOT &FrCV4Xr OtTALff) TO 3 &LOW THE lLkWr To A11Rr Ma Tff vm M AoaWoa TO TSf CEXN T?E SALK a fE ACT. W T+ *(TAW 1 &ZW CCM. TrE T tZOr 4r V91FY M OCK &L rat UlAvam OETAL% NO 9ECFCATOG a STE *c f Lp i my ! M AW WM Wx s TO THE e�E KL-n& CCCE ACT. fU OF T}E ~A TtM Silo 07fm To u- w or Trf CWW NJLD 3 COIX WT- I T+ VAJ1 r 9-� OCT t W1P G►� V is 013 HDT *F�cT =f+ *a WqH Tr E "W MC In ifAW 9JLD li COX 4- FEA4rh $ � PLU" No "AM 3-ki 006tY Mm ALL fCmdztRIAMW X"WACAW rW fifOX 4V A9&P4 "M cN czyrr�l nnr �g14CF,�r of OOW74 C 1W Or nWAOomF X WF VY fbF Q�AQ ZWM aA107Ml 7a16'AORW nfAftC MR , I M o1e 4, k& *V CeY i erg a. :. * DW 2W . (t F6 �Drlr i W�$'fi F�LEVATiON SOUT 11 ELEVATION Iglllll�ppIIIIIII�AIr, 11911111I�1 111111 I I I I �r�� I'I 11 III 1iI 1 I: 4 � � E�.�A�� ST ELEVATION -�l � I II II IiPP1nl W -44 110. rm OAT£ FEVOW SS" F d FUW DATE, M= FGA MCP,& Ottr DA F PRI&OLWY IDES KIN OW Y We A N D R E W H C f X T Y R S S ere ttd VPQ btvcL i#OR h& vkow" e to Udo. L(X -fro FAX 75i� �I >�M *•�Fprl�an-a�brl.CVrr1 m CUENTz CAllERON t KATHERINE GAUSBY PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM FARM BULDING TO STUDIO t�rna �ao ELEVATIONS MCINTYRE 9c ALt 1 +1 ,I �i � � 6Y: Al11IfY,p,O EY: wIq ra = na Aw03 IIH ACL ova Xasw ApRg4cwEw& D7RAWMZ All? 9TCF0TCW AM DxW ft, P),C THE rROPWY OF TM CFFE AFC WEFE MATM EVOLVM KWO DE+8.0PER FGA { BE CK AND N a NJjC`T rq wmi THE WfrM rRO,EC r OF Sr of=1s. OM04E AMANG igM OR f L." ?W.L su LMD EY OR 1C A. W P9"]1l FFM1 WWrF84 9AWN CAF IM OE" offer i 4MWW WCNrYW OMN 1117 DRAFTM ! NOTES Rf NJUff *W-L #EVEN AL OM "0 hW WWA7[1lii MCA T4 T* STMT CF *1 WW 00 WWY Ti£ [E'er f T1f W*y =i i60WA -T e W NOT &FrCV4Xr OtTALff) TO 3 &LOW THE lLkWr To A11Rr Ma Tff vm M AoaWoa TO TSf CEXN T?E SALK a fE ACT. W T+ *(TAW 1 &ZW CCM. TrE T tZOr 4r V91FY M OCK &L rat UlAvam OETAL% NO 9ECFCATOG a STE *c f Lp i my ! M AW WM Wx s TO THE e�E KL-n& CCCE ACT. fU OF T}E ~A TtM Silo 07fm To u- w or Trf CWW NJLD 3 COIX WT- I T+ VAJ1 r 9-� OCT t W1P G►� V is 013 HDT *F�cT =f+ *a WqH Tr E "W MC In ifAW 9JLD li COX 4- FEA4rh $ � PLU" No "AM 3-ki 006tY Mm ALL fCmdztRIAMW X"WACAW rW fifOX 4V A9&P4 "M cN czyrr�l nnr �g14CF,�r of OOW74 C 1W Or nWAOomF X WF VY fbF Q�AQ ZWM aA107Ml 7a16'AORW nfAftC MR , I M o1e 4, k& *V CeY i erg a. :. * DW 2W . (t F6 �Drlr i W�$'fi F�LEVATiON SOUT 11 ELEVATION Iglllll�ppIIIIIII�AIr, 11911111I�1 111111 I I I I �r�� I'I 11 III 1iI 1 I: 4 � � E�.�A�� ST ELEVATION -�l � I II II IiPP1nl W -44 110. rm OAT£ FEVOW SS" F d FUW DATE, M= FGA MCP,& Ottr DA F PRI&OLWY IDES KIN OW Y We A N D R E W H C f X T Y R S S ere ttd VPQ btvcL i#OR h& vkow" e to Udo. L(X -fro FAX 75i� �I >�M *•�Fprl�an-a�brl.CVrr1 m CUENTz CAllERON t KATHERINE GAUSBY PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FROM FARM BULDING TO STUDIO t�rna �ao ELEVATIONS MCINTYRE 9c ALt 1 +1 ,I �i � � 6Y: Al11IfY,p,O EY: wIq ra = na Aw03 MT Va. flu AROWD 900#6 DIN—,\ am 2 .70 XWA Dom MD DETAIL iW j7lRkfW� ARM ALL Xp ALT', ftATE TO EW� 3"~~^____ �A Lllil NOTES "Dm av ACT __ REVISIONS MLWA" W" OKLY DATE, pROpmao CHARGE OF USE FROM FARM BUILDING TO STUDIO f5 2ND UK SOM DETAILS DATE, lox 2DM Aw04 0744 Page I of I -I From.- Katherine Gausby Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 6-.08 PM To: Farquharson, Steven Subject: Description and background of KNG Technical Inc ----- Original Message r__ _ . " .. - Dear Mr. Kozlowski, My name is Cameron Gausby and I got your contact from my wife Katherine Gausby who indicated that you may need a description of our business as well as a background and I would be happy to provide both. Our company is an International Search Firm specializing in recruiting professionals from around the world who work the sectors of Life Sciences, lab services, medical device, mobile communications, imaging technology and mining. Most of our Recruitment specializes in engineering which is prominent in all of these sectors. Our company which we founded in 2002, identifies, recruits, and interviews Candidates for various positions and companies through out the world. Because our work is International, absolutely all of our work is done by the phone and the Internet so we never meet our Candidate's or clients. Currently our projects are in Massachusetts, Peru, Madagascar, Ottawa, Waterloo, California, Chicago, Alberta, and British Columbia. Our business started from 35 Woodfield Rd in the beaches area of Toronto where I ran the company from our basement of our home. We started a family and my wife being from the country (Arnprior Ontario) felt that Barrie would bring a good mix of winter and summer sport, community, and still maintain proximity to an airport. Because our business was and is exclusive to the Internet and phone, we really could move anywhere. In fact, Kingston was a close second. Since our move KNG has grown to employ 3 people in Barrie. They are Mark Smith, Natalie Schmid. and Nick Wootton. Mark hnc., hppn xvith im c-inve 04. Natalie since 05, and Nick just 7 months. I I k_� 1. Our website can be viewed at www.knEtechnical.com If you have any questions whatsoever please do not hesitate to call. Best Regards, Cameron Gausby' KNG Technical is a member-owner of NPA, The Worldwide Recruiting Network, your connection to premier Independent recruiting firms located throughout Europe, Asia, Australia, Africa and the Americas 2/29/2008 Dear Chief Building Inspector, Oro - Medonte Township. It has been brought to our attention by the Gausby family that they will. be running their home business from 475.Line 2 South RR #) in Shanty Bay, LOL - O. We are aware of the fact that they have 3 employees (2 more than, allowed by the by law under residential/com.mercial) but do not see any wav that their ho me business done entirely by phone and intemet, having acv negative impacit on our residence, or the town. We are aware of the renovations to the outbuilding and understand that the changes are reflecting the needs of the home business and will not create any unwanted sounds, sights., odors, etc. Kind Regards, a Name (printed.): Mailing Address: A, Home Phone Z- Dear Chief Building Inspector, Oro-Medonte Township. ft has been brought to our attention by the Gausby family that they will be running their home business from 475 Line 2 South RR #2 in Shanty Bay, LOL 2LO. We are aware of the fact that they have 3 employees (2 more than allowed by the by law under residential commercial) but do not see any way that their home business done entirely by phone and internet, having any negative impact on our residence, or the town. We are aware of the renovations to the outbuilding and understand that the changes are reflecting the needs of the home business and will not create any unwanted sounds., sights, odors, etc. Kind Regards, X. Name (printed): Mai-ling Address: ef fil-lx LA), Home Phone # .2 ZY Dear Chief Building Inspector, Oro-Medonte Township. It has been brought to our attention by the Gausby family that they will be running their home business from 475 Line 2 South RR #2 in Shanty Bay. LOL 2LO. We are aware of the fact that they have 3 employees (2 more than allowed bythe by law under residenti.al/co err -ercial) but do not see and wav that their home business done entirely by *V phone and, intemet, having any negative impact on our residence, or the town. We are aware of the renovations to the outbuilding and understand that the changes are reflecting the needs of the home business and will not create any unwanted sounds, sights, odors, etc. Kind Regards, X. Name (printed): DI �; � y��1� Mailing Address: 44- Home Phone #- it Dear Chief Building Inspector, Oro-Medonte Township. It has been brought to our attention by the Gausby family that they will. be running their home business from 475 Lire 2 South RR #2 in Shanty Bay, LOL 2LO. We are aware of the h ' fact that tey have 3 employees (2 more than allowed by the by law under resi-der ti,al/comm-ercial) but do not see any way that their home business done entirely by phone and internet, having any negative impact on our residence, or the town. We are aware of the renovations to the outbuilding and understand that the changes are reflecting the needs of the home business and will not create any unwanted sounds., sights, odors, etc. Kind .Regard s, X. Name (printed): � .� 5 Mailing Address: rzn Home Phone k- SRO ILI L MAR-10-2008 12:20 TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE P.001/001 MAR --1 O -- 20OO 12:22 FROM : NUCA 7054242115 TO : 1 7054070133 P.1/1 033 G a 60hlW� March 10, 200$ Watershed Countie'S � i niccx. Duffi.rin [ ;rcy 14lr*mber of 017ser� ing our Healthy waters W� N(- )TTAWA- SACw,,4VALLEY C_ONSMVATION AUT! !()RlTy ("FrItre for' CunFervatioti ��rr +n�atinR John HN Coriswv�ition Admi nistrati(rrl C .entre � Tiffin �1ons€ rvalis�n Are ;� r $1 95 �i! #r il.in� ONTARIO � Tel0pl�e�ne: 705,424.1479 ,. F�.rx: �t>`� � � utopia, �`ln i 4�.'v� l Tir1 . 4_4._ l 1 Wcb: www.nv'Ca.()n.r-.1 Etmi rl: adrriin0 r,vc a.rin.r..a Tnm x t n f%^ .c Arum Kozlowski, Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro-Medant€� Member F.O. Box 100 Municipalities Ora, Ontario, LOL 2O hdj:tia Toiors�rrriri Dear ll,llr. azlawski; Ar mrintf� lOrrip fie= Application for Minor Variance 2008 -A-0 (Gausby) ThF Kluc- Mouiflim.:= 475 Line 2 South, Pclrt Lot 23, Concession 3 kri4dfoid Wc�t C,tivillimburr Township of Ora- Medonte (Formerly Townshi p of Oro) C.c(,��J#A".' The Na��v�� i��ll� Conservation . � � er�r�ltian Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this .t llin ,u�# application for minor variance and based upon our mandate ndate and policies Eti under the Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection lr�nrzfil approval. M*d:incthon Thank you for circulating this application for our revie w and please forward Moll() a copy of any decision. Mulrrrrar N,Lw lr?crrni;,eth Sincerely, 0rc�- Medonic "..� Crey Highl -trid Shc ffiirr•np Tirn Sa lkeld F,rin w: l�:r Resource Planner Wa: aga BL:x h Watershed Countie'S � i niccx. Duffi.rin [ ;rcy 14lr*mber of 017ser� ing our Healthy waters W� N(- )TTAWA- SACw,,4VALLEY C_ONSMVATION AUT! !()RlTy ("FrItre for' CunFervatioti ��rr +n�atinR John HN Coriswv�ition Admi nistrati(rrl C .entre � Tiffin �1ons€ rvalis�n Are ;� r $1 95 �i! #r il.in� ONTARIO � Tel0pl�e�ne: 705,424.1479 ,. F�.rx: �t>`� � � utopia, �`ln i 4�.'v� l Tir1 . 4_4._ l 1 Wcb: www.nv'Ca.()n.r-.1 Etmi rl: adrriin0 r,vc a.rin.r..a Tnm x t n f%^ .c Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for March 20, 2008 ....................... ............... .................... Petet and Jean Hoffman 2008-B-06 4641 Line 2 Notts, Concess-ton 3, Lot 9 (o-rtnet Mcdonte) ............... ....................... THE PROPOSAL "rhe purpose of application 2008-B-06 is to permit a boundary adjustment. The subject land being 4641 1,ine 2 North is proposing to conveys a strip of land having a frontage of 3.6 metres (11.8 feet) on IA*ne 3 North. a depth of 179 metres (587 feet) and an area of 0.48 hectares (1. 18 acres) to the land adjacent to the east (owned by the applicant's son). No new building lots are proposecl 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 /ICU) Zone Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe - Public Works Department - Building Department — No Concerns Engineering Department - No Concerns BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to add approximately 0.48 hectares from the subject property to the neighbouring residential lot to the east, owned by the applicant's son. The proposed retained lot, being 4641 I-A*ne 2 North, would consist of 79.8 hectares,, and contains an existing single detached dwelling. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. OFFICIAL PLAN The subject hands are designated A 'cultural by the Official Plan (OP). Section D2 of the J gri .1 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 con se vlq�! be penililled " fi)r I.& purpose qfviod#j1h ,o loo boundan*ef, prol)ided no neu-1 b uildii�g ire/ /'S cre a lei . . . Ilse (,o fflIville e of -A (ilu, f Im e n / .� ball be xa li.c ie d //I al //) e b o u n da y a�ljlllslment will nol qftl The i)iabilily �)1'11)e use q "11)e p")pertie.f (Ifle(,-Ied. With respect to the application at hand, no new building lots are proposed. As such, the proposed. boundary adjustment is generally in keeping with the intent of the agricultural policies stated in the Official Plan, and otherwise conforms with the boundarv, adjustment policies contained in Section D.2.2.2. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is zoned A 'cultural/Rural (A /RU) Zone by Zoning By-law 97-95. ,1 grW The lot to be enhanced to the east of 4641 Line 2 North is zoned Agricultural/ Rural (A/Rt)) Zone. Pending approval of the application, the lot to be enhanced as well as the retained lands., would both conform to the minimum "lot area, use and frontage provisions of the A/RU Zone. The enhanced lot will have a total area of 0.68 hectares and resulting frontage of 40 metres on Hine 3 North. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescri-bed 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 Bv-law. Given that the surrounding area consists mainly, of large agricultural parcels, W generally over 20 hectares, the request to reduce an existing 80 hectare rural lot to approximately 79 hectares is deemed appropriate, and would generally be in keeping with the lot fabric in the area. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-B-06 to convey a strip of land having a frontage of 3.6 metres (11.8 feet) on Dine 3 North a depth of 179 metres (587 feet) and an area of 0.48 hectares (1.18 acres) to the land adjacent to the north (also owned by the applicant) 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 1,and Surveyor be submitted to the SecretarNT- 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. J'hat the severed lands be merged in title with 4608 line 3 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 area for the enhanced lot be no greater than 0.68 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 conditions of consent imposed by ComtTiittee be fulfilled within one W year from the date of the giving of the notice. .All of whiqh'� res ectfully sub1l-11tted Steven -quharson, B-URPL junior Planner Reviewed by Bruce Hoppe, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning and Building Township of Oro- Mcdontc Committee of A d ustmcnt Planning Rcport for March 20, 2008 Ray..�r�ar Investments ..ltd. 2008 -B -o7 1709.1 Mount Saint Louis .Road, Cone. 13, Lot 10 (Former Medonte) ...... ... -*- - - -- "-I'he purpose of Consent application 200$ -B -07 is to convey a block of land from the subject lands, being 1705 Mount Saint Louis Road, to the neighbouring vacant residential property to the immediate east. The block to be conveyed consists of 0.055 hectares, having a depth of 75 metres, and 11.59 metres of frontage on Mount Saint Louis Road. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of this application. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official. Plan. Designation — Rural, Environmental Protection Two Overlay Zoning By -law �7 -95 - - A 'cultural/ Rural (A /RU) Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS County of Sn' ncoe - r Public Works Department - Building Department - Enginee.ring Department - No concerns The applicants are proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.055 hectares of land from a .large vacant rural property to a neighbouring vacant residential. lot. The purpose of the adjustment is to provide more land area for the existing vacant residential lot. As a .result of this application, the proposed retained lands would consist of 35 hectares, while the lands to be enhanced would be enlarged slightly from the existing 0.22 hectares to 0.3 hectares. OFFICIAL PLAN Section D2.2.2 of the official flan provides a specific policy to allow Go nu-Zittee to consider applications for boundary adjustments. The policy states: ` 1 t n.�enl vygy be pertvilled for Me pugs o.�e roj' me difyin g lot bo ndaiies-, prorided no new building lo i.i� c -rented... in addition, tae itlee q A,�� l e n I .�� all e s fi.� e //I at Me boundat y a(jl uslment will not q �cl II)e i4(ibility o J' 11)e agfic llural-parcels ��c �tec. #� In reviewing the application, no new building lots will be created. A site inspection revealed that the retained lands are heavily treed., and display no evidence of past or current agricultural operations, nor are the lands likely viable for future farming activities. In addition, the County of Simcoe has commented that staff has no objection to the application. The subject lands are designated Rural by the Official flan.. Section C2.2 of the official Flan states "permitted uses ... are agriculture, single detached dwellings, home occupations ... " etc. The proposed retained and enhanced lands are currently vacant, however, approval of this application, would not preclude future permitted uses from being developed on either properties. With respect to the Environmental Protection Two overlaNT, Section B3.3 of the Official flan W states "the uses permitted in these areas shall be those permitted by the underlying designation provided the use conforms to the policies of this section ". As discussed above, the underlying designation is Rural, where the proposed boundary adjustment would not hinder or impede future uses as permitted in this designation. In addition, as the lands to be enhanced constitute an existing lot of record., an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required for a boundary adjustment. The application was circulated to the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and County of Sig -ncoe for comment. The NVCA indicated that the proposed boundary adjustment does not fall within the "Regulated Area ", and as such the NVCA had no concerns with the application. County staff indicated that there are no objections to the boundary adjustment. On the basis of the above, the application is considered to be appropriate, and generally conforms to the Official Plan. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property and lands to be enhanced are both zoned Agricultural/ Rural (A/RUI) Zone. The minimum frontage for a lot in the A /RU Zone is 45 metres; the lands to be enhanced currently contain 31.5 metres of frontage. As a result of this application, the frontage for the enhanced lot would increase from 31.5 metres to 43.1 metres, and thus bring the lands closer to conforn ity with the minimum requirements. In addition, the rninirnum lot area for a residential use in the A /RU Zone is 0.4 hectares; while the lands to be enhanced currently consist of 0.22 hectares, the application for boundary adjustment would in effect increase the property to just over 0.3 hectares, and therefore provide more room for the future construction of a single detached dwelling and septic system components. The lands to be retained would decrease slightly, from the current 34.98 hectares to 34.89 hectares. The rxai.rrimum lot area for an agricultural use is 2 hectares. On the basis of the above, the proposed boundary adjustment generally maintains the intent of the Zoning By --law. CONCLUSION The application for lot addition generally conforms with the policies of the Official Plan and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-B-07, being for a conveyance of land having 11.59 metres of frontage on Mount Saint Louis Road, and an area of 0.085 hectares, subject to the following conditions: I. 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- reasurer, 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed convey ante for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the severed lands be merged in title with Concession 13, East part of Lot 10, known as RP-51R768 Part 15, PIN 74059-0012 JJ), 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 applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. 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 res e: ull submitted, w Lot to be Enhanced (Vacant land) North of Warminster 4 a e , SKETCH OF PRO-POSED SEVERANCE 4L a� D�-s ZF PART LET �i �,CNESSl�N 13 '�►� '� � � � • � R � c ° ° sGEOGRAPHIC ms TOWNSHIP O MEDO �TTE NOW IN THE C:� TOWNSHIP OF O -I y COUNTY OF S IMC 0 E 10 D 10 20 30 40 50 metres � �1' SCALE 1:500 0 0 d1HSNAAOL �U1V�Q�,,_0, Q 401 10 Nvw PIN 74059 -0024 7)_ - 38 '�?A KIVAR »vVESTMENTS M" C O N C E S S 1 0 N 1 3 'RETAINED' PART 2 6 �► Vacar7 t (House Trailer) � MT. ST. LOUIS ROAD BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND 11 N32' 1 2'00 E 73.41 1 ROAD ALLOWNCE r' E�Eyz 8ODrne1� 'SEVERED' i 85Dsq. m. 7 N vacon t N LOT 10 N32' 12'OO "E 75.613 r <) l?c. C-) t PART 15 1, PIN 74059-0012(L T) f �� N p Warlc Z_ �� ' ;3 LOT' 9 }f M�' I�TY�E Q 4 1 Q � 0.219Ho A!i Vac are t • 0 N32'1 Oa'E 57.848 1t LOT 8 � PART 14 K EY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) 1?esiden tial Page I of I Kozlowski, Adam From: Timothy Salkeld [tsalkeld@nvca.on.ca] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:50 PM To: Kozlowski, Adam Subject: RE: Consent application Hi Adam. Looks straight forward. The NV CA doesn't need to see this one. Thanks for pre-consulting. Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 8195 8th Line Utopia, ON LOM 1 TO (705) 424-1479 ext 233 (705) 424-2115 tsa_Ikeld@_...nvca.on.ca a This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any Unauthorized review, Use. disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If YOU are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and message destroy all copies of the original -----Original Message ----- FrOM: KOZIowski, Adam [mailto:akozlowski@oro-medonte.ca] Sent: March 5, 2008 1:21 PM TO: Timothy Salkeld Subject: Consent application Hi Tim — enclosed is an application for boundary adjustment. The property does not have any EP zoning, but the proposed adjustment takes place pretty close to the re area limits (but does not appear to be within the reg area). Please let me know if you have any concerns. Adam Kozlowski Planner Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South, Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO P:705- 487 -2171 ext. 4240 F: 705-487-0133 E: akozlowski@oro-medonte.ca 3/10/2008 Township of Oro - Medonte Committee of Adjustment Planning Report for March 20, 2008 Raymond Dumont 2008-A-06 2109 Gore Road, East Part of Lot 10, Concession 1 (Former Oro) THE PROPOSAL The applicant had originally appeared at the February 21, 2008 Cornrm*ttee of Adjustment,, requesting relief from the required front yard setback. and to increase floor volume 'in a requited yard, as the proposed new dwelling would be partially located 'in the Environmental Protection Zone that bisects the subject property. The application was deferred until such time that Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authorit ' v, had provided comment on the application, as the subject lands are located in a floodplain. The 'Fownship received comments from the NVC.A on February 21, 2008, indicating no objection to the application. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-- 95: Zone: A-aricultural/Rura.1 ,A R1 Required Provosed Table B4 (B) Standards for Single Detached Dwellings: N,fim'mum Required Front Yard Setback 8�0 in 6.92 in Non-Complying Buildi.pgs and Structures Section 5.16.1 b) does not increase the amount of floor area or volume in a required yard,, to consltwd a new'wl le delaclied dwelling baivn a lar �loor area and 2 additional slorgs. g ,g get� MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Agricultural Zoning By-law 97-95 — Previous Applications — AGENCY COMMENTS Agricultural/ Rural (N/RLD Zone Environmental Protection (EP) Zone Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — No objection (see attached) Public Works Department — No concerns Building Department — No concerns Engineering Department — No concerns BACKGROUND This application. proposes to demolish an existing 69.5 square metre bungalow-style dwelling and replace with a new _)-storey, 23621 square metre dwelling. According to Township Zoning By-law Schedule A-9 the subject property is located within a flood plain, where a watercourse flows through the proper".r approximately 9.34 metres south of the location of the existing dwelling. In addition., the existing dwelling is located partially within lands identified as Environmental Protection (F--,P) Zone, where the Zoning By-law prohibits development within the boundaries of the EP Zone. However, the existing dwelling was constructed in approximately 1935, and as such pre-dates current provisions of Zoning By-law 97-95. The application was deferred until such time that expert comment was received from the NVCA, particularly, with respect to the concern over the proposed new dwelling being located on lands subject to the risk of flooding. The NVCA 'indicated that there is no objection to the replacement of an existing dwelling, subject to the applicant applying for and obtaining a development permit from the NVCA. It is now appropriate to consider this application. Do the trariances conform with the gencralintent of the 0fricial Plan? The property is designated _A gricultural bar the Official Plan. Section C1.2 of the Plan states that the priinaii7- permitted use of lands within this designation "shall be agriculture" and in addition, "other permitted uses include single detached dwellings, home occupations etc. Therefore, the demolition of an existing dwelling unit and replacement with residential structure having greater floor volume would constitute the renovation and expansion of a permitted use in the Agricultural designation. On this basis., the proposal is considered to conform to the intent of the Official Plan. Do the ijariances -maintain the �Yen intent of the Zoning Bj74.a w? 4=7 With respect to the Zoning By-law, the intent of controlling development within the limits of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone is to ensure that development does not occur on lands that contain hazardous slopes, natural features that are sensitive or incompatible with more intensive land uses, or are susceptible to flooding. Based on a site inspection, the proposed dwelling would be located above and awav from the edge of the top of bank for the creek to the south. In addition, .1 while the proposed new dwelling unit will not encroach further than the existing dwelling into the EP Zone, the watercourse itself is located 9.43 metres from the south face of the new dwelling. Therefore the EP Zone is currently providing a buffer of 9.43 metres between the existing dwelling and watercourse. As such, the historically deficient setback from the existing and proposed new residence to the watercourse will. be maintained. With respect to the request for reduction in the front yard setback from the required 8 metres in the A/RU Zone to a proposed 6.92 metres, the purpose of the front yard setback is to ensure that adequate distance exists between the traveled portion of the roadway and structures, and for the purpose of ensuring adequate space for on-site parking. In this case., vehicle parking onsite will be in the same location as existing, being at the front and west side of the proposed new dwelling. Aside from the front yard setback and setback to the EP Zone, the proposed dwelling will otherwise comply with the required interior, rear., and exterior side yard setbacks, along with the maximum height and minimum floor area provisions for residential uses. Are the variances desirable for the appropri;ite develop-tnent of the lot? The lands subject to the variance application contains two zone classifications, being Agricultural/Rural (A/Rt)l Zone along the front of the property to a depth of 10 metres, where the ma)oritv, of the sub' Environmental Protection. Specific policies and guidance Ica property is zoned 1 with. respect to development within a floc: dplain are listed in the Township Official Plan, and are implemented through the Zoning By-law: B5,1.3.2 Iniple-rn en ta tion . . . a// la n d f it till) i n an ide n 1i fie d. 11oo( lain s /) all be fu 1�e d to a - Ho lding . Flro i4sio n 111 //) e ihip lefil e n fil�>g Zonii(g Bylaw... no new delt lopvient U petwu'lled on land.f vulyea lo 11)e _Holdilz -) opision unfit The g l r jN,Foilawa,v,�,oa _11'4ey (,"on, eivalionAutl)w ly approivf 11)e dei�elopmenl... Comments were received from the NVCA on Februan- .2.1 2_008 indicating that the Authority has no ob)ection to demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new larger dwelling. 11'he NVCA. has also indicated that a condition of approval for this variance be that the applicant apply for and obtain a development permit from the NVCA, in order that the Authority can ensure adequate flood-proofing measures for the proposed dwelling are implemented. With respect to the reduced front yard setback, the proposed dwelling will not hinder or impede sight lines for the intersection of Gore Road and Line 1 South nor hinder on-site parking,. In addition c� n o t-k-,71thstanding a reduced front yard setback and increased floor volume in the EP Zone the proposed dwelling would otherwise meet with all other provisions for the development of a -residential. use in the A/RU Zone. Based on comments from the NVCA, and that the proposed dwelling comprises of redevelopment of an existing, non-complying structure that constitutes a permitted use by the Official. Plan and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law, the variance is deemed to be appropriate. a A-re the vart'aDcesmiDor? As the proposed variances to reduce the front yard setback and increase floor volume in a required yard maintains the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the variance is deemed to be minor. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-06, being for a reduction of the front yard setback from the required 8 metres to 6.92 metres, and for the construction of a 3 storey, 236.25 square metre single detached dwelling, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed dwelling unit be in conformity with the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 2. The an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification of Comrm'ttee's decision by certif Ting in writing that the proposed dwelling be no closer than 6.92 metres from the front lot line; and that the proposed dwelling be no closer than 9.43 metres from the watercourse to the south of the proposed dwelhng; That the apphcant obtain anv required permit(s) an.d/(,)r approval (s) from the Nottawasaga. W Valley Conserv;ation Authority for the construction of the dwelling; .z W 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 Platining.A.ct R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Adam Kozlowski, Secretary Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro- Medonte P.O. Box 100 Ciro, Ontario, LOL 2XO Mem. her Dear Mr. Kozlowski; x �c url'i'C 'iPa a if��es Re: Application for Minor Variance 2008 -A -06 (Dumont) Part Lot 10, Concession 1 f rra,Trs i 4: Township of Ciro- Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro) x;�� * }. ;w The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this minor variance application in accordance with regulations made under the ��= ��f��- ��Z�:�� r�c�� Conservation Authorities Act. (1011% i U' r ' `� ►f) -d The NVCA has no objection to the approval of this application subject to the following condition: That the applicant obtain a permit from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority under the Conservation Authorities Act. t 'Mon is � The purpose of the permit (among other things) is to ensure adequate 3 floodproofing elevations for the proposed structure and ensure erosion and sediment controls are installed prior to construction to protect the Willow Creek tributary nd associated environmental features ' ry and functions. We advise the application has been submitted to our office however further *� house design details are still required before a permit can be issued. Thank you for circulating this application and please advise us of an decision. Watershed Sincerely, caun ies 7 .. Tim Salkeld rr't4. Resource Planner Uemberoi Wal&15 I�d�]TWA /ASAGG A'JALLEY C 0 r 4 S E WVAtT 10 N A.0 t H RaTY Centre for Conservation eensemtjoll john H;X ons ation Adminis".tion Centre Tiffin Conservation A)-ea 8105 8th Ulne Utopia, Dn LOM 1 r0 ONTARIO �:1.7f1i1' G ; riY'F #f3i ?ri i. Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: w rw.nvca.on.ca Em iI admin@nv - a. n .ca 12-OW — P/5 1813) N82'35'15 "W 1A (738) FENCE ❑.27 W. i T� v 1.7 OVAL ICULVERT Li k ��• N S.I.B, 1813] WOOD STAKES -Ft N UL ' (73a) 0 -7 HtOC}D STAKE4D O4� cTQB ER ��, 2007. I ' } f-'D iEV- � FENCE �J &AL 012 W. Wc1c I i S11HO , ~J L6 V) P) r� r ■ W • p,1. N. 58552 - 002 1 (L T) CONCRETE] INV. BOAC CULVERT 235.04 `I Z �V � u7 °D LLI �? (i QL r 'r � U- Z �E owl v •! < APPROXIMATE POSITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL It..IMIT AS SCALED■ BY P FROM PHOTOGRAPH SUPPLIED RAYMOND DUMONT z IN V. ' I: EN C ON UN FENCE 0.2 N. C) POST AND WRE FENCE L& ""'..,.�' N82803'1 *W (NO3'D5'W — P/S 1613 -- 57,12) 52.'� � (738) PAR T J, 22 7�1 KLAN 51R -- P.I.N. 58552 -- 0023(L T) T� v 1.7 OVAL ICULVERT Li k S.I.B, 1813] rt- UL ' (73a) 0 -7 0m] cl) d • � &AL Wc1c I i S11HO , ~J L6 V) P) r� r ■ C) CONCRETE] INV. BOAC CULVERT 235.04 `I Z �V � u7 Q (i QL ^ Z �E owl v P z IN V. 236.62 C) DRIVE 110.4 m •,.t . t`! 11 1JVR a . � Q 1 REF. CHEC WITH r Comm'Ittee of Adjustment Minutes Thursday February 21 200 9:30 a.m. 0C - I In Attendance: Member Garry Potter; Chairperson Michelle Lynch; Member Lynda Aiken; Member Bruce Chappell; Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski Regrets: Member Rick Webster 1. Comm un*lcatiors and Correspondence None. 2. Disclosure of PecuniarV Interest None declared. ........... . . ...... ......... . ...... .......... 117 -4, M FEB 2- 1/ 2008 MEETING: r Committee of Adiustment-February 21, 2008 Page 1 or V , [-7 .. . . ... ................ 3. Hear* 9:30 2008-13-04 Candas Osborne Concession 12, Lot 4 3857 Line 11 North (Former Township of Medonte) In Attendance: Klaus Jacoby, Agent for Applicant. Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence received from Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation W Authority, dated February 11, 2008 indicating no objection to application. Motion to CA080221 - 1 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Bruce Chappell Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-B-03 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 3833 Line 11 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 area for the enhanced lot be no greater than 2.9 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 conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. ...Carried." Committee of Adjustor ent- February 21, 2008 Page 2 9:45 2008-13-05 Robert Mason Plan 819, Lot 35 8 Brambel Road (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance-. Klaus Jacoby, Agent for Applicant. Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence received from Eric & Amanda Rominger and; Jen Knelsen and; Mitch O'Reilly and; Henry & Christine Prusinowski (no objection to application). Brian Davidson made presentation to Committee. Motion No. CA080221- 2 BE IT RESOLVED thato, Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Garry Potter "Committee defer Consent Application 2008-B-05 until such time that comments are received from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority ...Carried" Motion No. CA080221- 3 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee reconsider deferral of Consent Application 2008-B-05 ...Carried" Motion No. CA080221- 4 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Garry Potter "Committee grant provisional approval to Consent Application 2008-B-05, being to create a new residential by way of severance having a frontage on Line 4 South of 38.37 metres, and a lot area of 0.233 hectares, 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 apply for and obtain a Zoning By-law Amendment for the retained and severed lands, to be rezoned from the Residential Limited Service *Hold (RLS*H) Zone to the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone, to accurately reflect the proposed residential land use; 4. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution; 5. That the applicant pay a Development Charges Fee in the amount of $4,749.95 (By-law 2004-082) to the Township; 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Ciro -lit edonte; 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" Corn miftee of Ad i ustm ent- February 21, 2008 Page 3 10:00 2008-A-05 Robert Mason Plan 819, Lot 35 8 Brambel Road (Former Township of Oro) In Attendance-0 Klaus Jacoby, Agent for Applicant. Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence received from Eric & Amanda Rominger and; Jen Knelsen and; Mitch O'Reilly and; Henry & Christine Prusinowski (no objection to application). Motion No. CA080221- 5 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee approve Application 2008-A-05, being to enlarge a non-complying structure, and to increase the floor area of the same structure from the maximum 70 square metres to 122.6 square metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant apply for and obtain a Consent from the Township of Oro-Medonte Committee of Adjustment pertaining to Plan 819, Lot 35, known municipally as 8 Brambel Road, and that the applicant must fulfill all conditions of Consent and receive from the Secretary-Treasurer a Form 2 "Certificate of Official", indicating that all conditions of said Consent have been fulfilled, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the 122.6 square metre detached accessory structure subject of Variance Application 2008-A-05; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and sketches, as submitted and approved by 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 that the detached garage be no larger than 122.6 square metres, and that the garage be located on the subject lands in conformity with the site plan prepared by "'The Design House", Drawing A1.0, dated 10/11/2007; 4. That notwithstanding Section 5. .6 of Zoning By-law 97-95, the detached accessory structure will otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions for such structures as prescribed by Zoning By-law 97-95; 5. That no outside storage of licensed or unlicensed vehicles, or building materials be permitted on the subject lands; 6. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. ...Carried." Committee of Adjustment-February 21, 2008 Page 4 10:15 2008-A-02 Ian Johnson Plan 1, Lot 13 3 Penetanguisene Road (Fortner Township of Oro) In Attendance: Wayne Seaman, David Seaman, Agents for Applicant Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence from Ian Walker, Environmental Planner, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority dated February 19, 2008 indicating no objection to application. Motion No. CA080221- 6 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-02, being to reduce the required minimum lot area for the subject lands, being 3 Pen eta nguishene Road, from the present area of 0.14 hectares to 0.12 hectares ...Carried." Committee of Adjustment - February 21, 2008 Page 5 10:30 2008-B-02 Ian Johnson Plan 1, Lot 13 3 Penetanguisene Road (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Wayne Seaman, David Seaman, Agents for Applicant I _& BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee approve Consent Application 2008-B-02, being to convey a block of land having an area of 0.0208 hectares from 3 Penetanguishene Road to 1 Penetanguishene Road, and that Committee concurrently approve Variance Application 2008-A-02, being to reduce the required minimum lot area for the subject lands, being 3 Penetanguishene Road, from the present area of 0.14 hectares to 0.1 2 hectares, 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 Plan 1, Part of Lot 13, known municipally as 1 Penetanguishene Road, 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 applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte. 7 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the Notice of Decision. ...Carried" Committee of Adjustment-February 21, 2008 Page 8 10,0-45 X008 -A -03 Barry Gardhouse Plan 626, Lot 28 104 Lakeshore Promenade (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Barry & Nancy Gardhouse, Applicants. Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence from Ian Walker, Environmental Planner, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, dated February 19, 2008 indicating no objection to application. BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee approve Minor Variance 2008-A-03, being to grant a reduction for the front yard setback from 7.5 metres to 4.07 metres for the construction of a deck having a floor area of 26 square metres, subject to the following conditions: 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 so that-.: a) the deck be located no closer than 4.07 metres from the front lot line 2. That the applicant enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the Township, including removal of the Holding Provision; 3. That the applicant receive any necessary permits and/or approvals from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if required; 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-February 21, 20©8 Page 7 11:00 2008-A-01 Susan Fleet Concession 7, East /2 Lot 3 108 Millpond Road (Former Township of Medonte) In attendance: Susan Fleet, Applicant Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence from Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner, Nottawasaga. Valley Conservation Authority, dated February 11, 2008 indicating no objection to application. Motion No. CA080221- 9 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Bruce Chappell "'Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-01 , being to recognize an existing dwelling, having a minimum setback of 4.29 metres from the structure to the west side lot line. ...Carried" Committee of Adjustment- February 21, 2008 Page 8 11:15 2008-A-04 Randy Sheldrake Concession 1, Lot 32 2309 Penetanguisene Road (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Randy Sheldrake, Applicant Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence from Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, dated February 20, 2008 indicating no objection to application. BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-04 subject to the following conditions*. 1. That the height of the detached garage not exceed 7.3 metres, measured from the finished grade to the midpoint of the roof-, 2. That the floor area of the detached garage not exceed 297 square metres; 3. 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, 4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the height of the detached garage not exceed 7.3 metres, and the floor area not exceed 297 square metres; 5. That the existing "tarp coverall", "barn", and "storage traller" on the subject lands be removed-, 6. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. . ..Carried." Committee of Adjustm ent- February 21, 2008 Page 9 11:30 2008-A-06 Raymond Dumont Concession 1, East Part of Lot 10 2109 Gore Road (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Raymond Dumont, Applicant. Motion No. 0 A080221- 11 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Garry Potter, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee defer Variance Application 2008-A-06 until such time that comments are received from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority .. -Carried." Committee of Adjustment - February 21, 2008 Page 10 11:45 2008-B-03 Anthony Keene Concession 8, West 1/2 Lot 24 143 Ridge Road East (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Anthony Keene,, Applicant. Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski read correspondence from Ian Walker, Environmental Planner, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, dated February 15, 2008 requesting deferral of application per completion of "Slope Stability" and "Environmental Impact Statement". Motion No. CA080221- 12 BE IT RESOLVED that*. Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Garry Potter "Committee defer Consent Application 2008-B-03 until such time that the applicant addresses comments in letter dated February 15, 2007 from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority carried ". Committee of Adjustment- February 21, 2008 Page 11 I f, . 12:00 2006-A-36 Cynthia Lee & Randy Ostojic (Revised) Plan M-780, Lot 92 197 Eight Mile Point Road (Former Township of Oro) In attendance,*. Cynthia Lee & Randy Ostolic, Applicants. Jack Steenh of, Agent for Applicants. Motion No. CA080221 - 13 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken 1. Notwithstanding Section 5.6 g) of Zoning By-law 97-95, that the maximum height of the boathouse shall not exceed 7.08 metres, ...Carried' Committee of Adjustment-February 21, 2008 Page 12 12:15 2007-B-32 Rosemarie Mars (Revised) Concession 8. Part of Lot 22 6328 Line 8 North (Former Township of Medonte) In attendance.- Beth Mairs, Agent for Applicant, I I : BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2007-B-32 (Revised), where an existing vacant lot having an area of 4 hectares, known as 51 R-23482 Parts 1 & 2, shall be "transposed" to encompass the existing single detached dwelling located at 6328 Line 8 North, subject to the following conditions.- 1 That three copies of a Reference Plan of the new lot, including the 1 square foot land noted in Condition 3, 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 Township receives a 1 square foot conveyance of land, free and clear of all and any encumbrances, from the property being transposed at Concession 8, Part of Lot 22, former Township of Medonte. 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; 4. That the retained agricultural lands be merged in title with the residential lot created in 1992 (Parts 1 & 21 RP 51 R-23482) 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; 5. That the applicant's solicitor provide the Secretary-Treasurer with an undertaking that the retained lands, Concession 8, Part of Lot 22 and the previously created residential lot (Parts 1 & 2, RP 51 R-23482) will merge in title, 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Carried ". Commiftee of Adjustment- February 21, 2008 Page 13 12:30 2008-A-08 Lorrie Emmons Plan 629, Lot 12 23 Nelson Street (Former Township of Oro) In attendance: Marty & Lorrie Emmons, Applicants. Rod Young, Agent for Applicants. Motion No. CA080221- 15 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Bruce Chappell, seconded by Lynda Aiken "Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-08, being for the construction of a 161.65 square metre addition with deck onto an existing dwelling, to be setback 1.5 metres from the north interior side lot line, and for the addition to be located 6.5 metres and deck to be located 5 metres from the average high water mark of Bass Lake, subject to the following conditions-. 1. The proposed attached deck shall be setback no closer than 5 metres from the average high water mark of Bass Lake; 2. The proposed addition to the existing cottage shall be setback no closer than 6.5 metres from the average high water mark of Bass Lake; 3. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on sketches provided to and approved by Committee, as submitted, 4. That the applicant obtain any necessary approval(s) and/or permits) from the Noftawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; 5. 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 that the addition to the existing cottage be setback no closer than 6.5 metres to the average high water mark of Bass Lake, and that the deck be setback no closer than 5 metres to the average high water mark of Bass Lake, and that the addition be setback no closer than 1.5 metres to the north interior side lot line, 6. That notwithstanding the variance(s) granted from the section(s) of Zoning By-law 97-95 as applied for in this application, that the addition and deck otherwise comply with all other provisions for single detached dwellings in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone, as prescribed by Zoning By-law 97-95; 7. 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-February 21, 2008 Page 14 4. Other Business e w C i. Adoption of Minutes from January 17, 2008 meeting Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Bruce Chappell "That the minutes for the January 17, 2008 Committee of Adjustment Meeting be adopted as printed and circulated 5. Adi"ournment Motion No. CA080221 - 17 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Lynda Aiken, seconded by Bruce Chappell "We do now adjourn at 1:40 pm ...Carried." ... Carried." (NOTE: A digital recording of this meeting is available for review.) Chairperson Michelle Lynch Secretary-Treasurer Adam Kozlowski Committee of Adjustment - February 21, 2008 Page 15