Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
07 17 2008 C of A Agenda
900��* t W 3. "DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF — IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 1 CT11 0 a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment Meeting of May 15, 2008. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: C , #I a) Application: 2007-A-10 Applicant, Richard Wainman Location: Penetanguishene Road, Con. 1, Lot 18, (Fmr. Oro) Proposal: Extension of timeline b) Application: 2008-8 -17to2008-B-18 Applicant: Anne Jassoy Location: Lot 26, Con. 7, 26 Lakeshore Road West (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 2 lots Applications c) d) and e) (Oldfield) to be heard jointly. c) Application: 2008-8 -20 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Boundary adjustment d) Application: 2008-B-21 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Technical severance e) Application: 2008-A-17 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Variance - frontage Approximate time: 10:15 — 10:45 a.m. f) Application: 2008-B-24 to 2008-B-30 Applicant: Paul and Cynthia Crooks Location: Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 7 lots Approximate time: 10:45 — 11:00 a.m. 9) Application: 2008-B-31 to 2008-B-32 Applicant: Paul and Cynthia Crooks Location: East Part Lot 15, Concession 11, 1472 15/16 Sideroad (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever I lot and boundary adjustment Approximate time: 11:00 — 11 :15 a.m. h) Application: 2008-B-22 Applicant: Ian Johnstone Location: Lot 22, Concession 10, 274 Line 9 South (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Boundary adjustment i) Application: 2008-A-16 Applicant: Raymond Dumont Location: Lot 10, Concession 1, 2109 Gore Road (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Variance - max floor area and setback to EP Zone Approximate time: 11:15 — 11:30 a.m. j) Application: 2008-13-33 Applicant: Dennis and Susan Tascona Location: Proposal: 1 Trafalgar Drive, Lot 1 Concession 1, RP 51 R 29810 (Formerly Oro) Permit boundary adjustment Approximate time: 11:30 — 11:45 a.m. k) Application: A-23-2008 Applicant: Lawrence Houben Location: 1642 Line 10 North, Lot 7, Concession 10 (Oro) Proposal: Relief from front yard setback Approximate time: 11:45 — 12:00 p.m. 1) Application: A-30-2008 Applicant: Jeffery Scott Orr Location: 48 Shoreline Drive. Plan 640A, Lot 28 (Oro) Proposal: Construct an attached garage Recess for lunch 12:00 — 1:00 p.m. Approximate time: 1:00 — 1:30 p.m. m) Application: A-27-2008 Applicant: Ron McCowan Location: 2243 Ridge Road West, Lot 2, Range 2, RP 51 R-4441 Part 3 (Oro) Proposal: Construct a two- storey boathouse with a deck Approximate time: 1:30 — 1:45 p.m. n) Application: A-26-2008 Applicant: Jaxx Trust WITHDRAWN Approximate time: 1:45 — 2:00 p.m. 0) Application: A-24-2008 Applicant: John Esteireiro Location: 2713 Lakeshore Road East, Reg'd Plan 51 R- 16475, Part Lot 20 and 21, Con 14 (Oro) Proposal: Construct a one and half storey single family Approximate time: 2.00 — adjournment P) Application: A-28-2008 Applicant: Michael and Liz Shaughnessy Location: Proposal: 51 Ward Avenue. Plan 979, Lot 44 (Formerly Twp. of Oro) Construct an attached garage q) Application: A-22-2008 Applicant: Donald and Susan Nick Location: Proposal: 12 Conder Road, Lot 28, Concession 13, RP 51 R-624 Construct a detached accessory building r) Application: A-29-2008 Applicant: Lynn Burgess & Dean Blain Location: Proposal: 73 Eight Mile Point Road, Lot 36, Plan 780 (Formerly Orillia) Addition to front and rear of existing single detached dwelling. 7. NEW BUSINESS a) Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, re: In Township Office schedule. 8. ADJOURNMENT TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday, June 19, 2008 MMUMMM.- Michelle Lynch assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order. Present: Chair Michelle Lynch Member Lynda Aiken Member Rick Webster Member Bruce Chappell Regrets: Member Garry Potter Staff Present: Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner Marie Brissette, Deputy Secretary Treasurer 2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA CA080619-01 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Webster It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that: the agenda for the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, June and adopted as amended: 5 i) Amend 2008-A-06 to 2008 -A -16 5 n) Amend 2008-B-02 (Revised) to 2008-13-03 (Revised) NEEM 19tH , 2008 be received Carried. 3. "DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF — IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT" 4. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS OF COUNCIL: a) Minutes Of Committee of Adjustment Meeting of May 15, 2008. CA080619-02 Moved by Webster, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that: the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, May 15th, 2008 be received and adopted as presented. Carried. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) Application: 2008-B-17to2008-B-18 Applicant: Anne Jassoy Location: Lot 26, Con. 7, 26 Lakeshore Road West (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 2 Lots CA080619-03 Moved by Webster, Seconded b� A* Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008 -B -17 to 2008 -B -18 (Anne Jassoy) for 26 Lakeshore Road West, Lot 26, Concession 7 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider comments from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, as per their request dated June 12, 2008. Carried. Page 2 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 Applications 2008-B-20 (item 5b)), 2008_B_21 considered jointly. (item 5c)) and 2008-A - 17 (item 5c)), were 3 C) 9J, Application: 2008-B-20 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Boundary Adjustment Application: 2008-B-21 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Technical Severance Application: 2008-A-17 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Township of Orillia) Proposal: Variance - Frontage Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Michael and Mabel Sim expressed concerns over the width of the proposed driveway, noted that various trees would be removed, and questioned access for emergency vehicles. The Sims informed the Committee of continuous vehicular travel and noise issues. John and Rosalee Bard noted that the proposed driveway was a hydro corridor providing hydro service to adjacent properties and questioned whether Poles would be removed to accommodate the driveway. Diane Pappas expressed concern over snow removal and storage, noted the wetlands in the area of the proposed driveway. Colleen Hughes articulated concerns of an additional driveway in a congested area. The Committee received comments from the Ministry of Transportation. The Committee directed staff to circulate the application to Hydro and the Township's Fire Department. CA080619-04 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-B-20, 2008-B-21 and 2008 -A -17 (Glen Oldfield) for North Part of Lots 2, concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia), in order to receive and consider comments from the Applicant, as per his request on June 18th, 2008. Carried. Page 3 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 e) Application: 2008-B-24 to 2008-B-30 Applicant: Paul and Cynthia Crooks Location: Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 7 Lots Robert Ward informed that the area was a high traffic area, noted environmental issues in the area, and noted that the school in the area was at capacity. Greg May noted that the application was precedent setting, and outlined a crick in the area. Steve and Dayle CoDyre questioned whether the area could support additional wells, noted various environmentally sensitive lands as well as a river, the high traffic and fear of the area resembling a subdivision. Lynda Roe supported the development. Sherry McKinnon reiterated the comments regarding the environmentally sensitive lands and the school being overloaded, and noted various wildlife in the area. CA080619-05 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-B-24 to 2008-B-30 (Paul and Cynthia Crooks) for East Part of Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider comments from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, as per their request dated June 12, 2008. Carried. Page 4 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 f) Application: 2008-B-31 to 2008-B-32 Applicant: Paul and Cynthia Crooks Location: East Part Lot 15, Concession 11, 1472 15116 Sideroad (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 1 Lot and Boundary Adjustment The Committee directed staff to circulate the Township's Building Department to address concerns regarding the shared septic and well. CA080619 -0-6 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Chappell Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-B-31 to 2008-B-32 (Paul and Cynthia Crooks) for Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider comments from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, as per their request dated June 12, 2008. Carried. Page 5 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 9) Application: 2008-B-22 Applicant: Ian Johnstone Location: Lot 22, Concession 10, 274 Line 9 South (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Boundary Adjustment CA080619-07 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-13-22 (Ian Johnstone) for 274 Line 9 South, Part of Lot 22, Concession 10 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider comments from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, as per their request dated June 13, 2008. Carried. Page 6 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 h) Application- 2008-B-23 Applicant: Indian Park Association Location: Lot 3, Concession 6, RP M-8, Block D, 15 Algonquin Trail (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Creation of New Lot Andria Leigh, Agent for the IPA was present. Anne Budge suggested the subject property be sold or donated to the Township, provided a descriptive overview of the IPA. The Committee received comments from Melanie Franner and the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. CA080619-08 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grant provisional consent to Application 2008-B-23 for the creation of a new recreational lot, having an area of 0.5 hectares and frontage on Algonquin Trail of 110 metres subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution; 4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Carried. Page 7 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 Application: 2008-A-16 Applicant: Raymond Dumont Location: Lot 10, Concession 1, 2109 Gore Road (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Variance — Max Floor Area and Setback to EP Zone RIM 19 CA080619-09 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for 10 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider application 2008-A-16 (Raymond Dumont) for 2109 Gore Road, Concession 1, East Pa rt Lot Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. comments from the Carried. Page 8 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 j) Application: 2008-A-18 Applicant: Brent Laing and Leah Friesen Location: Lot 27, Plan M10, 39 Pine Ridge Trail (Formerly Township of Medonte) Proposal: Variance - Shed Located in Front Yard Leah Friesen was present. CA080619-10 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Webster It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2008-A- 18, for the construction of a detached accessory structure having an area of 11.8 square metres, to be located 14.9 metres from the front property line, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the detached accessory building, notwithstanding Section 5.1.3 a), otherwise meet with all other provisions for detached accessory buildings; rw 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township Of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the detached shed be located no closer than 14.9 metres from the front property line, in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; 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 Page 9 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 008 k) Application: 2008 -A -19 Applicant: Mike and Wendy Guthrie Location: North Part Lot 22, Concession 11, 193 Line 10 South (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Variance - Side Yard Setback for Barn Mike Guthrie was present. The Committee received correspondence from Clayton Perry. CA0806-19 -11 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2008-A- 19, being for the construction of an agricultural structure having an area of 148 square metres, to be located 8 metres from the north interior side lot line, subject to the following conditions: I. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township Of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the agricultural structure be located no closer 8 metres from the north side lot line; 2. That the applicant obtain any permits and/or a Region Conservation Authority; pprovals, if required, from the Lake Simcoe 3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, C.P. 13 Carried, Page 10 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 Applicant: Location: 2008-A-20 Joanne Davison and Gordo n Lot 27, Concession 7, 92 Oro) Kennedy Lakeshore Road West (Formerly Township of Variance - Front Yard Setback CA0806-19--1-2 Moved by Chappell, Seconded • Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Minor Variance 2008-A-20, being to grant a reduction for the front yard setback from 6.5 metres to 4.7 metres for the construction of a balcony having a floor area of 14.1 square metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 PQo ucoo of the foundation by way of survey/real property report so that the balcony be located ser than 4.7 metres from the front lot line 2. That the applicant receive any necessa Region Conservation Authority, if required; ry permits and/or approvals from the Lake Simcoe 3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 11 Committee of Adjustment Minutes - June 19, 2008 m) Application: 2008-A-21 Applicant: Lawrence Crook Location: Lot 9, Plan 104 RP 51 R2540, 1180 Line 2 South (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Expansion of Non-Conforming Use and Accessory Structure in Front yard CA080619-13 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Application 2008-A-21 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant obtain the necessary permit(s) and approval(s) from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, if required; 2. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, C.P. 13. Carried. Page 12 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 n) Application: 2008-B-03 (Revised) Applicant: Anthony and Dianne Keene Location: West Half Lot 24, Concession 8, 143 Ridge Road East (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Creation of a New Lot CA080619-14 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Webster It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grant provisional consent to Application 2008-B-03 (Revised) for the creation of a new residential lot, having an area of 0.3 hectares and frontage on Ridge Road East of 38 metres 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. The applicant enters in to a Site Plan Control agreement to address the requested conditions of the Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority. 4. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. 5. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution. Carried. Page 13 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 6. STAFF REPORTS: a) Marie Brissette, Deputy Secretary Treasurer Re: Tree cutting by-law update CAO 30§19-15 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the verbal information received from Marie Brissette, Deputy Secretary Treasurer, re: Tree Cutting By-law, be received. 7. NEW BUSINESS a) Appoint Steven Farquharson as Secretary Treasurer CA080619-16 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that: Steven Farquharson be appointed Secretary Treasurer. CA080619-17 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Webster It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 1:25 p.m. until 9:30 a.m., Thursday, July 17 th 2008 or at the call of the Chair. Carried. Chairperson Michelle Lynch Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Marie Brissette (NOTE: A digital recording of this meeting is available for review.) Page 14 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 The applicant appeared before the Committee of Adjustment on May 17, 2007 to renovate and expand a non-conforming use by allowing a 600 ft2 attached garage addition and 374 ft2 of additional living space onto an existing vacant dwelling. The applicant requested relief from Section 5.18 of the Zoning By-law 97-95 — "Non-Conforming Uses", as the subject property is zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone, and a single detached dwelling is not a permitted use in the LC Zone. The applicant is requesting permission from the Committee of Adjustment to be granted an extension to condition 4, to expand the timeframe that was placed on the completion of the renovation. The applicant is actively working towards the completion of the renovation. 2. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve the request by the applicant to grant an extension to condition 4 as part of Variance application 2007 -A -10 Richard Wainman, 951 Penetanguishene Road, Lot 18, Concession 1 (Former Township of Oro). Respectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White, IVICIP, RPP Senior Planner -Fo To Pei N-Of to 0 �5 9�4- 6277 - il -Nt lu! -7> THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE 148 LINE 7 SOUTH, P.O. BOX 100, ORO, ONTARIO, LOL 2X0 (705) 487-2171 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT NOTICE OF DECISION Application No. 2007-A-10 IN THE MATTER OF Section 45 of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13 as amended; and IN THE MATTER OF the Official Plan of the Township of Oro-Medonte; and IN THE MATTER OF Comprehensive Zoning By-law 97-95, as it applies to the particular application; and IN THE MATTER OF Application 2007-A-10 submitted by Michele & Richard Wainman, owners of Lot 18, Concession 1, 951 Penetanguishene Road (former Township of Oro); and WHEREAS The applicant is requesting permission from the Committee of Adjustment to renovate and expand a non-conforming use by allowing a 600 ft` attached garage addition and 374 ft- of additional living space onto an existing vacant dwelling. The applicants are requesting relief from Section 5.18 of the Zoning By-law 97-95 — "Non-Conforming Uses", as the subject property is zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone, and a single detached dwelling is not a permitted use in the LC Zone. WHEREAS the subject property is designated "Agricultural" in the Official Plan, and Zoned "Local Commercial (LC) 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 200196, as amended, and having considered all relevant information as presented at the public hearing on the 17'h day of May, 2007. PAGE #2 APPLICATION 2007-A-10 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION Motion No. CA070517- 1 BE IT RESOLVED that: Moved by Rick Webster, seconded by Bruce Chappell "Committee approve Application 2007 -A -10 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant obtain the necessary permit(s) and approval(s) from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, if required; 2. That the applicant obtain the necessary permit(s) and approval(s) from the County of Simcoe, if required; 3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. 4. That all work be completed according to Ontario Building Code Requirements on or before May 17, 2008 ..Carried." Additional information ng regardi this Application is available for public inspection at the regarding Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Centre, 148 Line 7 South in Oro Station, Ontario, Monday to Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. PAGE 43 APPLICATION 2007-A-10 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Section 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended, the above decision and/or conditions may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal decisions in respect of applications for consent to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an unincorporated association or group. However, a notice of appeal may be filed in the name of an individual who is a member of the association or group. THE LAST DATE FOR FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL IS WEDNESDAY, THE 6"' DAY OF JUNE 2007. A "NOTICE OF APPEAL" setting out in writing the supporting reasons for the appeal should be received on or before the last date for "Appeal" accompanied by a 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, 148 Line 7 South, PO Box 100, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0. Members concurring in this decision: Lynda Aiken, Chairperson Michelle Lynch _4N Garry Potter DATED this 17"' day of May, 2007 Bruce ChaWell I Xt Rick Webster "dam)Cio-zlowski Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment t Township of Oro - Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 00: 00: • Lakeshore Road West, Lot « n 7 (Former Twp. of • « 1-PEOPOSAL The purposes of these applications are to permit the creation of two new residential lot by way of severance. The proposed lot to be created as a result of Consent Application 2008- B- 17(Part 1), will have 33 metres of frontage on Lakeshore Road West, a depth of approxmitly 60 metres, and an area of 0.2 hectares. Consent Application 2008 -B -18 (Part 2), will have 36 metres of frontage on Lakeshore Road West, and a depth of approximately 54 metres, and an area of 0.2 hectares. The retained lands would also front on Lakeshore Road West, having a frontage of 81 metres, and an area of 0.5 hectares. 2. MUNICIPAL POLICY ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Shoreline Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone 3. AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe — No Comments received Public Works — Driveway approval with entrance permit Building Department — Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code Engineering & Environmental Services — No Concerns Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority — No Concerns (formal comments forthcoming) 4. BACKGROUND The subject property is a corner lot, having frontage on Line 7 South of 53 metres, frontage on Lakeshore Road West of 150 metres, a lot depth of approximately 59 metres, and a lot area of approximately 0.96 hectares. The lot presently has a single detached dwelling, which is occupied by the applicant. The subject property contains undisturbed tree cover and underbrush along the road frontages and towards the rear of the properties. Surrounding lands uses are predominantly residential. Does the consent conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? Section C5: "Shoreline" of the Township Official Plan contains specific policies with respect to objectives for development within the Shoreline designation. Specifically, Section C5.2 states `permitted uses on lands designated Shoreline include single detached dwellings... etc" As such, the proposed severance of the subject lands for future residential development would constitute a use permitted by the Official Plan. Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains specific tests for the creation of a new lot by Consent. In particular, this section states "...the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and lot to be severed: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained on a year -round basis; Both the proposed severed and retained lands will have frontage on Lakeshore Road West, which are public roadway's maintained year -round by the Township of Oro - Medonte. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; This application does not propose to create a new lot fronting on either a County or Provincial road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; This application proposes to create two new residential lot. Significant traffic volume will not be generated by an additional dwelling fronting onto Line 7 South or Lakeshore Road West South. The applicant will be required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Public Works Department. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By- law and is compatible with adjacent uses; The application proposes to create a two lots having an area of 0.20 hectares, with lot (Consent Application 2008-B-17, Part 1) having frontage of 33 metres, and where the other lot (Consent Application 2008-B-18, Part 2) will have frontage consisting of 36 metres on Lakeshore Road West. The retained lands will have an area of 0.5 hectares and 81 metres of frontage on Lakeshore Road West. The minimum required lot area for a residential use in the SR Zone is 0.2 hectares, and the minimum required lot frontage is 30 metres. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal, The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. The Township Zoning By-law has established a minimum lot area of 0.2 hectares for a residential use in the SR Zone to reflect development on private services. The Building Department has comment the applicant is required to verify that the sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Future residential development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, where the construction of a new single detached dwelling may be subject to the completion of a lot grading and drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. g) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; Both the severed and retained lands, will meet with the minimum required lot frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-law. No development applications are active adjacent to the subject lands, and as such no negative impacts with respect to access are anticipated as a result of this consent. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; The subject lands are located at the bottom of Line 7 South and Lakeshore Road West, in a predominantly typical Shoreline residential area. The Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, is located only on the retained lands. No part of the severed lands falls within the regulated area of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA), or contain Environmental Protection (EP) Zoning. A site inspection was conducted by Township staff and the LSRCA, where they indicated there were no concerns in relation to this application, formal written comments are forthcoming. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; The applications at hand propose to create two new lots by way of severance, for the future development of one single detached dwelling for each lot. The dwellings on the severed lands will be serviced by a private water supply, namely a drilled well. The application does not propose a use that involves commercial or other large-scale water-taking operations, or any other use that involves the use of large amounts of ground water for regular operation. Based on these factors, the application to create two new residential lots through severance maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the consent conform with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The property is currently zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The proposed lot (2008 -B -17) will consist of 0.2 hectares, and will have 33 metres of frontage on Lakeshore Road West. The second proposed lot (2008-B-18) would consist of an area of 0.2 hectares, and will have a frontage of 36 metres on Lakeshore Road West; the required frontage for a lot in the SR Zone is 30 metres, and the required minimum lot area for a residential use is 0.2 hectares. The proposed retained lands would consist of 0.5 hectares, and maintain 81 metres of frontage on Lakeshore Road West. Therefore, the proposed lots and retained lands would meet with all requirements of lot area and frontage for the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. The retained lands also have some Environmental Protection (EP) Zone that runs along the northern portion of the property. This EP Zone will not be captured in the creation of the two proposed new residential lots, but will remain in the retained lands. All setback provisions as specified in the Zoning By- law under the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone, will remain in effect for the two proposed lots. A site inspection was completed by Planning staff and LSRCA staff, on July 8, where it was concluded by LSRCA that that they had no objections to the proposed application for severance. On the basis of the above, the application would appear to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. *qgj ivi I 1TJ 1:1 k, I It is recommended that the Committee grant provisional approval to Consent Application 2008-B-17, to create a new residential lot having a frontage on Lakeshore Road West of 33 metres, and a lot area of 0.20 hectares. Also Committee grant provisional approval to Consent Application 2008-B-18, to create a new residential lot having a frontage on Lakeshore Road West of 36 metres, and a lot area of 0.2 hectares; subject to the following conditions for each application: That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for each lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution; 4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Meclonte; 5. That the applicant verify the sewage system meets the minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Respectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner a�� \ � } ƒ \ t \2`\ \� � �� � � Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment June 19, 2008 2008-13-20 , 2008-13-21, 2008-A-17 - Glenn Oldfield 8882 Highway 12 (former Township of Orillia) U12MO The purpose of applications 2008-B-20, 2008-13-21 and 2008-A-17 is to permit a creation of a new residential lot. More specifically, application 2008-13-20 is to re-create a lot that has inadvertently merged in title, application 2008-13-21 would serve as a boundary adjustment to provide for access and frontage, and the minor variance 2008-A-17 proposes to recognize a deficient lot frontage for this lot. MILY111110 Official Plan Designation — Rural Settlement Area Zoning By-law 97-95 — Residential (Ri) Zone 3. AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe — None received Public Works Department - None received Building Department - None received Engineering Department - None received Fire Department- MTO- see attached 4. BACKGROUND The subject applications seek to re-create a lot which has merged on title. The applicants current property comprises approximately 1.3 ha (3.25 acres), and is a through-lot with frontage on Highway 12 (approx. 35 metres) and Bass Line (approx. 6.7 metres). There is an existing dwelling with driveway access on Highway 12 towards the east portion of the lands. The proposal involves the re- creation of a lot in the middle portion of the property comprising 0.3 ha (0.75 acres) which is currently landlocked. In order to provide frontage, a boundary adjustment is also proposed, which would add a small strip of land fronting on Bass Line comprising 0.89 acres (0.36 ha) area. Does the consent conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow Committee to consider applications for technical severances. The policy states: "D2.2.3 Technical Severances : The creation of new lots to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title may be permitted, provided the Committee of Adjustment issatistied that the new lot: a) was once a separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act, b) the merging of the lots was unintentional and was not merged as a requirement of a previous planning approval; c) is of the same shape and size as the lot which once existed as a separate conveyable lot; d) can be adequately serviced by on-site sewage and water systems; e) fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year-round by a public authority; f) there is no public interest served by maintaining the property as a single conveyable parcel, g) conforms with Section D2.2.1 of this Plan; and, h) subject to the access policies of the relevant road authority.. In reviewing the application, the applicant has provided a legal opinion that confirms that the lot was once a separately conveyable parcel in accordance with the Planning Act. In terms of item (e), the proposed boundary adjustment would facilitate frontage on a public street. Therefore the application would conform to the general policy. In respect of the proposed variance, the intent of a minimum lot frontage is to ensure an orderly and logical lot size and pattern. Staff recognize that the subject property is an odd-shape, and note that it forms the southerly boundary of the Prices Corners Settlement Area. Many of the existing lots north of the subject land are also of odd shapes and inconstant road frontages. Therefore, staff support the proposed applications given the fragmented development pattern in this area. Does the consent conform to the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The proposed retained parcel would comply with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the R1 Zone of 30 metres and 0.2 ha respectively. The proposed new building lot would exceed the minimum lot area, and the proposed lot frontage would be recognized should the variance application be approved. 5. CONCLUSION While the proposed lot geometry is not traditional, the proposed consent and variance applications generally conforms with the policies of the Official Plan and complies with the provisions of the Zoning By-law. - 0 i • 11 1 IgL11 T • It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-B-20 and 2008 - B-21 subject to the following conditions: 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 proposed strip subject of 2008-13-20 be merged in title with the re-created lot subject of 2008-B-21, as evidenced by an undertaking by the applicant's solicitor to this effect; 4. That application for minor variance 2008 -A -17 be approved; 5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Respectfully submitted u. 147 Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner r TN£ 'D'KING'S� HIGHWAY N °-50'� �/2 M SV 3r 42 -.-2- RnN Y30f4 1/2 ($MTN O t LIA) IMll. Fil! NT t ►_2203_ 9• 31' 30" 27 11iA1'M IN133' {p QO.5v 173.77' 4v y ,> J ti / �•,� N t r` / Il R pt r b" w'''e a Al J T '.J �l ' O C BASS UNE NED PORTION .26AC /RU KCAL CONSENT APPUCATION ;20a!?— 2 tco,5 -A -iq 'ONVEYANCE CONSENT APPLICATION O.WAC 2 (" �(- 6_ 20 PROVISTA GROUP INC. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES The Township of Oro-Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro Station, Ontario LOL 2XO Attn: Mr. Adam Kozlowski May 7, 2008 Re: Township of Oro-Medonte Consent proposal 8882 Highway 12 Our Proiect no 007-137 Dear Mr. Kozlowski, Further to our meeting regarding a possible technical consent approval for Mr. Oldfield, we have now had the advice of legal counsel and have enclosed a letter from Mr, Andrew Ain of the law offices of Burgar Rowe. Mr. Ain states in his letter that the subject property was a separate "Conveyable" lot prior to Mr. Oldfield acquiring this land and subsequently merged in title with his current holdings. It is for this reason that we now wish to apply for a severance under Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan, Technical Severances. We believe that this proposal meets all the policies for a Technical Severance with the exception of item D2.2.3 a). This property does not front onto a road however; we can obtain access to the Bass Line via a conveyance of the driveway property on Mr. Oldfield's property to the subject property by a boundary adjustment. Bass Line is a year round maintained municipal road. This existing 22 foot driveway referred to is currently a hydro easement that contains above ground hydro wires that are offset to the side of the easement and is currently used as an access drive and can continue to do so should this application be approved. Enclosed please find a completed application for a Consent for a "Technical Severance", an application for a Consent for a "Boundary Adjustment" and an application for a Variance since the subject proposed lot has no direct frontage on a road. Also enclosed is a plan and $2,400.00 application fee (2 x $900 plus $600 for a variance) and a $300 fee for the NVCA. We would appreciate your support for the applications made for the subject property and we are available for any questions you may have or additional materials you may need. Yours trul ProviO*.G a,, v Inc. Birry H. Peyton, MCIP, RPP cc: Mr. G. Oldfield Box 31 Green River Drive RR I Ph: (705)689-0852 Fax: (705)689-0853 Washago ON LOK 2BO provistagrp@on.aibn.com BURGAR NN ROWE BARB IS If RS. SOLICITORS 'MEDIATORS - TRADEMARK AGINTS April 17, 2008 By EMAIL ONLY: PROVISTAGRP@ON.AIBN.COM Pro Vista Group Inc. Box 31 Green River Drive Washago, Ontario LOK 2130 Attn: Barry Peyton Dear Mr. Peyton: RE: GLEN OLDFIELD SEVERANCE PART LOT 2, CONCESSION 1, OROMEDONTE PART 2 51R4949 OuR FILE No. 085OB16 We have now had an opportunity to review the matter and can advise that at one time each portion of Mr. Oldfield's property was once a separate conveyable lot. Part 2 51R-4949 was transferred on August 22nd 1975 ftOM Malcolm McKenzie Stewart to Catherine Anne Martin Pursuant to a Consent Catherine Anne Martin was already the owner of the balance of Mr. Oldfield lands. In 1997, Ms Martin transferred all of the above- reference lands to Mr. Oldfield. In order to satisfy the requirements of Section D2.23 (a) — Technical Severance of the Oro Medonte Official Plan, the new lot had to be at one time a separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act As Part 2 5IR4949 had a Consent to Sever issued on August 28, 1975, in our opinion, it was at that time a separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act. The balance of the lands were also obviously conveyable as Ms. Martin received them via a conveyance from John Nelson in 1968. There are ancillary debatable issues such as if the consent would still be applicable today with respect to the "once a Consent, always a Consent" as the Consent predated the enactment of subsection 50(12) of the Planning Act which was passed on March 31, 1979. The issue is moot as the land is landlocked and without a Consent for an easement who aside from the neighboring property would want it. Please note that in Order to complete this opinion much of the title search had to be re- reviewed and analyzed by our conveyancer which led to some of the time delays and some additional costs. We will forward you our account for services rendered in due course. 90 MulcOster Street Box 758 Barrie Ontario L4M 4Y5 7 705 721 3377 F 705 721 4025 www.burgorrowe.com Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the above opinion, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours very truly, BURGAR ROWE Per: Andrew Ain ada email: aain@burgamwe.com N �D Applications 2008-8 -20 (item 5b)), 2008-B-21 (item 5c)) and 2008 -A -17 (item 5c)), were considered jointly. b) Application: 2008-B-20 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Boundary Adjustment C) Application: 2008-8 -21 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Technical Severance d) Application: 2008-A-17 Applicant: Glen Oldfield Location: North Part of Lots 2, Concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia) Proposal: Variance - Frontage Michael and Mabel Sim expressed concerns over the width of the proposed driveway, noted that various trees would be removed, and questioned access for emergency vehicles. The Sims informed the Committee of continuous vehicular travel and noise issues. John and Rosalee Bard noted that the proposed driveway was a hydro corridor providing hydro service to adjacent properties and questioned whether poles would be removed to accommodate the driveway. Diane Pappas expressed concern over snow removal and storage, noted the wetlands in the area of the proposed driveway. Colleen Hughes articulated concerns of an additional driveway in a congested area. The Committee received comments from the Ministry of Transportation. The Committee directed staff to circulate the application to Hydro and the Township's Fire Department. CA080619-04 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-8 -20, 2008-B-21 and 2008-A-17 (Glen Oldfield) for North Part of Lots 2, concession 1, 8882 Highway 12 (Formerly Township of Orillia), in order to receive and consider comments from the Applicant, as per his request on June 18th, 2008. Carried. Page 3 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — June 19, 2008 G Township of Oro-Medonte Public Works Department Inspection Report for Consent%k" Minor Variance,-' Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date File No. -a5ZOP7 - Name of Owner. M Address )z Subject Property 2. Site Lines, Subject Property Poor Good Excellent Drive 3. Drainage Poor Good Excellent 4. Future Road Widening Required Yes No -' If yes, Amount 5. Will Road Surface be adversely affected Yes No 6. Future Drive to be located Remarks: ,, 9—� P-, (26DE, Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent %U Township of Oro-Medonte Public Works Department Inspection Report for Consent Minor Variance Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date Address Subject Property /Z 1. Site Lines, Township Road 2. Site Lines, Subject Property Drive 3. Drainage 4. Future Road Widening Required Poor Good Excellent Poor Good Excellent Poor Good. Excellent Yes No If yes, Amount S. Will Road Surface be adversely affected Yes No 6. Future Drive to be located Remarks: M� �� Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent BASS LINE NED PORTION .26AC NOTES: TECHNICAL CONSENT REQUIRES A VARIANCE TO CONFORM TO SECTION 02.2.1 a) OF THE OFFICIAL PLAN (FRONTAGE) do THE 30m FRONTAGE ON TABLE Bi IN THE ZONING BY —LAW /RU R1 ZONE REOUIRES A 0.49AC MIN LOT AREA. THE PROPOSED CONSENT LAND AREA IS 0.75AC. THE CONVEYANCE OF LAND WILL ADD A FURTHER 0.36AC. ICAL CONSENT APPLICATION ' ONVEYANCE CONSENT APPUCATION 0.36AC OLDFI ELD CONSENT_ PROPOSAL DATE: APRIL 28, 2008 'tc>iA.(— "L-D, tv(y -S PRO"STA GROUPING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Phone: (705) 689 -0852 Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 2008-B-24 to B-30 - Paul and Cynthia Crooks Lot 15, Concession 11 (Oro) k&2;Uo The purpose of applications 2008-13-24 to 2008-B-30 is to permit the creation of 7 new residential lots fronting on 15/16 SideRoad. The lots are proposed to have a frontage of 30 metres (98.4 feet), and lot area 0.2 hectares (0.49 acres). The land proposed to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 23.5 hectares (50 acres). Official Plan Designation — Rural Settlement Area, Agricultural and Oro Moraine Core/C nrririr)r Zoning By-law 97-95 — Previous 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Area Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — Comments Received (Attached) Simcoe County — No comments Public Works Department — Entrance permit for each lot - Drainage ditch in front of each lot must be established and maintained to flow west to area of cross culvert. Building Department — No Comments Received Engineering Department — No Comments Received Simcoe County District School Board- Comments Attached 11 N - - a 0 This application had originally appeared at the June 19, 2008 Committee of Adjustment, requesting approval from the creation of 7 new residential lots. The application was deferred until such time that the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority could conduct a site visit in order to determine that the proposed lots are setback 30 metres from the Provincially Significant Welland (PSW) to the rear of the retained lands. Township staff, and LSRCA conducted a site visit on July 8, 2008, which it was determined that the proposed lots were setback from the PSW. At the June 19th meeting, members of the East Oro community came to speak in regards to this applicants and the main concern that was expressed was that the East Oro Public School is currently over crowed. With the creation of these new lots it could bring in families with young children who would need to attend the school. Since the last meeting comments have been received from the Simcoe County District School Board, which have stated that their projections indicate a slight decline in enrolment over the next few years so this development will help sustain the school. The proposed 7 new residential lots will have a frontage onto 15/16 Sideroad. The land to be retained by the applicant, would have an area of approximately 23.5 hectares (58 acres) and currently contains an agricultural building, which the applicant uses for storage. 5. OFFICIAL PLAN The lands for the proposed lots are designated Rural Settlement Area. The retained lands are designated Oro-Moraine Core/Corridor Area and Agricultural. The proposed area in which the applicant is proposing to create the 7 new residential lots are all located in the Rural Settlement Area designation. Section C3.2 Permitted Uses of the Official Plan lists the uses permitted in the Rural Settlement Area Designation: " low density residential uses, small scale commercial uses that serve the needs of the settlement area and the surrounding rural area ... etc". For the consideration of subdivision of land, Section D2 of the Official Plan contains policies that are considered with every application to subdivide land in the Township. Section D2.2.1 contains the following general criteria for the Committee of Adjustment to consider: "Prior to issuing provisional consent for a new lot for any purpose, the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed.. a) fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained on a year- round basis; b) does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; C) will not cause a traffic hazard; d) has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and is compatible with adjacent uses; e) can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; f) will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; 9) will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; h) will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; i) will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; and, D will conform to Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, as amended." It is determined that under Section D2.1 a Plan of Subdivision is only required when the applicant is extending an existing public road or developing a new public road to access the lots. Due to the applicant proposing for all the lots to have frontage on 15/16 Sideroad there will be no need to alter the existing roadway or create a new road. In terms of the issue of servicing the applicant is proposing that the new lots will be serviced by private well and septic, no new municipal services are required to develop the proposed lots. This policy found in Section A5.2 of the Official Plan, which address the issues of servicing in the East Oro settlement area. This section of the Official Plan also states that when more then five lots are being created a hydrogeological assessment must be completed. The requirement of a hydrogeological assessment will be a condition of approval. As such, the application to create 7 new residential lots constitutes a permitted use in accordance with the Rural Settlement Area policies of the Official Plan. 6. ZONING BY-LAW The proposed lots are zoned Agricultural/Rural Zone (A/RU), however the proposed lot sizes that the applicant has submitted reflect the Residential One Zone standards. It is recommended to be a condition of consent be that the applicant rezone the property to the R1 Zone to reflect the new residential use. With respect to the requirements of the Residential One (R1) Zone, the minimum frontage required for a single detached dwelling use is 30 metres, and the minimum lot area is 0.2 hectares. As such, the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the Residential One (R1) Zone, On the rear portion of the retained lands is a Provincially Significant Wetlands. On July 8, 2008 a site inspection was conducted by Township staff and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority. The main purpose of the site inspection was to ensure that the proposed lots maintained a 30 metre setback from this wetland. Comments attached, no objections. 7. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application for the creation of 7 new residential lots conforms to the Official Plan, as the future development of residential uses would be keeping with the Rural Settlement Area Designation policies, and the proposed lots comply with the minimum zoning provisions of the R1 Zone. QK29EMMIZIMITINE6121 It is recommended that the Committee grant provisional consent for Applications 2008-B-24, 2008-B-25, 2008-B-26, 2008-B-27, 2008-B-28, 2008-B-29 and 2008-B-30 subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcels be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for each lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution; 3. That the applicant apply for and obtain a re-zoning, of the severed land to accurately reflect the proposed residential land use; 4. That the applicant submit a hydrogeological assessment of the proposed lots to the satisfaction of the Municipality; 5. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and, 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Reviewed by, Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE LOT 15, CONC 11 EAST ORO /V RETAINED LOT W I LSRCA RIEGULATED ,'LIMIT A /RU W LQ W Q / W TREE LINE Z � X � W � 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.27HA 0.21HA 30n 30rn JOm 30m 30m 30" 30. 70n 15/16 SIDEROAD A /RU R1 e) Application: 2008-B-24 to 2008-B-30 Applicant: Paul and Cynthia Crooks Location: Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro) Proposal: Sever 7 Lots Robert Ward informed that the area was a high traffic area, noted environmental issues in the area, and noted that the school in the area was at capacity. Greg May noted that the application was precedent setting, and outlined a crick in the area. Steve and Dayle CoDyre questioned whether the area could support additional wells, noted various environmentally sensitive lands as well as a river, the high traffic and fear of the area resembling a subdivision. Lynda Roe supported the development Sherry McKinnon reiterated the comments regarding the environmentally sensitive lands and the school being overloaded, and noted various wildlife in the area. CA080619-05 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment defers the discussion and decision for application 2008-B-24 to 2008-B-30 (Paul and Cynthia Crooks) for East Part of Lot 15, Concession 11 (Formerly Township of Oro), in order to receive and consider comments from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority, as per their request dated June 12, 2008. Carried. Page 4 Committee of Adjustment Minutes - June 19, 2008 Slmcoe County District School Board A A1170 Highway 26 West Phone: (705) 728µ7570 Midhurst, Ontario Fax: (705) 726 -2265 LOL 1XO www.scdsb.on.ca June 26, 2008 Mr. Steven Farquharson Intermediate Planner Township of Oro - Medonte 148 Line 7 South P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Farquharson: CONSENT APPLICATIONS B -24 TO B -30/08 IPAUL & CYNTHIA CROOKS 1472 15/16 SIDEROAD, EAST ORO TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE Thank you for circulating a copy of the Consent Applications and supporting information for the above -noted property to this office. The applicants have submitted applications to create seven (7) new residential lots in the Hamlet of East Oro. Each lot will be serviced by individual well and on -site septic systems. The development of these lots may generate 2 elementary students who may attend East Oro Public School. East Oro Public School has a current enrolment of 292 pupils and a FTE (Full Time Equivalent) of 268. The school's on- the - ground capacity (OTG) is 282 and the septic capacity is 350. There are no portable classrooms on the site. Projections indicate a slight decline in enrolment over the next few years so this development will help sustain the school. Should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, 174Y,4_�_ -u Holly Spacek, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner v Cc: Stuart Finlayson, Principal East Oro Public School �y �. ��: INC. PROVISTA GROUP PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES The Township of Oro-Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro Station, Ontario Attn: Mr. Steve Farquharson June 5, 2008 Re: Township of Consent proposals, Mr. Paul Crooks 1478 and 1472 15/16 Sideroad Our project no. 008-140 Dear Mr. During our submission o[ the proposed Consents it was advised by the planning dircctnc Mr.BruccEoppc[hotveoubodouexp}mnudonoshovhy this property i* more suited to uumrio a of Consents rather than u Plan of Subdivision. We have studied the ()ffiuiu| P|uo for the 7.ovvoohip nf[>no-Medoote and the policies do state that a subdivision is preferred over consents of 4 or more lots including the retained lot. After having said that, there are definitely good oruuouu to develop this land by Consent with [cv/ udvuobugcu obtained by going dbnxuuh the Plan of Subdivision process. We have proposal for lots plus the retained lot that all front onto the 15/16 Sidezoud T�c���d}��|��w���Rc�S�d��A��n��b���Offici�' Plan as the Community of East Oro. This property has been set aside for residential development as u part of this Community. |> ���cct�rx� k»� �U front '. y^vyvocu paved u]|�olail�incd road, there will heoo need to build uddidoou/ road orextend existing roads �^-- keeping oou/oicnauock)ozuidu�uou. The sight lines and speed liomitnf0Ukph for this pmti'u}ozstretch nf road are more than sufficient tn provide safe driveway entrances foru}ldhe proposed lots. 2). One rou*oo that o ploo of Subdivision is preferred is to insure that drainage from the proposed lots does not impact on neighboring properties and the municipal road by additional flows or flooding o[surrounding properties. Due t0 the Unpogrunhyo[ these lands there ixno possibility that drainage will impact on any surrounding landowners. These lands drain into a locally significant wetland located towards the rear of the retained lot also owned hythe yz0pooeoL 3). The Consent process is also a public process and local residents will have an opportunity {0 state any concerns they may have during the Committee o[A/6uutozeut hearing and once again u1a public nlcetiug held for }�ezOoing0f the lands. ^ \F�~\ 4>. The Plan of Subdivision process does provide for u Subdivision Agreement that < protects the Township during the construction of services and development nƒ the lots. Since [ho,e will heuoproposed road nrinternal services this agreement will only assure that the individual /0in will bo developed appropriately. A site plan agreement for each lot will do the same thing and protect the municipality at the same time. Au engineer will bchired tn design the grading n[ each o{ the lots similar k) what you would have iFit were u Plan o[Subdivision. 5}. This layout of lots would not hamper uPzopnycd [otucc development on the retained portion of property if allowed in the future since these lots would also front onto the 15/16 Sidcnoud either way. We realize that the F1oo of Subdivision process is u much more comprehensive review � oF thepcopouo]uoduouO�yuc1covodogoanyiuyucu , mostly todoviAluceug\oecc/ogo ftb n devrloDneuixodLhcSubdivision Agreement. However, this proposal requires very little engineering and the Agreement can bo done uu explained io item 5 above. Conditions of Consent approval may also ask for any particular studies and engineering that may bc desired by the municipal staff and/or the Committee. Wc would appreciate your consideration o[thc ^^ o— of these proposed lots 6yuseries of Consents rather than u Plan oF Subdivision that im and time consuming. Yours truly, Provista Group Inc. Barry H. Peyton, MCIP, RPP °ate i To '\8r)IS]] ip of Oro- ]\Iedonte Enolineerhw Deipartme »t Inspection Report/Comments for Consent Minor Variance Other File No. °2 d Name of Owner 11!w Address Eg` Subject Property Remarks:° The Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering & Environmental Services. committee of Adjustment Meeting Date: Township of Oro - Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 MMS- 15-32 - Paul and Timothy Crooks 2008 -B -31- Paul and Cynthia Crooks 1472 15/16 Sideroad, Lot 4, Concession 12, (Former Twp. Of Medonte) 1. PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2008 -B -32 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot and to be considered on conjunction with Consent Application No. 2008 -B -31. The severed lands is proposed to have a lot depth of 51.8 metres, frontage along 15/16 Sideroad of 22.4 metres, and a lot area of 0.12 hectares. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 02 hectares and frontage of 37.8 metres along 15/16 Sideroad. Both the proposed severed and retained lands currently have dwellings and accessory structures located on the property. The purpose of application 2008 -B -31 is to permit a lot addition to the newly created lot as a result of application 2008 -B -32. The application proposes to convey a strip of land having a frontage of 16.5 metres on 15/16 Sideroad, a depth of 51.8 metres, and an area of 0.09 hectares to the adjacent land to the east, 1472 15/16 Sideroad resulting in a new lot area of 0.21 hectares and lot frontage of 39 metres. 2. MUNICIPAL POLICY ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Rural Settlement Area Zoning By -law 97 -95 — Residential One (R1) Zone 3. AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe - No Comments Public Works Department — No Concerns Building Department — Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. Engineering Department - No concerns Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority- No Concerns The subject property is located in the former Township of Oro, in the East Oro settlement area, at the northwest corner 15/16 Sideroad and Line 11 North. The lands are designated Rural Settlement Area by the Official Plan, and zoned Residential One (R1) Zone. `I "he land that is proposed to be severed currently has two dwelling and accessory structures. The existing lot currently contains 51.8 metres of frontage along Line 11 North and 60.3 metres of frontage along 15/16 Sideroad. The purpose of the boundary adjustment is to provide a larger lot for 1478 15/16 Sideroad. The land to be retained, which is also owned by the applicant, would have an area of approximately 31.8 hectares, and currently contains one accessory structure. 5. OFFICIAL PLAN The subject property is designated Rural Settlement Area by the Official Plan. Permitted land uses within the "Rural Settlement Area" designation include low- density residential, small scale commercial. For the purpose of this application, it is noted that the creation of new lots by way of severance is permitted within the Rural Settlement Area designation, where the test listed in Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan are met. The resulting newly configured lots resulting from these applications would comply, with the Zoning provision�§o the 11 Residetnial One (RI) Zone. Section D229.2 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow Committee to consider applications for boundary adjustments. The policy states: ",J tonsent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lot is created... in addition, the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundaty adjustment will not qlfea the i,,iabilily qf'Ibe J�a q1 e � d. In reviewing the application, no new building lots will be created, the number of lots remain the same. The subject lands of these applications are located in the "Rural Settlement Area" designation. On this basis, the application is considered to be appropriate and generally conforms to the Official Plan. 6. ZONING BY -LAW The subject property 2008-B-32 is currently zoned Residential One (Rl) Zone in the Township's Zoning By- law. Consent application 2008-B-32 would have the retained lands having 37.8 metres of frontage on 15/16 Sideroad and a lot area of 0.2 hectares. This would allow for the lot to meet the zoning requirements for frontage and lot area. The retained lands would require the boundary adjustment to provide for additional area to meet the Residential One (Rl) Zone lot area. The resulting would be in compliance with the Zoning By- law. The enhanced lot as a result of application 2008-B-31 should zoned Residential One (Rl) Zone. The lands being added are zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone. The Minimum lot size in the Residential One (Rl) Zone is 0.2 hectares (0.45 acres), which the resulting lot will meet. It would be appropriate that the land to be conveyed over be rezoned to Residential One (Rl) Zone to reflect the proposed lot size and in keeping with the character of the surrounding residential land uses. 7. CONCLUSION Planning staff are in support of this application as the proposed consent for the creation of two residential lot and boundary addition conforms with the policies of the Rural Settlement Area Designation in the Official Plan. The resulting will be a consistent lot fabric, in accordance with the provisions of the R1 Zone. 8. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-B-31 and 2008-B-32 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 - 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 1472 15/16 Sideroad and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 4. That the maximum total area for the enhanced lot be no greater than 0.2 ha; L:2 5. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the landst� b enhanced will merge in title; 6. That the applicant apply and obtain a rezoning on the lands conveyed to 1472 15/16 Sideroad to accurately reflect the residential land use; 7. That the Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code 8. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled of the giving of the notice. within one year from the date All of which is/respectfully submitted, Lte`vefi�a quharson, B.URPI, Intermediate Planner Reviewed by Glenn White MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Township of Oro-Medonte Public Works Department Inspection Report for Consent Minor Variance Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date dt" r"J& -lz(,)--> -3 File No. —J K - Name of Owner 74 1 L D I ' Address ) t R -? - ) Subject Property Date of Inspection — -1 19- / a A , Name of Road Surface of Road _Aa2 1. Site Lines, Township Road 2. Site Lines, Subject Property Drive 3. Drainage 4. Future Road Widening Required Poor— Good Excellent Poor Good Excellent Poor Good Excellent. Yes No If yes, Amount S. Will Road Surface be adversely affected Yes No 6. Future Drive to be located Remarks: Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent Q3 To�►��Y�s]�ip of (Jro- 114edonte Engineering Department Inspection Report/Connments for Consent Minor Variance Other �r ,- "---7 z� k TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE LOT 15, CON C 11 EAST ORO a- 0 ASPHALT DRIVE AND PARKING LANDS ALSO OWNED BY MR. CROOKS 15/16 60.35m U) AREA 0.31HA E E 04 C14 O ONE STY ONE STY HOUSE HOUSE 60.35m CROOKS CONSENT EXISTING CONDITION SHOWING TWO HOUSES ON ONE LOT 3 �s -�Q _, ,yN,�. �� �5 TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE LOT 15, CONC 11 r--I EAST ORO O S N Y O 3 ASPHALT DRIVE AND PARKING LANDS .1-J OWNED BY M ROOKS c 15/16 T16 r,) 0 w ;EA -0:20fiA AREA 0.20HA E CIS 3.8m in ONE STY ONE STY HOUSE HOUSE 25m SHED w z J Hearing Date: 17/e5' Application #: y' 3`" Owner: -�h L Ci/'/7�✓i.✓ �c�X S MAS #: Lot #: Plan #: Conc. #: �I 'T The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application. ❑ Site inspection required and completed. ❑ Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. 15) 148 Line 7 5., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705) 487 -2171 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www.oro - medonte.ca air Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part S of the Ontario Building Code. ❑ Comments: Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal Respectfully submitted, Chief Building Official Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 zuuts-ts-zz - ian Johnstone 274 Line 11 South, Part of Lot 22, Concession 10, (Former Twp. of Oro) -• •• . The purpose of application is to permit a boundary adjustment to facilitate a proposed lot transposition. The applicant's intent is to move or transpose an existing lot which was recently severed at the northwest corner of the farm and establish this lot at the southwest corner of the lands. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. A site inspection was completed on July 8, with Township staff and the LSRCA, where it was determined by the Conservation Authority that a topographic survey be completed showing flood elevation (FE=258.74 masl), watercourses and 30 metre buffer required for coldwater watercourse. It is once this is completed that it can be determined if there is a potential development footprint. It is recommended that the Committee defers Application 2008-13-22 - Ian Johnstone, 274 Line 11 South, Part of Lot 22, Concession 10, (Former Twp. of Oro) until the applicant provide a topographic survey showing flood elevation (FE= 258.74 mast), watercourse and 30 metre buffer required for watercourse, as per their request dated July 11, 2008. Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner S h�Z Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 Z111TO-A-lb - Raymond Dumont 2109 Gore Road, East Part of Lot 10, Concession 1 (Former Oro) = M161 - ;91 i W I • I The application was originally scheduled for June 19, 2008 Committee of Adjustment, requesting relief from the maximum floor area for an accessory structure and the required setback to the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The application was deferred until such time that Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority could provide comments on the application, as the subject lands are located in a floodplain. The applicant, Township staff and NVCA conducted a site visit on June 24, 2008, which it was recommended that the accessory structure be located on the other side of the water course and to attach it to the dwelling. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Zone: Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Required Proposed Table 134 (13) Standards for Single Detached Dwellings: Minimum Required Exterior Side Yard Setback 7.5 rn 4.4 m Section 5.38: Setback to EP Zone: 30 metres 0 metres Official Plan Designation —Agricultural Zoning By-law 97-95 — Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone, Environmental Protection (EP) Zone Previous Applications — 2008-A-06 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — No objection (see attached) Public Works Department — No comments received Building Department — Proposal meets minimum standards Engineering Department — No concerns 4. BACKGROUND This application proposes to construct an attached garage to a dwelling that was part of Variance application 2008-A-06, that Committee approved on March 20th, 2008. The proposed garage will be attached to a new 3-storey, 236.2 square metre dwelling. According to Township Zoning By-law Schedule A9, the subject property is located within a flood plain, where a watercourse flows through the property approximately 9.34 metres south of the location of the existing dwelling. The previous Variance application to have the garage as an accessory structure on the south side of the water course was deferred by the Committee until such time that comment was received from the NVCA, particularly with respect to the concern over the proposed new accessory structure being located on lands subject to the risk of flooding. The NVCA indicated that there is no objection to attaching the garage to the dwelling, subject to the applicant applying for and obtaining a development permit from the NVCA and that the existing wood sided shed be removed to thereby increase the environmental buffer adjacent to the Willow Creek tributary. Therefore, it is now appropriate to consider this revised application. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Agricultural by the Official Plan. Section C1.2 of the Plan states that the primary 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. The proposed garage will be attached to a permitted use. On this basis, the proposal is considered to conform to the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law? 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 attached garage would be located above and away from the edge of the top of bank for the creek to the south. In addition, while the proposed garage will not encroach further than the existing dwelling into the EP Zone, the watercourse itself is located approximately 9.43 metres from the south face of the proposed new attached garage. Therefore, there is a setback of 9.43 metres between the proposed attached garage 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 exterior side yard setback from the required 7.5 metres in the A/RU Zone to a proposed 4.4 metres, the purpose of the exterior side yard setback is to ensure that adequate distance exists between the traveled portion of the roadway and structures. 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. Due to the proposed dwelling that was approved by the Committee through Variance application 2008-A-06, the reduction is front yard setback of the proposed dwelling was recognized and approved for 6.9 metres (22.8 feet). The proposed attached garage will have a front yard setback of 7.5 metres from Gore Road. However, since Committee recognized a closer setback to the front lot line in the Variance application for the proposed dwelling a variance for front yard setback is not required for the proposed garage. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the lot? The lands subject to the Variance application contains two zone classifications, being Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone along the front of the property to a depth of 10 metres, where the majority of the subject property is zoned Environmental Protection. Specific policies and guidance with respect to development within a floodplain are listed in the Township Official Plan, and are implemented through the Zoning By-law: B5.1.3.2 Implementation ...all lands within an identified floodplain shall be subject to a Holding Provision in the implementing Zoning Bylaw ... no new development is permitted on lands subject to the Holding Provision until the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority approves the development.. Comments were received from the NVCA on July 9 2008, indicating that the Authority has no objection to locating the garage on the north side of the water course and attaching it to the proposed new dwelling. The 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 and that the exsiting wood sided shed be removed. With respect to the reduced exterior side yard setback the proposed attached garage will not hinder or impede sight lines for the intersection of Gore Road and Line 1 South, nor hinder on-site parking. In addition, notwithstanding a reduced exterior side yard setback and being located in the EP Zone setback with the approval of NVCA, the proposed garage would otherwise meet with all other provisions for the development of a residential use in the A/RU Zone. There is an existing accessory structure that is located on the north side of the water course, behind where the proposed attached garage will be located. The applicant has indicated that if variance application 2008-A-16 (Revised) is approved then it will be taken down. The proposed garage is a permitted use by the Official Plan and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law, the variance is deemed to be appropriate. Is the variance minor? As the proposed variances to reduce the exterior side 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. It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-16 (revised), being for a reduction of the exterior side yard setback from the required 7.5 metres to 4.4 metres, and for the construction of an attached garage, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed attached garage be in conformity with the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 2. The an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification of Committee's decision by certifying in writing that the proposed attached garage be no closer than 7.5 metres from the front lot line on Gore Road; and that the proposed attached garage be no closer than 4.4 metres from the exterior side lot line on Line 1 South; 3. That the applicant obtain any required permit(s) and/or approval(s) from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority for the construction of the attached garage; 4. That the applicant remove the existing wood sided shed to thereby increasing the environmental buffer adjacent to the Willow Creek tributary; 5. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Reviewed by, 17 Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner GORE ROAD" l N dal G SITE PLAN - PROPOSED SCALE ; 1/32' - 1 * -0' x fer3a'r rra ( _4 - 1e13y N82'35'WW ! 75 sia — lit x S (r1 .,._.... HC tPt' ,NpM1C+'ys— �t j501 — [U Qj F NMtNtNihit� [ SC/+LCb Favu PUp GUMONt _ 14--7j` V [t &29Y) [13.61Y[ PROPOSED ACCESSORY ° I tO l ButtDING _., 52.1 iD wry" l N dal G SITE PLAN - PROPOSED SCALE ; 1/32' - 1 * -0' ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND "D" POSTED AS "GORE ROAD" P.I.N. 58552 - 0020(LT) CIL ASPHALT _ .��Glr lWnl EDGE ASPHALT — --- I.] OVAL ULVERT DRIVE WAY 1 ._... (Nb2'30'W - P/S 1613) I 3 1 OVER HEAP WIRES ( j I�lV N82- 35'15 "w 50.75 1 1° 112. Q 1613) 1 V I L8. _I (738) UE27 W. _I jay i ye0 1 14- w i. PROPAN T'��-�-, :::D V T I NK `�(736) NEW 1 SEPTIC' 719 N� :3 _- ATT. fp q i. ELEV. TOP _3119 a m ID CE STOREY A*L E SHED aD Q) APPROXIMATE o / [27MM] 14'- ED / APPROXIMATE POSITION or / v) `) ENVIRONMENTAL LIMIT AS SCALED FROM PHOTOGRAPH SUPPLIED BY 1 a+ W� RAYMOND DUMONT tt STARE 1 td0 z 8 H SW ODW WOOD cSp0£R 22 iNY CONCRETE �yptE 23504 BOX CULVERT � J 1 1 i STAKE, OF „ DGC OCTOBER 22. FEN22 CE CRS �pTfR {n U W O / m• ca y 4 P. t. N. 58552 — 0021(L T) o. z a z ')' .W m � N b .,1 • W' J z Q h �( 2 V APPROXIMATE POSITION OF INV, Q ENVIRONMENTAL LIMIT AS SCALED {/ 235.62 O FROM PHOTOGRAPH SUPPLIED BY �[ n j RAYMOND DUMONT VVV FENCE FENCE DRIVE IICUL VER DN LINE - x —X-- - % POST 0.2 N. AND W` RE FENCE INV (738) N82'03'15 "W (M82`02'OSW - P/S 1613 - 5212) 52.16 1.tl. 236 n3) 236.66 PART 3, ^ PLAN 51R — 225')1 w P.I.M. 58552 - 0023(L r) 0 G °\ SITE PLAN — PROPOSED A -0 SCALE : 1/32" - 1' -0" c ' /"y /, � Fliearing Date: Application #: Owner: 94t i MAS #: ` L M Lot #: 1 Q 62E V's iz:� Plan #: Conc. #: 148 Line 7 S., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705) 487 -2171 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www.oro- medontexa The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application. ❑ Site inspection required and completed. Cd Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. ❑ Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. ❑ Comments: Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal Respectfully submitted, Michael Diver, CBCO Chief Building Official Township of Oro-Medonte Engineering Department Inspection Report/Comments for Consent Minor Variance Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date I yars File No. `-i.,`-"ZS - k - i kc L T-LI-LvIs T- Name of Owner padLOrri" ' Address k-L) Subject Property Remarks: Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering & Environmental Services n FION P July 9, 2008 Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Farquharson; s >tz Watershed Thank you for circulating this application and please advise us of any decision. Counties Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Member ot N� '�"TA; /,JF�SkGA�JF:s_!_EY'�C3i SE!'<vA ?(�PJ P.J''!- iORIT't' Ce^�re for Cogs ✓ Eicn Consenratfc., ;ohn Hiy. Codfse(vaz ;on Adrnifiis *raticn C @litre TifiirE Conser`1a,Ecn Area 8, 95 c�ti'1 =irte f.�iQ�in, On L ✓F� I iQ �� � Telephone: 795.424.1479 t=ax: 7C5.424.2115 Web: www.nvca.on.ca , Emafi: admin@nvca.on.ca Re: Application for Minor Variance 2008 -A -16 (Dumont) N4emher Part Lot 10, Concession 1 unicipaitties Township of Oro - Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro) The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this minor Amaranth variance application in accordance with policies established under the Provincial Policy Statement and regulations made under the Conservation Authorities Act. On June 24, 2008, The NVCA met on site with the applicant and yourself to discuss k4odltt,dAVest Gwilfinft,ut }' alternatives for the accessory building which was originally proposed within the floodway of the Willow Creek tributary. As you are aware, Section 3.1.2d) of the Provincial Policy Statement states development and site alteration shall not be r= afi�it.x3i permitted within a floodway. Based upon the revised drawing, the NVCA understands proposed development within the floodway has been abandoned and a replacement dwelling with an attached garage is now planned on the north side of the creek. The NVCA therefore has no objection to the approval of this application subject to the Mol „ 01w, following conditions: NA " i '' "`� • That the existing wood sided shed on the property be removed thereby increasing the environmental buffer adjacent the Willow Creek tributary, and; Nei %�' Tiq,niloth (;rt"M(,dowr • That the applicant obtain a permit from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority under the Conservation Authorities Act. f .rcy 9 h�l }(iarf5 The purpose of the permit (among other things) is to ensure adequate floodproofing elevations are established for the proposed structure and ensure erosion and sediment controls are installed prior to construction to protect the Willow Creek tributary and associated environmental features and functions. Watershed Thank you for circulating this application and please advise us of any decision. Counties Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Member ot N� '�"TA; /,JF�SkGA�JF:s_!_EY'�C3i SE!'<vA ?(�PJ P.J''!- iORIT't' Ce^�re for Cogs ✓ Eicn Consenratfc., ;ohn Hiy. Codfse(vaz ;on Adrnifiis *raticn C @litre TifiirE Conser`1a,Ecn Area 8, 95 c�ti'1 =irte f.�iQ�in, On L ✓F� I iQ �� � Telephone: 795.424.1479 t=ax: 7C5.424.2115 Web: www.nvca.on.ca , Emafi: admin@nvca.on.ca Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 zuva-m-ii - iiennis and Susan Tascona 1 Trafalgar Drive, Lot I Concession 1, RP 51 R 29810 (Formerly Oro) 1.PROPOSAL The purpose of application 2008-13-33 is to permit a boundary adjustment. The subject land being 1 Trafalgar Drive is proposing to convey a strip of land having a frontage of 15.2 metres (50 feet) on Trafalgar Drive a depth of 84 metres (275 feet) and an area of 0.12 hectares (0.29 acres) to the land adjacent to the west being 3 Trafalgar Drive. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. 2. MUNICIPAL POLICY, ZONING AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS Official Plan Designation — Shoreline and Rural Zoning By-law 97-95 — Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone Previous Applications — 3. AGENCY COMMENTS County of Simcoe - No comment Public Works Department - No comments received Building Department — Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. Engineering Department — No Concerns Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority- No Concerns (Formal comments forthcoming) 4. BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.12 hectares from the subject property to the neighbouring residential lot to the west being 3 Trafalgar Drive. The proposed retained lot, being 1 Trafalgar Drive, would consist of 2.2 hectares, and contains an existing single detached dwelling. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. 5. OFFICIAL PLAN The subject lands are designated Rural and Shoreline by the Official Plan (OP). Section D2 of the OP contains policies with respect to subdivision of land. Specifically, Section D2.2.2 -"Boundary Adjustments", provides the following guidance for Consent Applications in general: "a consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries provided no new building lot is created... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected." 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 rural and shoreline policies stated in the Official Plan, and otherwise conforms with the boundary adjustment policies contained in Section D.2.2.2. The County of Simcoe Planning Department has no comment or objection to the boundary adjustment as proposed. 6. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone by Zoning By-law 97-95. The lot to be enhanced, to the west of 1 Trafalgar Drive, is also zoned Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone. Generally, the RLS zone reflects that the road servicing the subject lands are located on an unassumed private road by the Township, however the Township has assumed all responsibility of the road, but has not change it to the appropriate 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 RLS Zone. In addition, the existing dwellings on both the retained and enhanced lands would also comply with the minimum setback requirements for a structure in the RLS Zone. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law. 7. CONCLUSION The proposed consent application for a boundary adjustment would appear to conform to the policies of the Official Plan, and maintains the use and setback provisions of the Zoning By-law. 8. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee grant Provisional Consent to Application 2008-13-33 to convey a strip of land having a frontage of 15.2 metres (50 feet) on Trafalgar Drive a depth of 84 metres (275 feet) and an area of 0.12 hectares (0.29 acres) to the land adjacent to the west, 3 Trafalgar Drive and subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the severed lands be merged in title with 3 Trafalgar Drive and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the maximum total area for the enhanced lot be no greater than 0.39 '2Y ha 6. That the Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Respectfully submitted, --- -rc� Steven Farquharson, B.URPL RPP Intermediate Planner Reviewed by ty Glenn White, MCIP Senior Planner �RARA, 15.211(01 I S", 2 9,, V `�:; - ro 6C cof,JUEY c1) �2 0 5 10 20 30 40 Meters am FHearing Date: Application #:t'— Owner: /� MI5 --� Ai(L-J MAS UU 14/a Lot #: l Plan #: ; �,2 /P Conc. #: 148 Line 7 S., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705) 487 -2171 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www.oro- medonte.ca to The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application. ❑ Site inspection required and completed. ❑ Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. ❑ Comments: Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal Respectfully submitted, Michael Diver, CBCO Chief Building Official Township of Oro-Medonte Engineering Department Inspection Report/Comments for Consent'%-� Minor Variance Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date File No. Name of Owner Address— Y Subject Property Remarks: Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering & Envirom-nental. Services Farquharson, From: Marek Greg KGreg.K0arek@aimooe.oa] Sent: To: Farquharson, Steven Subject: RE: Consent Application 2008-B-33 Thanks Steve. I hadn't seen it. The County has no comment, Greg Marek Planner if Phone: 705-72G-S30Ox1862 From: Farquharson, Steven [mailto:sfarquharson@oro-medonte.ca] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 3:29 PM To: Marek, Greg Subject: Consent Application 2008-B-33 Greg, Im not sure if this was sent to you but can you please review and provide comments. Steven Farquharson, B.WRPL Intermediate Planner Township ofOro-K8edonte Bus: (7U5) 487-ZI71Ext:42]9 Fax: (17O5) 48?-U/32 _ This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by and is believed to be clean. Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 2008-A-23 - Lawrence Houben 1642 Line 10 North, Lot 7, Concession 10 Pro) The applicant is requesting relief from the required front yard setback for an existing single detached dwelling. Specifically, the applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By- law 97-95: Zone: Rural Residential One Exception 65 fRUR1 *65)Zone: Required 15 m 13.1 m Official Plan Designation — Rural Residential Zoning By-law 97-95 — Rural Residential One Exception 65 (RUR1 *65) Zone Previous Applications — 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works — No Comments Recieved Building Department — Proposal appears to meet minimum standards Engineering Department- No concerns is 9 The subject property has a lot frontage on Line 10 North of approximately 52 metres (170 feet), and a lot depth of approximately 129 metres (423 feet), and a lot area of 0.41 hectares (1.03 acres). The lot is presently occupied by a 328 square metre (3532 square feet) two storey dwelling, which was constructed in 1997. The applicant is applying to the Committee to recognize that the existing dwelling was constructed with the required 15 metres setback from the front property line. Does the variance maintain the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Residential in the Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings, accessory uses, home occupations, and bed agricultural uses. As the existing dwelling constitutes a permitted use within the Rural Residential designation, the application would therefore maintain the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject property is zoned Rural Residential One Exception 65 (RUR1 x`65) Zone. Permitted uses in the RUR1 Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory 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 with a covered porch, is located 13.4 metres (43.9 feet) at its closest point from the front property line. The zoning exception 65, which is placed on the property address minimum lot frontage of 25 metres (82 feet), and the first storey floor area of the dwelling must be 8.3 M2 (go square feet). Aside from the reduced front yard setback, the proposed dwelling would otherwise comply with height, floor area, and all other setback requirements. In Section 5.9.1 states: Architectural features such as sills, belt courses, cornices, eaves or gutters, chimney breasts, pilasters, roof overhangs, stairs and landings used to access a main building, cantilevered window bays, unenclosed porches and balconies may encroach into any required yard a distance of no more than 1.0 metre (3.2 feet). This would allow the front porch to encroach 14 metres (45.11 feet), to the front property line, which would mean the applicant is seeking a recognition of 0.6 metres front yard setback decency. On the basis of the above, the existing dwelling would therefore maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the lot? The location of the existing dwelling appears to be appropriate, as the structure is located at a significant distance from the travelled portion of Line 10 North. The purpose of the front yard setback is to maintain separation between the traveled portion of the roadway and residential structures, and to allow for vehicle parking. The existing driveway and vehicle parking space on the subject lands will also not be affected by the nature of this application, the existing dwelling, albeit setback further into the lot. On the basis of the above, the recognizance of the existing dwelling and proposed reduction of the required side yard setback is deemed to be appropriate. Is the variance minor? As the proposed variance maintains the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, the variance is deemed to be minor. It is recommended that Committee approves Variance Application 2008-A-23, being to recognize an existing dwelling, having a minimum front yard setback of 13.1 metres. Reviewed by Glenn White, MCIP RPP Senior Planner �Gl L C j f �-J Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 &1111,0-A-41; - jeTTery bcott arr 48 Shoreline Drive. Lot 28, Plan 1. PROPOSAL - PURPOSE OF APPLICATION The applicant is proposing to construct an attached garage onto the side of an existing single detached dwelling. The garage is proposed to have a total floor area of 76 square metres (827 square feet). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Zone: Rural Residential One (SR) Required Table 131 Standards for Permitted Uses: Minimum Required Interior Side Yard Setback 3.0 m (9.8 ft) Official Plan Designation —Shoreline Zoning By-law 97-95 — Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Previous Applications — None 3. DEPARTIVIENVAGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — No comments recieved Building Department — Proposal appears to meet minimum standards Engineering Department — No Concerns 4. BACKGROUND 2.1 m (6.8 ft) The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 30 metres (98.5 feet), a lot depth of approximately 60.3 metres (197.8 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.18 hectares (0.45 acres). The property currently has a single storey dwelling with an area of 114 square metres (1231 square feet) and detached shed, which is proposed to be removed if variance application 2008-A-30 is approved. The Township Zoning By-law requires a 3 metre (9.8 feet) interior side yard setback in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. The proposed two car attached garage to the single family dwelling is to be built a distance of 2.1 metres (6.8 feet) from the east side lot line. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5 of the Plan states that the primary permitted use of lands within this designation shall be single detached dwellings and home occupations. A single detached dwelling with an attached garage are permitted uses un the Shoreline designation and common features found in residential neighbourhoods. On this basis the proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject lot is currently zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The purpose of the interior side yard setbacks is to provide access to the rear yard of the property, and to provide for a degree L of separation between neighbouring dwellings. The site inspection revealed that the proposed attached garage should not adversely impact access to the rear of the property, as the west interior side lot line is located approximately 5.48 metres (18 feet) beyond the east wall of the dwelling. The proposed side yard of 2.1 metres (6.8 feet) will still provide adequate access to the rear yard. In addition, the proposed expansion of the dwelling otherwise meets with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height, front and rear yard setbacks) for dwelling units in the SR Zone. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? Based on the site inspection, the proposed attached garage would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Existing trees will provide the abutting dwelling with adequate buffering from the proposed attached garage. Due to the location of the applicants driveway being on the east side of the property and the location of the septic bed on the south west portion of the lot, the garage cannot be attached to the west side of the dwelling. There is an existing shed located in the front yard, which the applicant has indicated will be removed if application is approved by the Committee. The proposed attached garage would still maintain the character of the neighborhood. On the basis that the addition of an attached garage to the existing dwelling would not adversely affect the character of the shoreline residential area, the proposed variance is considered to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. 5. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Minor Variance 2008-A-30, being to grant a reduction for the east interior side yard setback from 3 metres to 2.1 metres, for the construction of an attached two car garage to the existing dwelling, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 attached garage be located no closer than 2.1 metres from the east interior lot line 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the 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. Respectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, N Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner IN 01s9194W r — U TOWNSHIP OF ONO COUNTY �,�H 0E ,�,�c PAUL R. KiTCH i N SURVEYING, LTD. �. ©� i L.. 0 pA, ?CEL vtA,v -IIJE�l� rri av gr,N -3B: is tisrw4s -s otlr dtir -sat! rttls•:s't We"aml 20040 tsa 0!N'is'ii"s (low" (tilM•s�iw�A/�l�s01 mow igltASi tOtlt l�l ti* [Aft t� t0�p assess' s ttq►�NOAl lu.rs' st i iMKlittl .r !• t11t =JAW; SET, Lt. ' �. ai w ,,4 Dt�u tD W" • Tt. �• �' a.st Oti! er`+rriouac k s.w' � wi11'1. $ am wom �tlti as.tla' �; trJ �Y an.as' te•tr� �� ,LS �_ r sa 4REA= 0.455Ar. AREA =0.456 Ac. Vf- � p it* A#AO WT! iN �! �4Q -�� tTt 00.� to*"#Ai ` `2 tAt [RtiiC N ! is! Nt/►titt3Aitit ;Ai! i0• tout tout � FOOH AVER - . (BY k P 640A) vw (NOW KNOWN AS L.AKESHORE ROAD) s� A�a,c 4" LEGEND 0 __ C K O ,El + -. 1, •'fw F* NiD C) — »-- K"o n rotnilq,tti mot ► *--- -- itDOM A tW. WO NO — __.utiweris i onto& atilt ox KAhtM4i AN AffM*DW Alp AM TO TIC 1I*RTlitla.y tarot user avas w at swm*" IliAtt lltD IRL&K ti* 040A HAW" A 1"All" c in KK <- -7, 4-T- r- � -p � If e c ell- 11r, ?r,&9 f., @| �w 6--4 5 F-M ON-41 ■ Iv Sat Mar 08 14:40:21 2008 JEFF ORR ADDITION 23'X 28' ip 11) 7 A - ""4 m 'A' T { Y L�-1 7"" J I '17 60 Shoreline Drive R, P. # I Hawkestone, Ontario LOL 1TO June 26, 2008 The Corporation of The Township of Oro-Medonte P.O. Box 100 Line 7, South Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO To Whom It May Concern: We, Robert and Lynn Stevenson, are under the understanding that, Mr. & Mrs. Jeff Orr, are applying for a variance for the purpose of building a garage. We have no issues with this request and we are happy to comply, Sincerely, Robert and Lynn Stevenson -S- k-t - Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 2008-A-27 — Ron McCowan 2243 Ridge Road West, Lot 2, Range 2, RP 51R-4441 (Formerly Oro) A The applicants are proposing to construct a two-storey boathouse with a deck, where the boathouse is proposed to have a total footprint area of 168 M2 (1817 ft). The applicants are requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: 1. Section 5.6 q) Maximum height for the boathouse from the required 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to a proposed 7.95 metres (26.1 feet). 2. Section 5.6 c) Maximum width of boathouse from the required 30 percent of the width of the lot at the average high water mark to a proposed 43 percent 2. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee defers Application 2008-A-27 — Ron McCowan, 2243 Ridge Road West, Lot 2, Range 2, RP 51 R-4441 (Former Twp. of Oro) at the request of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority in order to attain comments from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, as per their request dated July 11, 2008. Respectfully submitted, Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner c� 9 OP INVERT: cp �r 1 O \ \\ ! 0.40 CS \ i � N54"26'0�E— 30.48 1 V 18(1035) x / d (Pr "k}evs -) \ V MT 223.0 1 Ditch Cn N �� a —222.00— = '� Boulders — Bott \ — — — — — J- , ; d� Slope — 221.00 — — j �- 1 220.0 — \� Boulders �0� :AL WATERS EDGE NATURAL WATERS ED �l \ C rw, °mss e°o, 01-n $ LAKE a ro SIMCO 219.15 HIGHWATER MARK SET BY THE LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Rw11=1® -41 U09 L3 ;s. 7 9 1 A INVERT: 0.4rn0r0 v RCSr: P — 224.00 30.48 �r 1 1 (B {1035]> '223.00 �` I L- -Ditch k� 23.00 — \\ 1 1 Sop of_Iope q qn — — _ tJ LP l_-- '� ,C7 W 3oulders _ 0 J X Boulders :S EDGE 1 J LAKE s1mc0E o� 219.15 HIGHWATER MARK SET BY THE LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY NATURAL WATERS EDGE -a F� D L) � � N I � I EME � WK A9O'rE \\ ( Iti, lall p \ \ I twtlNU td K4MML WEw`s y NEW BOAT SUP NEW BOAT %F `, NEW BOAT SUP } IB¢ OF comma "91MAL +rA16R's I NOLKAL *AM S } COOKRre PIs ' ext I I - --} L i rk 01,11 COMCMI PER s FiHCE ` k MAL r 9 :2 4-9' ROAMSE NEW BOAT SUP NEW BOAT SY. NEW BOAT SL F NOURAL WAMIS mGz E3 L------------------ Z/- ---------------------- crJ D" 1� V, 4 I N all �a F n� ~�~� � ���� Township of Oro-Medonte - Cmmmittee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 2008-A-24 - John Esteireiro, 2713 Lakeshore Road East, Part of Lot 20 and 21, Plan 51 R-1 6475, Con 14 (Oro) The applicant iG proposing b] construct 84S7.9M2(535O ft) one and half storey single h3DOik/iO replace Of the 8x|SUngdvveUiDg.The applicant iSr8qU8S�Dgn2Ueffn}rDSeChOn5.33 "Setback f[OrD8 'r courses" 8s well as 8gcUVD 5.81 "Setback from the average high water mark Of Lake Girn[o8°: Required Proposed Setback to Lake Simcoe 20 metres 17.5 metres Setback to a Water Course 30 metres 7.5 metres Official Plan Designation —Shoreline Zoning By-law 97-S5— Shoreline Residential (SR)Zone Previous Approval- the applicant has obtained a building permit from LSRCA based on the drawing submitted with this application. 3. DEPARTMENT AND AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department- NO Comments n2Ci8veU Building Department- PnDpOSD/ meets minimum standards EngiDeeringDepadnleDt — NOCOncerns LSRCA-NO Objection (See attached letter) 4. BACKGROUND The subject property has 8 street frontage 0fapproximately 30.6 metres /100 f88� G|UOg Lakeshore Road East and G lot area Of8ppn}xi[DGt8|yO4 ��Ct@nB /098 \ T� � ' | � S ` � @�r8S'� S property single storey dwelling. The applicants are proposing b] construct 8497.SmO2(588O*� single detached dwelling with 8D attached deck being located at both the rear and front of the proposed dwelling. The proposed dwelling will be located 7.5 metres from a water course on the east side of the property, the required setback from O water course is 30 metres (98.4 feet). The rear part Vfthe proposed dwelling is proposed h}Ue located 17.5 metres from the average high water mark Of Lake SimOc08, where the required setback i6 20 Dleto8S. As 8 R3GU|t, permission is required from the COrnnlidB8 of i for the 0UnstruCb0DOf the dweUin0. Does the variance conform to the general intent ofthe Official Plan? The pn]p8dv is designated Shoreline in the C}ffiCi8/ Plan. Section {}5.1 which C0nt@iOS the SU0/8|iD8 policies in the Township's Official Plan S8b8 out the fO||0vviOg objectives: ° TO Dl8/nb3iD the existing character Ofthis p[eU0nniDRnUy o8SideOU8/ area. ° T0 protect the D8tu[8| features of the shoreline area and the immediate ShOnG|iOS. The requested variance for the proposed dwelling would appear to maintain the character of the shoreline residential area, 8s dwellings are 8 permitted use in the shoreline designation. Therefore, the variances m/mu|d conform to the general intent of the policies contained in the Official Plan. Does the variance cmn/armrnthe general intent mfthe BY-Jaw? The subject lot is CUneDUy zoned Shoreline ReSid8Dh8i (SR). The primary purpose of the setback requirement from Lake Sim0coe is to protect the n8tVn3| features Of the Sh0r8|iD8 area in 0en8[8|. and the immediate shoreline [f the subject property. x |D8SGgs�Ug the �SueOfCODfOnnhvv�hthe Zoning By-law, the proposed dwelling should not detract the overall character Ofthe lot and surrounding natural fe8kJrGS being the watercourse which runs through the property and the rDGtUr8 trees located in the front and side y8vU yard. One Of the purposes of regulating structures from being built within the 30 metres setback from 8 watercourse is to maintain and enhance the 8CO|ogiC8| |Dt8Q[ib/ of the D8tVc8| heritage SySt8OQ' to ensure that development does not occur 0n lands that are unstable O[susceptible to flooding and b] ensure that development does not occur On hazardous slopes. The applicant has been in contact with the Lake Sin0Coe Region Conservation Authority, and has obtained G permit approval for the construction of the proposed dwelling. When a site iOSp8CtjnD was done by P|8ODiOg sb3ff. it was revealed there were mature trees 8|ODg the interior pk]p8dY line and b}vv8K1S the front of the property. This tnBg vegetation vvOu|d provide an adequate buffer between the proposed dvv8||inQ and the neighbouring dwellings. Therefore the proposed dwelling and deck meets the general intent Of the Zoning By-|avv. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The proposed dwelling should provide for @form of development that is suitable and consistent with the surrounding area. The proposed variance will provide for the construction Uf8 dwelling and will continue b] maintain the shoreline character of the area. DO h3 the |VC8dOO Of the watercourse and the shape Of the property, the applicant is limited to pOSSiU|e area VO where to develop. The proposed dwelling will be |OC@t8d over the existing building foot print and the new deck will be in the G8nne |0c8UoO as the existing deck. |tis therefore determined that the proposed dwelling iS appropriate for the development On the lot. Is the variance minor? On the b8SS that the pK}pOS8| is reasonable and would not appear to 8dve[S8k/ affect to the surrounding properties, and that this type of development is aoommun feature in the shoreline area and will not have e negative impact on privacy or access for either the subject orsurrounding properties, the proposed variance is considered tobeminor. 5. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application ���24subject to the following 1. That the size and setbacks of the proposed dwelling be in conformity with the sketches submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 2. That Gn Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision bv1\ pinning the footing and 29 verifying in writing prior b]pouring of the foundation SOthat: i} The dwelling including the attached deck be located Do closer than 17.5 metres /57.4 feet) from the average high water mark Of Lake 8i[DCOe; ii) The dwelling including the attached deck be located no closer than 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) from the top 0f bank Of the water course; 3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official OOk/after the COnlrDdtee1s Ue�S�D b8CO[DeS hn8| and binding, as provided for within the P|8DOiOg Act R.S.O. 1990. c.P.13. 4. That the applicants Obtain approval from the Lake GhDCOe Region Conservation Authority under the Conservation Authorities Act. Reviewed by, Glenn White, MC|P.RPP Senior Planner �... j �..� �®,. OF PARTS t, 2 Af01 3. StR -10475 // (GEOGRAPMC TOWMMP Oi /! TOIYNSIU OF ORO— ORO NTE ti COUNTY OF SiMCOE METRES ` 3°0 MOWN AS RE ROAD C.T. STSTRONGMAN O.LS. T AIQ�HO 2008 (TRESPASS ROAD) LoT �,1 2 Dil- waL \` ` ,I"`0 T'� 2 1 p i I i 1 CD C i' 1 11 co ,vw.w m �{ \ powr 0°°°" N� ftp CIO LA$� tb OeSTMM SW" ON D*S " ARE IN METRES MW CAM BE C0 VERIEO TO FEET RV MOM W 0.3040. 0, a t STRONGMAN SURVEYING LTD. Ontario Land Surveyors A.R. Ma A OMNO% l7V-MM TYd� (7iMi �;StO -0710 pp.�n.s�- ���'°"C,mi a= �T OililYaLA — 01\ —AMO NC n. 65749& " C -44V FRONT ELEVATION -rev3 4 V ) V 0 na "! PON up: rmm 11 F] LUTELEVATION -rev3 CIA, C /* m REAR f LfVATION-rev3 LAY', RIGHT ELEVATION-rev3 to Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282, Newmarket, Ont. U 4X1 Telephone: (905) 895 -1281 Website: www.lsrca.on.ca Fax: (905) 853 -5881 Email: info @lsrca.on.ca PERMIT No. OP.2008.023 Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ONTARIO REGULATION 179/06. Permission has been granted to: Owner: JOHN ESTEIREIRO Applicant: RICK MCCANN 209 OLD FOREST HILL ROAD 1034 COWBELL LANE TORONTO, ON M6C 2H1 SEVERN BRIDGE, ON POE 1NO Location: LOT 20/21, CONCESSION 014 (FORMER TOWNSHIP OF ORO), PLAN LOT PARTS 1 -3, PLAN 51R- 16475, TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE 2713 LAKESHORE ROAD EAST, ORO- MEDONTE s;; >s For the: demolition of the existing cottage; construction of a new single family dwelling with associated septic system as shown on plans submitted and marked "approved ". on the above property during the period of Wednesday, June 18, 2008 to Friday, June 18, 2010 subject to the following conditions: a) All development subject to provincial, federal and municipal statutes, regulations and by -laws. b) This permit does not confer upon you any right to occupy, develop or flood lands owned by other persons or agencies. c) The applicant must maintain and comply with the local drainage requirements of the municipality. d) That all areas of exposed soil be stabilized immediately following construction. e) That no grading or placing of fill occur on the lot except what is required for the proposed works as shown on the attached site plan. 0 That sediment and erosion controls be installed prior to the commencement of any works onsite. Silt controls are to be inspected after every rainfall event and maintained until all exposed areas have been stabilized in order to prevent silt from leaving the site or entering a watercourse or water body. g) That all swales be constructed entirely within the boundaries of the subject property. h) That no development or alteration of grading take place within 15 metres of the annual high watermark of Lake Simcoe (219.15metres A. S. L.). *NOTE The approved plans submitted with the application for this permit are hereby incorporated into and constitute part of this permit. Any construction, placement of rill or interference with a watercourse or body of water otherwise than in accordance with such plans, constitutes a breach of this permit which may then be revoked at the option of the Authority. In addition, any person responsible for such activity is liable to prosecution. • Owner Health Unit, Township of Oro - Medonte • Applicant - Building Dept., Engineering Dept., MR, Midhurst, Ref. # Ian Walker By -law Dept. DFO, Peterborough, Ref. # Environmental Planner File 0P.2008.023 Other - Page 1 of 2 ___ —_ A Watershed for Life JUL -10 -2008 17:05 TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE 07/10/lE008 THU 16:05 FAX Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Pax: 905.853.5881 &Mail: infoOlsrca.on.ca Web: www.lsrca.on.ca 120 Bayview Parkway Box 282 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 Sent by Facsimile 1- 705 -487 -0133 July 10, 2008 Ms. Marie Brissette Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Corporation of the Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100, Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Ms. Brissette: P- 001 /002 0001/002 File No.: 2008 -A -24 TMS No.: PVOC483C2 Re: Minor Variance Application - Reduce Watercourse Setback & Lake Setback John Esteireiro, Owner Part of Lot 20 & 21, Concession 14 (Former Township of Oro) 2713 Lakeshore Road East, Parts 1 -3, Plan 51R -16475 Township of Oro - Medonte (Oro), County of Simcoe The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) has reviewed the above noted Minor Variance application in the context ofthe Provincial Policy Statement 2005 (PPS - 2005), and Ontario Regulation 179/06 made under the Conservation Authorities Act. This application, if approved, would permit the construction of a replacement dwelling with associated septic system. Our mapping indicates that the above noted property is partially within the Approved Regulation Limit of the LSRCA. The eastern portion of the above noted site is regulated for a watercourse with associated meanderbelt (erosion allowance) and floodplain (FE = 225.13 - 219.65 masl). The southern portion of the above noted site is regulated for shoreline erosion allowance and 100 -year wave uprush (FE = 219.87 masl). A permit may be required for any future development of the regulated portion of the above noted property. Based on our review, we provide the following comments: I . Based on our mapping, the proposed detached house is located within the regulated portion ofthis property. A permit under Ontario Regulation 179/06 is required from the LSRCA for the proposed development. Please note, permit OP.2008.023 has been issued for the proposed development. 2. The proposed new dwelling is no closer to the creek or to the shoreline than the existing Watershed dwelling which is to be demolished. Based on the above noted information, the LSRCA has no objection to the Minor Variance application, subject to the following conditions: For 3. That a permit under Ontario Regulation 179/06 be obtained from the LSRCA, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit for the proposed dwelling (condition has been fulfilled). 4. That prior to any site alteration, proper erosion and sediment control measures must be in Life place. Page I of 2 JUL -10 -2008 17:05 TOWNSHIP OF ORO— MEDONTE ..07/10/2x08 THU 16:05 FAX July 10, 2008. Ms. Marie Brissette Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committe of Adjustment File No. 2008 -A -24 IMS No. PVOC483C2 Page 2 of 2 P.002/002 0002/002 I trust this meets your requirements at this time. In order to facilitate our processing of this file, please reference the above noted file numbers in future colTespondence. Ifyou have questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 905 -895 -1281, extension 287. Please advise us of your decision in this matter. Yours truly, Ian Walker Environmental Planner IW /ab C. Rick McCann, Agent, 1034 Cowbell Lane, Severn Bridge, ON, POE 1NO - Mail S:\IaiiMCorrespondence\ Planning\ Variances \Oro- Medonte\2008\2008 -n -24 (Minor Variance - Esteireiro) 2713 Lakeshore Road East - I.wpd Township of Oro-Medonte Engineering Department Inspection Report/Comments for Consent Minor Variance L,-" Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date I&L File No. 2e(-,� /-2Z Name of Owner 1W Address Subject Property. Remarks: t r eL"-,---,-)r(-- ,— &F,' C, q-- C-k�, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering & Environmental Services Hearing Date: J Application #: '219 - - Owner: �rs� MAS #: 2/ ��Kr tt, �Ti C Lot #: 2D4 -- Plan #: t P- /6`/ r Conc. #: V The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application. Cl Site inspection required and completed. ;'0 Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. �6--)cs 148 Line 7 5., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705) 487 -2171 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www.oro- medonte.ca 0 Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. C] Comments: Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal Respectfully submitted, Ulm, Michael Diver, CBCO Chief Building Official Township of Oro-Medonte - Committee of Adjustment July 17, 2008 2008-A-28 - Michael and Liz Shaughnessy 51 Ward Avenue. Lot 44, Plan 979 (Former Township Of Oro) 0 - • • %'IT 'INENLI 'JiLuk The applicant is proposing to construct an attached garage onto the side of an existing single detached dwelling. The garage is proposed to have a total floor area of 44 square metres (480 square feet). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By- law 97-95: Zone: Shoreline Residential (SR) Required Proposed Table 1311 Standards for Permitted Uses: Minimum Required Interior Side Yard Setback 3.0 m (9.8 ft) 0.5 rn (1.6 ft) Official Plan Designation— Shoreline Zoning By-law 97-95 — Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Previous Applications — none 3. DEPARTMENVAGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — No comments received Building Department — Building would have to be designed for spatial separation - Approved engineering Lot Grading Plan would be required. Engineering Department — No concerns 4. BACKGROUND The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 40 metres (132 feet), a lot depth of approximately 45 metres (150 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.18 hectares (0.45 acres). The property currently has a single storey dwelling with an area of 214 square metres (2305 square feet). The Township Zoning By-law requires a 3 metre (9.8 feet) interior side yard setback in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. The proposed attached garage to the single family dwelling is to be built a distance of 0.5 metres (1.6 feet) from the south east side lot line. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5 of the Plan states that the primary permitted use of lands within this designation shall be single detached dwellings and home occupations. A single detached dwelling with an attached garage are permitted uses in the Shoreline designation and common features found in residential neighbourhoods. On this basis the proposal is considered to conform to the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject lot is currently zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The purpose of the interior side yard setbacks is to provide access to the rear yard of the property, and to provide for a degree of separation between neighbouring dwellings. The site inspection revealed that the proposed attached garage should not adversely impact access to the rear of the property, as the west interior side lot line is located approximately 17.5 metres (57.4 feet) beyond the west wall of the dwelling. In addition, the proposed addition of an attached garage would otherwise meets with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height, front and rear yard setbacks) for dwelling units in the SR Zone. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? As noted during the site inspection, existing trees will provide the abutting dwelling with adequate buffering from the proposed attached garage. Due to the location of the applicants, driveway, and the existing tree coverage which surrounds the septic bed location. The garage cannot be attached to the northwest side of the dwelling. Given the above, the Building Department has requested that engineered lot grading would be required, which would design the grades and drainage abutting the proposed garage and the lot line so the neighbor property would not be affected. It is recommended that the Committee approve Minor Variance 2008-A-28, being to grant a reduction for the south east interior side yard setback from 3 metres to 0.5 metres, for the construction of an attached garage to the existing dwelling, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 the attached garage be located no closer than 0.5 metres from the south east interior lot line; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. 4. That the applicant obtain any required permit(s) and or approval(s) from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation authority for the construction of the attached garage. Reviewed by, 4/ 4 Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner AV M I WAIN UW AmLoopm BASS LAKE SUBJECT LANDS 0 25 50 100 150 200 Meters 5��y r --I a,,-* I Ift I VqA��) AVIEI,,�O E- Z I. 1 2?_. *7 -A oN SIPS 61M f i l La qLt, �i --I a,,-* I Ift I VqA��) AVIEI,,�O E- Z Timbr Garage Plans Search rage,,-,I,.-I g- a y Garage Type: hp Types Garage Capacity: One car >f Bathrooms Bedrooms ", Any number TAal sq ft F, 0 -1500 sq-ft ( 15o1 - 3000 sq _ft I— 3001+ sq.ft Platt #TBM07 -2984 Garages Order now. toll -free across Canada 1 -800 -563 -1807 Total Living Area; l 103 sq.ft; 82.79 sq.m) �-araoe Srze. (676 sq.tt 1 51.84 sq.m1 Bonus Space- (455 sq.tT t 4055 sq.rri; Bedrooms 0_ Bathrooms 0 Garage Capacity. 1 Sneciai Features; Second level storage of 455 sq- ft _ (40,95 sq. m.) Foundation Option_ Floating Slab 1st level rea (576 sq.rt! 51.&4 sq.m) /, 1 o��5 vooj , Ina Age http: / /www.timbr,com/ resources /applgarageplanslindex.php ?action= displayHomeplan&homeplan_id =... 03/05/2008 Timbr Garage Plans Search it 32' -O" 9,60 m T ..04 189-0" PRO- 5,40 m 2nd level Afea- (455 sq,YY1 40,95 sq.m) ragb.- oI 4 http:// www. timbr. com/ resourceslapp lgarageplanslindex.php? action= displayHomeplan &homeplan_id =... 03/05/2008 t imor Uarage runs �oearcn Pricing Data 3 sets of blueprints - 5 sets of blueprints - 8 sets of blueprints - 1 set of CAC construction package construction package construction package reproducible MC masters $139 $159 $179 $239 5439 Ordering Hoeneplans • TIM-BR MART homeplans are not returnable nor refundable • Each TIM -BR MART homepian Comes with the foundation as noted on the pane. • Alternate foundations are available for an extra fee • Purchase of a reproducable master is necessary to make any changes to your chosen plan. ra�e .s of 4 http:// www. timbr. eom/ resourccs lal)plgarageplanslindex.php? action= displayHomeplan&homeplan_id =... 03/05/2008 kajustmepi July 17, 2008 2008-A-22 - Donald and Susan Nick 12 Conder Drive, Lot 28, Concession 13, RP 51 R-624 (Former Medonte) The applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building, which is proposed to have a total area of 83M2 (896 ft). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: 5.1.6 Maximum floor area The maximum floor area of any one detached accessory building or structure, excluding boathouses, is 70 square metres (753.5 square feet). Official Plan Designation — Rural Residential Zoning By-law 97-95 —Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone Previous Applications — None 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department — Building Department — Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. Engineering Department — No Concerns 91�•111 The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 31 metres (106 feet) on Conder Drive, a depth of approximately 123 metres (404 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.38 hectares (0.94 acres). The subject property contains a single detached dwelling and two accessory structures. The property is surrounded by residential parcels similar in size to the subject lands, containing various underbrush and medium-sized trees. The applicants are proposing to construct a 83 M2 (896 ft2 ) detached garage to be located in the rear portion of the property, over approximately 42 metres (137 feet) behind the main dwelling. The proposed garage is to have a height of 4.3 metres (14.4 feet). As such, the applicant is requesting relief from the comprehensive zoning By-law to increase the maximum allowable floor area for a detached accessory building. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Residential in the Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings, accessory uses, home occupations, and bed agricultural uses. As the proposed accessory structure constitutes a permitted use within the Rural Residential designation, the application would therefore maintain the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance conform with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone. The Rural Residential Two Zone permits single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. Aside from the maximum floor area, the proposed garage will otherwise meet with the required interior side and rear yard setbacks and 5 percent lot coverage. The applicant has indicated that they plan of demolish the existing accessory building located directly behind the existing garage and use the proposed accessory structure as a storage building on the lot. Therefore, the variance is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? A site inspection revealed that the proposed location for the garage will be located over 67 metres (220 feet) from the front property line, which will allow it to be out of sight from Conder Road. Surrounding lands to the north, south, and east consist of large, residential parcels similar in size as the subject lands. Mature tree cover is located in the western portions of the property, which is proposed to be maintained by the applicant. The location of the proposed garage is open and free of any significant amount of tree vegetation, which allows for the maximum preservation of tree vegetation. Due to the existing tree coverage and proposed setbacks, the variance for an increase in floor area will not likely have a negative visual or location impact on neighbouring properties. On this basis the proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the subject lot. Is the variance minor? As this application should not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area, the proposed variance is therefore considered to be minor. It is recommended that the Committee approve Variance Application 2008-A-22 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the floor area of the detached garage not exceed 83M2; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on the sketch submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the floor area not exceed 83m2; 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. Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner x� s E E )i 5 i i 4, } } {3 [4 SUBJECT LA DS 045 90 180 270 360 Meters Fro►.'yC vrj-N\e; (1�C0.r cockA."IL N1'►nu5 �'->oot5) JIN ginpeC�t� T�s �i� Elcvaiton o�w" �jerkre5 it I 2xeX10 Wp LLB W, e,,A rf 3ox80 noo� 'dCo ,j r.-,e= e IC, k- 0 0 f n4irrered 10.10 0 0 l-4 qg� }i t it THE CORPORATION OF THE �o N Ih — or Minor Variance Review FHearing Date: �t Q r Application #: Owner: L MAS #: ► Lot #: CU4��Plan #: 1r2 ,(� "2`� Conc. #: 13 ja The Township Building Dept. has reviewed this application. ❑ Site inspection required and completed. Z Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. 148 Line 7 S., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705) 487 -21.71 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www.oro- nnedontexa ❑ Applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. ❑ Comments: Note: This is not approval for any particular development proposal Respectfully submitted, Michael Diver. CBCO Chief Building Official Township of Oro-Medonte Engineering Department Inspection Report/Comments for Consent Minor Variance Other Committee of Adjustment Meeting Date File No. Z- -,oe) Name of Owner 29�,�,/,-V-i Address —/C'-" 6,^ Subject Property ry Remarks: C,)F C--rqL4 Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering & Environmental Services Township ofOro-y0edon1e- Committee ofAdjustment July 17.2888 ~ 2008-A-29 - Lynn Burgess & Dean Blain 73 Eight Mile Point Road Lot 36, Plan 780, (0 ®R ia) Te ap/cn s ooaig ommscanadto o he on and ma ote es�ange dece deUi� Theopp|cant s requeabng edef hom Sec ton 531 "Setbackfrom average high maMhof Lake ~~mcoe" `' well as Table B1 "Interior Side yard setback": Required Setback to Lake Simmm 20 metres Minimum Required Interior Side Yard 1.5 metres Official Plan Designation -Shore|ine Zoning By-law 97-S5- Shoreline Residential Exception 2(SR°2)Zone PnsviouaApp|icatinns - nnne 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works Department - NoComments received BuiNingOepartment - Appmvo meets minimum standards EngineeringDepartmert - NoConoerna Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority- No comments received 4. BACKGROUND Proposed 14.6 metres 1.2 metres The subject property has e road frontage of approximately 30.4 metres (101 feet) a lot depth of approximately 73 metres (241 feet), and a lot area of approximately 0.2 hectares (0.46 -'''Asingle dehached Uwa}|ing. aune boathouse and an accessory structure currently exist on the subject property. The proposed addition on the rear of the dwelling facing onto Lake Simcoe' while the portion of the addition tV the attached garage will be on the front of the dwelling towards Eight Milo Point Hood. The proposed addition -n to the rear will located 14.6 metres from the water's edge, where the required is 20 metres from the average high water mark required. The front addition will be located 1.2 metres from the south interior side /o{ line, ''evn a 1.5 metre setback is required. A site inspection was completed with the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 8, with written comments fourth coming. on July Does the variance conform to the general intent ofthe Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.1 which contains the Shoreline policies in the Township's Official Plan sets out the following objectives: ° To maintain the existing character cf this predominantly residential area. ° To protect the natural features uf the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. The requested variance for the addition to both the front and rear ofthe existing dwelling would appear to maintain the character ofthe shoreline residential avaa, as the proposed additions is a common architectural feature found in residential neighbourhoods. Therefore, the variances would conform to the general intent ofthe policies contained in the Official Plan. Does the variance conform bothe general intent of the Zoning By-lam? The subject lot is currently zoned Shoreline Residential Exception (SR*2) Zone. The primary purpose cfthe setback requirement from Lake8imoom is to protect the natural features of the shoreline area, and the immediate shoreline of the aubjeo property. The interior side yard setback has been established to provide ` access k)the rear of the property, along with preserving privacy from and for neighbouring properties. A site inspection ~� revealed there were mature trees along the interior property line. kks noted that the garage addition wU| with (end a continuation of) the existing wall ofthe dwelling and adequate access is provided by the ~ ~~ ^ ' '� n ~ ~~'^~^�~'~' yanj. With m decrease from the required 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres for the interior side lot line, it hs the opinion "' staff that the proposed setback iaappropriate. Therefore, given that the applicant is seeking a reduction for setback from Lake 8im000 and the interior side yard setback the proposed additions will be well blend in with the existence of a natural treed bufhar, privacy for neighbouring pvmpe�ieewould not appear tobe negatively impacted. Based on the above the application xvould comply with the general intent of the policies of the Zoning By-law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development afthe lot? Based on the site inopeoion, the proposed additions will not change the overall character of the dwelling, and �u|d�����p�ri��r�e'�i��d������r�o�/�/kw�����r��e surrounding residential area. ~' 5. RECOMMENDATION kis recommended that the Committee grant Minor Variance 2O08'A'2Qsubject to the following conditions: 1- The proposed addition to the rear of the existing dwelling ahmU be setback no closer than 146 metres from the average high water mark nf Lake Simcm*; 2. The proposed addition on the front of the existing dwelling shall be setback no closer than 1.2 metres to the south interior side property line; 3. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application, as submitted; 4. That the applicant obtain (if required) any required permit(s) and/or approval(s) from the Lake Gimooe Region 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. G. That the appropriate building permit be obtained from the Township's Chief Building Official only after the Respectfully submitted, Steven FarqOhamon. B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White, MC|P, RPP Senior Planner C16x -r ma-F7 Pn1 -r kA C �I K i j 4A, rhi N10`19TTE (REFERENCE BEARING) 1099.87' (MEAS) 1100.00' (F°) 600.00' _ .— 99.81'(MIEAS) 100.00' (P) N � � c 2 SETT G . � t I W � .,J 1 f70 y tp �i to N _ pa O ,a 5.54' 21.92' =° < N Ei- •P t �I r ..i 23.56' � Al t r•, 0.72' � r V"i a w ° LA ✓��� Cpl z 1 [ s, N10`19'00*E (REFERENCE BEARING) 1099.87' (MEAS) 1100.00' (P) 1 +600.00' 99.81'(MEAS) 100,00' (P m tf��r 5.85" 6.32' r t' SLPT�C BX� co NJ ..- c 1.92 ' 7 ( l V LO r --, x 191 1 O 8.4t t) F p � *t 'T> 23.56 v 0.72' r a '— i' �� 71 —k-\ �fi} cn C l I >` �' I Ul rn Zg� �1d � 3cG� �o'7W� }tad FX15nHG GAKAGE 0 Q2