06 18 2009 C of A AgendaTnwnship of
Proud Heritage, Exciting Future
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
MEETING AGENDA
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
June 18, 2009
9:30 a.m.
Page
1. OPENING OF THE MEETING BY THE CHAIR
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
a) Motion to adopt Agenda.
3. "DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF — IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
3 -9 a) Minutes of May 21, 2009.
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
10 -27 a) 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead)
93 Shoreline Drive, Part of Lot 11 and 12, Plan 640A and Part 1 on 51 R -8107
Variance from setback from average high water mark of Lake Simcoe.
28 -47 b) 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen)
3 Nelson Street
Variance from side yard, front yard and lot coverage.
48 -66 c) 2009 -A -12 (Matthew McCowan)
152 Lakeshore Drive West
Variance for increased floor volume in a required yard.
67 -80 d) 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge)
123 Lakeshore Road East, Plan 589, Lot 5 & 26 (Former Township of Oro)
Relief from maximum lot coverage and maximum floor area.
81 -99 e) 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright)
127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan 653
Variance from side yard setback for dwelling and boathouse.
100 -110 f) 2009 -A -08 (Rob Butler)
67 Barrie Terrace
Variance for front yard setback.
Page 1 of 205
Page
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
111 -156 g) 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh)
290 Ridge Road
Consent for Specialized Agricultural Use.
157 -167 h) 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh)
1753 Ridge Road West
Boundary adjustment.
168 -185 i) 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron)
1384 Line 10 North
Technical severance.
186 -205 j) 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne)
1192 Concession 12 North
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. NEXT MEETING DATE
8. ADJOURNMENT
Page 2 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
s
Township of
Proud Heritage, Exciting Future
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES
Council Chambers
May 21, 2009 9:35 a.m.
Present: Michelle Lynch, Chair
Bruce Chappell
Linda Aiken
Garry Potter
Rick Webster
Staff Present: Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner /Secretary Treasurer
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator /Deputy Secretary
Treasurer
1. OPENING OF THE MEETING BY THE CHAIR
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
a) Motion to adopt the agenda.
CA090521 -01
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that the agenda for the
meeting of Thursday, May 21, 2009 be received and adopted.
Carried.
3. "DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL
NATURE THEREOF — IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
None declared.
4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
a) Minutes of April 16, 2009.
Penonjz,3i _n,3
Moved by Webster, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting
of Thursday, April 16, 2009 be adopted as printed and circulated.
Carried.
Page 1 of 7
Page 3 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
a) 2008 -A -34 (Lane)
85 Moon Point Drive
Variance from Front Side Yard Setback.
No one was present to speak to the application.
CA090521 -03
Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Webster
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance
Application 2008 -A -34 (Revised), being to provide relief from the Township's
Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to the required front yard setback,
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the stairs be located no closer than 4.3 metres from the front lot line;
2. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained
from the Township 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 2 of 7
Page 4 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
b) 2009 -A -09 (Colquhoun)
327 Horseshoe Valley Road East
Variance for garage in front of house and maximum floor area.
Ms. Heather Colquhoun, applicant, was present.
CA090521 -04
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance
Application 2009 -A -09, being to provide relief from the Township's
Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to the required location and
maximum floor area for an accessory building provision, 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 that the detached garage be no larger than 75 square metres,
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 notwithstanding Section 5.1.3(a) and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95,
the detached accessory structure will otherwise comply with all other
applicable provisions for such structures as prescribed by Zoning By -law 97-
95;
4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained
from the Township 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 3 of 7
Page 5 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
c) 2009 -B -13 (Del Coin Holdings Inc)
13 Line 14 South
Boundary adjustment to enhance lands of 5219 Highway 11 North.
Mr. David Walker, applicant, was present.
CA090521 -05
Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional
approval to Consent Application 2009 -B -13, to permit a boundary adjustment
to convey approximately 0.4 hectares (0.98 acres) from the subject property
to the neighbouring commercial lot being 5219 Highway 11 North, 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 5219 Highway 11 North and
that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act
apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject
lands;
3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
Defeated.
CA090521 -06
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Webster
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional
approval to Consent Application 2009 -B -13, to permit a boundary adjustment
to convey approximately 0.4 hectares (0.98 acres) from the subject property
to the neighbouring commercial lot being 5219 Highway 11 North, 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 5219 Highway 11 North and
that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act
apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject
lands;
Page 4 of 7
Page 6 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
6. That the applicant apply for and obtain a rezoning
Defeated.
CA090521 -07
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional
approval to Consent Application 2009 -B -13, to permit a boundary adjustment
to convey approximately 0.4 hectares (0.98 acres) from the subject property
to the neighbouring commercial lot being 5219 Highway 11 North, 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 5219 Highway 11 North and
that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act
apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject
lands;
3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
6. That the applicant apply for a rezoning.
Carried.
Page 5 of 7
Page 7 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
d) 2009 -B -14 (Beaton)
Part of Lot 15, Concession 1, Plan 51 R -29496
Boundary adjustment to enhance lands of 336 Horseshoe Valley Road East.
Mr. Bill Beaton, applicant, was present.
CA090521 -08
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Webster
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional
approval to Consent Application 2009 -B -14, to permit a boundary adjustment
to convey approximately 0.2 hectares (0.49 acres) from the subject property
to the neighbouring residential lot being 336 Horseshoe Valley Road East,
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 336 Horseshoe Valley Road
East and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the
Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the
subject lands;
3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands
and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title;
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
Carried.
Page 6 of 7
Page 8 of 205
Agenda Item # 4a) - Minutes of May 21, 2009.
Committee of Adjustment minutes of May 21, 2009.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
a) Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner /Secretary Treasurer, verbal
update, re: OMB Appeal, 2008 -A -51 (Gannon).
CA090521 -09
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken
It is recommended that the verbal update presented by Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner /Secretary Treasurer re: OMB Appeal, 2008 -A -51
(Gannon), be received.
Carried.
7. NEXT MEETING DATE
June 18, 2009.
8. ADJOURNMENT
a) Motion to adjourn.
r Anan1;,?1 -1 n
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Aiken
It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 11:10 a.m.
Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer Michelle Lynch, Chair
Carried.
Page 7 of 7
Page 9 of 205
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead) 93 Shoreline Drive,...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
P.tuJ He.i[a,Q�� P_..ci�in� F��r�rc
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -10
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
(Theodore and Susan Lunstead)
93 Shoreline Drive, Part of Lot 11
and 12, Plan 640A and Part 1 on
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 004 -4500
51 R -8107
D13 -39335
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
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 that the dwelling be located no closer than 15
metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe;
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and
sketches submitted and approved by the Committee;
3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority, if applicable
4. That the applicant install a swale along the west property boundary line to the satisfaction of
the Township;
5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only
after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act
R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to consider Variance Application 2009 -A -10, for relief from the
Township's Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to the required setback for a structure from the
Average High Water Mark of Lake Simcoe.
Development Services
Application No. 2009 -A -10
Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Page 1 of 4
Page 10 of 205
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead) 93 Shoreline Drive....
ANALYSIS.
The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling. The applicant is requesting relief
from Section 5.31 "Setback from average high water mark of Lake Simcoe":
Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, no building, or structure or with the exception of
boathouses and pumphouses shall be located within 20 metres (65.6 feet) of the average high water
mark of Lake Simcoe or 15 metres (49.2 feet) from the average high water mark of Bass Lake.
Required Propose
Setback to Lake Simcoe 20 metres 15 metres
FINANCIAL.
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the 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 of this predominantly residential area.
• To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline.
The requested variance for the proposed dwelling would appear to maintain the character of the
shoreline residential area, as dwellings are a permitted use in the shoreline designation. Therefore,
the variances would conform to the general intent of the policies contained in the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law?
The subject lot is currently zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The primary purpose of the setback
requirement from Lake Simcoe is to protect the natural features of the shoreline area in general, and
the immediate shoreline of the subject property. In assessing the issue of conformity with the Zoning
By-law, the proposed dwelling should not detract from the overall character of the lot and surrounding
natural features. One of the purposes of regulating structures from being built within the 20 metres
from the average High Water Mark of Lake Simcoe, is to maintain and enhance the ecological
integrity of the natural heritage system, to ensure that development does not occur on lands that are
unstable or susceptible to flooding and to ensure that development does not occur on hazardous
slopes. When a site inspection was done by Planning staff and LSRCA, it was noted that this
increase setback from Lake Simcoe would not have a negative effect on the ecological integrity of the
shoreline. It was also revealed there were mature trees along the interior property line and towards
the front of the property. This tree vegetation would provide an adequate buffer between the
proposed dwelling and the neighbouring dwellings. When reviewing the surrounding residences in the
area, there were many dwellings that were located within the required 20 metre setback from the
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-10 Page 2 of 4
Page 11 of 205
Agenda Item # 58)-2009-A-1 0 (Theodore and Susan LuOSte@d) 93 Shoreline Drive....
average high watermark of Lake Simooe. With the applicant proposing toincrease the setback from
the average high vvaternlarkf[oOmthecurreDiSituabODOf6OnetraSbotheppopOGed15rn8tneS.
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?
The proposed dwelling should provide for 8 form CJ development that is suitable and consistent with
the surrounding area. The proposed variance will provide for the construction Uf8 dwelling and will
continue to maintain the shoreline character of the area. The existing dwelling is currently located
approximately metres from the average high water mark. The applicant is proposing that the new
dwelling be located 15 metres from the 8m9rGg8 high water mark. There are also two accessory
buildings that are not in compliance with the Bv-|Gvv, that the applicant has indicated they will remove
if the Committee grants the requested variance for the dwelling.
Even though, the proposed dwelling will still not meet the required setback from Lake Simcoe, the
applicant is removing a non compliant structure and bringing the proposed dwelling closer to
compliance and making development desirable on the lot. Due 10 the topography of the lot and the
chosen location Dfthe septic system, the applicant is limited in possible areas where to develop. It is
therefore concluded that the proposed dwelling is appropriate for the development on the lot.
Is the variance minor?
CN the basis that the proposal io reasonable and would not appear b] adversely affect bJthe
surrounding properties, and that this type of development is a common feature in the shoreline area
and will not have a negative impact on privacy or access for either the subject or surrounding
properties, the proposed variance iS considered k)heminor.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department- Swale required along west property boundary
Bui|dingDepartment- NnCommente
EngineeringDepadmgnt — NoConmarna
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority- No Objection(formal comments to follow)
1. Location Map
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2009-A-10, being an application to
consider the construction of a dwelling within the required setback from the average high water mark
appears to meet the tests of the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted:
Ste n Farquharson, B.UFlPL
Intermediate Planner
Reviewed by:
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-10 Page 3 of 4
Page 12Of205
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead) 93 Shoreline Drive
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -10 (Lu nstead)
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-10 Page 4 of 4
Page 13 of 205
2
E
Sj
J
0
0 �
z
W
� r
J
1
tl $I al °I3
C
5! r
fL " -I^
e
Y �
s
4 m
2
Q
F> 4
E (�
aY �� ej
=KZ
", S
W Z
2 W
a06�y
z
F Z
�um�a
J
W FUy
woZr y lM--
wz
�.F40w
LO
0
N
O
N
s
m�
W��
� N
2 � Q
Cr G % D •
,J W
o�_j C)
D
a �
�I
�I e
-L
Y
e I
� a
s
f{ w @4 w
i
a
Z
gp0
gK2
Fs
W
°o m
W
Fm2
Q a
�msa
T
QFEUF�N
Z�50�
LO
0
N
O
LO
a)
2
e
� E
E
][ 2
2
iL Ni LILL OQ a o p¢ m pg uOa Ct
z 11M ONO
�e�
Y S� G b3 y b� ffi W N
w
f
Q P fiF. �' ggi
a
a 41� 63
V
0
N
O
, r
1 Y-
Lp,
fly
Ott.
Ixy, �1t� •T � Y _ 1 •d
1L W et '
Y `e y1 i I
W-4 Air-
4
-xm-7
14�
rwq
A
IFl Li
xe f y � •pa
• is ? �'. ® ^,•. 4 t etc., �e �.�
w 1
r � ' - "tiv�ti� � e , '`" - ►•. ,fir+',. , �
r
77 '
,� _ � ,:.r , dr.: '�'• � * � •
t `, 11 +,^ , �G`•'� f�.;`tfr'; a ,�� � ..�'},�.. . i t� '. .a�ii.'J,�Ik, ' c ' '` `;
!�
} ; .maxp 1 • if 1 • d !,.• ��+!!! ,
;.� °` � � ''� �, `,�k•C� i 1 .L, � (�•,� + •+ X79' \t++' ,�yl �. ' 4� �
,''•:, ' .,�' � r 4' .}��'��' .• 7! Sic, jr "� Frr ���� ' �'
- .r , .?F � � r -llril ij a tt° t v I r t ••' L` v t - ` � , � i?....'. r � �
ZF
If .;
r
Ow
y y a t 1 ^ •Y
� P � fit.. �� '` �tp�i tj ;� •���" + � 7�'
. � '- � •,. '�; 11 to Y , Il
e r
•. 1
r
t
�� ► �; Y1- I 1.
. . . _
y ,
4
rV 4�»
a,
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
N
O1
p4t
r ol
it
it litr
' IT
As.
it
A' � � .�� �` ' 1 i3h � i "t '{;`� 11 4 fit `'•'i • �y .
4L
fill
fl
0
LO
0
N
4-
O
C7
N
N
O1
r.
T
lk
4k
%
jf.
AG -
' -} e .i u `'r C�,O' "rly �6��i:�JN:•1.Mi
ia 1:
�h ,v
! aw 1
a
r{�
evc
�f <t ryia ._�� M'3.•lu
r °It •'' � �, .{ j it' j •
Ib ^ly,.
!f 'p,r • °pia
.��r,�•,:g•i•
:^r K�"ruk
?I
ILA ,'}'t -[ iW '� �`�'�1�
W
•
L s
.iaf� �.
�, "i VI
tv •r
' f�` •� �F4,. S� �"
a,t'r ��•
�h ,v
! aw 1
F
1 d
t �
s
t.
a
evc
�f <t ryia ._�� M'3.•lu
r °It •'' � �, .{ j it' j •
Ib ^ly,.
tAt 4F
T l:it J(yty
J � •:•r
?I
ILA ,'}'t -[ iW '� �`�'�1�
r ti !� �'
•
v t.. " S . Not, .
rlY
t
tft. to e•�it • t 5r
•'�t� i
�,
�
—7�t tt
y
•
It 1 :4
c
•
a +. h�� � S ,t
r, i --
F
1 d
t �
s
t.
a
t
1
Y
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead) 93 Shoreline Drive
NMEMI=
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner,
Township of Oro Medonte.
We are forwarding this letter urith regard to the Application for Minor
Variance posted at 93 Shoreline Drive, Oro Medonte, Lot 11 & 12 Plan
N# 64oA Part I (RP-SIR-8107). It is our understanding that the
meeting with the Committee of Adjustments regarding this
application will be held on June 18, 2009. We look forward to an
invitation to attend this meeting, as we are adjacent property owners.
We would like to bring to your attention the fact that the property
named in the application currently contains a structure which
encroaches on our property. We are forwarding a copy of the most
recent survey completed and stamped by Dearden and Stanton Ltd.
which clearly outlines the encroachment for your perusal. We have
highlighted the area of concern on the copy of the survey.
We appreciate you taking the time to review this information. Should
you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at 705-
325 -7640 or tpcgsy)r�oers.,com
mzm�
Todd and Paulyne Casselman
2 Wilson Street
Hawkestone, Ontario
Page 26 of 205
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009 -A -10 (Theodore and Susan Lunstead) 93 Shoreline Drive....
Z
o 0 z
ID
0
s.
_O 6
I - �q� .1 � Cc 1=4 ti
z -�Z0
z
--3
5
wM 5�
-o
z
,cl x
O
> JLj
x
N
FOCH AVENUE (REGISTERED PV 64M) W
M
v---- ------- - ------- :T-
Page 27 of 205
oil
-14
arm-
tz)
13
>z
2 p
0
co iz
> .3 0
Z
Page 27 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
P -d H- yr, F- -q F--
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -11
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
Andrew and Claudia Geen
Lots 2, Plan 629
3 Nelson Street
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346 -010- 005 -03960
D10 -39333
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
That the detached accessory building, notwithstanding Section 5.1.3 a) and d) and Section
5.1.5, otherwise meet with all other provisions for detached accessory buildings;
2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the detached garage be located no closer than
4.2 metres from the front property line; and that the detached garage be setback no closer than
0.2 metres from the interior side lot line;
3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals, if required, from the Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation Authority;
4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only
after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning
Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located on Nelson Street on the west side of Bass Line, having 15.2 metres of
frontage on Nelson Street, 18 metres of frontage on Bass Lake, a lot depth of approximately 45
metres, and a lot area of 0.08 hectares. The applicant is proposing to construct a 52.0 square metre
detached accessory structure, proposed to be setback 4.2 metres from the front lot line, and 0.2
metres from the interior side lot line, which will also place the accessory building over the allowable
5% lot coverage. The subject property currently contains a 128 square metre single detached
dwelling and a 7 square metre shed located in front of the dwelling.
Development Services
Application No. 2009 -A -11
Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Page 1 of 5
Page 28 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
ANALYSIS.
The purpose of variance application 2009 -A -11 is to construct a detached accessory building (2 car
garage), to have an area of 52.0 square metres. The applicant is requesting the following relief from
Zoning By -law 97 -95:
Section 5.1.3 Permitted locations for detached accessory buildings and structures in all
zones
a) Not be located in the front yard, Notwithstanding this provision, a detached private garage
is permitted in the front yard of a lot that abuts Lake Simcoe ... provided it is set back a
minimum distance equal to the required front yard for the main building from the front lot
line (being 7.5 metres in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone) PROPOSED to be located
4.2 metres from the front tot tine.
2. Section 5.1.3 Permitted locations for detached accessory buildings and structures in all
zones
d) Be set back a minimum distance of 2.0 metres from the interior side lot line, PROPOSED
to be located 0.2 metres from the side lot line.
3. Section 5.1.5 Maximum lot coverage
The maximum lot coverage of all detached accessory buildings and structures on a lot excluding
boathouses is 5 percent. PROPOSED lot coverage is approximateiv 7.9 %.
I FINANCIAL: I
Not applicable.
POLICIES /LEGISLATION:
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated "Shoreline" by the Official Plan. Permitted uses within the Shoreline
designation include "low density residential uses, small scale commercial uses etc" As the
application to construct a detached garage accessory to a residential dwelling constitutes a permitted
use, the proposed variance is deemed to conform to the intent of the Official Plan.
On this basis, the application is considered to be appropriate and generally conforms to the Official
Plan.
Does the variance comply to the general intent of the Zoning By -law?
The application seeks to reduce the required front yard setback from 7.5 metres to 4.2 metres, and
the interior side yard setback from 2 metres to 0.2 metres and increase the lot coverage from 5% to
7.9 %. The purpose of the front yard setback is to ensure that adequate distance exists between the
traveled portion of the roadway and structures, and for the purpose of ensuring space for adequate
on -site parking. The purpose of the side yard setback is to provide a degree of buffering between
properties for privacy, and to provide access to the rear of both the accessory and primary structures
on the property.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -11 Page 2 of 5
Page 29 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h\-2009-A-1 1 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
VVhi|g the proposed garage would be located closer tothe front and side kd line than permitted, the
reduction in the front yard setback will still allow for adequate parking space, and buffering from the
roadway. With respect to the request for 8 reduced side yard setback, the proposed garage would
not hinder access t0the rear Ofthe dwelling, as the garage is proposed to be located well ahead of
the existing home in the front portion of the lot. Regarding phvmoy, the neighbouring dwelling to the
east has an existing garage that is to be blocked by existing vegetation that will provide a degree of
buffer from the proposed garage, and not likely create 8 visual hindrance or otherwise impact on
privacy.
The request to construct a52 square metre accessory building would have the lot coverage increase
from the required 5%toO.7%.The applicant currently has an accessory building on the property with
a size of 7 square metres, which would bring the proposed lot coverage to 7.3%. The purpose of the
lot coverage is to ensure that the lot is not over developed. Due to the size of the lot the applicant is
|inlibad on the size and location that accessory buildings can b8. In addition, aside from the proposed
front and side y8nj setbacks and lot coverage, the garage vvnu|d otherwise comply with all other
provisions for accessory structures aa required in the Zoning By-law. As such, the variance h]permit
a reduction in the front and aide yard setbacks and increase lot coverage mxau|d therefore maintain
the general intent mfthe Zoning By-|8w.
Are the variances desirable for the appropriate development of the lot?
The Subject property is 8 relatively n8rn]vv and ah8|lovv residential lot, as is the typical historical
pattern of lakefront development along Bass Lake. Asa result of the site inspection, it was noted that
the dwelling on the subject lands and neighbouring properties are ggn9ns|k/ setback further into the
property than in other typical residential zones; this rof|gcba the historical residential development
along the sho,e|ine, vvhena many dwellings are oriented to Bass Lake, vvhens the front yards in fact
serve as "rear yands'', containing vehicle parking and accessory structures such as garages and
storage sheds. For this reason, the Zoning By-law permits accessory structures tobo located infront
of the primary permitted use ufthe pvoporty, to reflect the orientation of such structures hzthe Lake.
A survey of surrounding properties was taken, emphasizing garages that appeared not to comply with
the front yard setback. There were five detached accessory garages noted east and west nfthe
subject |anda, having front yard setbacks ranging from an encroachment onto Nelson Street and
Bards Beach Road a||ovvanue, up to approximately 1 metres from the front property line. The
average setback to the front lot line for detached garages on surrounding properties is approximately
3.2 metres. As suoh, the proposed variance for a4.2 metre front yard setback will maintain the
general character of development of accessory structures in the surrounding neighbourhood.
The applicant has also been in contact with the Township's Chief Building Official in terms of the
location of the septic oys&ann On the subject lands. The applicant has exposed his septic location in
the front yard which limits the garage from being located further away from the interior lot line on the
east side. The proposed garage is in compliance with the maximum allowable size under the zoning
By-law. The proposed size is in keeping with the shoreline residential area. The NottavvasagaVa||ey
Conservation Authority has reviewed the application and has indicated that they have no objection to
the proposed garage. The proposed ganagg, despite being proposed closer to the front and side lot
line, would otherwise not create a visual or privacy concern for the neighbouring dwelling to the east.
As such, the variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the lot.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18,2009
Application No. 2009-A-1 1 Page 3 of 5
Page 30 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
Are the variances minor?
On the basis that the proposed garage constitutes a permitted use, and will otherwise maintain the
intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is in keeping with the general character of the
surrounding residential neighbourhood, the requested variances are deemed to be minor.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department-
Building Department-
Engineering Department —
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority- No Objection
I ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule #1- Location Map
I CONCLUSION:
It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that variance application 2009 -A -11 satisfies the test of
the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted:
Larquharson, B.URPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009 -A -11
Reviewed by:
Glenn White
Manager, Planning Services
Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Page 4 of 5
Page 31 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -11 (Geen)
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -11 Page 5 of 5
Page 32 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
,1.111...
.. .. ,
PIN 58531- 0451
zn 3q 16, rrfHO�
18,26
FP O. Ia 8.4 DDS AP Pfay ��•24(RP) Ib11p
1 �t
Y
1 M n FP I LTi91FP
Tlli(
CONC
4.01
FEET 2!I
eox -Ly
u£
o�
jet
Y•.
4.25 iNG •in R � piN 5853 - 0�
2 STOREY
m
1,p051D1N0 {�
1 O,RETE gEO0<
CON T lON �ow/N Law FEh51r
Fq�NOA
PiN/58531. 0271 ✓ �.r
6 A 4 .46
4.31 I DECK
FP 0. YS
a � 2
.. PSN 5g53y 027
.i
`dP,
�N85' 22' 30_•E _
N 18.02 —
�.
— Ee /
PIN 58531- 0505
PRESENT WATER'S EDGE
L E G E
■ FOUND
O PLANTED
SIB STANDARD IR(
IB
B IRONTBARf
INST. INSTRUMENT
NI NOT IOENTIF]
RP REGISTERED F
FO , N FOUNDATION
Pi O&SCANN
PL
-;
P2 0 &S PLAN C -f
Page 33 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
-
BYL E ;Ei(3,U DLAI!
PIN 58531— 0451
_ 18FH ! r
[ C} I ('25 �'ti,�ARTNp�5����
FP O. is •45'0 Hp Ptefa 13.31 (RP) ,01 "vifcA CjF f^_l�[�CiRSy'-
TANG Y
- COtIC
1 4.f1 �E� o,am srcE { s�
1 ZOf —`7 _
P� F0 x
1
1 4.00 df „/� q
i4 N , 3c 11�OCRJ B
U N 1� f 1S.90 5 :.' i
F ; ; fs .sync —roWK .
4.25 DING C r plN 5g53Y 02
2 StOftEY � °�
1 1,OG5,v1NG fF
1 OOZE g1,OCK
aOWIN Z1AK FL
.. ` Fpl)NOATI
PIN,5g5j
'�iiJJA 4 4b
4 31 Ir DEC(-
FP O. JJ
i
ri p1N, 58531' p27�
n
t0 1
18.02
r 0'
PIN 58531— 0505
PRESENT WATER'S EDGE
INS
L E G E
■ FOUND
D PLANTED
SIB STANDARD IRf
SSIS SHORT STANDI
IB IRON BAR
M MEASURED
INST. INSTRUMENT
NI NOT IDENTIFI
RP REGISTERED F
FD'N FOUNDATION
FP FENCE POST
PS O&S PLAN C-'
P2 DFS PLAN C -F
Page 34 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
F'age 3b of 20b
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
Page 36 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
R.R. #2
1 Nelson Grove
Orillia, ON L3 V 6112
9 May 2009
Oro Medonte Planning Department
SUBJECT: GEEN MINOR VARIANCE, 3 NELSON GROVE
Dear Sir/Madam:
Regarding the above variance request by our neighbours, Andy and Claudia Geen, we
have no objections to them building their garage which requires a minor variance.
Yours truly
,n
Mrs. Elaine Hallett
Page 37 of 205
4 Ii \Li
ly
N
' . 411,
YJ
Y Y
r� } _ .. rla.•
Y #1
t G
Y, n
ell . a[
r n ?. 'jji4l, �ir"P.Vr � ( I • S 1 r � P �c�{
1r R
t ' y' yyµ •� t(ti � w(� 'd' •1 r��� T ,d �,r�' ' , y i ' dr �
+:
Y ,
ff,it f � •1 -0P t _
¢6
t�('�v t ��� �Q I�. ;l� V/ � � ��''�'�' t✓' Trig !�.
3' 17rY �'Z � ��{�i ��li y��i ���i�'��Y�� l� � ! �/ � � ! •� ,:�
<} tr
R t� �• , � •1 f
r ��� L'fl�i" �j '} iii777iff qg / rte• "� � �t �, �,• 41' � 1
Ile .I� r
fit
, d
g F7 At
r fj�e7T' Gq ii IIh,�
pp
a,,��, ,����•+ ���� f ri� -{ 1,1r. it. i {'A1/. � 1 1 •t 'I�r � } / t l� / �.�r � JJJ, 4� }'i��P,
Lp
Af
? �'f f Ety ,.rt�(�.� '�6�, � rf Y (�� �.� i '' ! 4 . � II•y� lr ub -,
i
rf 4k •
It
f �t • Y !� ti'sr
if
{�✓
4L
r r-
n. F n , • Ira
rl
�Proposed Interior Side Yarl
4.;
�'' . µ, _ ' _ "` .-� • .. ` mil, 4 �. °
IP
ell
r' i
SA
Lilt� S � - a e � � � . j •;�i
.F
� .K •�"�• nFe, ' '� lie` ` <',
o � �•.. ;', ��y' ^� - .7i�'iM fit. • . P -.
!T'
Far
.,,
i
,i'M1 '..ltJ Sd r
jr. �*
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
N
O1
v
P'
�, ti
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
r
H
Y
r ..
PL
P�
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian
R.R. 42
1 Nelson Grove
Orillia, ON 1-3 V 6142
9 May 2009
Oro Medonte Planning Department
SUBJECT: GEEN MINOR VARIANCE, 3 NELSON GROVE
Dear Sir/Madam:
Regarding the above variance request by our neighbours, Andy and Claudia Geen, we
have no objections to them building their garage which requires a minor variance.
Yours truly
Mrs. Elaine Hallett
Page 46 of 205
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009 -A -11 (Andrew and Claudia Geen) 3 Nelson Street Varian...
� p5AGq�
Ort
June 1, 2009
' ECEIV D
JUN 0 4 2009
ORO- MEDONTE
TnMm� Hie
Steven Farquharson, Secretary- Treasurer
Member Committee of Adjustment
Municipalities Township of Oro - Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Adjala- Fosorontio Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0
Amaranth
Barrie Dear Mr, Farquharson;
The Blne Mountains Re: Application for Minor Variance 2009 -A -11 (teen)
Rradtord -West Gwiaimhury 3 Nelson Street, Part Lot 3, Concession 14
aearviev Township of Oro - Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro)
Con ingwood
Essa
Innistll
Meiancthon
Mono
Mulmur
New Tecumseth
Oro- Medonte
Grey Highlands
Shelhon w
Springxvater
VVasaga Beach
Watershed
Counties
$irncoe
Dutferin
G rev
Member of
It1�
Conservation
ONTAaR10
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this
application for minor variance and based upon our policies under the
Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to its approval.
We advise the property is under the regulatory jurisdiction of the NVCA due
to the proximity of Bass Lake. A permit (or clearance) is therefore required
under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to any development.
Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward
a copy of any decision.
Sincerely,
r
Tim Salkeld
Resource Planner
Conserving our Healthy Waters
NOTTAWA.SAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTIIORITY Centre for Conservation
John Hix Conservation Administration Centre - Tiffin Conservation Area WH 8th Line - Utopia, On LOM iTO
Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705,4242115 = Web: www.nvca.on.ca Email: adnnrPrvca.on.ca
Page 47 of 205
h�nsh y
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009 -A -12 (Matthew McCowan) 152 Lakeshore Drive West
Varia...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -12
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
(Matthew McCowan)
152 Lakeshore Road West, Plan
967, Lot 84 (Former Township of
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346 - 010- 009 -33000
Oro)
D13 -39337
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by pinning the footings and confirming that the proposed addition does
not extend into the side yard further than the existing building,
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 notwithstanding Section 5.16.1b) of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the addition to the single family
dwelling will otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions for such structures as
prescribed by Zoning By -law 97 -95;
4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only
after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning
Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to consider Variance Application 2009 -A -12, for relief from the
Township's Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to increasing the amount of floor area or
volume in a required yard of a non - complying building.
It should be noted that the Notice of Hearing was revised. The original Notice mistakenly reported the
subject land as zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The subject lands are zoned Residential One (R1).
The Notice listed the required setback as 3m, however the side yard setback in the R1 zone is 2.5m.
Therefore the relief requested is actually less than originally reported. The sketch attached to the
Notice was accurate and has not changed. The requested relief from Section 5.16.1 b) of the By -law
was correctly listed and has not changed. The Notice was revised and re- circulated within the
prescribed time frame.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -12 Page 1 of 6
Page 48 of 205
Agenda Item # 5x\-2009-A-12(Matthew MCCOVV8O)152 Lakeshore Drive West
ANALYSIS: I
The applicant is proposing to construct an addition to a single detached dwelling. Currently the dwelling
does not meet the required side yard setback for an interior side yard. The Residential One (Rl) Zone
requires 2.5m from the side lot line and the dwelling is approximately 2m from the lot line. The building
is deemed tobenOn'CO[nplyiDg.
The applicant is proposing an addition to the dwelling with the existing setback and is therefore
requesting relief from Section 5.18.1b of Zoning By-law 97-95. 8eCtkJO 5.16.1b "Non Complying
Buildings/Structures" requires that the enlargement, repair, [ep|8C8rDe[t or renovation Of 8 non-
complying building or structure does not increase the amount of floor area or volume in a required yard.
As the proposed addition will increase the floor area in the side yard, which does not meet the By-law
requirement, a variance i8required.
Not applicable.
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated Shoreline i0 the Official Plan. Section C5.2 lists the uses permitted in the
Shoreline designation, single detached dwellings are permitted. Additions hoexisting permitted uses
are permitted in the Shoreline designation.
The objectives of the Official Plan for the Shoreline designation are 0o maintain the existing character
of the anau, podmot natural features of the shoreline and ensure that existing development is
appropriately serviced. The proposal before the Committee will maintain the g»jadng character of the
area aethe use is residential. The surrounding land uses are also residential dwellings on private
services. This proposal does not affect any natural features, nor does it affect the shoreline as it is not
a water lot. The lot is appropriately serviced for the existing use. The size and capacity of the septic
system will be confirmed a1 the building permit stage.
On this basis the proposal is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By4aw?
The subject property is zoned Residential One (R1). The R1Zone permits single detached dwellings.
The location of the proposed addition vvOu|d comply with the mnininnUrn required setbacks for the front
and rear yards of 7.5m each. The renovated dwelling will have a front yard setback of 12.7m and a
rear yard setback of 18.8m. The proposed addition is also in compliance with the required maximum
height of11m;itio approximately 3.9m.
It is the intent and purpose of Zoning to ensure the safe and orderly development of land in
municipalities. SpeuiDua||y, as it relates to this pnzouea|, it is the opinion of Staff that vvki|e the
situation of non-compliance will be increased, it will not result in an undesirable situation. There is an
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-12 Page 2 of 6
Page 49 of 205
Agenda Item # 5x\-2009-A-12(Matthew MCCOVV8O)152 Lakeshore Drive West
existing hedge between the neighbouring property and the existing building which acts as a buffer
between the buildings.
In obtaining relief from Section 5.16.1b) the applicant is, in effect, reducing the required Side yard for
8 dwelling. The intent of side yards is t0 ensure there is access to the near yard and that the
neighbouring properties are not negatively impacted. AS previously mentioned there is an existing
cedar hedge row which can act @s a buffer. Also the entire east side of the property remains open for
access tO the rear yard.
Notwithstanding, Section 5.16.1 b), the proposed addition meets the Zoning By-law provisions.
Therefore, the variance is considered hU comply with the general intent nfthe Zoning By-law.
Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of&he lot?
An addition tO8single detached dwelling unit is considered desirable development eS residential
uses are permitted by the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law.
The variance ia appropriate to permit the proposed development 8Sthe addition \ain keeping with the
existing character Ofthe area, the |0t is appropriately Semkzed' and it should not infringe on the
neighbouring property.
On this basis, the proposal ia considered appropriate for the desirable development cf the subject lot.
Is the variance minor?
As this application should not adversely affect the character ofthe surrounding area, the proposed
variance ia considered tubeminor.
Public Works Department
Building Department
Engineering Department
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2009-A-12, being an application to
permit an increase of floor area in the required yard of a non-complying building, appears to meet the
tests of the Planning Act.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-12 Page 3 of 6
Page 50 of 205
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009 -A -12 (Matthew McCowan) 152 Lakeshore Drive West
Varia...
Respectfully submitted:
I "I
V
'Ali b",
Meghan Keelan
Planner
Reviewed by:
t
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-12 Page 4 of 6
Page 51 of 205
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009 -A -12 (Matthew McCowan) 152 Lakeshore Drive West
Varia...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -12 (McCowan)
SCE
fr
t C�1v�i+iIRYC4UF�T_ /
BLS
E
S§CR RO
LAKE SR0C E
®SUBJECT LANDS
152 LAKESHORE ROAD IA EST
9 15 30 60 90 120
P�1et�rs
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -12 Page 5 of 6
Page 52 of 205
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009 -A -12 (Matthew McCowan) 152 Lakeshore Drive West
Varia...
Page 53 of 205
SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT
(PART 2) REPORT SUMMARY
Description of Land
ALL OF LOT 84, REGISTERED PLAN 967, GEOGRAPHIC
TOWNSHIP OF ORO, TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONT'E
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
Registered easements andla Ri ht- s
NONE
Compliance with Municipal Zoning -Laws
Ndnwbffd by this Report
Additional Remarks
NOTE LOCATION OF RAIL FENCE
THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED FOR MATT MCCOWAN /
AND THE UNDERSIGNED ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY
FOR USE BY OTHER PARTIES.
SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT
(PART 1) PLAN OF ALL OF
LOT 84
REGISTERED PLAN 967
GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF ORO
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
5 0 5 10 15 tom
SCALE = 1:250
DINO R.S. ASTRI, O.L.S.
LOT 120 API) LOST 119 � ^!,P•6N56556 -0163 -p
P.LN 56558 -0164 0 "' 964 4700 wuL ¢ ( SPf) RML FDIDE � LDT 118
'1` ALN 58558 -0161
M(IOIS)
DOS , REGISTER amDw PC��ea, 7 LEGEND
ti > ^� a ■ DENOTES FOUND SURVEY MONUMENT
1 o w' C o
4
QjN
Z
vE
Y
�ry
iF-
0
1(
'00
q V.J`I
A R
7
�p T'
r-
0
TBM
—I TOP IB =223.51
00
N 16(7035)1(30.46 Pt) ;
30.47 .n
A0
awE
'
h
SIB DENOTES STANDARD IRON BAR
tiryry
$q M1`4 LOT 84
7
IB DENOTES IRON BAR
DRIVEWAY
T
2ryh
ry
n
_ MT DENOTES WITNESS
$ X X DENOTES FENCING
P*D
° 7 ryh
ti
asoEC
"f�
c $ (1035) DENOTES R. WELSMAN, O.L.S.
ry M1
ryh
oP
(1841) DENOTES P. RAIKES, O.L.S.
y
e.0
f 3 (P1) DENOTES REGISTERED PLAN 967
e
b
D.SCCN
r
0
�ry
00
00
ry
0 M1
ryy
ELEVATIONS
D
PlN 56558 -0119
(60.96 PI)
D
n9DEC
ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE GEODETIC AND
(30.48 Pt)
30.47
ego,
(152.40 PI)
Qo
r ARE DERIVED FROM MNR VERTICAL CONTROL
QMONUMENT 001673109 HAVING AN ELEVATION
ro
ry ryyry
hh �o
2
�" OF 220.21m.
elate
,� °ry
h-'
0h
e
LOCAL MM IS TOP OF IB AT SOUTH WEST CORNER
tazt
I OO/OF LOT 84 HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 223.51m.
4
�
O V '
I STY.
METAL SIDED DAFLUNG
rY j
METAL CAD GARAGE
Nn 192
2
'0
0 00 0°
,+V. mm -`�M1'
t ry
7h
ryh 14 . 69 D79EC�
D.eDEC � M1^,'
2
9�' 6
Chi_ 'y0
0.40*
ry�hh'
(30. P
346 I) � � � (IMIOP t sm
N49'4D'00 "E f h� °
, (PROP
56558 -0068 .a
EDGE OF SHODUIER
M1 ry, EDGE OF PAVFIIFNT ry� M1 ry s LAKE VIEW VIEW BOULEVARD BY R.P. 967) ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO
ry�� ry�"0 LAND SURVEYORS
OENTREUNE ROAD PLAN SUBMISSION FORM
1721803
KNOWN AS LAKESHORE ROAD WEST
BEARING NOTE METRIC
BEARINGS ARE ASTRONOMIC AND ARE REFERRED TO THE DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND TIRS PLAN IS NOT VAUD AN EMBOSSED
NORTHERLY LIMIT OF LAKE VIEW BOULEVARD (NOW KNOWN AS CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048. D OiirNALL Y
ISSUED eY THE SURVEYOR
LAKESHORE ROAD WEST) AS SHOWN ON REGISTERED PLAN 967 m uttadmn .nm
HAVING A BEARING OF N49'40'00'E. (E)COPYRIGHT 2009 ftAWatlon ID26. S--U. 29(3).
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE DING ASTRI
I CERTIFY THAT.
1) THIS SURVEY AND PLAN ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS SURVEYING LTD.
ACT, THE SURVEYORS ACT AND THE REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THEM. I m
Lo
O
N
0
^o
W
LL
7
DRIVEWAY
ry��
Pry
N�
O1
asoEC
D
0
r
0
00
00
m
�ry
ryy
D
ry7.
(60.96 PI)
D
n9DEC
e: SET)
M1 ;fi0.92
(30.48 Pt)
30.47
(152.40 PI)
x
8(10]9) 9e(tO39)
EDGE OF SHODUIER
M1 ry, EDGE OF PAVFIIFNT ry� M1 ry s LAKE VIEW VIEW BOULEVARD BY R.P. 967) ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO
ry�� ry�"0 LAND SURVEYORS
OENTREUNE ROAD PLAN SUBMISSION FORM
1721803
KNOWN AS LAKESHORE ROAD WEST
BEARING NOTE METRIC
BEARINGS ARE ASTRONOMIC AND ARE REFERRED TO THE DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND TIRS PLAN IS NOT VAUD AN EMBOSSED
NORTHERLY LIMIT OF LAKE VIEW BOULEVARD (NOW KNOWN AS CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048. D OiirNALL Y
ISSUED eY THE SURVEYOR
LAKESHORE ROAD WEST) AS SHOWN ON REGISTERED PLAN 967 m uttadmn .nm
HAVING A BEARING OF N49'40'00'E. (E)COPYRIGHT 2009 ftAWatlon ID26. S--U. 29(3).
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE DING ASTRI
I CERTIFY THAT.
1) THIS SURVEY AND PLAN ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS SURVEYING LTD.
ACT, THE SURVEYORS ACT AND THE REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THEM. I m
Lo
O
N
0
^o
W
LL
LO
O
N
0
LO
LO
¢
2
n
�
k
t
!«
LO
O
N
0
LO
LO
¢
2
n
�
LO
0
N
4-
O
LO
N
O1
FNI_ Aj
v h F
� o I•
1
1 0
I I I
--
�
LO
0
N
O
ti
LO
N
c>3
M
M
w
3— 4 ,
Al
F,9i
LO
O
N
O
co
LO
M
0
'Q1 ?i to
- 4
:y
T�' Y 6 Dili' 3 z ,
w �
3 n iD ��'� 'I • � ial ,qp Y N.
c Q 6 M tyi
iE
I v
000y� n b
M
3C�
N o�
1 ,
i
�v;41 driZa
q��roo��a�r n'cKCVyrn��air�ri�r.�
q,�a000V�r.
LO
O
N
O
LO
�� wry ' I �•- , � . • V ." � � -.i' ��-
'' ��%to�Rear of Built Ong -Loca #ions
A
rte'= ! =--- -� '��U, ^.f.►� ���V O
l u l 1,
--
' r �
t
L1lliiii "�iflY , f a
fi, r)a e` +a d�'�4tn' ti+iY� i t
Wn-
moll.
,• *i ;, ��S.ttak::ti rapF{�f+'�14�i �4!t
vr} r fxs��`Pi'14p•iyY'�f#'`'{i\ "t' -.¢tr N; eti i` , `��" - j G ,,{ •! r14'
r [t -'^aFr �"' "k S'rftiic•i�,3.� t'y�.�'J' rI I .. r. J', {I' .%
etra r H,'F�J - r e ��� 7 "t��(5,�1• j- vY.ri••"T' / ?� f�+ � �t F` 1
{r let
0.
yc r'A`\•`j -i ,t ry {[ ru/ �a t. .0 yr •y,• I �.,� 1 r�S,`� '),A' ! cc }i( �• ff+ i F
'c
.gin i h'S ( � � �s. e •+ '} a Y '43L t.
Y a r• t r.1 7 to k tt aA. ,-r r .. .( . -t.•.• Je ..,
�. %4 I;��,° �'`�� i- .a�'�,•td'a9"{� >v. � �' H� r�\q.,�y ��'V;�••�,,y +,5�.���� ,,�y�,'��ri�'.r - � n
,e- 4 I A �r 5•.. Nr,�t•CR�,M t �4�6 �, 'v4�r+'K � ��'er�3'r �r7'. ,i .�/� � -i�. ,�'e' ,YT� r �� n�.
S � -�� ryd y *la`�`�. ir� v 7`-z\ •tyrk/�ri , `�61 y�?"J,.r�a tT s''��` ¢� ^1�r � 1j r�" ' -' Prf` r ,
y t} j„ it 1F 1' .✓' !: ` ;{ "• 1��� i���j �P �r. tj' t-r' 's r rt !1 i
(i• I rf ,, ., `y7T t v +�`ir.�{i�7,� rt f',r'}r .� vJ �,p' 37r'.r ." i�v;� t'�e8' • `• �. •-,y±y�,7
t ,rf wl rA fr i,y 'ji yf� :, " •riF.ii <y 1 � v'J. -.w -7 {?r6.iY�,�
ti aiw�' rr rf r'2 rr�rz
J. i' •� "i,, �t s4 r f u, .c y, . � �V F S„y�Y
art w 1 c r' 9
Y uf�t�c'L �`°iJ�' y� v �' �•d^ _'1P:.lF ,y1 rR
s v \�,� 1.., 5yl ^r _.C,i�r` qy t,•YC rp�:r - * .r• r�a 7Y'F1 !`7..ao��r1 �`Y {' w gt 'r� '
d � � • �},P r p{ r x to rc r►?$�P 'd � c $ # r ,rti+e. " r �.." ,' r
_!4•¢ ,. r ..s�'•t� .�^ 1}�a � / }FcN�� gf•lt•r r � � � JF ^• FF". L �� _�`'.,:� -
fr^- {j r t, ias .� 9'?yF�li� J j i F, •_ f .rr"
`�+ i.r��- ���► {'` .r�l7F
_+vlrJfliA�d a r `tR.r i� ♦' a'r -r ti
� c ,..1y � � � �r
I'p �.a r. f . r j�.�if"�{•�.`�, r 1iv ...IV+- r'S,f� ,4^i L r^�, c :�-:'� - .l,.�r '.' �-` y, [• ip��
,rn. ',Y -il ✓.hr `9'Sft� - ,".r''. t. i _' rr'�f
TI
p + Y rx
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
>J
fit'• \r i Zi �.-, - � � jk :`-ri y ' ,. i } -.�> -' \ � �'/- u: ,ia �. f n
-
ri
�f. � `z !a�`~' �\y� n A �, \ r/ t'S f ♦ yY Ll�' b .;�}+t 3,���4.,
p ay / r if
�b�''e7i /t °� I 11 1♦ S \ .t?, 't•l_T 4i .+S (i .'. V i5 r ' ti- +�. 1 r7'p.
li
Irj•( Ty`� ►. vr�'1,\ `fi'. � t � r� _ •1 • ; dr k," ". ..
.. � i ; T S, n It ! t •� r �.
}� �J yH ° 4 ` .• � \� F � i ,. tf ll< 1�Y ,jl � ,i ( y I � {'r � �' `� �is
K
�� 4yr'•ri'- ,i'mpue�.'1�. i r 4 k,. ` 4�.. ' *�(_', .# �, {_
t
m '' �` ,, . t, a '� ` ,� ` •tom . .
� ~` '1� �i��l� i t t1. #� E4 � 1� ��� �L,ytr. rY-�yy�� "fsr. al .•
• � ° .'�.r Y '.th N�`� � ii � r C�ia �}e., 't "1' �Fy `4 �� ✓,rrr �` i t � - g 1
y}, ,t
• *g ��dy t(� �. t r s t t?I' �nV � f\ � r °,.. - 4. t?�
Al,
LO
0
N
4-
O
C7
N
O1
�i. pp V�h •:�ytk 3. t � I i.
rJ. .��.a.�,�' �''>s6� ¢ .t^i�'.c �=' k'J��''lr r°Sk'44�'• �;4, V/
C�
•.+. �,,R a �.3 � }t..` r ` ^,';t r ., ._ �� � ,
,. �, r'� Fix �. � r�s• ' q,
LL
- r tv,)
Vi
r r
"
�i r it f.7C
� � Y,$ ��. ,r��� �� � � r� ke t 7+ ,ry .7 v rti: \Y�lr�k'�••e• "A
�+r• �, .t A. � f,�- +'i1�rR4 `. } �. F �. F�� , �, �, .,�, t. ,r aft �.k•.
a
4 _e
rac, ♦�j1
v I�
fti�
`gip �i`i ���+ �r•A ' � -t
���� .��+ � ��% a:. is +�1�• � �'
It
f f 1rv..y
,r•: •9/
LL
LL
�11�! IBS ,r * \�• 4�T � r�S'y , _ ? ..y a..�, =" O <-
Old,
INN�. y
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
-Ibenuhp of .
P1 Ffr.11 qv, Eih , t "I.—
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -13
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
(Blake and Patricia Partridge)
123 Lakeshore Road East, Plan 589,
Lot 5 & 26 (Former Township of
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 009 -57500
Oro)
D13 -39338
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footings of the building and 2) verifying in writing prior
to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the detached accessory
building is no larger than 107 square metres,
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 notwithstanding Section 5.1.5 and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the detached accessory
structure will otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions for such structures as
prescribed by Zoning By -law 97 -95;
4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only
after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning
Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to consider Variance Application 2009 -A -13, for relief from the
Township's Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to the maximum floor area and maximum lot
coverage for an accessory building.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct an accessory structure to an existing single detached dwelling.
The accessory structure is proposed to have a ground floor area of 107 square metres (1,151.7 square
feet).
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -13 Page 1 of 6
Page 67 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
The applicant is requesting the following relief from Section 5.1.5 and Section 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law
97 -95:
Accessory Buildings, Structures & Uses Required Proposed
Section 5.1.5 Maximum Lot Coverage: 5% 5.1%
Accessory Buildings, Structures & Uses Required Proposed
Section 5.1.6 Maximum Floor Area: 70 sq. m. 107 sq m.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.2 lists the uses permitted in the
Shoreline designation; single detached dwellings are permitted. Uses accessory to a permitted use
are permitted in any designation. Therefore, the proposed detached accessory building would be
considered a permitted use in the Shoreline designation.
The objectives of the Official Plan for the Shoreline designation are to maintain the existing character
of the area, protect natural features of the shoreline and ensure that existing development is
appropriately serviced. The proposal before the Committee will maintain the existing character of the
area because the surrounding lots also have detached accessory buildings. Specifically, the abutting
property to the east has a detached accessory building, which Staff estimates is similar in size and
positioning to the proposal, this was determined during the site visit by visual inspection. This
proposal does not affect any natural features, nor does it affect the shoreline as the accessory
building will not be on the shoreline. The lot is appropriately serviced for the existing use with a
private well and septic system.
On this basis the proposal is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By -law?
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The Shoreline Residential Zone permits
single detached dwellings and accessory buildings. The location of the proposed new accessory
building would comply with all minimum required setbacks. The required side yard setback is 2m. The
applicant has proposed to locate the building 2m from the side lot line as required. The accessory
building will be located over 20m from the rear lot line. Therefore it is also located over 20m from
Lake Simcoe, as required in the By -law.
As the property abuts Lake Simcoe, the detached accessory building is permitted in front of the
house, provided it is not in the front yard as defined in the By -law. The minimum required front yard is
7.5m from the lot line in the Shoreline Residential Zone. The accessory building is proposed to be
setback 12m from the front lot line; therefore it is not located in the front yard and complies with the
By -law. The proposed building is also in compliance with maximum height provisions; 4.5m is
permitted and approximately 3.8m is proposed.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -13 Page 2 of 6
Page 68 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
With respect to floor area, the intent of the Zoning By -law in limiting the size of any one accessory
structure floor area to 70 square metres is to ensure that the building remains clearly secondary to
the primary use of the lot. In this case, the dwelling on the subject lands has a floor area of 270
square metres (2,906.2 square feet), and as such the proposed building would remain secondary to
the existing dwelling.
In terms of lot coverage, it is the intent of the By -law to ensure that the lot is not over developed and
residential remains the primary use of the lot. In this case, the applicant is proposing a lot coverage of
5.1%. This will not result in the over development of the lot. There will still be enough land area for
drainage and the residential building is still the primary use of the lands. Even though 5.1% of the
lands will be covered by the accessory building; it still secondary to the house in floor area, as
discussed above.
Notwithstanding, Sections 5.1.5 and 5.1.6, the proposed accessory building meets the provisions for
accessory buildings as outlined within the Zoning By -law.
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?
The location of the proposed garage in the front yard is due to Lake Simcoe being abutting the
property. The proposed location and size is similar to the neighbouring garage.
The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) conducted a site visit and has no
concerns with the proposed location. The applicant will be required to obtain formal sign off, either a
letter or email, from the LSRCA prior to issuance of a building permit.
During the site inspection, Staff confirmed that the location of the accessory building will be visually
screened from the neighbour's property to the east, which is closest to the proposed location. It will
be screened by the existing cedar hedge.
The variance is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot as it is designated and zoned for
residential uses. It is Staffs opinion that it is appropriate to grant the variance as the accessory
building is visually screened from the closest neighbour and will not negatively impact the drainage of
the lot. As well the primary use of the lot will still be the residential use. The proposed accessory
building appears to be similar to the existing accessory building to the east. Also, as previously
discussed, the proposed building meets all of the setbacks and height requirements of the Zoning By-
law.
On this basis, the proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the subject lot.
Is the variance minor?
Based on the analysis above, it is Staff's opinion that this application should not adversely affect the
character of the surrounding area. Therefore, the proposed variance is considered to be minor.
Development Services
Application No. 2009 -A -13
Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Page 3 of 6
Page 69 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-A-1 3 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
Public Works Department
Building Department
Engineering Department
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
In the opinion of the Planning D8pgrtnlerd, Variance application 2009-A-13. being an application to
consider an accessory building with an area of 107 square metres and a lot coverage of 5.1 %,
appears to meet the tests of the Planning Act.
:
Respectfully submitted
J ^
Meghan Keelan
Planner
Reviewed by:
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-13 Page 4 of 6
Page 70 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -13 (Partridge)
}
IJ pip \
LL \
V Lu
to I
Z3
� J I
i — -
SINIGGE -ROAD
S
2
a
i
0
L i
r,�y/ ! /
BOU
[L
s � z
rp
K L
{ LAKE 51MCOE
ejECT LANDS
123 LAKESHORE ROAD EAST
012525 °yo- 75 100
t9et €rs
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A•13 Page 5 of 6
Page 71 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009 -A -13 (Partridge)
a
- - - - --
r -v
r $ P
ter- r.d
RR - `� �, ♦ 4
r i
I - --
r � f
1 ti
r ( + E4
}
.`� SCI. 1.
y
L y
y I �
1 e
y f r y
a r `
I I
i
-4 R
rT1
I 1
\r t
—T-
-1.
I -♦
41
r4/
ft1
i 1
f °♦
k -I
r -�
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -13 Page 6 of 6
Page 72 of 205
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009 -A -13 (Blake and Patricia Partridge) 123 Lakeshore Road...
r 7,
'- 8j
•__ � -` �^ � rf- C �� { iii Y
I '� , � • v ' �tif
-- -_ -� -
der A� � a �o � %•
O I R
+ FF
f 0" / 0 -- CL m1 4 6
TI n �
j T E- N I
- - -- - 0 r
O
c
M CL
O
O
N
CD
CL
CD
SM
3
Page 73 of 205
°g
6
o
Igg
$
r, � _M]
Yf�
C"1
r
���..`i�
fir"
iii
T
n �g
m
X1-1 f•7
� y Q
09
►�4
►i
6
m
Uzi
gig U RI
O r°i
m° m
gmg
� W-1, `
O
o in
� �
�i
At �,
ODI
�
� �
NCR.
s
117
ig
i�
q
ms �
8
o
� >
m
� $
m
°
8
'
- C2
1#
y �
bnii
ms
y
L�
y
Ai
�
g
�
r•ii
cssm y°
C)MQ
Or'U
0
O
O
N
CD
CL
CD
SM
3
Page 73 of 205
ej
00,00
0 0-1: 0
13
09101 I o00
0 0,0 0 ���
o a'.0 o -�{� 1111CCQ
0 B-10 01 "' �pi��a I i Cn
D000 ��� � � Q
00'
0 01
05.006
i. of -Q L L
•6reMN Y/1
at
07
LO
0
N
0 4--
ti
Cu
0—
r
r
t.
r
•r.
r
•
t
Ib 71
e a.
%6
i.
i[ pit,
,. 1\ ?, Y
'�I!- P Phi }•
r � ,
3
1 ar
�
'lay
1 ;i���� SE'}r M q•t� , , r ti I ' � .. �I:�L.: f �
r �
rf fj W ,
WI,�} ;R
'r
LO
0
N
4-
O
ti
ti
N
O1
-,. mwka,
oil
If
_. Af�
-:47-
X. ... . .
owl
Ao -
m
m
r I
40,
4� :0.y • `' .;
'R
1v-
� - `4
d o'
i - if
G ^Pa�ii �ivl
P�^
4
4 i
1�'' '
•'tw.�i17
'. fin.i�rY'
d _
P�^
4
4 i
P�^
nl
Ow
.1
m
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
0) "c1?tGlF4'
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -14
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
(Paula Wright)
127 Robinson Street, Plan 653, Lot
23 (Former Township of Oro)
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 011 -3001
D13 -39344
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
1. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches
submitted and approved by the Committee;
2. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after
the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O.
1990, c. P. 13.
3. That the applicant obtain and /or approvals, if required, from the Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority
4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by verifying in writing that:
a. The proposed dwelling setback does not exceed 1.27 metres to the west interior side lot
line.
b. The proposed boathouse setback does not exceed 0.91 metres from the east interior
side lot line.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 15.2 metres (50 feet) and a lot area of
approximately 0.23 hectares (0.59 acres). The property currently has a one storey single detached
dwelling, which the applicant is proposing to demolish, which is setback approximately 1 metre (3.2
feet) from the interior side yard. The Township Zoning By -law requires a 3 metre (9.5 feet), interior
side yard setback in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone for a dwelling and a 2 metre (6.5 feet)
interior side yard setback for a boathouse. The proposed single detached dwelling is proposed to be
a distance of 1.46 metres (4.9 feet) from the interior side yard lot line.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -14 Page 1 of 6
Page 81 of 205
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
ANALYSIS:
The applicants are proposing to construct a two- storey dwelling with a gross floor area of 993 square
metres (10,688 square feet) and a boathouse which is proposed to have a total area of 31.2 m2 (336
ft2). The applicants are requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95:
Required Proposed
1. Table 131- Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: 3.0 metres 1.27 metres
2. Section 5.6 a) Minimum interior side yard setback for a boathouse from the required 2
metres (6.5 feet) to a proposed 0.91 metres (3 feet).
FINANCIAL.
Not applicable.
POLICIES /LEGISLATION:
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the 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 of this predominantly residential area.
• To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline.
The requested variance for the proposed dwelling and boathouse would appear to maintain the
character of the shoreline residential area, as dwellings are a permitted use in the shoreline
designation. Therefore, the variance would conform to the general intent of the policies contained in
the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By -law?
The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR). The Shoreline Residential Zone permits
single detached dwellings and boathouses. The new location of the proposed dwelling would comply
with the minimum required setbacks for the front yard of 7.5 metres and setback to Lake Simcoe of
20 metres. The existing dwelling does not meet the required interior side yard setback, however the
applicant is proposing to construct the new dwelling further away from the interior lot line. The
proposed setback of 1.27 metres (4.1 feet), is still within the required setback, but the foot print of the
proposed dwelling will not further encroach into what is already existing. The purpose of the interior
side yard setback 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 single
detached dwelling should not adversely impact access to the rear of the property, as the east interior
side lot line is proposed to be located approximately 3.1 metres (10 feet) beyond the east wall of the
proposed dwelling. Further, the proposed dwelling otherwise meets with all other Zoning By -law
provisions (such as maximum height, front and rear yard setbacks) for single detached dwellings in
the SR Zone.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -14 Page 2 of 6
Page 82 of 205
Agenda Item # 5e)-2009-A-14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23,Plan
In terms ofthe variance for the proposed boathouse being located 0.01 metres (2.9 feet) from the
required 2 metres (6.5 feet). One of the purposes of regulating the location and height of boathouses
in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone is to prevent over-development of the shoreline frontage which
may |g8d to the shoreline being dominated by the boathouse structures and ultimately impacting the
character Ofthe shoreline. The proposed boathouse meets the provisions of the By-law with the
exception of the required interior side yard setback. The proposed boathouse will remain, visually,
secondary to the dwelling, will not dominate the shoreline, and will not impact the potential views from
adjacent lands.
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 single family dwelling addition would appear to be
appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. A large existing hedge will provide the abutting
dwelling b)the west with adequate buffering from the proposed dwelling. The location of the
applicants' driveway is situated on the west side of the property due to the location of the septic bed
being located north of the proposed dwelling. The applicant is proposing to maintain the interior side
yard setback on the east side of the proposed dwelling of3.1 metres <10feet) in order bube able to
access the rear of the property. The lots in the area are generally double lots averaging in width of
appnoximn|e|y25 metres (82 feet), allowing for the required setbacks to be met. With the proposed lot
having an average width of 15 metres (49.2 feet), the applicant has a difficult time being able to meet
the required setbacks.
Based on the site inspection, the proposed boathouse would appear to be appropriate for the
desirable development of the lot and in keeping with the surrounding shoreline area. |t should be
noted that there is mature cedar hedge located along the interior property line of the proposed
boathouse which will provide a visual buffer to the neighboring property. - [heneighbVring|otbothe
east has a fairly large boathouse that does not appear to comply with the boathouse provisions in the
By-law. Given that the proposed boathouse will not result in the over-development of the subject lot or
the shoreline, the proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the subject lot.
On this basis, the proposal is considered appropriate for the desirable development ofthe subject bd.
Is the variance minor?
As this application should not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area, the proposed
variance is considered to be minor.
Public Works Department
Building Department
Engineering Department
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-14 Page 3 of 6
Page 83 of 205
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2009-A-14, being an application for
relief from the interior side yard for a proposed dwelling and boathouse, appears to satisfy the tests of
the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by:
-7-
Ste n F uharson, B.URPL Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Planner Planner Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-14 Page 4 of 6
Page 84 of 205
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -14 (Wright)
ul
ROB
,f
I
i
cv i
Z
I
i
i
I
E
4
t
AKE v*dMCOE
SUBJECT LANDS
127 ROBINSON STREET
0 30 60 120 180 240
Meters
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -14 Page 5 of 6
Page 85 of 205
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009 -A -14 (Wright)
r
I's,
;KETCH OF
LOT 24 AND PART OF LOT 25
REGISTERED PLAN 653
vMNSH,P OF ORO btEDQM1TE
1\ tt M
t � ecnaiao R vrnr
�
t
4
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -14 Page 6 of 6
Page 86 of 205
/
d
't
� r
/
IK-
cL
i
r
o$
Y� R
LO
0
N
O
ti
o
W
c6
LO W
Nw
u
a
W ZN
Ir le) 0
ONLoQ
U-7oMoO
°
407 1 o�n
�
�� 6 §
�
�-Oo
�a�
031
�yg;
GO
q
Ul Z(nFO_l]"
O�zgio
'Qrtn —OQ
"g,�{,�{koo�'"oa'" It
,�{mm
�c�doW
Q
N2(�VU
gg
mm?a
Woo ®"sui:'
O0
C
/
d
't
� r
/
IK-
cL
i
r
o$
Y� R
LO
0
N
O
ti
o
W
c6
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009 -A -14 (Paula Wright) 127 Robinson Street, Lot 23, Plan
41
N-
Page 88 of 205
t too
:U21 t
0'�z
- '2, -C)
H z
z
M"
LLJ
j,
04 X.Z
' zz
b
F-
0
41
N-
Page 88 of 205
LO
0
N
4—
O
co
N
O1
LO
O
N
4-
O
O
O
N
O1
I
a
a0 ��
OOZ9
a
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
-k
c
d
............
............
............
LU
ODD
W
U)
d
0
Ono
d
U-
o
®®®
®
w
z
Lo
0
N
4
O
N
N
O1
I
Qn
� f 0
T 1
LO
0
N
O
co
m
N
CD
ll"'
. ' ��r ~`. } _.. fit•,
l
IA
` �F ', - 'iiif �.�I �' �4r� a ,..., . I Yhi ' " •
Tj ��'"� 1�.. r •r
kk
'}� � 'f .t .w •,,, .�i,f .° ,444 yid
5
y�y C
�w. h aU'3' • r r r� .f � n � `I
4'..r• Xr�'
�I
e!` '. � '� •A y •, . $� � � � try L� ,
kw
!Q
SS r
t3,
6. r•
3 -
w ,. •� �;�+,..•y�' ,s a,.57 ..; i+a,. _ j L _ �:. e, k.�a•�'4T�
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
VOW
i
J V
r 'rw
�r
• i _
�L
• r �
LO
0
N
4—
O
co
N
O1
s 7e
��'tx DTI
y4Art
i/ 11
Saar
IL
- +•
a
f�
R
�kf 40
.r
f:
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009 -A -08 (Rob Butler) 67 Barrie Terrace Variance for fro...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -A -08
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Consent Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
(Robert Butler)
67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 006 -00800
D13 -39084
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
1. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches
submitted and approved by the Committee;
2. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after
the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O.
1990, c.P. 13.
3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provides verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the proposed attached garage does not exceed
4.8 metres to the front lot line.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to consider Variance Application 2009 -A -08, for relief from the
Township's Comprehensive Zoning By -law in relation to the required front yard setback for an
accessory building in the Residential Limited Service Hold (RLS(H)) Zone. The applicant had
previously applied for a variance in 2007, which was subsequently denied by the Committee. The
proposed garage in 2007 was to be 62.8 square metres (675 square feet) and was proposed to be
3.9 metres from the front lot line and 2 metres (6.5 feet) from the interior lot line. The Committee
deemed the application not to be minor, and thus denied the application.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct an attached garage with an area of 51 sq. m. (576 sq. ft), onto
the front of an existing dwelling. The property is zoned Residential Limited Service " Hold (RLS*H)
Zone. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Table B1 of Zoning By -law 97 -95:
Table 61- Minimum Front Yard Setback:
Required Proposed
7.5 metres 4.8 metres
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -A -08 Page 1 of 4
Page 100 of 205
Agenda Item # 5D-2009-A-08(Rob Butl8h67 Barrie Terrace Variance for frO...
Not applicable.
Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The property isdesignated Shoreline in the [>ffiCid Plan. Section C5.2ofthe Plan states that
"permitted uses On lands designated ShD$elin8...@nasin8|edgtaChgddvveUingskand8CogSS0ry
buildings 0oouchl" Therefore, the addition to the existing dwelling to attach a proposed garage to the
dwelling would be considered a permitted use.
On this basis the proposal is considered to conform with the intent Ofthe Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intemmfthe Zoning By-law?
The subject property ky zoned Residential Limited 8envima^HoN( Zone. Permitted uses inthe
RLS~H Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory bui|dingo, such as garages and
storage sheds. The property is zoned "limited service" to reflect that access is provided by Barrie
Terrace, being an unassumed or private road. The *Hold provision ensures that further development
on such properties will require o Site Plan Agreement, to be approved by the Township and
registered ontitle. For the application at hand, it is appropriate that site plan approval be imposed as
a condition cfvariance.
With respect to the reduced front yard setback, a site inspection revealed that the subject property
does access Barrie Terrace directly; according to the survey provided by the applicant, a 4.5 metre
wide easement exists along the entire frontage of the pnopehy, and oan/ao as |anmvvayto provide
aooeaa for the subject and neighbouring properties to {|o|buurne Street. As a result of the site
inspaodon, concerns were raised by staff regarding the proposed garage potentially being located
partially on the eaaannanL The applicant has subsequently had e surveyor verify that the proposed
garage is in fact setback 4.1 metres from the front lot line, and will not encroach on the easement.
While the Zoning Bv'|avv does not have a setback requirement to the easement boundary. the
Transportation and Environmental 8en/ioms Department has indicated that structures are not permitted
on this right'of'vvay, as it currently serves as an eoceae route for properties along Berrie Terrace. The
Director ofTransportation and Environmental Services, has indicated to Planning Staff, that report will
be put forward to Council, with regards to Barrie Terrance, recommending it brought up to municipal
standards, therefore leading to the Township assuming the roadway.
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?
With the existing dwelling having a floor area of approximately 93.1 sq. metn*a, and the proposed
attached garage of 51 sq. metnaa, the proposed total floor area of the dwelling will be approximately
144 sq. rnotnas. The By-law is silent is regards to a lot coverage provision. The resulting dwelling will
cover 17 percent of the lot. The addition is proposed to be smaller than the existing dwelling by
approximately 42.1 sq. metres.
Development Services Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-08 Page 2 of 4
Page 101 of 205
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-A-08 (Rob Butler) 67 Barrie Terrace Variance for fro...
A site visit revealed existing tree vegetation located along the road allowance between Barrie Terrace
and the front yard of the subject property, which in turn would provide visual buffer for the proposed
garage from the traveled portion of the roadway. The proposed attached garage will otherwise meet
all other provisions in the Zoning By-law including side yard and height limits. It has been confirmed
through a survey that the proposed garage will not encroach onto the easement at the front of the
subject property, and as such will not restrict or hinder vehicular and pedestrian access for the
neighbouring lands.
Based on the above, the application to construct an attached garage in the required front yard
setback does appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot.
Is the variance minor?
As this application maintains the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the proposed variance
is considered to be minor.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department- that a report will be put forward to Council, with regards to Barrie Terrance,
recommending it brought up to municipal standards, therefore leading to the Township assuming the
roadway.
Building Department- Proposal appears to meet minimum standards
Engineering Department — No Concerns
Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority-
ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule 1: Location Map
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2009-A-08, being to construct an
attached garage, to have a front yard setback reduced from the required 7.5 metres to 4.8 metres,
appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act.
Respe'Qtfo submitted:
tey_e16 Farquharson, B.URPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Reviewed by:
Glenn White, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Planning Services
Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Page 3 of 4
Page 102 of 205
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009 -A -08 (Rob Butler) 67 Barrie Terrace Variance for fro...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -A -08 (Butler)
/ t-
T
r` �1 /N
<✓ % /
1K, � , r
' f
r'
7 l
LAKE SIP1C E
®SUBJECT L;ac ; T
67 BARRIE TERRACE
0 10 20 60 60
t et '!
t
Development Services
Application No. 2009 -A -08
Meeting Date June 18, 2009
Page 4 of 4
Page 103 of 205
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009 -A -08 (Rob Butler) 67 Barrie Terrace Variance for fro...
bag ad
s _
RUM,— OgY
h3
h�SYN t`�s$�s $ gsptj 6(ey sye $ �6 a a o
89 68ppi b s �z d� e9� Ys' i i t z Q
MINON, ��w� �tl � R i A �m � 3a
MI NON, N $ � �&& °$ vs ;� Y7 A to g � s
j
Ef
IF
i
ii
t.
o lr'
{3
i
i
Page 104 of 205
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009 -A -08 (Rob Butler) 67 Barrie Terrace Variance for fro...
Page 105 of 205
,M -h
b
JIM
G
�� 33 4
ai yy
t3Y o3 C k
6
11bL
�r
1
.0
1
tl 21
oL.tlb
o� ��e
a M' �
g'g° 'a
€ as€ &
S
cs,°
x° o
mV
a
II
)t
r
II
I 1
,I
- -- -----
,I
I
I.
I-
'I C`-
I I
I
I
I I
Mal Fl�
-
0 1r1
i
1
I
T
II
�I
�-�
I
In
��
I I
I
-
I
----- SqF ;l(
id m
I �f
Page 105 of 205
LO
O
N
4-
O
O
O
N
O1
LO
O
N
4-
O
ti
O
N
O1
c
O
0
J
0
CL
0
L.
mls�w
■
4
LO
0
N
4—
0
W
0
(1)
LL
4
JQ
Xto
Ii
■
4
LO
0
N
4—
0
W
0
(1)
LL
f�f l
,.:
r
HIM
oi
n P `
ri'r �1
�.'�" Etna � 4.' ..�' ¢'! y�•� ,i� --
AAA, • °
r..`t. �±. rte. .., `�t! , 'p .•+ '#�dn � �� � 1 ;�+ ■,
;I
e ar'F• I � � - f �
pi—*!k-
i•
V
t
V
I
1p
MONO
F� Awl 1A1 11
� r� � 1 ��L i[# Y y �- �1 ■iir it } Y i � •�
k
I
-
r 1 •r i
1
. V
i•-y lei,
z
��n►'/ �'ai.1� _ �� � �,��� .ATM �-
s 1 }I w
IE
NQ �Zt
AX �si
/� '•i�. ,1 .iV it ?: ,,
a
�' �•! /� III /// ' f � �� � I. , I
• PS j
1
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
�hrr
0 1' tAintE
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -B -12
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Consent Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
Barry and Susan Leigh
West Half of Lots 24 and Part of Lot
25, Concession 7
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010 - 009 - 001 -0001
290 Ridge Road West
D10 -39181
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be
prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor and 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 all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte;
4. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of parkland contribution;
5. That the applicant apply for a zoning amendment to reflex the proposed specialized
agricultural use;
6. That the maximum total lot area for the new lot be no greater than 6.7 hectares;
7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the consent application is for the creation of a lot for a specialized agricultural use.
The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage along Ridge Road West of
approximately 264 metres, a lot depth of approximately 302 metres and a lot area of approximately
6.7 hectares and currently used for agricultural purposes. The lands to be retained would have
frontage along Ridge Road West of approximately 388 metres, a lot depth of approximately 820
metres, and a lot area of 49.5 hectares and currently contain a dwelling and various outbuildings. The
applicant is proposing to grow and sell organic market garden produce for the local community.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -B -12 Page 1 of 4
Page 111 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of Consent Application 2009 -B -12 is to permit the creation of a new lot for a specialized
agricultural use. The land to be severed is proposed to have frontage along Ridge Road West of
approximately 264 metres, a depth of approximately 302 metres, and a lot area of approximately 6.7
hectares. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 49.5 hectares, and
currently contains a dwelling and agricultural buildings.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES /LEGISLATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject lands are designated Agricultural by the Official Plan (OP). Section C1.3 of the OP
contains-policies with respect to the creation of new lots for Agricultural Purposes. The applicant has
included with their submission a business plan and Agricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) report
prepared by Azimuth Environmental Consulting Inc. as required by the policies contained in the
Official Plan. It is the intent of the Official Plan to encourage the expansion, consolidation and
development of new agricultural uses since the agricultural sector greatly contributes to the economy
in the municipality. For the purpose of this Plan and the implementing Zoning By -law, a specialized
agricultural use is defined as:
"Means lands where a specialty crop such as tender fruits (peaches, cherries, plum) grapes, other
fruit crops, ginseng, vegetable crops, greenhouse crops and crops from agricultural developed
organic soil lands are predominantly grown, usually resulting from:
• Soils that have suitability specialty crops or lands that are subject to special climatic conditions,
or a combination of both and/or
• A combination of farmers skilled in the production of specialty crops, and of capital investment
in related produce, store or process specialty crops
A specialized agricultural use may also consist of a market garden where the products grown on the
site are sold. For the purpose of this definition, a specialized agricultural use does not include a fur
farm"
The Official Plan state: " it is recognized that specialized agricultural uses generally do not require
more than 10 hectares of land to be economically viable." The proposed lot is approximately 6.7
hectares.
The submitted Agricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) Report concluded that the subject lands contain
sandy loam soil, which is classified as Class 1 by the Canada Land Inventory. This soil type has good
fertility and drainage, which is well suited for the specialty agricultural such as a market garden crops.
The study as showed that the specialized agricultural use will not have any adverse impact on the
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -B -12 Page 2 of 4
Page 112 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g)-2009-B-12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290Ridge Road Consent f...
remnant farm parcel or the continued lands for agriculture in the long term. There isa number of
criterion contained in the Official Plan when considering a lot creation for a specialized Gghculturd
use. The submitted Agricultural Impact Assessment report and farm/business plan have addressed
these criterion.
On this basis, the application isconsidered to be appropriate and generally conforms to the Official
Plan.
ZONING BY-LAW
The subject property iG currently zoned Agricultural/Rural A\/RU\ and Environmental Protection (EP)
Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law g7-Q5'oaamended. AS8 result of the policies contained in
the Official Plan, the proposed specialized agricultural use would be subject to a site-specific zVnS,
which will prohibit the development of residential uses. The rezoning of the property to permit a
residential use is strongly discouraged since the development of a residence would have an impact
on either the rural character of the area and/or the viability of agricultural operations in the area. The
proposed and retained lots would continue to comply with the provisions of the Agricultural/Rural
Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law.
Department-
Building Department-
Engineering Departmont—
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority-
I ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule #1- Location Map
I CONCLUSION:
Itia the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 20Q9-B- 2 for the creation ofa
lot for specialized agricultural use would appear to conform to the policies of the Official Plan, and
maintains the use and setback provisions of the Zoning By-law.
Reviewed by:
Glenn White
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-12 Page 3 of 4
Page 113Of205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009 -8 -12 (Leigh)
i l t
I'
j RETARIED LANDS
4
i
i a
r
� r
y".
I
I
PROP SEE) SEVERED LOT
0 45 90 1951 270 360
Meters
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -B -12 Page 4 of 4
Page 114 of 205
LEIGH PROPERTY
SEVERANCE SKETCH
Part of West Half of Lot 24 and Part of Lot 25, Concession 7,
p of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe
Ken"nW Bay
ae
Agricultural 0 Agrcullural
Res dVnpal � A1y� P ResidenliaFr
Agricultual Qto'�'
' F
Agricultural 'F3esden6al
WOedlel -, `
Agricultural � Watercourse vQ
Aprox 47.3 ha.
Severed � .
brR� Residential .�': .° "
'h � _ NF Residential ��!
0+
CsidCnfldl \ � ` V ryP �\ E ,i.
� 9�e \ RVS do. �• � f�a/
�,,. Agricultural ` Rosidential
ResNentia O � yam ,Y /�
eo \
y' Hgncultural ms . ` �.y �p0
- Total • Holdings
91 Ridge Road
NMI
_
- Lands • / - --
JONES
O
N
4—
O
N
O1
JONES
CONSULTING GROUP LTD.
PLANNERS, ENGINEERS. SURVEYORS
Dear Mr. Farquharson:
MAR 3 12009
ORO- ME:DONTE
March 20, 2009
HAND DELIVERED
Mr, Stephen Farquharson
Secretary- Treasurer
Township of Oro - Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
148 Line 7 South
Oro, ON LOL 2X0
Re: Application for Consent - 290 Ridge Road, Township of Oro - Medonte
Part of West Half of Lot 24 and Part of Lot 25, Concession 7, Township of Oro -
Medonte, County of Simcoe
Our File: LEI - 09149 -75
Background
Please refer to this letter as an overview of pertinent Provincial, County of Simcoe and
Township of Oro - Medonte policy as it relates to the above -noted proposal for consent.
Specifically, the policies pertaining to the creation of new lots within an agricultural
context are highlighted in this letter.
This letter is also accompanied with an application for consent to the Committee of
Adjustment for the Township of Oro - Medonte.
Furthermore, the proposed 'specialized agricultural' use would provide for an opportunity
to promote the agricultural and rural heritage of the area through the production and
sale of agricultural products on -site and a complementary use to the landscaping
business now operational on the Leigh property. The rural character of the whole
property would be accordingly strengthened. The Leigh's have long believed that the
special circumstances of the property in relationship to location and productivity
potential, coupled with their long residency on the property, will promote an intensity of
the whole agricultural operation in compliance with the policy.
Provincial Policy Statement (2005)
The subject lands are located in Class 1 -3; prime agricultural lands, according to the
classifications found in the Canada Lands Inventory (CLI).
The Provincial Policy Statement was very specific policies as they relate to the creation of
lots or lot adjustments within lands indentified as prime agricultural land,
Prime agricultural land is defined as 'land that includes specialty crop areas and /or
Canada Lands Inventory Classes, 1,2 and 3 soils, in this order of priority for protection',
according to the definitions in the Provincial Policy Statement.
Section 2,3,4 includes explicit policies related to the conditions under which lot creation
can occur within prime agricultural lands, The PPS discourages lot creation within these
Head Office: Barrie
Collingwood
Porn 10 R.+I
Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive, Barrie, ON UN OB4 705 - 734 -2538 • 705- 734 -1056 fax
243 Ste, Marie Street Collingwood, ON L9V 3K6 705. 446.3230. 705 -446 -3240 fax
ISO 90O1:2000CertiBed www.4onesconsulting.com
LO
0
N
O
m
N
Cu
0-
areas, indicating that new lot creation will only be permitted under the circumstances
listed below;
(a) New lots for agricultural purposes may be permitted provided that they are of a size
appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and are sufficiently
large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural
operation;
(b) For agricultural- related uses, provided that any new lot will be limited to a minimum
size needed to accommodate the use and appropriate sewage and water services;
(c) A residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided
that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on
any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance, The approach
used to ensure that no new residential dwellings are permitted on the remnant parcel
may be recommended by the Province; or based on municipal approaches which
achieve the same objective; and,
(d) Infrastructure, where the facility or corridor cannot be accommodated through the
use of easements or rights -of -way,
The land use proposed, as a 'specialized agricultural' use, would correspond with the
overall intent of the Provincial Policy Statement. Specifically, the consent would create a
parcel sufficient for future use for another agricultural operation /use of a specialized
character appropriate to the nature of the subject lands and surrounding rural area, The
property and adjoining area would be strengthened by this initiative by multiplying the
choice for future agriculturally- related activities,
County of Simcoe Official Plan (In- Force)
'Rural & Agricultural'
The subject lands are designated 'Rural & Agricultural' in the County of Simcoe Official
Plan. A new County of Simcoe Official Plan has been approved and is in the process of
review by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The current County of Simcoe
Official Plan is currently in- force,
The prevailing intent of the 'Rural & Agricultural' designation is to 'enable the agricultural
industry to function effectively in prime agricultural areas by minimizing conflicting and
competing uses while accommodating uses and facilities which support the agricultural
industry'
Section 3,6,6 further states that prime agricultural areas will be protected and maintained
for agricultural use, The permitted uses within this designation category include
agriculture related uses, secondary uses, natural heritage conservation and forestry,
aggregate developments, subject to Section 4,4 (Aggregate Developments designation),
processing of agricultural products, and agricultural produce sales outlets generally
relating to production in the local area,
With regard to the permission of 'specialized agricultural' uses, the County stipulates that
the following criteria be adhered to in Section 3,6,6 of the Official Plan;
Head Office: Barrie Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive, Barrie, ON L4N 0134 705- 734 -2538 • 705- 734 -1056 fax
Collingwood 243 Ste, Marie Street Collingwood. ON L9Y 3K6 705 -446 -3230 • 705- 446 -3240 fax
Fay, 10 ae, r ISO 9001:2000 Certified www- ionesconsultina.com
LO
0
N
0
ti
N
c6
a) Specialized agriculture must be defined with such uses being primarily related to
the suitability of soils or climate to produce specialty crops or, in limited
circumstances, the presence of facilities relating to the production, storage or
processing of such agricultural products;
b) Justification shall be required of specific applications to demonstrate the above
and that other lots of proposed size are not available in the vicinity; and
c) The size of parcels shall be sufficient size to accommodate agricultural uses
common to the area
Lot creation policies within the 'Rural & Agricultural' designation make reference to the
local municipal Official Plan policies. However, the County, generally, will permit the
creation of new lots for agricultural purposes for a farm retirement lot, a residence surplus
to a farming operation and residential infilling. New lots for agricultural purposes should
generally not be less than 35 hectares or 4 hectares for organic soils used for specialty
crops, The application before the Committee of Adjustment complies with this general
intention,
County of Simcoe Official Plan (Proposed)
Schedule 5,1 - Land Use Designations of the County of Simcoe Official Plan identifies the
majority of the subject property as 'Agricultural'. However, there is a small portion
situated toward the interior and northern portions of the property, abutting an existing
watercourse, that are designated as 'Greenlands' in the proposed County of Simcoe
Official Plan.
The prevailing intent of the 'Agricultural' designation is to 'protect the resource of prime
agricultural lands' of the Township and to direct other non - agricultural uses to Settlement,
Rural and Economic District designations within the County.
Section 3.6.4 lists the permitted uses of the 'Agricultural' designation as agricultural uses,
agriculture - related uses, secondary uses, natural heritage conservation and forestry,
mineral aggregate operations subject to Section 4.4 (Aggregate Developments
designation), processing of agricultural products and agricultural produce sales outlets
generally marketing producton of the local area,
The proposal for consent features a use that is compatible with the permitted uses as
indicated in Section 3.6.4.
Lot creation within the 'Agricultural' designation references the local municipal Official
Plan for guidance, however, it is generally accepted by County of Simcoe policy that
new lots may be created for agricultural purposes that are sized no less than 40 hectares
or 16 hectares for specialty crop lands. Section 3.6.5 stipulates that where a residential lot
for a residence surplus to an agricultural operation is created, the remaining lot shall be
zoned to prohibit the development of a dwelling unit. A zoning bylaw amendment in this
regard will be sought concurrent with the application for consent of lands.
Head Office: Barrie
Collingwood
ram 10 R.r
Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive, Barrie, ON AN 084 705 -734 -2538 • 705 -734 -1056 fax
243 Ste. Marie Street Collingwood. ON L9V 3K6 705- 446 -3230 • 705- 446 -3240 fax
ISO 9001:2000 Certified www.ionesconsuItina.com
LID
0
N
0
00
(1)
1)
M
0-
'Greenlands'
The general limits of the 'Greenlands' designation are noted in Section 3.8.11 as being
approximate. They are situated near, however, not directly, affecting the location of the
proposed use, according to aerial photography of the subject property.
It should be noted that any type of new development within the 'Greenlands'
designation would require the accompaniment of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), prepared by a qualified environmental practitioner, which substantiates that there
would be no negative impact on existing natural features or their ecological functions as
a result of development activity,
Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan
'Agricultural'
The subject property is designated 'Agricultural' within the Township of Oro - Medonte
Official Plan, As noted in Section D2.1, the primary objectives of the 'Agricultural'
designation are to maintain and preserve the agricultural resource base of the Township,
protect land suitable for agricultural production, promote agricultural industry and to
preserve and promote the agricultural character of the Township.
Permitted uses with the 'Agricultural' designation, as noted in Section D2.2, include single -
detached dwellings, bed and breakfast establishments, home occupations, commercial
dog kennels, forestry, resource management uses, farm implement dealers and feed
fertilizer distribution facilities, storage facilities for agricultural products, greenhouses,
agriculturally - related commercial uses and seasonal home grown produce stands.
Wayside pits and portable asphalt plants are also permitted.
The proposed use contemplated for the severed parcel complies with the intent of the
'Agricultural' designation of the Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan.
Section D2.3.1 - Development Policies applies directly to the use proposed. 'Specialized
Agricultural Uses' have consideration in the Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan. These
uses are to correspond directly with prescriptive policies as they apply to the creation of
new lots by way of consent. New lots may be permitted and considered by the
Committee of Adjustment under these circumstances as noted in the Development
Policies section of the Official Plan:
a) The creation of the new lot can be justified, In order to assist the Committee of
Adjustment in this regard, the applicant shall submit a farm /business plan that:
I. Describes how the soil conditions, climate and location are
appropriate for the proposed specialized farm use;
ii. Describes the proposed specialized agricultural use in detail;
M. Describes the capital investment that is to be made;
iv. Identifies the market area for the product; and
v. Forecasts the income that would be generated by the proposed
use.
b) The applicant has experience and /or training with the type of specialized
agricultural use being proposed,
Head Office: Barrie
Collingwood
Fam 10 Ra 1
Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive, Barrie. ON L4N OB4 705 -734 -2538 • 705 -734 -1056 fax
243 Ste. Marie Street Collingwood, ON L9Y 3K6 705 -446 -3230 • 705 -446 -3240 fax
ISO 9001:2000 Certified www.lonesconsu lti na.com
LO
0
N
0
rn
N
t:6
c) The new lot can be used for other agricultural uses that are common to the area If
the lot ceases to be used for specialized agricultural purposes. In order to assist
the Committee in this regard, the applicant shall provide a report to the
Committee prepared by a qualified agrologist that:
I. Describes the nature of farming operations in the area; and
ii. Describes the types of agricultural uses that are feasible on the lot if
the use of the lot for specialized agricultural uses ceases.
d) The remnant parcel will continue to be viable for agricultural use after the
severance has been granted. To assist the Committee of Adjustment in
determining the viability of the remnant parcel, an agricultural viability report shall
be prepared by a qualified agrologist. This report shall review:
i. The quality of soils;
ii. The nature of the existing farming operation, if one exists;
and,
iii. The potential uses of the remnant parcel,
e) The area of the lot to be created for specialized agricultural purposes does not
exceed approximately 25 percent of the area of the lot from which the severance
is proposed,
f) The lot from which the severance is proposed has an area of at least 20 hectares,
g) The new lot has an area of not less than 4 hectares.
The proposed use corresponds with the intent of the specialized agricultural permissions in
the Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan, The creation of a single new lot for the
purposes of the proposed use, therefore, should be permitted, under the guise of Section
D2.3,1 of the Official Plan for the creation of new lots for specialized agricultural uses,
The submissions to be made to the Committee will attest to the productivity and business
utility of the proposed severance and future improvements.
Township of Oro - Medonte Zoning Bylaw
The subject property is currently zoned 'A /RU - Agricultural /Rural' in the Township of Oro -
Medonte Zoning Bylaw.
Permitted uses in the 'A /RU - Agricultural /Rural Zone', according to Table A4 in the
Township of Oro - Medonte Zoning Bylaw, include agricultural uses (ntensive), agricultural
uses, agricultural uses (specialized), bed and breakfast establishments, conservation uses,
custom workshops, equestrian facilities, farm produce and sales outlets, forestry uses,
hobby farms, home industries, home occupations, market gardens, pits, portable asphalt
plants, private clubs, private home daycare, single- detached dwellings, veterinary clinics
and wayside pits,
As specialized agricultural uses are permitted under the Township of Oro - Medonte Zoning
Bylaw, a rezoning related to the proposed use will not be required. However, an
exception to the 'A /RU - Agricultural /Rural Zone' will be requested and will provide for an
exclusion from the Zoning Bylaw of residential uses within the 'A /RU - Agricultural /Rural'
zone,
Head Office: Barrie Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive, Barrie, ON UN 084 705- 734 -2538 • 705 -734 -1056 fax
Collingwood 243 Ste. Marie Street Collingwood, ON L9Y 3K6 705- 446 -3230 • 705 -446 -3240 fax
cam 10 R . r ISO 9001:2000 Certified www.lonesconsuItina.com
LO
0
N
O
0
N
N
t:6
The assessment of the policy framework pertinent to the consent to land severance for
the purposes of a 'specialized agricultural' use has been provided in the preceding letter
for initial project feasibility purposes. It would appear that the proposed specialized
agricultural use conforms with the spirit and intent of Provincial, County of Simcoe and
Township of Oro- Medonte land -use policies as they relate to agricultural/greenlands-
designated lands, and more specifically, the creation of new lots by way of consent for
'specialized agricultural' uses. As noted, our presentation to the Committee will affirm
compliance with the policies and the viability of the future enterprises associated with this
severance.
Sincerely,
THE JONES CONSULTING GROUP LTD.
MBA, MCIP, RPP
Partner
Head Office: Barrie
Collingwood
ram10R .i
Suite 100 • 300 Lakeshore Drive. Barrie, ON UN OB4 705 -734 -2538 • 705 -734 -1056 fax
243 Ste. Marie Street Collingwood, ON L9V 3K6 705 - 446 -3230 • 705 -446 -3240 fax
ISO 9001:2000 Certified www,ionesconsultina.com
LO
0
N
O
N
N
O1
I:6
wvAjp
Agricultural ,� Agricultural z'
Residenhal ,yF. > �. Residential „\
1
Agricultural P4�ot'
Agdcultural Pus dential
Woodlol
Agricultural Watercoursa
a
Retained
Aprox. 47.3 ha. O
Residential ? Severed 4.
Aprox. 6.7 ha. f
is r �� hF Residential i �!(
A
!
Residential \
9� �,
Agricultural
°, Agricultural ' `Ros doi�,� Residential.
Residential
�o
Agricultural �o
Rcsidenhal
i
Inst tuh
low
ri
,' Resldenlial
- Total i Holdings
290 Ridge Road West
Lands To Be Severed(Apmx.
- I
Lands To Be • I ONES
LO
O
N
O
N
N_
(D
0)
M
0—
eivv, U TH ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTING, INC.
Environmental Assessments & Approvals
June 1, 2009 AEC 09 -140
The Jones Consulting Group Ltd.
300 Lakeshore Drive
Suite 100
Barrie, ON L4N OB4
Attention: Gord Dickson
Re: Agricultural Impact Assessment
West Half of Lot 24 and Part of Lot 25, Concession 7
Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe
Dear Mr. Dickson:
Azimuth Environmental is pleased to submit our report for the Agricultural Impact
Assessment (AIA) undertaken for your property at 290 Ridge Road in the Township of
Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe. Our assessment of the property determined that the
proposed severance would not have an adverse impact on the continuation of agricultural
operations on the retained parcel or the surrounding agricultural operations. In the event
the proposed specialized agriculture operation on the severed land is terminated in the
future, the lands can readily be maintained in agricultural production. Our assessment is
presented in the following sections.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is in response to your request for Azimuth Environmental Consulting, Inc.
(Azimuth) to undertake an Agricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) for the lands at 290
Ridge Road, Part of the west half of Lot 24 and part of Lot 25, Concession 7, Township
of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe (see Figure 1).
The purpose of this AIA is to determine the establishment of a specialized agricultural
use for the purposes of growing and marketing specialty crops will have an adverse
impact of the remaining agricultural lands, or restrict the reestablishment of the property
229 Meplevlew Drive East, UNl 1, Bartle, Ontario L4N OW5
telephone: (705) 721-8451; fax: (705) 7214MB irfo@azimuthemrironmental.o m
LO
0
N
O
co
N
a)
0)
M
0-
to the existing use of the cultivation of common field crops. The lands are designated in
the Official Plan as Agricultural (Schedule A appended) (Township of Oro - Medonte,
2007).
2.0 METHODOLOGY
Azimuth undertook the AIA using existing published information on soil capability for
crop production classifications and soil types combined with a field survey of the
property and windshield survey of the agricultural land use and associated infrastructure
within one kilometre of the property. The agricultural land use information was used to
confirm the accuracy of the published information with regard to soil capability for crop
production and the nature of the agricultural operations in the area.
The Provincial Policy Statement defines soil capability for crop production Classes 1, 2
and 3 as prime agricultural lands. The Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs
(OMAFRA) has prepared a Guideline for Detailed Soil Surveys for Agricultural Land
Use Planning (May, 2004) that defines Class 1, 2 and 3 soils agricultural land as soils that
with the necessary capital improvements in place (e.g., the drainage) or are physically
feasible for the landowner /manager /farmer to make the necessary capital improvements
to permit mechanized row cropping. The guideline further states, that land where
mechanized row cropping is not feasible should be considered less than prime or Class 4
or 5.
3.0 PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE
The proponent is proposing to sever approximately 6.7ha of existing cultivated
agricultural land and retain approximately 47.3ha of the existing farm. The severance is
being requested to establish a specialty agriculture operation on the 6.7ha parcel for the
purposes of growing and locally marketing specialty crops.
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
4.1 On -Site Agricultural Lands
Existing Farm Operation
The farming operation from which the severance will be taken is approximately 54 ha
(133 acres).
LO
0
N
O
N
(D
0)
M
0-
rAo
The farmstead has a 34m x 18m structurally sound barn that was previously used for a
dairy operation and a 14m x 30m machinery driveshed. The livestock operation has been
terminated and the barn is now used to store hay and as part of a greenhouse business.
The livestock on the farm is currently limited to three horses.
The farm is not farmed by the owner and is rented to an area farmer. The land is
currently in the cultivation with common field crops.
The Corn Heat Units for the municipality is between 2500 and 2700.
Proposed Severance
The proposed severance represents approximately 6.7 ha of cultivated land. This
growing season the field appears planted in small grains. The field that encompasses the
proposed severance is separated from the remaining farmland by a treed creek valley that
eliminates direct access to the property from the farmstead. As a result access to the
property is from Ridge Road West. Rural residential land uses are located along Ridge
Road West adjacent to the proposed severance.
The proximity of the adjacent residences would restrict the use of the proposed severance
for the establishment of livestock operation under the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs Minimum Distance Separation Implementation Guidelines
(Publication 707).
4.2 Soils /Soil Capability For Agriculture
The Soil Map of Simcoe County defines the entire farm as Bondhead sandy loam. The
Canada Land Inventory (CLI) classification defines the Bondhead sandy loam as Class 1
agricultural soils with no limitations to crop production. The land associated with the
creek valley is Class 4 due to the steep topography restricting cultivation and generally
limiting the area to pasture.
Field review of the soils of the land proposed for severance confirmed the sandy loam
texture as indicated by the Simcoe County soil mapping. Stones were present in the field
but they were limited in number and generally small in size (under 15cm in diameter) and
would not require stone removal for cultivation.
The field slopes upward to the north at approximately a 4% slope, based on topographic
mapping provided by the County of Simcoe web site. This slope does not represent an
erosion hazard as the sandy loam soils are generally well drained and the permeability of
LO
0
N
0
LO
N
N
0)
M
0-
the soil would facilitate the infiltration of precipitation events minimizing the potential
for erosion. Review of the down gradient limits of the field showed no evidence of past
soil erosion resulting in the deposition of surficial soils into the roadside ditch.
4.3 Adjacent Agricultural Lands
The agricultural lands surrounding the property are predominately in active cultivation in
common field crops (e.g. com, soybeans, improved forages). Livestock operations are
generally absent in the surrounding area with the majority of the bams no longer used for
livestock production. Generally where a decline in full time animal husbandry is evident
the majority of the lands are rented to full time farmers in the area for cash crop
production. Review of the agricultural activity in the adjacent concessions confirmed the
majority of the lands where being actively cultivated.
4.4 Minimum Distance Separation Calculation
The Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) calculation is not required for this assessment.
MDS guidelines states it is only applied to land use applications where non - agricultural
development is being proposed through a zoning -bylaw or official plan amendments or
consent application involving a proposed lot or existing dwelling. This consent
application does not involve the construction of any residence or the establishment of a
building lot. The application is for the continuation of cultivation for a specialized
agricultural use.
In the event that the livestock operation was reestablished at the existing barn on the
remaining farm the proposed specialized specialty agricultural use would not impose any
restrictions. The MDS Guidelines only apply to non - agricultural development in
proximity to livestock facilities.
5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
It is our understanding that the agri- business associated with the consent application is for
the establishment of a specialized agricultural operation involving the cultivation of
market garden produce that will be sold from a facility on the property. For the purposes
of this assessment it is assumed the operation will require a small structure and associated
area for the retail portion of the operation and potentially a storage facility for equipment,
materials and produce. In order to provide a conservative estimate of the facilities that
may be required we have used the existing farm driveshed (14m x 30m) and adjacent
graveled area, which equals a total area of 0.12ha, to estimate the retail/parking/storage
area that may be required.
LO
0
N
0
m
N
(D
0)
M
0-
Based on the estimated area retail/storage area the establishment of the specialized
agriculture operation could potentially remove 1.8% of the tillable area within the
consent application area. This area does not represent a significant loss to the agricultural
productivity to the severed area or the remnant farm. In the event the specialized
agriculture stopped 98.2% of the existing agricultural lands could be returned to the
cultivation of common field crops.
Approval of the severance will result in a retained area on the existing farm operation of
approximately 47.3 ha (116 acres). The County of Simcoe Official Plan states that new
lots for agricultural purposes should be a minimum of 40 hectares, therefore the retained
lands are in compliance with the County guidelines. Included within this area is the
existing farmstead buildings and the barn which is structurally sound and could be
reestablished as a livestock operation. The proposed severance would not impose any
restriction to livestock housing on the retained existing farm because it will be an
agricultural land use and would not be subject to the MDS calculations for expanding
livestock operations.
The soils on the property are sandy loam with a Class 1 Canada Land Inventory soil
capability for crop production. These soils have good fertility, do not require any
subsurface drainage systems and have no significant limitations to crop production.
Sandy loam soils are well suited to specialty crop cultivation because these moderately
coarse soils resist compaction from higher level of equipment use, have sufficient
porosity to permit tuber or root crop growth, and are well drained to minimize the adverse
effect of saturated soils on crop growth. In the event the specialty crop production is
terminated in the future the lands can be easily returned to the current common field crop
production without the requirement for any significant financial investment.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on our assessment the proposed use of the severed parcel for specialized
agriculture will have no adverse impact on the continued use of the remnant parcel for
agriculture, nor will it restrict the reestablishment of the lands for common field crops, in
the event the specialty crop operations cease. The proposed severance will retain the
lands in an agricultural land use that does not restrict the reestablishment of livestock
operations on the remnant farm parcel, nor will it restrict the continued rental of the farm
for common field crops. The severance is physically separated from the remnant farm
parcel by the creek valley, therefore the specialty agriculture land use will no affect
cultivation of the remnant land or the associated equipment access.
LO
0
N
0
ti
N
(D
0)
M
0-
The sandy loam soils have good fertility and drainage, and as such are well suited for
specialty agriculture such as market garden crops.
In our opinion the proposed severance for the planned establishment of a specialty crop
agricultural enterprise will have no adverse impact on the remnant farm parcel nor will it
adversely impact the continued use of the lands for agriculture in the long term.
Thank you for providing Azimuth with the opportunity to work with you on this project.
If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to call.
Yours truly,
AZIMUTN'I O E AL
Paul Neals, B.Sc. gr.
Vice - President
PCN:
Attach:
CONSULTING, INC.
LO
0
N
O
00
N_
0)
M
0-
as 411 D] U 1930"1
Agriculture Canada, Canada Land Inventory Soil Capability for Agriculture, 1:50,000.
Government of Ontario, Provincial Policy Statement 2005
Mr. Leigh, Property owner. 2009. Personal communication.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 2006, Minimum Distance Separation
(MDS) Formulae, Implementation Guidelines, Publication 707.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 1959, Soil Map of Simcoe County,
South Sheet, Soil Survey Report No. 29.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 1997, Crop Heat Units for Corn and
Other Warm Season Crops in Ontario.
Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan, March 2007.
LO
0
N
0
rn
N
N
0)
c6
tZ
LO
O
N
4-
O
O
C7
N
O1
P4-
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
SMALL BUSINESS PLAN
THE GREEN HOUSE
AT LB LANDSCAPING
Prepared for
Township of Oro- Medonte
Prepared by
Barry & Susan Leigh
Page 132 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
HISTORY
Barry and Susan Leigh and family operated a Dairy Farm for 30 years. When the Leigh
family sold their herd and quota in 2001, they were looking for another venture.
Henceforth, the idea for a landscaping company. LB Landscaping was established in
2002. The company is a family owned and operated business.
Barry has farmed all his life and has extensive knowledge in soils, grasses, and
environmental issues. Susan is knowledgeable in flowers, as well as, soils and
environmental issues due to her many years gardening and worked in the agricultural
sector for the Simcoe County Federation of Agriculture for five years. Therefore, LB
Landscaping started with a bit of grass cutting and gardening. .
Each Year the business kept growing and in 2006 because the maintenance of gardens on
large summer properties became there main focus of business Barry & Susan decided to
expand their business to include a greenhouse. Now they operate two full greenhouses
and are open to retail sales from their farm gate property. Sales include annuals,
perennials, and fresh market produce.
The property that LB Landscaping is run out of has been owned and operated by the
family since the late 1800's and therefore is a strong family business with strong
community interest.
Page 133 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
NEW BUSINESS OBJECTIVES
LB Landscaping has set a new business objective. The Company will still have a
strong focus on property management and landscaping structure such as gardens and yard
designs. Going forward, we will be able to offer a variety of different market products in
different ways.
The Greenhouse will be offering a new concept of roadside market now know as CSA
Program. (Community Shared Agriculture). The program would run for 16 weeks
Based on the CSA model, people purchase annual shares in the farm's harvest and in
return, receive weekly food baskets full of fresh produce throughout the season. The
Greenhouse would grow fresh produce when in season to be picked up on a weekly
schedule by registered families for their weekly produce needs. Consumer demand for
locally produced affordable natural food has driven the evolution of CSA's When you
join, you are not just buying vegetables, you are supporting sustainable farming practices
and contributing to a reliable, healthy local food supply and income for farmers. One
share is geared to provide produce for a family of four.
Barry & Susan Leigh would like a separate piece of property that could in time
become a registered organic and specified for Market Garden use distinct from the
existing farm property. The main farm would still be used for normal farm practices and
the Greenhouse operation and landscaping.
LB Landscaping now employs two full time seasonal help and occasional part time
help as needed along with both Barry & Susan working full time. As the new business
grows, they plan to employ more seasonal labourers. The main goal is to retain
knowledgeable, skilled, and loyal employees. The business is seasonal and experiences
down times. Landscape labourers assist in providing snow removal services in the
winter months as needed.
Farm Market research has shown that buying local fresh produce is important to
today's consumer.
Page 134 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
MARKET APPROACH
The Green House at LB Landscaping will offer a unique opportunity for families in the
areas of Oro - Medonte Township, Orillia and the City of Barrie. This market area
includes a high population of Baby Boomers and Generation Xers. The company's
marketing efforts will focus primarily on the consumer market, which consists of
professionals, dual- income families, and recent retirees.
Target Market
In order to identify the specific traits of the target market, LB Landscaping researched the
markets by postal code. The results of the study, as shown in attached appendix
confirmed the company's initial theory that the majority of the population was comprised
of the selected target consumer. The selected market contains solid citizens, small towns,
affluent families, and comfortable empty Nesters, as depicted in the following bar chart.
Target Market
Groups
MGroup B: 13 Group C: 13 Group E: 13 Group K:
Affluent Families Solid Citizens Comfortable Nests Small Towns
Page 135 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
Solid Citizens
The Solid Citizens group makes up the largest percentage of the total population
(24.50 %) in the target area. "This group is primarily comprised of professional married
couples within the age range of 45 to 59 with children in elementary or high school.
They have high discretionary income, upscale homes, and demanding careers. "They
appreciate beauty whether that is in the arts, in nature..." (Generation5). This group
spends the most on landscaping services, which amounts to an annual expenditure of
$5,557,610. The next group, Small Towns, also live in single detached homes.
Small Towns
This group is the second highest population percentage (18.88 %) in the LB
Landscaping's selected market. The Small Towns group contains both age waves — Baby
Boomers and Generation X. They are mainly located in rural communities; and
according to the Canadian Mosaic, they represent one in ten Canadian households. Even
though their income is slightly below average, "Large amounts are spent on home upkeep
and renovations" (Generation5). For this reason, the Small Towns class is included in the
target market. Their annual expenditure on landscaping services is $4,282,762. The third
group, Affluent Families, spend large amounts of money on improving their homes as
well.
Affluent Families
Although the Affluent Families category is a smaller percentage (11.50 %) of the target
market, the people in this group are financially well off. They are generally married
between the ages of 30 to 49 with children. They are hard pressed for time as both
parents typically work and their children are involved with various extra curricular
activities. "Much time, money, and energy is focused on improving their homes with ...
landscaping" (Generation5). Affluent Families group has expenditures of $2,608,674 on
the goods and services provided by landscaping companies annually. The final niche,
Comfortable Empty Nesters, is similar to Affluent Families because both categorizes
appreciate home improvements.
Page 136 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
Comfortable Nests
This group has a slightly lower population percentage (11.01%) than the Affluent
Families group. Comfortable Empty Nesters commonly reside in the suburbs and occupy
single detached homes. Usually, Baby Boomers make up this group. In addition, they
are facing retirement and enjoy many outdoor activities including gardening. "There is
some sense that this is their time and that they are going to spend a bit to make their
family home look nice ..." (Generation5). This group spends $2,497,522 annually on
landscaping services. Moreover, it is evident that all groups in the selected market take
pride in the appearance of the homes.
Although Solid Citizens, Small Towns, Affluent Families, and Comfortable Nests groups
have varying income levels, they have similar purchasing behaviours. The combined
selected target market spends $14,946,568 annually on landscaping services. According
to the area websites, the company's selected market area is predicted to be the fastest
growing urban area in Canada. However, LB Landscaping will need to review any
external constraints affecting the company.
Even though this research was done for the landscaping part of the business, it still shows
the population of the area and the average annual income for each sector in respect.
Page 137 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
SALES PROJECTIONS
LB Landscaping had sales amounting to $118,000 in 2008 the Greenhouse had sales of
$15.000.00 (January to December). However, with the new proposed business idea in
2010 they will increase the Gardening income by $20,000; increase in sales is due to the
CSA Program which would operate from the new severed piece of property
CSA Program
LB Landscaping would offer 50 families a full share for 16 weeks at $25.00 per week
generating at seasonal income of $20,000. Paid in monthly installments per family of
$100.00
In return the family would receive hampers, weekly, throughout the season and may
include such things as
Beans Broccoli Carrots Chard Cucumber Onions Peppers Pumpkins Rhubarb
Squash Herbs Lettuce Garlic Beets Corn Peas Potatoes Radishes Tomatoes
Flowers Turnips
A recipe will be included each week
Growing food organically includes such practices as the use of crop rotations, cover
cropping and using natural amendments to improve the soil and plant health.
Total revenues of $35,000 are from both sale of flowers and CSA Program. The flowers
are started in the spring and summer months in the Greenhouse and some of the Produce
the remainder will be sown directly in the ground.
Page 138 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
9:21 PM LB Landscaping
05127109 Profit & Loss
Accrual Basis January through December 2008
Jan - Dec 08
Ordinary IncomelExpense
Income
Farm Income
4010 -,3afd0nij49
15.6)27 75
4350 - Land Rental
5,00000
Total Farm income
N) r,27
Landscape Cuniparry income
4020 Grass CuftingiMaintenance
5405343
4040 Snowplowing
19,92761
4060 Materials & Supplies
13, 195.94
4060 Landscaping
26,752 00
4090 Excavator
3,615 00
4100 • Sales
48490
4110 • Finance Charges Earned
2001
Total Landscape Company Income
118,048.89
Total Income
138,675,64
Cost of Goods Sold
5000 - Equipment Rental
23611
5010 • Job Materials
7,521 64
5020 Subcontractors
4,17891
5030 • Direct Labour
26,6!8,65
5040 • Greenhouse inventory
19,89970
Total COGS
58,455.61
Gross Profit
80,221 03
Expense
6050, Cell Phone
1 A95 so
6090 - Building Supplies
89253
6095 • Landscape Materials
34646
'3120, Bank Service Charges
591 83
6140 - Contributions
11400
6150 • Depreciation Expense
1.744 93
6175 • Tools and Machinery
2,95464
,3180, Insurance
6196 Commercial insurance
480831
6197 BuislFarm Ins.
78.31
6198 Trailer Insurance
235,98
6420 Wca
1172.34
Final 6180 • Insurance
6,295 94
6200 , Interest Expense
1210 K
F'
S oancca Charge
1 242 04
6220 - �,)" interest
to 1-136,37
6200 - Interest Expense - Other
4,569,40
Total 6200 - Interest Expense
1659831
6230 • Licenses and P1!!r-rjts
'18,50
6240 - Miscellaneous
14,000
6250 Postage and Delivery
13464
:TA'"o
2270 AC-CoUnting 1 Lz;a!
6275 Advertising
2671,79
6280 Fees & Dues
65000
63i)o - Repairs
6 33
.205 f 7cOht w cclNwary
752.15
6310 Building Repairs
1656,90
6315 Machinery Repairs
3.291,95
v %16 Fuei for Equip. x iviacnin,"
—
-4 � 6�6 —
Page 139 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
9!21 PM
05127109
Accrual Basis
LB Landscaping
Profit & Loss
January through December 2008
Not Ordinary income
Jan - Dec 08
6350 - Travel & Ent
6360 Entertainment
74 "15
6360 1 ravel & Ent - Other
142 10
Total 6350 • Travel & Ent
21685
6560 - Office Supplies
2,607 10
6560 - Payroll Expenses
2.554 57
6600 JO Leader Lease
6.2 70,84
6650 JO Excavator Lease
3007.96
6670 Uniforms
450,90
9999 • Suspense
000
Total Expense
71 22042
Not Ordinary income
9 M0 6: i
Other Income/Expense
Other Income
7010 - Interest Income
1 98
7030 - Other Income
77304
7040, GaInfLoss on Farm Equip. Sales
10,656.19
Total Other Income
11,431 .71
Other Expense
2004 Ford F550
6196 - Truck Insurance
2,17902
6321 - Truck Fuel
2,766 5 9
6322 - R & M
604 75
6324 Truck Lease
4,641,76
Total 2004 Ford F650
10,191 12
2006 Ford Escape Expenses
6860, Gas
1,24906
6865 • Auto insurance
962,04
6870 Fseape tease
.5 05548
2006 Ford Escape Expenses - Other
11,83
Total 2006 Ford Escape Expenses
7,27841
Ford R-ingaer eypevses
6880 - Ranger cruel
1 S 7 2 77
6890 - Truck Insurance
885,02
Ford Ranger Expenses - Other
82.72
Total Ford Ranger Expenses
2,540,51
PERSONAL
Disability Insurance
571,20
1 55
other'fuff
r'!3r
4;jr, R?
Pet Expenses
1.23237
Total PERSONAL
5,67594
6100 • Farm Expenses
6226 Farm Insurance
886,26
6100 • Farm Expenses - Other
952.76
Total 6100 - Farm Expenses
1 839 012
Pacts 2
Page 140 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
9:21 PM LB Landscaping
05127109 Profit & Loss
Accrual Basis January through December 2008
Jan - Doc 08
6900 • USE OF HOME
6905 Property Taxes
1 74769
6910 Telephone
2. 104 32
5920 hydro
"I "I Q 11 146
6930 Medical
1,213 70
6940 Water Heater Rental
368 25
6950 House R & M
t26 34
6660 House 111sulatice
1,249.96
6900, USE OF HOME - Other
2748
Total 6900, USE OF HOME
12.83942
Total Other Expense
40,364,42
Not Othor!ncamo
'28,932 7i
Net Income
-19,932.10
Page 3
Page 141 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
Future Forecasts
Revenue increases are a direct reflection of the number households in the area.
Therefore, LB Landscaping. calculated the growth rate for the selected target area as
7.2% (www.citv.)rillia.on.ca and www.citv.barrie.on.ca). Based on this percentage, the
second and third year sales revenues are $158,676.00 and $170,100.00, respectively. The
basis of the growth rate includes the areas surrounding the company's physical location.
LOCATION & PHYSICAL FACILITIES
The location not only provides a home for Barry and Susan, but also offers all the
necessities to effectively operate the business. Barry and Susan Leigh have farmed at this
location for over 40 years. The location is described as two, west half of Lot 24 and pt.
Lot 25 in the Oro - Medonte Township.
Selected Location
LB Landscaping operates from R.R. #3, 290 Ridge Road West, Oro Station, Ontario, LOL
2EO. This site provides a central location to the selected target market . Furthermore,
the new, severed, parcel of land would allow expanded market garden in a specialized
area. It would have easy access from the existing driveway for equipment . In addition,
the property has 122 acres of viable agricultural land. This fact allows Barry & Susan
Leigh the opportunity to carry on a viable normal farm practice without having to
designate all the land as organic. The final reason that LB Landscaping and The Green
House. will operate from this location is accessibility to Highway 400 and Highway 11.
This accessibility permits ease of bulk deliveries (i.e. Fertilizer).and easy access to the
selected consumer.
Description of Physical Facilities
The portion of the property allocated to LB Landscaping & The Green House facilities
includes 7.25% use of the family home for office space, 100% use of the workshop,
0.126% use of land, and the use of existing equipment. These section details are below.
Page 142 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
Office
. LB Landscaping. Will occupy the family room, which is 232 square feet for use as an
office.
Workshop
The 4,000 square foot building is made of steel, as seen in the picture below. In addition,
the building has insulation, electricity, water, and heating.
The workshop is essential to the operations of LB Landscaping & "The Green House The
Company completes the physical components of constructing the landscape designs in
the workshop. Furthermore, the structure houses all tools, equipment, and demand
materials. Due to the easy access and layout of the workshop, the company performs all
repairs and maintenance indoors. This fact contributes to reducing maintenance costs.
However, this space is not suitable for storing bulk inventory items.
Page 143 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f...
Page 144 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
Business Insurance
Fhe company requires business, insurance in order to operate �jnd there are 4 ;everal types.
These types include general liability, equipment / machinery, and automobile insurance
coverage Peel Nlwuai carry insurance for 1.13 I'andwapilig Tfausure insurance i,(d. Is
I B l,andscaping's insurance agent. Shelley Kirby, Transnre Insurance l.td., provided
details of each type of insurance for the company. The first type of insurance discussed
is general liabllity coverage.
1, -
General Liability Coverage
This mandatory coverage provides a $5million dollar liability for landscaping, general
propertY
and porzonal iniury, Goneral h Phil j*ty coveragt-
jjC 4) iP cjjl(k,� � fire
insurance, Equipment / machinery coverage is also mandatorv.
Equipment/ Machinery Coverage
The company realizes that damage and / or theft of equipment is a possibility. Equipment
1
machinery insurance is required. Fhe final coverage required for the company is
automobile coverage.
Automobile Coverage
The zffltoluobib_- ;Instfrance provides coinprehensive imd collision fl-e nI ally
requires protection from theft or damage of the truck, as well as from bodily iijiury or
pwpefiV datilage it)
The annual cost tbr all types of insurance coverage is $6.885 dollars, The company has
the appr-pr;,-i!,- husinLsss fnsuran,— to pr rovido the necessary A
- ssur:
Insurance Ltd. does not provide coverage for workers' compensation, the Ontario's
Workplace ,-4itety rind insurance Act fern Inds Al 6usine-.sses too0tan-1 1111is insurance
0,vx,vw.kv--iib.on.ca). The company will remit monthly payments directly to the WSJ
t R.
P-ie ha.sls f'Or the pa-,,,ments is the conwanv*s oa-vroll. Me location and Dhviical 1, �jitics
dictate other legal specifications that the hU,,ineSS must cornpIV -,kith, as LiiSCLISSCCI in the
Page 145 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
Employees
Currently LB Landscaping and The Green Mouse employ 2 seasonal fall time employees.
The job requires employees to be adaptable because job duties performed change from
day to day and with each season. The website of the I luman Resources and Development
Centre assisted the company in developing the landscape labourer job description. The
table below explains the duties, responsibilities, and employment requirements for
landscape labourers.
Duties - Spread top soil, plant flowers, vegetables grass, shrubs and trees
- Cut grass, rake, weed gardens, prune shrubs and trees, and
maintenance duties as directed by supervisor
- Operate mowers, snow blowers, chain saws, and other landscape
maintenance equipment
- Perform duties to maintain landscaped environments
Employment - Completion of secondary school
Requirements Experience in field
Source: Human Resource Development Canada. (200 1).Nauonal Occupation Classijications (8612).
Retrieved May 17, 2006, from http.�,� v.hrd� - ge�.c
wAvv— q_drhc,_ - -4
Page 146 of 205
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009 -B -12 (Barry and Susan Leigh) 290 Ridge Road Consent f
(he dim" perf'Ormcd by the land,;cape 1,thourcrs are )';ist
in nalure, Thi,; fact k-
,ri jblt,s
employees to be busy without becoming bored with tasks. The company has a strict
hcs
POlicv to have cmplo�c,�s rricet the �mplo mcnt rcquu for t
result, it is imperative that 1.11 Landscaping's employees are well educated and have
extensive experience in the field. Because there are few representing. the company, the
success of LB Landsc,,iping and The Green I louse depends on the roles of their
employees. For this reason, the company offers competitive wages. Although the
kompaay has the i'esoutc, s to coulPlete loaliv 'u,16'acts, LB Luodstapii g tii a t tit-e
require the use of contingent workers.
Contingent Workers
In order to a--,sist the company during peak pc-,i,,-ds, it will be necessary to have
contingent workers. Based on financial projections, it will not he feasible to hire
additional iuii-time staff. Therefore, LB Landscaping. plans to contract the services of
continaent workers on a revular basis. Personnel is verb important to the future needs
of the business.
Page 147 of 205
LO
0
N
4—
O
co
N
O1
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
O1
ol .v..
............
Mqit
VAW,
M4
I `c13,;� �; ?+`!.� ±�, as +• . �.
gal
tit
All
IWII
LO
0
N
4-
O
N
LO
N
O1
LO
0
N
4-
O
C7
LO
N
O1
LO
0
N
4-
O
LO
N
O1
LO
0
N
4-
O
LO
LO
N
O1
LO
0
N
4-
O
LO
N
O1
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
P�n.l lirrrla�� �'.a r�i ^R Fuur�
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -B -15
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Consent Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
Jane Walsh
Lot 28, Concession 3,
1753 Ridge Road West
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 007 -21400
D10 -39336
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
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 1755 Ridge Road West 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 conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.18 hectares (0.44
acres) from the subject property to the neighbouring residential lot being 1755 Ridge Road West.
The proposed retained lot, would consist of approximately 0.75 hectares (1.85 acres), and is currently
contains a residential dwelling. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot
addition.
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of application 2009 -B -15 is to permit a lot addition /boundary adjustment. The proposed
lot addition will result in no increase in frontage along Ridge Road West, with a depth of
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -B -15 Page 1 of 4
Page 157 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
approximately 256 metres and an area of approximately 0.18 hectares. The proposed enhanced lot
being 1755 Ridge Road West, will have a new total lot area of approximately 1.0 hectare. No new
building lot is proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES /LEGISLATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject lands are designated Shoreline and Rural 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 Shoreline and Rural policies stated
in the Official Plan, and otherwise conforms with the boundary adjustment policies contained in
Section D.2.2.2.
Due to the proposed boundary adjustment on the subject lands having a split designation in the
Official Plan, Section E1.8, applies to the application at hand. This Section of the Official Plan states:
"Where the general intent of the document is maintained, minor adjustments to boundaries will not
require amendment to this Plan"
An objective of the Shoreline is to protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate
shoreline, while the intent of the Rural policies is to preserve and promote the rural character of the
Township and the maintenance of the open countryside. The proposed lot addition would add lot area
to the existing residential use. The general intent of the Official Plan is maintained.
ZONING BY -LAW
The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) and Shoreline Residential (SR)
Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law. The lot to be enhanced, 1755 Ridge Road West, is also
zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) and Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone and currently contains a
residential dwelling. The applicant has indicated that the portion of the lands to be conveyed
currently contain the septic system for the dwelling located at 1755 Ridge Road West. The portion
that is proposed to be conveyed is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone. The enhanced lot will have
a total area of approximately 1.0 hectares (2.47 acres). Therefore, the application would comply with
the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By -law.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -B -15 Page 2 of 4
Page 158 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
Department-
Building Department-
Engineering Deportment-
SCh8du|g#1-LooatkonK8ap
It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2009-B-15, for a boundary
adjustment would appear to conform to the general intent of the Official P|on, and maintains the use
and setback provisions of the Zoning By-law.
Respectfu!N submitted:
RPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-15
Reviewed by,
Glenn White
Manager, Planning Services
Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Page 3 of 4
Page 159 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-13-15 (Walsh)
LANDS TO` BE CONVEYED
ENHANCED LC-T 1755RIDGE ROAD WEST
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-15
'Al
I
ROGEROPID—,
RETAINED LANDS
0 2043 80 120 160
Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Page 4 of 4
Page 160 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
Page 161 of 205
NO. 20 III PARr t - n.ro 0.876Haf
yMCCEPCOU�NIOG
. C WEST ..- ...r�x = anRT 2 _ Area m a.�e'irHio. C')
AS o0.6H
KNOWN
— P- -
RT s A 0.72H ..
w+• �� r;~o
� I I
� _ _ynico I I
WAIL
__ F e Ao.x�sneN.
e
PART OF THE EAST•PART OF LOT 28,
t_il
CONCESSION 3
GEOGRAPHIC TOWNGH;P F ORO )
qp TOWNSHIP OF ORO— MEDONTE
F
M.
_
d cuNTY
I
I
I
I
I acAR:Re R
I w
___ - -J
EAST
PART;
OF LOT 28, .oR:
II CONCESSION
3
R
I
� a
se$`!n FOAO AD N05' pNZr s55�y.sv bn
^j AOUR RO vi sw
<c. i•�%
OGE
K OW, °.',•Y"� —'' = _mw
n
� ;nom_ —_p 88•
_ -
EAST PANT Ot m'� LOT W. u 28,
4p9
CONCESSION
J.
rc
I
I
I
�
s
I
I
e
p
� ��
� EYlfli! YaRWEt 4M1flNC L10 Q�
LAKE SIMCOEy�p,
Page 161 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
T�
County of Simcoe
Transportation and
Engineering
1110 Highway 26,
Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0
Steven Farquharson
Secretary- Treasurer
Township of Oro- Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Oro, Ontario
LOL 1X0
Dear Mr. Farquharson,
Main Line (705) 726 9300
Toil Free 1 866 893 9300
Fax (705) 727 7984
Web: simcoe.ca
TZANSPORTATION, AND
June 2, 2009
*Via: E -Mail*
RE: Consent Application No. 2009 -5 -15 (Walsh)
1753 Ridge Road West (County Road 20), Lot 23, Concession 3, Township of Oro -
Medonte, County of Simcoe
Thank you for circulating the above -noted application to the County of Simcoe for review. The
applicant is seeking consent to add approximately 1874 m2 from the subject property to an existing
adjacent lot. The existing County Road 20 right -of -way adjacent to the subject property is
approximately 17.0 metres wide. In accordance with Schedule 5.5 of the current Simcoe County
Official Plan, the required basic right -of -way width for County Road 20 is 20.0 metres. In order to meet
this requirement, the applicant will be required to transfer to the County of Simcoe a road widening of
approximately 1.5 metres along the entire frontage of the subject property. This will provide a 10.0
metre right -of -way from the center of the County Road 20 road allowance.
The County of Simcoe has no objection to the approval of the application, subject to the inclusion of the
following condition:
1. The Applicant shall transfer to The Corporation of the County of Simcoe ( "County "), at no cost,
a fee simple, unencumbered interest in a road widening along the entire frontage of the
subject property to provide a 10.0 metre right -of -way from the center of the County Road 20
road allowance.
The Applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the County's Transportation and Engineering
Department a preliminary reference plan (3 copies) which sets out the road widening to be transferred
to the County. Upon approval, the County will instruct the surveyor to deposit the reference plan in the
Page 162 of 205
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009 -B -15 (Jane Walsh) 1753 Ridge Road West Boundary adjus...
County Comments - 2
Land Registry Office for Simcoe County and request the surveyor provide the County with 3 copies of
the signed deposited reference plan.
All costs associated with the land transfer, including costs relating to surveying, legal fees and
disbursements, agreements, GST, etc. shall be borne by the Applicant. All documentation is to be
prepared and registered by the County's Solicitor and to be executed where required by the Applicant.
The Applicant shall submit to the County's Solicitor a deposit in the amount of $2000.00 (payable to:
Graham, Wilson and Green in Trust), prior to the services being rendered.
The County of Simcoe is requesting the road widening pursuant to section 53(12) of the Planning Act
and is acquiring the land for the purpose of widening a highway in accordance with section 31(6) of the
Municipal Act, 2001.
Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sinc
er n Xthe County of Simcoe
v t
s
Paul Murphy\\B.SC.
Planning /Engineering Technician
(705) 726 -9300 ext. 1371
Cc: Jim Hunter, County of Simcoe
Bryan MacKell, County of Simcoe
X:lCerporate SeroiceslPtanning':D - Development & Pianning D'D07 to 014 Development Correspondences .tiro- PRedontetDIO Severance, & D13
`dariancest2003t1753 Ridge Road, 03845, Jute 2,09iT &E Continents, June 2,02.doc
Page 163 of 205
to �,. , y �• . -- I
• � to 4 1, r
Al
eY'v. -
'E.;: 4:.., • � { � cr q .1' `�' �_ . � t �f/: _` +,�augs•wfp � �v? p � c i ,
`..'`,° �'a i L9 ii+1r. r� ` .t.'�a• �'. s r,• 1 t 1 �' 'V, e -
i�;'t
SJ
� .�tPl -$ r+� _ ". �', i ,•• ;4 — +�^�a� '. rr yp., �,.
,�
i }V
� jy. f,{r t r3'. }.�"' •a -/ I�pfi , �'r { ,`rr" �•�+ ��l ' _ ,' 4� ..
Y ,
�h fiirei
rrlt..�t,stt ,�t�,� f C <rfL t M1 h +va.i it
"? � a t �.• q' �r ' r"� <! k �' P. 'f�r ` \ e �+ � � yy 1l s '" r v't r � ` .
to ra�� � �`•� � I •� S�r /''tY,s• '`� _ �iff 1(•� �j�� t Y ? A+ t f' �� �' ., _
;.S P � 1J Y ' t "' bi1t f •f. . - -. � i �`�ry� � I ' � f 1
t t
f2 g. F �}J,'F fJl,J •� It (, 1 Y''1 i. i' .. .,as` .Y n <1, a.,
jff�.�j i•` t 1 1, "� J ity I
`{ r r . `mil i (i-,
* Via. �' ;' av 1�' ti•4 frd` 'I� O%ijW
ir_•.`•° J ,r rf ✓• .. if ��ti Mr Y
,r.,, � },�°hT4•Ati � `w. ���yN, { St ! . ? �t � 6 1.�� • 4 1, _ �' i�! r i
.'�, ,r } �• �r! � r y..2 _ q ��i �,.! �Et f•'�t. � SSA e: � c/ ! • � M1 �'JL,iYI',
. �J, ��' G•� 4'�.a7-r r�[ l `�.c�:..f �• ��j ♦1 •!i�R? yl ? ,.{a �V g vs�� �..�T'j� ,�
* tt''J qyl ���° ;'rS- M1,`3����1`%Y'YrA�`. ,.} d�- r #'�r�w�, F�t� 'F1�•• tijJ 7jr � 'r 4 ,� �`
4
r,,' rFri \ Fo5, <h- �C,�(•1,�' 1� 1r„`% t Rl.
�f�'f 'P i' � � �. � � - �•Y J > i %r{ y'�,.R,. ►.[ ' � I'�flj Lf � '; � y
f
4 r [
' 1 y�fl. \ IJ S•, t� ...•t ,w.�f. r / - � ' ( j � x�� ± y 3,!''i d �'y :'i
�,� [ r, tet a � � 4 t J,,ls ► � � f f � � I ;its. ,� � ; j � � ,'s[ , t -
�cf-
°s ��� ;� }�tf� ,[�•'('� '.• ,.• � r� ,mss -- �r��.� r _
'7'' "; � ^�' '� tr r" �' 1 rF _ •�� S i ..��d� .. . ,i�} it �a. � t ,
1.4 � •rtol a Jt t! i i'��+ i, @.;S r
s<•.+� t,'#tl � j � � r;• ,�, 'avi 1 �_� � '. a .� r
�i`� at i ''4.y1t�f , la... � ''���rp r � '��,� J��y +'•9 t 3� �r �� ' ... .. r1i i r r � J S'
..sjr � f rt 0ys �. k • *Y
4
r5+ ' #� Mj Ala �' i j' • IJtt� f v' , i'r i
-
h } � •� t� it 4 � � .� f. ,
A .r� it (.�h` {il `, f �•- R 4
It it :r. !F , 1•
M1► �_ ` s � r?� " ' Any .� -.n� .�rE' _t _ r 'f�c' ?e.,. �!
s y�>
y
S t ,d 1� Y r ri*t I• i 'S h����1� r �.. �� 4
\r.lv {{�,,�� n7idAy .,4ti s `, ,�1 fr�_ 1! � +•„ra! r ' 1 „�` If
w +a +'`'� , 4�yth "�.. r R ''Ir*'�':r � -. �vt;±,�'y'� ?"" y --y,, � I +•� ` ,
' y i 1 i,, s � ¢ �.1..;y[• -�^ �.�1 �,,' 1` '_ r rlil +1� '�'',
�•,i 1iS+ ?t � � t nil �Ffi�t� .��,- s r 1 "�' h r'� {f�'��: � yy �1 d, t l�r .,P wj''' � y�
.f• � ,. ...... a .. ✓U)I..A :. � � %� 7,+t .. t � J i gglr Imo. 4yo ., Y' -b'f 71)i � i
�t• t. �ro } .�:,+s�d?s�.,, . :' li.n„i t�?r\ti�.)9S i,k'' .y 1 � k'
�
�� �l'`.y{e'�l �a � 0 �.�„ iJ�^ '� t�. �• > rr . � � r�« . - °f.lY
,r'.7t ;,r
,fs-�, r � • t �'' say +s
+^r S// r,.. f sly E _ �4t1•N' .t, `K i� F# '
,.e�$ e J o afar`' 1w rF.
� � : �; �,. �, 4'
,, ' r �,`' � Y �`� -"` 1I�% ,�, ; J `�, p f' � ! it • ?fir, r�'i--� ";
>J , r Y, � h 1 �,, la . i 11 �'� g� •�� .i. ���� e � rY'`X.y� °t _'' ',w „
{ ;fir A YT' • r.
UF IF
f j t Y°.+t� ir',*�,,y P � r
Iv jA
�,
.!`.%�^^. —Y "{>tis �'`I. ,,'`� /i'i'r�.}y�ti �y »dttll.q.. tYr�l'`h �l'•1�', rv.l.
E'er"' Pr• a. l �i�.. _ 1_ r, td- t �. ✓,.i_
l.1 tt
ti
4.
IN
47
P I
-.1. 01,
.•1
1 1 §•,.r "w
Qf t
�Al
A7If
FM�&
V, IA.
A.'r.
-44, t�
Ali
101
lk
"4;j
V
A
VI
if�. . : �. ... . .. I . . .11, 1 ` : :- C
lg . 11
- , I , '
I
Alll 1,
VIP"
It.
36
ill�%k J
TV �Wl
VIP"
It.
36
r I "1` "� .1'',. (/ r n•F(�' •,Jo. _ �.. { (y.r
1' 1 µ�y. , yt �{y �y� 1' K '•,�j i -7
` A
�3 '• \'may 153 �r;.€ �' �' �,}• ,r� , •�_ �. {� ('.Ct� r,'p' �;`, 45 +�V,>fr f�'�
l o: •, r t� a r , r}'iy ;j, ltv r . n +y .} j?tj
�r y,4Q► •w1a #� N t 7 • 1
.a6' -- �'rs "iY I "t Iy .• t
{,a` �. ��'�.' ' ,� �� � �- •> � ,��. _P " Vii.
,'4• YI \` Y� N[•, � �. r,4 - r Z'°. y i d. �j. �,�t� ,'i ; 1 l0.\ v F ^7y�,+.
't w �� 5l L' ( f r k1rlw` w. {_,y.y� _ Y 1 ,. 'x,•f :i
ik
S�Ci"- (�':... • # }� �,5..., t1 Fr „`• ,i„
JA
' Y1
I• Ir + i ., r•a
. ` ` , r r. • ,( ti� Y r ,t . .� �5ti' � ] �",Y' u �d)7 it t1 w L3 �'
r • � J E i i •� t} t i
T�. I � • • ;t,. n� i•._��Vyl���`{i?) � .{ ✓.. � � trrl I.�` } I t� ., y�4 � .7� � �;
,. •:�r..�.yT� • • - .i,+ \J�rs',�`�t'.,�7,I{yC�# ply' S "' "1�. h 1.,. �,y�))yy ry �,.rW � ;.,
-W,3;
�' � 5' "mot {�;��%` s,,,y`�ni r, 'w �' l ��, ��` i•
JET
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
�'n: «�f Ne.ira�c, Fitt fKq Pa�rve
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -B -16
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Consent Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
John and Nancy Cameron
South West 1/4 Lots 11, Concession
10, Plan 51 R -6310
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346 -010- 004 -12600
1384 Line 10 North
D10 -39334
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be
prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor and 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; Furthermore, the legal description of the
severed lot be identical to that contained in the original deed- and must be so designated on a
Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant;
3. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the consent application is for a technical severance to recreate a lot which once
existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along
Line 9 North of approximately 307 metres (1,006 feet), a lot depth of approximately 593 metres (1945
feet), and a lot area of approximately 16.9 hectares (42 acres). The lands to be retained would have
frontage along Line 10 North of 611 metres (2005 feet), a lot area of approximately 26.5 hectares (66
acres), and currently contains a dwelling and various outbuildings.
The applicant's solicitor has submitted a historical timeline of the property, which has been attached
for the Committee's reference. The deeds showed that the lots were once separate and conveyable
in 1866. In 1879, Parts 1 and 2 on Plan 51 R -6310, which is the proposed retained lands, merged and
became one lot. This was subsequently followed by Parts 3 and 4 merging in title with Parts 1 and 2
in 1890.
I ANALYSIS: 1
The purpose of consent application 2009 -B -16 is for a technical severance to create a lot which once
existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -13-16 Page 1 of 5
Page 168 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
along Line 9 of approximately 307 metres (1,006 ft), a lot depth of approximately 593 metres (1945
ft), and a lot area of approximately 16.9 hectares (42 acres). The lands to be retained would have a
lot area of approximately 26.5 hectares (66 acres) and currently contain a dwelling and various
outbuildings.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN
Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow the Committee to consider
applications to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title the policy states the
creation of a lot maybe be permitted, provided that the Committee of Adjustment is satisfied that the
new lot:
a) Was once 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 system;
e) Fronts on a public road that is maintained year-round by public authority;
f) There are 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
Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains criteria for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In
particular, this section states "... 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:
Both the proposed severed and retained lots will have frontage on Line 9 North and Line 10 North,
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 a lot. Significant traffic volume will not be generated by an
additional dwelling if located on the proposed lot fronting onto Line 9 North. The applicant will be
required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Transportation Department.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-13-16 Page 2 of 5
Page 169 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-B-1 6 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive
Zoning By-la and is compatible with adjacent uses;
The application proposes to recreate 8lot that once existed, which has inadvertently been merged on
title. The lands bo bm retained would have on area of approximately 3Ghectares and a lot frontage
along Line 1O North of611 metres. The severed lands would have a lot area of approximately 18.8
hectares. The minimum required lot area for 8 residential use in theA/RU Zone is 0.4 hectares, and
the minimum lot frontage is 45 metres. it has been noted that the proposed Severed lot does meet the
lot area and frontage of the A/RUZone.
od Can be serviced with an appropriate wm6greupoly and means 0fsewage l;
The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for
septic system installation and private vvCder supply. The Township Zoning By-law has established 8
minimum lot area of 0.4 hectares for m residential use in the A/RU Zone to reflect development on
private services. The applicant will be required at the time of building permit to verify that the sewage
system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part H$f the Ontario Building Code.
0 Will not have a negative im4paotonthednainagepottenxs/nbhe 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 8 lot grading and
drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties.
o) Will not restrict the development 0f the retained lands or other parcels Of land, particularly as it
relates to the provision n/ access, if they are designated fordevelopmm7tbvthis Plan;
The 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 tm access are anticipated maa result of this consent.
tU Will not have anegative impact on the features and functions of any ecological heabuop/nbhemoaa;
0 Will not have @negative impact 0n the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses
in the area;
The application has been submitted to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for
formal comments. The Township has received oral comments from LSRCA, indicating that they have
no objection to the proposed recreation of the lot. LSRCA have indicated that the property is
regulated and that a permit would be required from their office if any development is to occur on
either the retained or severed lands
On this baaio, the application is considered to he appropriate and generally conforms to the Official
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-13-16 Page 3 of 5
Page 170Of205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-B-1 6 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
ZONING BY-LAW
The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-
law R7-95'as amended. The proposed severed and retained lots would continue to comply with the
provisions of the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone, as noted above.
Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning E�aw.
Department-
Building
Department-
Engineering Department —
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority-
Schedule #1- Location Map
By reviewing the comments received from the applicant's Solicitor, which confirmed that the 44.7acre
parcel described as Parts 3 and 4 of Plan 51 R-631 0, was once a separate and conveyable parcel,
before the merging with the Part 1 and 2 of Plan 51 R-631 0. The proposal appears to meet the criteria
required by Section D2.3.10of the Official Plan.
It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2009-B-16 for atechnical
severance xv0u|d appear to conform to the policies of the Official P|an, and maintains the use and
setback provisions ofthe Zoning By-law.
Reviewed by:
Gle6n White
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18,2009
Application No. 2009-13-16 Page 4 of 5
Page 171 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
LANDS TO
RETAINED LANDS 1384 LINE 10 NORTH
0
WIMM
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-16 Page 5 of 5
Page 172 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
LEWIS DOWNEY TORNOSKY LASSALINE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries
info@greatlaw.ca
Hon. Doug Lewis r.c.A., QC- P.C.
77 Coldwater Street East
Doug Downey B.A., M.A., LL.B., L .M., C.S.
Linda D. Lewis (1940 - 2008)
Orillia, ON L3V 1 W6
Sheri L. Tornosky B.A., LL.B.
Patrick J. Lassaline B.A., LL.B.
Tel: 705- 327 -2600
Timothy G. Timpano B.so, LL.B.
John H. Ewen B.A., LL.B., M.I.R.
Fax: 705- 327 -7532
June 10, 2009
Township of Oro - Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Committee of Adjustments
Dear Sirs:
RE: JOHN CAMERON
Application for Severance
Part Lots 11 and 12 Concession 10
This is an application to sever approximately 50 acres from a total of approximately 150 acres. This would
create two separate lots.
The lots were separately held and only merged as a result of Peter Shaw's separate acquisition of the two
properties.
The accompanying drawings are marginally awkward as the Lots between the east and west half of the
concession do not line up. This is the result of surveying lots from a crooked road (County Road 11). [see
fig 1]
100 Acres (more or less
In June 1865 Henry Shaw transferred 80 acres to Peter Shaw by Instrument 41882. This was described as
the whole east half of Lot 12 Concession 10, less 14 acres and 6 acres, with a right of way. I have not
determined the exact location of the 14 and 6 acre lots because they were obtained by Peter Shaw in 1877
and merged with the 80 acre parcel at that time. We are not requesting these smaller lots be re- recognized so
there is no point in outlining the exact location.
In November 1877 Frederick Shaw transferred 20 acres (14 + 6) to Peter Shaw by Instrument 289.
Peter Shaw now owned the entire east half of Lot 12. This is now referenced as Parts 1 & 2 on Plan 51R-
6310. The actual acreage is a bit less than 100 acres (actually 90 acres) but the land referred to over time has
remained consistent, regardless of the reported acreage. [see fig. 2]
Page 173 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
50 Acres (more or less)
In April 1879 William Lount transferred approximately 50 acres to Peter Shaw by Instrument 710. This was
described as the south half of the west half of Lot 11 Concession 10. It is now described as Parts 3 & 4 on
Plan 51R -6310. The actual acreage is a bit less than 50 acres (actually 45 acres) but the land referred to over
time has remained consistent, regardless of the reported acreage.
Prior to this point the 50 acres was held in a separate name from the 100 acres. At this point in time Peter
Shaw had acquired both properties and they merged. [see fig. 3]
There appears to have been no severances from the combined 150 acres of land, even prior to their merging.
The properties are now in the joint names of John & Nancy Cameron. [see fig. 4]
1 trust you find the above in order. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask.
Yours truly,
LEWIS DOWNEY TORNOSKY
LASSALINE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
00%
Douglas R. Downey
DRD/sm
Page 174 of 205
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009 -B -16 (John and Nancy Cameron) 1384 Line 10 North Tech
Fig. I- reference map
N V2 Lot I I
.......... ............... ............. -
S V2 Lot I I
N 1,12 Lot 12
............. . . ............ .....................
S '/z Lot 12
Fig. 2- 1877
N11 /2 Lot 1l
...........
William Greenshields
................ I .....................
S 12 Lot I I
William Lount
N1 /2 Lot 12
............. Peter Shaw . .......... ..........
S %2 Lot 12
Fig. 3- 1879
N 1/2 Lot I I
William Greenshields
I ............... ..........
S '/2 Lot I I
Peter Shaw
N 1/2 Lot I
........... Peter Shaw ............ ...
S 1/2 Lot 12
Fig. 4- current
N 1/2 Lot 11
............
Third Parties
............. I ............
S 1/2 Lot I I
John & Nancy Cameron
N 112. Lot I
John & Nancy Cameron
S 1/2 Lot 12
Page 175 of 205
O
N
O
^M
LL
C
I
C
C
a
a —
Q
m o I I�Q
U
9113Yp�:
li
z gFO
iiW
X z
I
i
z
s�oo.� G�
aXN °o
`zWgN
v'
O O LL W N wg34
?
Z
�'�
@$dy•
c
Ln o g
O O
''deg
@6!
,
U7 tl Q$
LL,
ppI ! g 9¢
!
£
W Y Z F-
t
�G./o
"oof
£amo
f
O O 3 O¢
6¢,�
j
w J O cr O
d m F O U
D
6£ ag N3010
J --------- w______
d/ OAV N ShV /553AW 3 ALM 3W#DTM ______ _
_____ _________._ __„____________ __
_e_ _ __ _ J
i
•
ISO MS Ow
M
f(V +'
o
m
tl
t7
11 ONY W SNDISS3 N33M13B 3OMNOTA' Oft@I
f � IIli
•N33M136h
_l •
� •
I . Of ON 6
0!W
LP
la
< I
xr6
o
a+
-
NNNNi
r �fA00WS NYU •. I 1
y e
,;,'i �f.%
iat �..
k
RI ifs ...�
Q# i 4i p
i C
ea.
6Y ��1 � [.r _ 1 .ice
%'.i� ?,: ±g 4•i �
&fmv.B skvss3yw 3JIJNMN'm
II .�
ti
.L
SNBSdP1S
SNO/S53av N33RL33 3.itYAUTK Q!M 3M @�l5 MaW' ii
fIVS85 N0019
v
• !
i
0 • •
•
O
N
O
^M
LL
LO
0
N
O
[`
a
W°
Z Z
Q
��i
a
��
z, c i
m
Binia
dl
6S
4°
Q
� tU) ((tl��i m
LLWW�o
g •
yt
C
W
rc i
�
§
g
o Uoo�a
NZZQNFW
n
Z
o�NZ
ikg
�g °
•
3�
�:
$
O v
-j
ad
a
O �e
°�
fV
as SS
ps Z6.
e�p'E3r',
oO'i�
I
CL i10
� W
la
� ¢_
�Ie
�N�fSS3J,4'CL�
-
-g
a
j II ONV OI
SNOISS33NOD
N33M130
3ONtlMOIIV
." OV08
Till
}
r
9 A
m
r!
_
Srl�•
it n e
�.
+
�
m
j
Its
n
Q.
�-
�
q
Q
t-
y
e \7
t�
`
C
C C)
1�
�a
i3
t•
e�
Q
Y
.a
°
a
g
� OI OW 6 SN04SS33NOO N33M13S 33NtlM0197
IId3
MOM �—
S
bt�ISS�'�,yC
a
LO
0
N
O
[`
LO
0
N
4—
O
co
ti
N
O1
/��
�:.
.,A,.
=r.,�^
��.�.:__
i
I � I
� ;.
.i
I �n
+ {.,. F
'� I��
�a
,. '+' �' , V+ .
,'I� � }'
. •f
•. .y
4 is �
',k II
�. {%
��,+
.�:a
?'•e
:i t a
.f
Q
'..
I',
i'
JJi
i
�'
•
� >.
��� '1 ^ "pl,,
''r
fir', .
/ .S "• PP
\ •,
y nr
fL::6.
a 9 . �
"!' 1 l -� f yr/ 'r:l , _
�•!,'
'`L,,
j•.• ,tai„
� - -.�, ,a �. � '0f;� -.-
�_
� �.} � ,r f Lea.. •.fl.
�
{� \ ��
l•
6
� ..�� � Lit
1/
,`%
jj
�"I.y,
t. . 1S - t• �� 4
LO
0
N
4—
O
co
N
O1
LO
0
N
4—
O
N
co
N
O1
mN
fl
11 r
M1.
IN
IV
—,4
YAd
nt
-I, kill,
YW
-t V
J.
ii
ir
Y
N. I
4
LO
0
N
4—
O
LO
co
N
O1
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
r
TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE
REPORT
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009 -B -17
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Consent Application
Motion #
June 18, 2009
Dorothy Horne
Lots 11 and 12, Concession 12,
1192 Line 12 North
Roll #:
R.M.S. File #:
4346- 010- 005 -0300
D10 -39345
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision:
That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be
prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor and 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; Furthermore, the legal description of the
severed lot be identical to that contained in the original deed- and must be so designated on a
Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant;
3. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the consent application is for a technical severance to recreate a lot which once
existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along
Line 11 North of approximately 278 metres (912 feet) a lot depth of approximately 728 metres (2388
feet) and a lot area of approximately 16.9 hectares (49.9 acres). The lands to be retained would have
frontage along Line 12 North of 248 metres (813 feet), a lot depth of approximately 1,464 metres
(4,803), a lot area of approximately 39.6 hectares (97 acres) and currently contains a dwelling and
various outbuildings.
The applicant solicitor has submitted a historical timeline of the property, which has been attached for
the Committee's reference. The original 100 acre parcel was transferred from Margaret McLeod to
brothers William McLeod Horne and Donald Horne in 1866. In 1877, the Crown Granted was given to
John McLean, which was then in 1881 was transferred to Mary McNiven. In 1882 a 2 acre parcel was
transferred to a third party. In 1888, Donald Horne transferred his interest in the south 1/2 of the north
half of concession 12 to William McLeod Horne. In 1889 the 50 acre parcel was transferred from Mary
McNiven to William McLeod Horne. It was at this point that the two properties merged into one lot.
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -13-17 Page 1 of 5
Page 186 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of consent application 2009 -B -17 is for a technical severance to create a new lot which
once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot
frontage along Line 11 approximately 278 metres (912 feet) a lot depth of approximately 728 metres
(2388 feet) and a lot area of approximately 16.9 hectares (49.9 acres). The lands to be retained
would have frontage along Line 12 North of 248 metres (813 feet), a lot depth of approximately 1,464
metres (4,803), a lot area of approximately 39.6 hectares (97 acres) and currently contains a dwelling
and various outbuildings.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN
Section D2..2.3 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow the Committee to consider
applications to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title maybe be permitted,
provided that the Committee of Adjustment is satisified that the new lot:
a) Was once 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 prevouis
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 system;
e) Fronts on a public road that is maintained year -round by public authority;
f) There are 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
Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains test for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In
particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be
retained and the lit to be severed:
a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis:
Both the proposed severed and retained land will have frontage on Line 11 North and Line 12 North,
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;
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009 -8 -17 Page 2 of 5
Page 187 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
This application proposes tocreate akt. Significant traffic volume will not be generated bvan
additional dwelling if located 0n the proposed lot fronting onto Line 11 North. The applicant will be
required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Public Works Department.
cU Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use inaccordance with the Comprehensive
Zoning By-la and is compatible with adjacent uses;
The application proposes to recreate a lot that once existed, which has inRdverU|dy been merged On
title. The lands to be retained would have an area of approximately 39.6 hectares and a lot frontage
along Line 12 North Qf248 metres, R lot depth Uf approximately 1.484metres. The severed lands
would have a lot area of approximately 20.2 hectares. The minimum required lot area for a residential
use in the A/RU Zone is 0.4 hectares, and the minimum lot frontage is 45 metres. It has been noted
that the proposed severed lot does meet the lot area and frontage of the /VRUZone.
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 G
minimum lot area of 0.4 hectares for a residential use in the A/RU Zone to reflect development on
private services. The applicant will h0 required at the time of building permit to verify that the sewage
system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8ofthe Ontario Building Code.
D Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns/nhhe area,'
Future residential development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, vvhn/e the
construction ofa new single detached dwelling may be subject to the completion ofn 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 0faccess, if they are designated for development by this Plan;
The 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 8negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature /n the area;
i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses
in the area;
The application has been submitted to the Luke Sim000 Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA)for
formal comments. The Township has received oral comments from LSRCA, indicating that they have
no objection to the proposed recreation of the subject lands. The have indicated that the property is
regulated and that a permit would be required from their office if any development is to occur on
either the retained or severed lands
On this basia, the application is considered to be appropriate and generally conforms tothe Official
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-17 Page 3 of 5
Page 188Of205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
Irk*] 11111111544 1- A
The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-
law 97-95, as amended. The proposed severed and retained lots would continue to comply with the
provisions of the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone.
Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department-
Building Department-
Engineering Department —
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority-
ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule #1- Location Map
CONCLUSION:
By reviewing the comments received from the applicants Solicitor, which confirmed that the 50 acre
parcel described as West 1/2 of Lot 11, was once a separate and conveyable parcel, before the
merging with the North 1/2 of Lot 12. The proposal appears to meet the criteria required by Section
D2.3.10 of the Official Plan.
It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2009 -B -17 for a technical
severance would appear to conform to the policies of the Official Plan, and maintains the use and
setback provisions of the Zoning By-law.
Reviewed by:
0,
Glenn White
Manager, Planning Services
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-17 Page 4 of 5
Page 189 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
Development Services Meeting Date: June 18, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-17 Page 5 of 5
Page 190 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
LEWIS DOWNEY TORNOSKY LASSALINE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries
in infocigrx-atliw.ca
Hon. Doug Lewis F.C.A , Q C- P,C- 77 Coldwater Street East Doug Downey BN., M.A., U.S., 1.LMXS,
Linda D. Lewis (1940 - 2008 ) Orillia, ON UV I W6 Sheri L.Tornosky S.A., LLB,
Patrick J. Lassaline B.A.. 1,1-R Tet: 705-327-2600 'rin)othy 6, Timpano B-sc-, LL,B.
Julm IT Ewen B.A., LL.B., MIR. Fax: 705-327-7532
May 29, 2009
Township of Oro-Mcdonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, ON
LOL 2XO
Attention: Committee of Adjustments
Dear Sirs:
RE: DOROTHY HORNE
Application for Severance
Lots I I and 12 Concession 12
This is an application to sever 50 acres from a total of 150 (or more particularly 148) acres. This would
create two separate lots of 50 and 98 acres respectively.
The lots were separately held and only merged as a result of William McLeod Home's separate acquisition
of the two properties,
100 Acres
In December 1866 the 100 acre parcel was transferred by Instrument 44067 from Margaret McLeod
(deceased) to brothers William McLeod Home and Donald Home [fig. 2].
In April 1873 Donald Home transferred his interest by Instrument 71858 in the north '/2 of the north half of
Con. 12 [see fig. 3] to William McLeod Home.
In November 1882 by Instrument 1668 a 2 acre parcel was transferred to a third party.
In June 1888 by Instrument 3409 Donald Home transferred his interest in the south 1/2 of the north half of
Con. 12 to William McLeod Home [see fig. 4].
50 Acres
In March 1871 Crown Grant was given to John McLean. In June 1881 by Instrument 1.339 the Estate of
John McLean transferred the west'/ of Lot I I to Mary McNiven.
Page 191 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
In 1889 the 50 acre parcel (west !/2 Lot 11) was transferred by Instrument 3722 from Mary McNiven to
William McLeod Horne [fig, 5].
At this point in time William McLeod Home had acquired the north 1/2 Lot], 2 from his brother and the
properties merged.
The properties continued within the Home family and the current severance would allow the 50 acre parcel
to be gifted to one son and the remaining 98 acre parcel to be gifted to another son and his wife [fig. 7].
1 trust you find the above in order. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask.
Your-, truly,
LEWIS DOWNEY TORNOSKY
LASSALINE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
el,
oug-C-p'. Do' w1ney
DRD/sm
Page 192 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
Fig. 5- 1989
Mary MeNiven
N VzLot 11
........ .....
William McLeod Home
S V2 Lot I I
William McLeod Home
........
N V2 Lot 12
....
S Y,. Lot 12
Fig. 6- Current
N VS, Lot 11
Dorothy Home
S '/2 Lot 11
Dorothy Home
N V2 Lot 12
S ', Vot 12
Fig. 7- Proposed
............
N '/,. Lot 11
Daniel Horne
S V, Lot I I
Robert & Jackie Home
...........
N 1/z Lot 12
S VS Lot 12
Page 193 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009-B-17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
Page 194 of 205
Fig. 1- reference map
............... ............. .......... -
N V2 Lot 11
S 1/2 Lot 11
N '/2 Lot 12
S I/, Lot 12
Fig. 2- 1866
N 1/2 Lot I I
... ........ Crown Land
S 1/2 Lot I I
William McLeod Home & Donald Horne
N '/z Lot 12
S'1/2 Lot 12
Fig. 3- 1873
N 1/z Lot I I
John McLean
...............
S /z Lot 11
William; McLeod Home
------------------------------------------------------
N 1/z Lot 12
.........
William McLeod Home & Donald Home
S '/,. Lot 12
Fig. 4- 1888
N I/-- Lot I I
Mary McNiven
S !% Lot I I
William McLeod Home
.. . .........
N V2 Lot 12
S 1/z Lot 12
Page 194 of 205
X
a
W�
I
i�
0i
e!7 {
o� CP
C 0
Teraview"
0 129 258 387 516 695 774 metres N
Apr 6, 2009 ` W+E
Protected by Copyright May not be reproduced without permission. This map was compiled using plans and documents S
recorded in the Land Registry System and has been prepared for property Indexing purposes only. This Is not a Plan of Survey.
For actual dimensions of property boundaries, see recorded plans and documents.
Teranet Customer Service Centre: 1- 800 - 208 -5263 (Toronto: 416 - 360 -1190)
LO
O
N
O
LO
O
0)
M
0-
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
LEWIS DOWNEY TORNOSKY LASSALINE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries
infoCRgrtatlaw_ca
Hon. Doug Lewis P.C.A., q.c., P.C.
77 Coldwater Street Fast
Doug Downey B.A., M.A., L -H. , u..rvL, CAS
Linda D. Lewis (1940 - 2008)
Orillia, ON L3V t W6
Sheri L. Tornosky B.A., LLB.
Patrick J. Lassaline B.A., LL.B.
Tel: 705- 327 -2600
Titnathy G. Timpano iisc., LL. B.
Jolui H. Ewen B.A., LL B.; M.I.R.
Fax: 705 -327 -7532
May 29, 2009
Township of Oro- Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Oro, ON
LOL 2X0
Attention: Committee of Adjustments
Dear Sirs:
RE: DOROTHY HORNE
Application for Severance
Lots i 1 and 12 Concession 12
This is an application to sever 50 acres from a total of 1.50 (or more particularly 148) acres. This would
create two separate lots of 50 and 98 acres respectively.
The lots were separately held and only merged as a result of William McLeod Home's separate acquisition
of the two properties.
100 Acres
In December 1866 the 100 acre parcel was transferred by Instrument 44067 from Margaret McLeod
(deceased) to brothers William McLeod Horne and Donald Home [fig. 2].
In April 1873 Donald Home transferred his interest by Instrument 71.858 in the north 't /z of the north half of
Con. 12 [see fig. 3] to William McLeod Home.
In November 1882 by Instrument 1668 a 2 acre parcel was transferred to a third party.
In June 1888 by Instrument 3409 Donald Home transferred his interest in the south %2 of the north half of
Con. 12 to William McLeod Home [see fig. 4].
50 Acres
In March 1.871 Crown Grant was given to John McLean. In June 1881 by Instrument 1339 the Estate of
John McLean transferred the west 1/z of Lot I I to Mary McNiven,
Page 196 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
In 1889 the 50 acre parcel (west % Lot 11) was transferred by Instrument 3722 from Mary McNiven to
William McLeod Horne [fig. 5].
At this point in time William McLeod Horne had acquired the north 1/z Lot 12 from his brother and the
properties merged.
The properties continued within the Horne family and the current severance would allow the 50 acre parcel
to be gifted to one son and the remaining 98 acre parcel to be gifted to another son and his wife [fig. 7],
I trust you find the above in order. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask.
Yours truly,
LEWIS DOV6'NEY TORNOSKY
LASSALiNE & TIMPANO
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
f .... ----
,. ' ,,. ...... r•- ; �' ����
'tom ^fl�-'NY
3
-Erbug a. -it Downey
DRD /sm
Page 197 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
Fig. 1- reference map
N'' /z Lot I1
S '/z Lot I I
.................. . ............. . ......... ............. - ............ ........................... __ _ ......_................_....... ....-
N %z Lot 12
S % Lot I2
Fig. 2- 1866
N %z Lot II
.......... .......
................. _. .... ..... ..... Crown Land .. ......... ............. ... ....... ......................._ -._.
S' /z Lot I I
William McLeod Horne & Donald Horne
- ............... _... _...........
N %z Lot 12
S'/2 Lot 12
Fig. 3- 1873
N '/z Lot I I
.T
John McLean
............................ .. ...............................
S '/z Lot I I
William McLeod Homc
--- -
--- -- - - - - -- ------------------------ - - - - --
N' /z Lot 12
William McLeod Horne & Donald Horne
.................... _ _.........-............. ................ ----------- ... -..
S '/z Lot 12
Fig. 4- 1888
N'/ Lot 11
MaryMcNiven _-....__.__ ........_- ._._...._....._......
S '/ Lot I I
......
William McLeod Horne
....... ..... , _ ..... ............. ....................... ........ ...................... ..... ..................._........... .., .......... .
N' /z Lot 12
S '/ Lot 12
Page 198 of 205
Agenda Item # 5j) - 2009 -B -17 (Dorothy Horne) 1192 Concession 12 North
Fig. S- 1889
Fig. 6- Current
Fig. 7- Proposed
Mary McNiven
William McLeod Home
William McLeod IIorne
Dorothy Home
Daniel Horne
Dorothy Home
...................... ....:..........................
Robert & Jackie Home
N %z Lot I I
S' /z Lot II
N '/z Lot 12
S %a Lot 12
N % Lot l l
S' /2 Lot 11
N'' /a Lot 12
S '/z Lot 12
N'/ Lot 11
S '/z Lot 11
N' /z Lot 12
S '/2 Lot 12
Page 199 of 205
IN
� a a ! G +i
}' L L f'S� •A � -,gip. •!+ •' � !•
spy ?`� 1'li�f� �+'•Y %y. i x
fi
*-, ji
w 41" i
nrt a
T
h
w
^c 'air .. •ita. '� +1' 1
H '
1 ~
�, � r ,� �- 4, �,,, . �,, Cdr ,i „ �� •
r. � ,� ;�, ,l �• a ,, .. ,•
�.1 ,''Aar y r � .'.A(. 4 �, '� r. •
tR r
ti n r'� •,yr , • _ X11
ya_ P rl /rr�t '
or ��
n r
� .'j' f r + .Irl • f l� sr ��' y p
(r aM }
� ,mo�tt•: �i/ ,,✓=. ' ✓' }� ' ry �; �: � !• � ;�.
rii': any 1' � r'r • ,
t rT • t } j 6
r t i
701, Ek 1,x;1,, r°
r
it ,�'i � • t ". .: r �Fk: ii.
:,fir � "l4,r ;•' �.elta �. ,,►'�.�'� �•, 1:.��h� ° +�.
M
J
LO
O
N
4-
O
N
O
N
N
O1
a .i
y, -
i,
��:
t
I
• '. i
r'
� ' i�r _�_
S 9y
•s.
•� � +.
"�
•
•
-r >; "f
..}� ..i
4
�.
- ��.
'.A' � '�
'.�_
,,li' �,
x � s ;1, 4 , r � ,.4
.4 � ,, �.
�.
�l/% •
;;
j
'�' _.
'" � � � t
a
�, ;.
'l ti �, �
! 1' � 4. 1 SP E. ;
r"{ I
LO
O
N
4-
O
O
N
N
O1
LO
O
N
4-
O
LO
O
N
N
O1