08 20 2009 C of A AgendaTOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
MEETING AGENDA
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TownsI of
August 20, 2009
Proud Heritage, Exciting Future 9:30 a.m.
Page
1. OPENING OF THE MEETING BY THE CHAIR
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda.
3. "DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF - IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
3-11 a) Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, July 16, 2009.
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
12-23 a) 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski
1081 Woodland Drive, Lot 29, Plan 993 (Former Township of Orillia)
Variance from Interior Side Yard Setback.
24-38 b) 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew
13 Greenwood Forest Road, Concession 5, Plan 709, Lot 37, (Former
Township of Oro)
Variance from Interior Side Yard Setback and Rear Yard Setback.
39-55 c) 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly
7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 & 4, Plan 626 (Former Township of Oro)
Variance for Structures and Uses - Permitted Locations.
56-90 d) 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge
Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro)
Sever Existing Single Detached Dwelling Unit.
2009-A-22 - James and Nancy Partridge
Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro)
Sever Existing Single Detached Dwelling Unit.
Variance for Agricultural Buildings.
91-104 e) 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge
Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5 315 15/16 Sideroad East, (Former
Page 1 of 261
Page
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
Township of Oro)
Creation of New Lot.
105-119 f) 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi
1270 Line 1 North, Lot 22, Concession 1 (Former Township of Oro)
Lot addition/boundary adjustment.
120-138 g) 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury
West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro)
Severance for Proposed Development of a Plan of Subdivision.
139-219 h) 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and 2009-B-28 (Lot
14) - Indian Park Association
Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-9, Block A & Part of Lot 3, Concession 6,
Plan M-8, Block A & Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-30, Block A, (Former
Township of Oro)
Creation of New Lots.
220-261 i) 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler
67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1
Variance for Front Yard Setback.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
a) Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer/Intermediate Planner, verbal update
re: OMB Appeal, 2009-A-51 (Mike Gannon).
7. NEXT MEETING DATE
8. ADJOURNMENT
a) Motion to Adjourn.
Page 2 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
MINUTES
T,°u'hsaf Council Chambers
Proud HeritaXe, EseithaZ Future
July 16, 2009 9:34 a.m.
Present: Rick Webster, Chair
Bruce Chappell, Garry Potter
Regrets: Lynda Aiken, Michelle Lynch
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
Rick Webster assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order at 9:34 a.m.
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
a) Motion to adopt the agenda.
CA090716-01
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that the agenda for the meeting of
Thursday, July 16, 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 June 18, 2009 meeting.
CA090716-02
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting of
Thursday, June 18, 2009, be adopted as printed and circulated.
Carried.
Page 1 of 9
Page 3 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
5. PUBLIC MEETINGS:
a) 2009-B-24 - Terence and Mary Hunter
5696 Concession 4 North
Creation of a new lot.
Mrs. Mary Hunter, Applicant, and Mr. Brad Robinson were present.
CA090716-03
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Application
2009-B-24, Terence and Mary Hunter, Lot 17, Concession 14 (Former
Township of Medonte), in order to attain comments from the Nottawasga
Valley Conservation Authority, at per the request of the Applicants.
Carried.
Page 2 of 9
Page 4 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
b) 2009-B-18 - Dr. David and Darcy Campbell
4335 Vasey Road, Lot 24, Concession 7
Boundary adjustment.
Mr. Ross Heacock, Agent, was present on behalf of the Applicants.
CA090716-04
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Application
2009-B-18, being to permit a lot addition/boundary adjustment, 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 4325 Vasey Road, and that
the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act apply to
any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands;
3. That the applicants' 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.
Carried.
Page 3 of 9
Page 5 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
c) 2009-B-20 to 2009-B-23 - Tom Obradovich and Kathy Reid
Lot 1, Concession 5 (Oro), south-west corner of Horseshoe Valley Road and
Line 4
Creation of four (4) lots.
2009-A-18 - Tom Obradovich and Kathy Reid
Lot 1, Concession 5 (Oro), south-west corner of Horseshoe Valley Road and
Line 4
Variance for Lot 1 for minimum required lot area.
Mr. Dan Amadio, Agent, was present on behalf of the Applicants.
CA090716-05
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves applications
2009-B-20, 2009-B-21, 2009-B-22 and 2009-B-23, being to permit the
creation of four new residential lots fronting on Line 4 North, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the
severed parcels be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to
the Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicants' pay $ 2,000.00 for each lot created as cash-in-lieu of a
parkland contribution;
3. That the applicants' solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed
conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte;
5. That the applicants enters into an agreement with the Township to provide
hydrant installation and services from the water main to property line, with all
cost being paid by the applicant;
6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within
one year from the date of the giving of the notice.
Carried.
Page 4 of 9
Page 6 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
CA090716-06
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance
Application 2009-A-18, being an application for relief from the minimum lot
area of Lot 1, subject to the following condition:
1. That the minimum lot area for Lot 1 (2009-B-20) be no less than
approximately 0.84 hectares.
Carried.
Page 5 of 9
Page 7 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
d) 2009-B-19 - Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd
1101 Horseshoe Valley Road, Lots 1 & 2, Concession 4
Boundary adjustment.
Mr. Dan Amadio, Agent, was present on behalf of the Applicant.
CA090716-07
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Consent
Application 2009-B-19, being a boundary adjustment, 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 Con 3, PT Lots 1 and 2, PT
ORA, RP 51 R32830, Part 2, 8, 9, 14 to 16, 18 to 30, 35 to 40, 42 to 45, 47,
48 and 50 (the former road allowance and assessment number 4346-020-
010-004) 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 9
Page 8 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
e) 2009-A-15 to 2009-A-17 - 206334 Ontario Inc (Homire Subdivision)
1885 Warminster Sideroad
Variance for three (3) additional model homes.
Mr. Galem Lam, Agent, was present on behalf of the Applicant.
Mr. Neil Warburton questioned whether the Township had received the
appropriate documentation for the subdivision agreement.
Mr. Tom de Munnik questioned whether it was one house per lot.
CA090716-08
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance
Applications 2009-A-15 to 2009-A-17, inclusive, subject to the following
conditons:
1. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained
from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and
binding;
2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the
application and on the sketch submitted with the application and approved by
the Committee.
Carried.
Page 7 of 9
Page 9 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
f) 2009-A-19 - Margaret Arnold
227 Bass Line, Concession 1, Part Lot 3 (Orillia)
Variance for front and rear yard setback for a deck.
Ms. Jamie Jacobs and Mr. Don Faiers, agents for the Applicant were
present.
CA090716-09
Moved by Potter, Seconded by Chappell
It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance
Application 2009-A-19, being to grant a reduction for the front yard setback
from 7.5 metres to 5.4 metres and rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 0.2
metres for the construction of a deck having a floor area of approximately 22
square metres, subject to the following conditions:
1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of
compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2)
verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real
property report so that:
a) the deck be located no closer than approximately 5.4 metres from the front
lot line;
b) the deck be located no closer than approximately 0.2 metres from the rear
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.
3. That applicant to verify that sewage system meets minimum required
setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code.
Carried.
Page 8 of 9
Page 10 of 261
Agenda Item # 4a) - Committee of Adjustment minutes, meeting held on Thursday, J...
Minutes of the July 16, 2009, meeting of the Committee of Adjustment.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
a) Correspondence from Ann Budge dated June 21, 2009, re: Indian Park
Association Applications for Creation of New Lots.
CA090716-10
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that the correspondence from Ann Budge dated June 21,
2009, re: Indian Park Association Applications for Creation of New Lots, be
received.
Carried.
b) OMB Appeal of 2008-A-51 (Mike Gannon), 6 Catherine Street
CA090716-11
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that the OMB Appeal of 2008-A-51 (Mike Gannon), 6
Catherine Street, be received.
Carried.
7. NEXT MEETING DATE
8. ADJOURNMENT
a) Motion to adjourn.
CA090716-12
Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Potter
It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 11:58 a.m.
Carried.
Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer Rick Webster, Chair
Page 9 of 9
Page 11 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
7a,~ hrr of
REPORT
C fY i/lE'LUNZte,
Prend FLrilaRe, r W., I-'~
Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment
2009-A-20
Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application
August 20, 2009 (Michael & Dawn Oschefski)
1081 Woodland Drive
Roll Lot 29, Plan 993 (Former Township
4346-030-012-3000 of Orillia)
Prepared By:
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D13-39574
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 so that the raised cottage be located no closer
than approximately 1.4 metres from the side 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.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is approximately 1273 square metres (13,702 square feet) in area and has 19
meters (62.3 feet) of frontage both at the road and along the shoreline of Lake Simcoe. The property
currently has a one storey single detached dwelling, which includes an attached deck. There are
several detached accessory buildings on site. It is the applicant's proposal to remove the deck, and
raise up the cottage. A basement is proposed to be constructed underneath the cottage. The cottage
is currently only 1.1 m (3.6 feet) from the eastern side lot line. The Township Zoning By-law requires a
1.5 metre (4.9 feet) side yard setback in the Shoreline Residential Exception 2 (SR*2) Zone.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-20
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 5
Page 12 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct an addition (basement) to an existing cottage of an area of
approximately 95.6sq.m (1,029sq.ft). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-
law 97-95:
Shoreline Residential Exception 2 (SR*2) Zone
Interior Side Yard Setback
Reauired Prooosed
1.5 m 1.1 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 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.
• To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services.
The requested variance for an addition to the cottage would appear to maintain the character of the
residential area, as dwellings are a permitted use in the Shoreline designation and the surrounding
uses are also residential. 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 Exception 2 (SR*2). The Shoreline Residential
(SR) Zone permits single detached dwellings. The dwelling was constructed in approximately 1968, it
would be considered a non-conforming structure as it does not meet the existing interior side yard
setback. The purpose of the side yard setback is to ensure that there is unobstructed access from
the front to the rear of the property. Maintaining the existing setback on the east property line would
not impede access as there is approximately 7m (22.9ft) for access on the western side from the front
to the rear of the property. There is existing vegetation on the eastern property boundary which acts
as a buffer between neighbouring property and the existing cottage. The cottage would otherwise
meet with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height, front yard, rear yard and
setback to the Lake).
On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning
By-law.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-20
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 5
Page 13 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot?
As discussed above a residential land use is permitted. The proposed addition to the cottage would
be considered desirable as the expansion would not further encroach into the reduced setback. The
dwelling was not constructed in conformity with the current By-law provisions. Section 5.16 of the By-
law states that non-conforming buildings may be enlarged if they do not further encroach into the non
conforming yard. As the floor volume will increase in the required yard, the applicant is seeking to
recognize the current setback.
Is the variance minor?
As this application should not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area, and is consistent
with the surrounding dwellings, the proposed variance is considered to be minor.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department
Building Department - no concerns
Engineering Department - no concerns
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2009-A-20, being an application for
relief from the side yard setbacks for an addition to a single detached dwelling, appears to satisfy the
tests of the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted:
A
Meghan Keelan, B.E.S.
Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-20
Reviewed by:
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director, Planning & Building Services
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 5
Page 14 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-A-20 (Oschefski)
`2
Uj
z
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-20
■ SUBJECT LANDS
50 100 200 300 400
I.leters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 4 of 5
Page 15 of 261
V
- o/
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009-A-20 (Oschefski)
L R Y- f-
i-s - -
t r '±i
a
Gt37 f ~4G '
1i
'-Y
0
J
6-
-9;t
IJ
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-20
N
f`•
N
C~
F i
r v
a a
51 A f3.ir
2
t 4' O
a
M
1Q
--,t
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 5 of 5
Page 16 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
rr = 331-C
I ~ 4 24 C~
I \
o _
I
~ i
i _
80 \
3' c r ~v
f > A I \ \\\'V.\ ~ \\\\\\\\®\\\1_ ~ ' \\\\\\\\\'v MU NI S.~' EQUAI
k\VA
I v ~ ~ iab~CY~NIGnS
l cl) C)
i
i
\ I
I \ ,
i
II'
j -
2 c
I
,
rnCOwrP.
1._0.
Page 17 of 261
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
L
%
m
V
N
F
S
r
f _
~.S
T,
74
r
Page 18 of 261
f3
SU
Cr
Q)
COTTAGE
F
! IV
►da Item # 5a)
A& dMM-- Tp 8E
:►ST1NG DECK
0
0126
Page 20
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
Page 21 of
I
Agenda Item # 5a) - 2009-A-20 - Michael & Dawn Oschefski 1081 Woodland Drive, L...
5 l~q
,K?
'!'4
1 r
~ T 4i ?
g 4 tir, 1 ^f
7 F 3
q~ ~4 rvsp'60 a j k,. gr
4,
" Y w-
{
>E
.we.
1 U
e,
.x.
d
Page 22 of 261
D
Keelan, Meghan
cQ
~
Q
v
From: Chris Currie [C.Currie@lsrca.on.cal
-
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 1:50 PM
To: Keelan, Meghan
Subject: RE: Committee of Adjustment
Attachments: image001.gif; image002.jpg
Hi Meghan,
N
CD
CO
After reviewing the Mayhew, Hatherly and Oschefski Committee of Adjustment Applications, the Lake Simcoe Region
I
Conservation Authority has no objections. However, each of the applications would require a permit for development as
N
they are located inside our Regulated Area.
C)
O
(O
(D
N
W
O
-h
N
ff you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Thanks Mcghan,
Chris Currie
Jr. Environmental Planner
Lane Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282,
Newmarket ON UY 4X 1
Tel: (905) 895-1281 Ext. 284
Fax: (905) 853-5881
E-Mail: c.curriefcblsrca.on.ca
Web: www.lsrca.on.ca
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
O
r-
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
l/Yff!C'L(NltL'
Nrnud Hair .e's lJ.~~vrxp tiu.irc
Application No:
2009-A-23
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-008-19800
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Subject: Variance Application
(Ed Mayhew)
13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession 5, Plan 709, Lot 37,
(Former Township of Oro)
Prepared By:
Meghan Keelan,
Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D13-39610
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:
a) the deck be located no closer than approximately 1.7 metres from the side lot line
b) the deck be located no closer than approximately 4.9 metres from the zone boundary
acting as the rear 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.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property has a road frontage of approximately 15 metres (50 feet) and a lot area of
approximately 1.16 hectares (12,200sq.ft). The property currently has a one storey, 128.9sq.m
(1,388sq.ft) single detached dwelling, with a basement and a loft. The deck is proposed to be located
on the lake (rear) portion of the dwelling. The applicant is proposing to erect a 53.2sq.m (573sq.ft)
deck, which would be setback 1.7 metres (5.5 feet) from the side lot line and 4.9 metres (16.1 feet)
from the boundary between the Shoreline Residential and Open Space Zones, which acts as a rear
lot line. The Township Zoning By-law requires a 2 metre (6.5 feet) side yard setback and a 7.5 metre
(24.6ft) rear yard setback in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone for a deck attached to a dwelling.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 7
Page 24 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct a deck with an area of approximately 53.2sq.m (573sq.ft). The
applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95:
Table 1131 Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone and Section 5.7 Decks regarding encroachment into
interior side yard
Reauired Proposed
Interior side yard setback for a deck 2 m 1.7m
Rear yard setback 7.5m 4.9m
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 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.
To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services.
The requested variance for the deck would appear to maintain the character of the residential area,
as a deck is accessory to dwellings, which are a permitted use in the Shoreline designation. The deck
would not infringe on any natural features or the shoreline. 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) and Open Space (OS). The Shoreline
Residential (SR) Zone permits single detached dwellings. The dwelling was constructed in
approximately 1940; it would be considered a non-conforming structure. The existing dwelling does
not meet the required interior side yard setback of the SR Zone, which is 3 metres. The deck will be in
line with the house and is permitted to encroach into one interior side yard up to 1 metre. The
purpose of a side yard setback is to ensure adequate access to the rear of the property from the front.
The other side yard is approximately 4.7m (15.6ft). This will provide adequate access from the front to
the rear of the lot and therefore the intent of the side yard setback is maintained.
This property is subject to a split zoning, historically the OS zone was applied along the shoreline in
this area. The Township's Zoning By-law states that the prescribed setbacks are measured to lot
lines, or in the case of a property with a split zoning, the zone boundary acts as a property boundary
(Section 5.15). In this instance, the boundary between the OS and SR Zones acts as the rear
property line for the setback to the deck. As such the Township applies the rear setback of 7.5m.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 7
Page 25 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
However, the applicant has measured that there is only 4.9 meters from the edge of the deck and the
zone boundary. The purpose of interpreting zone boundaries as lot lines in the case of properties with
split zoning is to ensure the proper separation of uses. However, in this instance the same use is
happening in both zones, it is the amenity space of the dwelling. Therefore no separation is
necessary and the intent of the By-law is maintained.
The deck otherwise meets all of the other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height and
setback to the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe).
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 deck would be located at the side of the existing dwelling and is in
line with the existing location of the dwelling. When the dwelling was originally constructed it may
have been built in accordance with those standards; but does not meet the provision of the current
By-law, therefore Section 5.16 of Zoning By-la w 97-95 applies. It states that structures which are not
in conformity with the By-law can be erected, enlarged, repaired or renovated provided it does not
further encroach into the non conforming yard. As the deck does not further reduce the side yard
setback and does not require separation from the use on the OS Zone, the proposal is considered to
be desirable for the appropriate development on the lot.
Is the variance minor?
As this application should not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area, or the intended
use of the subject lands, the proposed variance is considered to be minor.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department
Building Department- no concerns
Engineering Department - no concerns
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
3. Zoning Boundary Location
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 7
Page 26 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2009-A-23, being an application for
relief from the side yard setback for a deck and rear yard setback to a zone boundary, appears to
satisfy the tests of the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by:
MKeelan, B.E.S. Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Planner Director, Planning & Building Services
Development Services Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-23 Page 4 of 7
Page 27 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-A-23 (Mayhew)
`NINDFIELD-DRIVE
M SUBJECT LANDS
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
\L-AKESHORE-ROAD
BALSAM LANE
0 20 40 80 120 150
Meters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 5 of 7
Page 28 of 261
-v 1
{
I~
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
is
(1403)
Aeas.)
o
1 O
0
1^
0
a
0
N
io=
~to
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009-A-23 (Mayhew)
ae
(1390) (P1 &Meas f.)
00 '100.00^~_ 50.00• i-
(P1 & Set)
(P1 & Meos.)
vi
I~
d_
IB
v
't
W
~ m
CN
~ N
O
o
ra
Fes'
I
v°i
'
> ^
r_. Dwelling
x
f
_r
32
(U03)
50.1'1
J (1403 & Set) y
~
set)
(P1 &Meas.) a
d
~ x
tV
7i(j r'. i• ^ O
Q; `e
O
i
100.00
Bea
PAF
IS
(p1 &Meas.)
M
~
i
'H t
0
T 9
PAR
M
co
z
PART $
N 1B
wlt. ! NSO'OA 35 _E
J -r-_ ss.o
(y50"04 35_E _ 50,09 _ { h - giA7' 1n
T- 7
W, t.
33.7 N
Q'S'--1k ,-e-s~T` r` MARCH
lp'-' to 4.
N ~p E o~ 1 N f OC'
:H tn
r' 9 r~3 ai r~i fE Is
NRi. M ~Z~'~' M Z *P`
"--(_'9
7 1
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 6 of 7
Page 29 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
SCHEDULE 3: ZONE BOUNDARY LOCATION
2009-A-23 (Mayhew)
GR NWOO0 FOR~SI ROAD
® SUBJECT LANDS
❑ OPEN SPACE ZONE
SHORELINE RESIDENTIAL ZONE
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-23
poll,
~.f
0 3.5 7 14 21 2R
Meters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 7 of 7
Page 30 of 261
I
2011y-H-40 L-u ~Vt
Agenda Item # 5b)
EASTERN EDGE OF DWELLING
LOCATION Pl
Page 31 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
I
ROPOSED SIDE YARD SETBACK FACING N
Page 32 of 261
p rl
'Am PNNP-- , ACING
L1ECi'~ F R OF PPOPOSEC r
WEsT CORNS
Page 33 of 26
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest son d,
e
Page 34 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
Page 35 of 261
Agenda Item # 5b) - 2009-A-23 - Ed Mayhew 13 Greenwood Forest Road,
Concession
Page 36 of 261
}
t~
t fiy :og9
Y
ti
4
a
Ati
r O E
F , a
Jy -
nr~nP. 37
O
cQ
(D
W
Cb
O
-h
N
0)
Keelan, Meghan
From: Chris Currie [C.Currie@lsrca.on.caj
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 1:50 PM
To: Keelan, Meghan
Subject: RE: Committee of Adjustment
Attachments: image001.gif; image002.jpg
Hi Meehan.
After reviewing the Mayhew, Hatherly and Oschefski Committee of Adjustment Applications, the Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority has no objections. However, each of the applications would require a permit for development as
they are located inside our Regulated Area.
ff you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Thanks Meghan,
Chris Currie
Jr. Environmental Planner
Lane Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282,
Newmarket ON UY 4X 1
Tel: (905) 895-1281 Ext. 284
Fax: (905) 853-5881
E-Mail: c.curriefcblsrca.on.ca
Web: www.lsrca.on.ca
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
D
c~
CD
Q
v
CD
3
C3~
Cr
N
O
O
D
fV
W
m
Q
O
CD
GJ
CD
CD
O
O
n Q
O 1l
=3 O0
O CD
(n
Ln• ~C1
O O
~ O
Q
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
r REPORT
Tumnsh7 .t !r-
I~fYY`~!l L'L~t}f2tf'
YmssJ (ien/.g,•, Lxciring t^+i.ve
Application No:
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
2009-A-21
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Meeting Date:
Subject: Variance Application
Motion #
August 20, 2009
(Larry & Linda Hatherly)
7 Stanely Ave
Roll
Lots 3 & 4, Plan 626 (Former
R.M.S. File
4346-010-010-13600
Township of Oro)
D13-39573
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 detached accessory building be no
closer than approximately 1 m from the front lot line and 1 m from the interior side 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.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is approximately 1,486 square metres (16,000 square feet) in area and has
approximately 30 metres (100 feet) of frontage along Stanley Ave. There is a dwelling on the property
with an attached garage. The applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building for
storage in place of an existing storage shed, with a second entrance onto Stanley Ave. The proposed
location desired by the applicant does not meet the By-law requirements for detached accessory
buildings. The Township Zoning By-law requires a 2 metre (6.5 feet) side yard setback and a 7.5
metre (24.6 feet) front yard setback.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 22.3sq.m (240sq.ft) detached accessory building for storage
purposes. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95:
Section 5.1.3 Accessory Structures and Uses - Permitted Locations
Reauired Proposed
a) Setback distance equal to front yard 7.5m 1m
d) Interior side yard setback 2 m 1m
Development Services Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Application No. 2009-A-21 Page 1 of 5
Page 39 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
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 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.
• To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services
The requested variance for an accessory building would appear to maintain the character of the
residential area, as the use is secondary to the residential use and there are similar accessory
detached buildings in the neighbourhood. 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). Detached accessory buildings are
permitted in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. The Zoning By-law permits accessory buildings to
be located in the front yard of properties which have frontage on Lake Simcoe, provided they are not
located within the required front yard setback. The front yard setback for the SR Zone is 7.5m. The
purpose of the setback is to ensure that structures do not cause an obstruction for the travelled
portion of the road. In this instance, it is staff's opinion from observations during a site visit, that the
proposed structure will not hinder the travelled portion of the road as it is being integrated into the
existing cedar hedge and will not extend beyond. Therefore the intent of the front yard is maintained.
An entrance permit has been granted by the Township's roads department at the proposed location
on Stanley Ave. Also determined during the site visit, is that there are other properties in the area
which have detached accessory buildings in similar positions on the lot, close to the road.
In terms of the reduced side yard setback, there is a vegetative buffer and fence between the
proposed structure and the closest neighbouring property. The building, as proposed, would not
infringe on the neighbour's property. The garage will not be higher than the permitted 4.5m (14.7 ft).
The intention of the side yard setback is to ensure there can be adequate access around the structure
for maintenance etc. The 1 metre (3.2 feet) setback will still permit some access to the eastern side
and therefore the intent of the setback is maintained
The detached building would otherwise meet with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as
maximum height, front yard, rear yard and setback to the Lake).
On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning
By-law.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-21
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 5
Page 40 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot?
It would be considered desirable development for the lot to construct a detached accessory building
as they are a permitted use. The proposed location is desirable, as it is the only location in the front
yard that does not infringe on the septic system, setbacks to the septic system and preserves the
mature trees on the lot. The applicant has recently had the trees professionally trimmed and cabled in
order to conserve them.
Is the variance minor?
The determination of minor is not decided on a numerical basis. Based on the above analysis and site
visit, it is planning staff's opinion that the application should not adversely affect the character of the
surrounding area, and is consistent with the current character of similar accessory structures;
therefore the proposed variance is considered to be minor in nature.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department
Building Department - no concerns
Engineering Department - no concerns
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2009-A-21, being an application for
relief from the front yard setback and side yard setback for a detached accessory building, appears to
satisfy the tests of the Planning Act.
Respe ;tfully submitted:
Jt
J
Meghan Keelan, B.E.S.
Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-21
Reviewed by:
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director, Planning & Building Services
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 5
Page 41 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-A-21 (Hatherly)
YVC;rVN
tl~
S.
SUBJECT LANDS
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-21
0 15 30 60 90 120
MUE:N~ ~ Meters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 4 of 5
Page 42 of 261
OPoSED SITE p~N
SC~EDVLE PR 1 (Ha~hertyl
2009-A-~
-1
a-i
s, ~ 0. •r, N
(N Y
vm m a
~ x
a ~ p i .p •l'. 7 ~ y~ 1~
Tr ~L V,0
3 °
m
fn ~ $
Z >
4c
m
t
M
{
Dev M m „nN0. A 1
N N
n
~m
Z
SI ; L
r
o ~ nM
4 a
m
N►eeiing p~jte Au9uPage
n~nP. 43
Agenda item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
`t
V
Q
r
J
i r-
s
ta.-
e'J A
i
3
v
U
Page 44 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
1
j
~i
ce
f
S f
i
t
f Lt) k t
rl
cr
~ Y'J ytjx:' `Q"4
~ E
'gg
Page 45 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
i
.
LE
Z
W...
1 1 f
t f
3ItE
'S L I I 4F(E
~p rr
0
__V
_ -s
L
i
Page 46 of 261
Agenda Item # 5c) - 2009-A-21 - Larry & Linda Hatherly 7 Stanely Ave, Lots 3 &
r ar t } r,'p-'« ice, r I co
t
m
n
~ A C
_ o-
.
r tip" r+y
h .
a
+w r
fir; I
k
p ~x
,
r
u
s. SE .y $
.e 'y iii •
i
~aa RW' .
r..- -
I-"
0*
0
ow
I
I
P 49
f& cY ~ r } I
A i r 1 O
'L?kp , ` »e Val
c
~ ~ ~ a- f ~ s sue. ~
i
i ;4c
P
4 ~ 5{
co
N
s ao~d
1= _ 0 3.4
"eF Pt _ _
pro;
jaa UW'.
~V
w~
.-0
"I
~„nP 51
NOW
i
t
~ I "e K.
■
pace 52 of
m
t9 i a '
w 'Y
- Page 53 of 261
RG
■
m
P
p
~ ~ s x~ ,rs€ y - ` Ate.. y}~ +p} ,
,w -
r 3
k
7
rn'.:-:,. as J ,.A
.
"Ire
,s
~ - _ ` _ .y ate.. - ~ ,
-Jr
!v
(D
011
(YI
0
h
N
0)
Keelan, Meghan
From: Chris Currie [C.Currie@lsrca.on.caj
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 1:50 PM
To: Keelan, Meghan
Subject: RE: Committee of Adjustment
Attachments: image001.gif; image002.jpg
Hi Meehan.
After reviewing the Mayhew, Hatherly and Oschefski Committee of Adjustment Applications, the Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority has no objections. However, each of the applications would require a permit for development as
they are located inside our Regulated Area.
ff you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Thanks Meghan,
Chris Currie
Jr. Environmental Planner
Lane Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282,
Newmarket ON UY 4X 1
Tel: (905) 895-1281 Ext. 284
Fax: (905) 853-5881
E-Mail: c.curriefcblsrca.on.ca
Web: www.lsrca.on.ca
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
r-
0
W
i0
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
0. 75-hipnf-
.,~..i~.T u~~rrte
!'roaJ Herirxhc, EMirray f'amre
Application No:
2009-B-31
2009-A-22
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-002-2600
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Subject: Consent and Variance
Application
(James and Nancy Partridge)
Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5
(Former Township of Oro)
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D10-39597
D13-39598
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision regarding Consent
applications 2009-8-31:
That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land
Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the
parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the applicant pay $2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte;
5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision regarding Variance
application 2009-A-22:
1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the
Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the agricultural barn be located no closer than 8
metres from the interior property line; and that the Quonset but be setback no closer than 2
metres from the interior side lot line;
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-31
2009-A-22
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 7
Page 56 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of Consent application 2009-B-31, is to sever an existing single detached dwelling unit
from the property known as 837 Line 4 North. The applicant's currently own and farm four properties
within the Township. The parcels are actively farmed by the Partridge's, while the dwelling has been
used as a rental unit. The applicants have applied to dispose of this dwelling unit by way of
severance, for the reason that the dwelling consists of a "surplus residence" as a result of farm
consolidation. Committee should note that the applicants have four agricultural holdings in the area,
which have been identified on the attached map. It should also be noted that three of the four
holdings contain single detached dwellings and various accessory and agricultural buildings. One of
the properties is vacant of structures.
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of application 2009-B-31 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot as a surplus to
a farming operation. The lot to be severed is proposed to have frontage along Line 4 of
approximately 168 metres, and approximately 118 metres along 15/16 Sideroad and having a lot area
of approximately 2 hectares. The subject lands currently contain a dwelling and 2 agricultural
buildings. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 53 hectares and is
currently being used for agricultural production and vacant.
The applicant is proposing that the two existing agricultural building, be recognized as being within the
required interior side yard setback. Specifically, the applicant is requesting the following relief from
Zoning By-law 97-95:
Table 1134(c): Minimum required setback from the interior side lot line:
wired Proposed
15 metres 2 metres (Quonset Hut)
8 metres (Barn)
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Provincial Policv Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides direction with respect to the creation of lots in prime
agricultural areas. Specifically, Section 2.3.4 discourages lot creation, however, allows for a lot to be
created based on certain circumstances. For the purpose of the application at hand, Subsection
2.3.4.1 states:
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-31
2009-A-22
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 7
Page 57 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
"2.3.4.1 Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be
permitted for
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"
The PPS also provides a definition for a "surplus dwelling" created as a result of farm consolidation:
"Residence surplus to a farming operation: means an existing farm residence that is
rendered surplus as a result of farm consolidation (the acquisition of additional farm
parcels to be operated as one farm operation)."
The proponents have indicated on their application that the single detached dwelling unit located on
the subject property, 837 Line 4 North, has become "surplus" as a result of "farm consolidation".
Townshio Official Plan
The subject lands are designated Agricultural, Environmental Protection One and Environmental
Protection Two by the Official Plan. The creation of new lots for non-agricultural purposes is not
permitted within the Agricultural designation, and the Plan is silent in terms of the severance of
surplus dwelling. These types of applications are permitted under the PPS and Section 3.6.6 of
County of Simcoe Official Plan. The County of Simcoe has been circulated and they have states that
have no comment on the proposed lot creation. The proposed lot will conform to Section D2.2.1 of the
Official Plan in relation to the subdivision of land policies.
Zoning By-law
The subject lands both the retained and severed lands are zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone and
Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The proposed severed lands will have a frontage along Line 4 of
approximately 168 metres, and approximately 118 metres along 15/16 Sideroad and having a lot area
of approximately 2 hectares. This would meet the provisions of the A/RU Zone in terms of lot frontage
and lot area for a single detached dwelling.
The applicant has also submitted a variance application to recognize the agricultural buildings that
are being located on the severed lands, which are within the required side yard setback. The required
interior side yard setback for an agricultural building is 15 metres, where the existing barn is 8 metres
and the Quonset but is 2 metres. If the proposed lot lines were to be shifted to try and ensure that the
barn met the interior side yard setback, then implement shed on the retained lands would not meet
the required 8 metres setback.
On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning
By-law.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-8-31
2009-A-22
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 7
Page 58 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
CONSULTATIONS:
Transportation and Environmental Services -
Building Department
Engineering Department
NVCA- No Objection
County of Simcoe- No Comment
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
3. Applicants Farm Holdings in the area
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent application 2009-B-31 being to create a lot by
way of severance conforms to the Official Plan, and complies with the minimum lot area and frontage
as required by the Zoning By-law. It is also the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance
application 2009-A-22, being an application for relief from the required interior side yard setback for
an agricultural building, appears to satisfy the tests of the Planning Act.
Respectfully submitted:
Reviewed by:
Stevetbidrqauharson, B.URPL
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Intermediate Planner
Director of Development Services
Development Services Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Application No. 2009-B-31
2009-A-22 Page 4 of 7
Page 59 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-13-31 & 2009-A-22
(Partridge)
l1T~p I
r
4
I~
z
W~
C L~JI
I
® SUBJECT LANDS
I
I
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-31
2009-A-22
,%D~,, RRR iE ROAD
DI
I
LI~~
z
I
Z DADJ
I
I
I
0 75150 300 450 600
Meters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 5 of 7
Page 60 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009-B-31 & 2009-A-22
(Partridge)
SOME: FWT BNE SDUM gMEE BBIGW
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-31
2009-A-22
Scole 1:1,250
P/N 2327 1 JULY 2009
fthakepwal
CpON~InJ1~.177N~6 ICI t~L~
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 6 of 7
Page 61 of 261
- ~ UV\W 1 V OC JCVCRCV '
FIGURE 29
LANDS TO BE RETAINED PIUCEY FARM
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
SCHEDULE 3: APPLICANTS FARM HOLDINGS IN THE AREA
2009-B-31 & 2009-A-22
(Partridge)
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-31
2009-A-22
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 7 of 7
Page 62 of 261
L90" FIGURE 1 - LOCATION
OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION
w+DSOrRffnar~rPUCwr AORM.UUURAL Scale 1:30,000
- i MD2TODESEMM EM _ x......:...... , P/N 2327 1 ,RAY 2009
EM {LPROTEOIiDM2 ohm
~2q FW
BOURMORO OFFAMPlAU222Y tore S,1~ r.wx6K-
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
PLANNING BRIEF
PARTRIDGE CONSENTS AND MINOR VARIANCE
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
PIN 09-2327
July 28, 2009
Prepared by: Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
93 Bell Farm Road, Suite 107
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5G1
Telephone: (705) 726-1141
FAX: (705) 726-0331
E-mail: mailro).skeltonbrumwell.ca
Prepared for: Jim and Nancy Partridge
Page 63 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,,..
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION I
2.0 BACKGROUND
3.0 Planning Context 2
3.1 Provincial Planning Policy ..................................................................................................2
Figure 1 - Location Official Plan Designation ....................................................................3
Figure 2A -Pilkey Farm ......................................................................................................5
Figure 213 -Pilkey Farm ......................................................................................................7
Figure 3A-Nancy's Farm ...................................................................................................9
Figure 3B -Nancy's Farm .................................................................................................11
3.2 County of Simcoe Official Plan .........................................................................................13
3.3 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan ...........................................................................13
3.4 Zoning ................................................................................................................................14
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................16
Page 64 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
PLANNING BRIEF
PARTRIDGE CONSENTS AND MINOR VARIANCE
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
PIN 09-2327
July 28, 2009
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Jim and Nancy Partridge farm four properties with a total area of approximately 190 hectares
(471 acres) in the Township of Oro-Medonte. They reside on one of the properties. Two of the
other properties have residential buildings that are surplus to the farming operation. These houses
are rented, however, this is an ongoing management and financial issue. Their objective is to
sever and surplus the residences and retain the remainder of the properties for their on-going
farming operation.
Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc. was retained in May 2009 to provide planning services
related to their objective. This report has been prepared to provide background information and
planning justification relative to applications for Consent and Minor Variance, and for future
applications for Zoning By-law Amendments.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The four properties owned and farmed by the applicants are located in the former Township of
Oro as shown on Figure 1. General information about the properties is provided in Table 1 below.
As illustrated on Figures 2A and 2B, the lands proposed to be severed from the property in Lots
14 and 15, Concession 5, known as the Pilkey Farm, will include the house, barn, and quonset
hut. A minor variance is proposed relative to rear yards of the barn and quonset but. The severed
parcel will continue to use the existing sewage disposal system, well and driveway.
A new driveway will be constructed for the retained parcel. The applicants have already obtained
a permit from the Township for this entrance. No other services are required for the retained
parcel.
Planning Brief 1 Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
P/N 09-2327 July 28, 2009
Page 65 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
The lands to be severed from Nancy's Farm will include the existing house, well and sewage
disposal system, as shown on Figures 3A and 3B. There are existing driveways for the severed
and retained parcels. No minor variances are necessary for this application.
No additional buildings or development are proposed for either property, therefore no impact on
natural heritage features or nearby residents is anticipated.
TABLE 1
DESCRIPTION OF FARM OPERATION
Property
I A
B
Pilkey Farm
I Nancy's Farm
Location
Lot 19, Conc.4
Pt Lots 15 & 16,
Part Lots 14 and 15, Part Lot 16, Conc. 7
Cone.5
Cone.5
Area ha (acres)
( 40f (100)
54t (133)
56 f (138)
40t (100)
Date of Purchase
1972
1969
1999
1998
Buildings
House, livestock
None
House, barn,
House, barn, shed
barns, silos,
implement shed,
implement sheds,
other accessory
workshop
buildings
Comments
The farm unit
House is rented,
House is rented,
operates from this
Barn rented for
barn and shed to be
location.
storage
removed
The Partridges
reside on this farm.
3.0 Planning Context
3.1 Provincial Planning Policy
The Provincial Policy Statement March 2005 (PPS) Section 2.3.4.1 states that lot creation in
prime agricultural areas may be permitted for a residence surplus to a fanning operation provided
that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on the remnant
farmland parcel. PPS Section 2.1 requires the protection of natural features and areas for the long
term. The proposed severances are consistent with PPS in that the proposed lot creation is
specifically permitted and no impact on natural heritage features will result.
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2006 (GPGGH) applies to the Township of
Oro-Medonte. However, as no population growth or change in land use is proposed through these
consent applications there is no issue relative to conformity with the GPGGH.
Planning Brief 2 Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
PIN 09-2327 July 28, 2009
Page 66 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
A LANDS TO BE SEVERED
I ENVIRO N7AL PROTECTION1
P/N 2327 1 JULY 2009
a] "Skop"
i
CONWLTING ENGINEEMS & PLANMMS
aac 107 °f RO 10 OBI
ENWROMMIENTAL PRDTECTION 2
PLAN 2007
Page 67 of 261
LEGEND FIGURE 1 - LOCATION
OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION LANDS OWNED BY APPLICANT AGRICULTURAL. Stole 1:30,000
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
P/N 2327 JULY 2009
CONSULT" 040 EMS a PLANNMS
Page 68 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
LANDS TO BE RETAINED
FIGURE 29
PILKEY FARM
Scale 1:1,250
SOURCE: F RU BABE SOLUnWI 2008 111AGEW
P/N 2327 1 JULY 2009
a] ohm bmwel
CONSULM10 ENMH9 R~S*& PLAN- KPIC
a pnNis-'~"I I~ ~a Caiysur eon
Page 69 of 261
LLULNU CONCESSION 5
%my ORO-MEOONTE
LANDS TO BE SEVERED
~ IL~~
k
n ~
ea+~ ~T ~~oNa z~a wu~~
WES r'4"' - t4 7
CotACESSIO
ORO-NEDONSE „
FIGURE 38
NANCYS FARM -
cGID1e 1:1,000
9p4 2327 JULY 2009„
p~N{N
Page 71 of 261
LEGEND
LANDS TO BE SEVEF'F-D
-
r LANDS To SE RETAINED
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
3.2 County of Simcoe Official Plan
The subject lands are designated "Rural and Agriculture" on Schedule 5.1 Land Use Designations
of the County of Simcoe Official Plan 2007. Schedule 5.2.4 describes the areas surrounding the
subject properties as Prime Agricultural Areas. In these areas lots maybe created for a residence
surplus to a farming operation.
Schedule 5.2.2 of the Official Plan identifies locally significant wetlands in Lots 14 and 15,
Concession 5. There are no issues related to waste disposal sites, mineral resources, County
Roads, or other significant natural heritage features or in the vicinity of the site identified on other
Schedules of the County Official Plan.
The new Official Plan for the County, adopted November 28, 2008, permits consents for surplus
residences and requires that the remnant farm property be zoned to prohibit dwelling units
consistent with the PPS Section 3.6.5.
3.3 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
The subject properties are primarily designated "Agricultural" in the Official Plan of the
Township of Oro-Medonte as shown on Figure 1 - Location and Official Plan Designations.
The Pilkey Farm has an Environmental Protection One designation related to the Pilkey Swamp
Complex in the north and east portions of the property. The proposed severed lot is more than
300 metres from this designation.
Nancy's Farm has an overlay designation of Environmental Protection Two in the south east
corner, more than 400 metres from the proposed lots.
The Official Plan objectives in Section C1.3.2 include maintenance of the agricultural resource
base, protection of agricultural lands from uses unrelated to agriculture, promotion of the
agricultural industry and its capacity to contribute to the economy of the Township. While the
creation of new lots for non-agricultural purposes is not permitted, the Plan is silent relative to the
severance of surplus dwellings that is specifically permitted by the PPS and County of Simcoe
Official Plan.
Planning Brief 13 Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
P/N 09-2327 July 28, 2009
Page 72 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
The proposed consents are in conformity with criteria for new lots set out in Section 2.2.1 of the
Official Plan.
• They are located on existing Township roads that are maintained year-round and will use
existing or permitted driveways.
• The size and frontage of the proposed lots are in compliance with the Zoning By-law and
compatible with adjacent uses.
• Appropriate servicing is in place.
• No physical development is proposed that would have negative impact on drainage patterns,
natural heritage features or the quality or quantity of ground water.
3.4 Zoning
The Township of Oro Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95 zones the subject properties
Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) and Environmental Protection (EP) as shown on Figures 2A and 3A.
The lot to be severed from the Pilkey Farm includes lands zoned EP along a watercourse. The lot
to be severed from Nancy's Farm is entirely within the A/RU zone.
As summarized in the Table below, the severed and retained lots are in compliance with the
relevant zoning provisions with two exceptions. On the Pilkey Farm the available rear yard of the
barn and Quonset but relative to the proposed lot line will be 8.0 metres and 2 metres
respectively.
A Minor Variance is requested to recognize the available rear yard from these buildings relative
to the new lot line. This will allow these two useful buildings to be maintained and utilized by
the purchaser of the severed lot. The full 15 metre side yard is provided relative to the implement
shed on the retained parcel to provide for a driveway wide enough to accommodate large grain
trucks and farm machinery.
Planning Brief
P/N 09-2327
14 Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
July 28, 2009
Page 73 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
TABLE 2
ZONING COMPLIANCE
Pilkey Farm
Nancy's Farm
A/RU Zone Provision
Severed Retained
Severed
Retained
Min. Lot Area (ha)
Agricultural Uses
2.0
54.0
39.85
Single Detached Residence
0.4
2.0
0.6
DWELLINGS
Min. Lot Frontage (m)
45
118.5 (
n/a
( 63
n/a
Min. Front Yard (m)
8
69
n/a
44
n/a
IMin. Rear Yard (m)
8
75
n/a
36
n/a
IMin. Interior Side Yard (m)
4.5
40
n/a
25
n/a
Min. Exterior Side Yard (m)
7.5
65
n/a
n/a
n/a
OTHER BUILDINGS
Min. Lot Frontage (m)
None
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Min. Front Yard (m)
30
145E
n/a
n/a
n/a
Min. Rear Yard (m)
15
>1000
n/a
n/a
Barn
8t
Quonset Hut
2f
Min. Interior Side Yard (m)
15
n/a
n/a
Barn
38t
Quonset Hut
20t
Implement Shed
15
Min. Exterior Side Yard (m)
15
, 46f
30t
' n/a
` n/a
Planning Brief
15
Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
PIN 09-2327
July 28, 2009
Page 74 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our research and analysis we conclude the following.
Provided that rezoning of the retained agricultural lands to prohibit dwellings is required
as a condition of consent, the proposed severance of existing dwellings surplus to the
farm operation are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.
2. There is no issue relative to conformity with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe as no population growth or physical development is proposed.
3. The proposed development is in conformity with the "Rural and Agricultural"
designation of the County of Simcoe Official Plan.
4. The proposed severances are in conformity with the objectives of the Township's Official
Plan related to Agriculture in that they will assist a long standing family farm operation
by eliminating a financial burden unrelated to the agricultural use.
The proposed Minor Variance Application related to the Pilkey Fain will allow useful structures
to be retained while and maintaining the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and the
Official Plan.
We recommend approval of the Consent applications subject to rezoning of the agricultural
parcels to prohibit residential use.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
SKELTON, BRUMWELL & ASSOCIATES INC.
Pei JiGf ~GC~~
Trudy P. Paterson, T, RPP
Senior Planner
TPP/tpp
Planning Brief
P/N 09-2327
16 Skelton, Brumwell & Associates Inc.
July 28, 2009
Page 75 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
AUG-11-2009 10:30 FROM:NVCA
August 11, 2009
7054242115 TO:17054870133 P.1/1
Steven Farquharson, Secretary-Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Member
Oro, Ontario
Municipalities
LOL 2X0
AdJ ala-Ta.,arnn tirr
Dear Mr. Farquharson;
Arnaranth
Barrie
Re: Application for Consent 2009-13.31
tht Bluc Mountain;
Application for Minor Variance 2009-A-22 (Partridge)
Branford-Wrist Gwilli nbuty
Part Lot 14 & 15, Concession 5, 837 Line 4 North
Township of Oro-Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro)
Cle.~roiew
Colhnewrrnrl
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed
Essa
these applications and based upon our mandate and policies under the
innrsUl
Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to their approval.
Mel.vxrhon
We advise a significant part of the property is under the regulatory
Motto
jurisdiction of the NVCA due to Willow Creek, the Piikey Swamp and
Multnur
associated natural hazard areas on the property. A permit (or clearance) is
NewTerumseth
therefore required under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to any
Ow-Medonte
development in these areas.
C-AvIlrbhlands
Thank you for circulating these applications for our review and please
4hnlburm
forward a copy of any decision.
Sprinywatur
Wasap Beach
Sincerely,
J
Watershed
Counties
Tim Salkeld
Simux
Resource Planner
1)nlfrnn
Copy: Trudy Paterson, Skelton Brumwell Associates Inc.
Croy
Member vl
Conserving our Healthy Waters
NO) fAWA5AGAVALLEY CONSFRVA11C)N AUTHORITY Centre inr C.nnsarvabon
Conservation John Hix Conservation Adrruuuiralion Centre Tiffin ['nnservAinn Area 15195 8th line Utupla On I oM 1 M
O NTA RIrD TelephnnP: 705.424.1479 - Fax 7054112111 • Wcb- www nvca on.ra - Ema& adminaunvcd nn.ra
raa
Page 76 of 261
D
v
c0
(D
v
v
0
h
m
0)
(Q
CD
Q
v
CD
3
cn
Q
N
O
O
W
W
C--
0)
3
CD
Q
Z
v
n
v
M.
Q
c0
CD
0
r-
0
C-n
aCjNG WesT TOWARDS
F
LINE 4 NoRTN
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
Page 79 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
D
Z
J
G
W
Z
Q
N
W
OC
Page 80 of 261
15115 S1DER~AD
NED LADS ~R0
RETA~
Y
r"
W I
j
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
It
W
Z
J
0
w
LL
U)
Cl
Z
J
G
W
Z
4
h
W
w
Page 82 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-B-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
Page 83 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
Z
Q
J
D
W
Z
Q
W
Z
O
Z
OC
Q
m
Page 84 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
D
a
Q
J
W
W
W
t/D
Z
O
C9
Z
J
J
W
D
Page 85 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
August 11, 2009
,w
Steven Farquharson, Secretary-Treasurer ~
Committee of Adjustment AuG t i 2009
Township of Oro-Medonte
P.O. Box 100
Member
Oro, Ontario '
Municipalities
LOL 2X0
Adjala-Tosorontio
Dear Mr. Farquharson;
Amaranth
Barrie
Re: Application for Consent 2009-B-31
The Blue Mountains
Application for Minor Variance 2009-A-22 (Partridge)
Bradford-West Gwilhmburv
Part Lot 14 & 15, Concession 5, 837 Line 4 North
Township of Oro-Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro)
Clearview
Collingwood The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed
Essa these applications and based upon our mandate and policies under the
Innisfil Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to their approval.
Melancthon
We advise a significant part of the property is under the regulatory
Moro jurisdiction of the NVCA due to Willow Creek, the Pilkey Swamp and
Mulmur associated natural hazard areas on the property. A permit (or clearance) is
New Tecumseth therefore required under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to any
Oro-Medonte development in these areas.
Grey Highlands Thank you for circulating these applications for our review and please
Shelburne forward a copy of any decision.
Springwater
Wasaga Beach Sincerely,
Watershed
Counties Tim Salkeld
Simcoe Resource Planner
Dufferin Copy: Trudy Paterson, Skelton Brumwell Associates Inc.
Grey
Member of
Conserving our Healthy Waters
NOTTAWASAGA VALLFY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation
Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On TOM 1TO
ONTARRIO Telephone: 705.424.1479 fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.nvca.on.ca Email: admin@
,~„arca , mca-on.ca
Page 86 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Sox 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent and Minor Variance Applications
837 Line 4 North, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township Files: 2009-S-31and 2009-A-2~,
We have no objection to the approval of the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to
sever a 2.0 ha lot including the existing residence, barn and quonset but from the above noted
property.
We have no objection to the applicati
from t barnand quonse ut.
Signature
on for Minor Variance to per
f
Signature
Name
yard setbacks
ASc(-\ k v" Y--i
Name
Address a _L Address
l 0
Signature Signature
Name
Name
Address t ( Address
Page 87 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Box 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent and Minor Variance Applications
837 Line 4 North, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township Files: 2009-B-3 land 2009-A-22-
We have no objection to the approval of the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to
sever a 2.0 ha lot including the existing residence, barn and quonset but from the above noted
property.
We have no objection to the application for Minor Variance to permit reduced rear yard setbacks
from the barn and quonset hut.
Si ature Si gnalu a re
C~ Y7 ire 'J a l eatq
Name Name
j ~-t#
ski' Tr,,(' sed
Address
J
Siaturc
avI,A
Name
Address
Address
c
Signature
T L~
44
Name
A,e _r~ 1 /V ir y -4
Address
Page 88 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Box 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent and Minor Variance Applications
837 Line 4 North, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township Files: 2009-B-31and 2009-A-2,7-
We have no objection to the approval of the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to
sever a 2.0 ha lot including the existing residence, barn and quonset but from the above noted
property.
We have no objection to the application for Minor Variance to permit reduced rear yard setbacks
from the barn and quonset hut.
1) ~ t ~ e ,
d"tz
Signature S`i~nature
DAVJ l~Il~ ~r
Name
Address
Signature f
Name -S
(1 f s-1 1k! Y,Jr~ (t
Address /
k
Name
1129 z JA's
Address
Page 89 of 261
Agenda Item # 5d) - 2009-13-31 - James and Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15,...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Box 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent and Minor Variance Applications
837 Line 4 North, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township Files: 2009-B-31 and 2009-A-21-
We have no objection to the approval of the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to
sever a 2.0 ha lot including the existing residence, barn and quonset but from the above noted
property.
tt
We have no objection to the application for Minor Variance to permit reduced rear yard setbacks
from the barn arid, quonsel_hut.
SJare Signature
Name Name
Address Address
Sf gn4ure
Name
Address Address / / ~o
Page 90 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
t'rnu<+ f(rrEla~r, 6ntUfrrg d-ur.vc
Application No:
2009-B-32
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-003-25400
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Subject: Consent and Variance
Application
(Nancy Partridge)
Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5
31515/16 Sideroad East
(Former Township of Oro)
Prepared By:
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D10-39599
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision regarding Consent
applications 2009-B-32:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land
Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the
parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the applicant pay $2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte;
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 purpose of Consent application 2009-B-32, is to sever an existing single detached dwelling unit
from the property known as 315 15/16 Sideroad East. The applicant currently owns and farms four
properties within the Township. The parcel are actively farmed by the Partridge's, while the dwelling
has been used as a rental unit. The applicants have applied to dispose of this dwelling unit by way of
severance, for the reason that the dwelling consists of a "surplus residence" as a result of farm
consolidation. Committee should note that the applicants have four agricultural holdings in the area,
which have been identified on the attached map. It should also be noted that three of the four
holdings contain single detached dwellings and various accessory and agricultural buildings. One of
the properties is vacant of structures.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-32
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 6
Page 91 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of application 2009-B-32 is to permit the creation of a new residential lot as a surplus to
a farming operation. The lot to be severed is proposed to have a lot frontage along 15/16 Sideroad of
approximately 63 metres, a depth of approximately 100 metres and having a lot area of approximately
0.63 hectares and currently contains a dwelling and an agricultural building. The land to be retained
is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 39.5 hectares and is currently being used for
agricultural production and would be vacant.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Township Official Plan
The subject lands are designated Agricultural and Environmental Protection Two by the Official Plan.
The creation of new lots for non-agricultural purposes is not permitted within the Agricultural
designation, and the Plan is silent in terms of the severance of surplus dwelling. These types of
applications are permitted under the Provincial Policy Statement and Section 3.6.6 of the County of
Simcoe Official Plan. The County of Simcoe has been circulated and they have states that have no
comment on the proposed lot creation. The proposed lot will conform to Section D2.2.1 of the Official
Plan in relation to the subdivision of land policies.
Provincial Policv Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides direction with respect to the creation of lots in prime
agricultural areas. Specifically, Section 2.3.4 discourages lot creation, however, allows for a lot to be
created based on certain circumstances. For the purpose of the application at hand, Subsection
2.3.4.1 states:
"2.3.4.1 Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be
permitted for:
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"
The PPS also provides a definition for a "surplus dwelling" created as a result of farm consolidation:
"Residence surplus to a farming operation: means an existing farm residence that is
rendered surplus as a result of farm consolidation (the acquisition of additional farm
parcels to be operated as one farm operation)."
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-32
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 6
Page 92 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
The proponents have indicated on their application that the single detached dwelling unit located on
the subject property, 315 15/16 Sideroad East, has become "surplus" as a result of "farm
consolidation".
Zonina By-law
The subject lands both the retained and severed lands are zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone and
Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The lot to be severed is proposed to have a lot frontage along
15/16 Sideroad of approximately 63 metres, a depth of approximately 100 metres and having a lot
area of approximately 0.63 hectares and currently contains a dwelling and an agricultural buildings.
This would meet the provisions of the A/RU Zone in terms of lot frontage and lot area for a single
detached dwelling. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 39.5
hectares and is currently being used for agricultural production
CONSULTATIONS:
Transportation and Environmental Services -
Building Department
Engineering Department
NVCA- No Objection
County of Simcoe- No Comment
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
3. Applicants Farm Holdings in the area
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent application 2009-B-32 being to create a lot by
way of severance conforms to the Official Plan, and complies with the minimum lot area and frontage
as required by the Zoning By-law.
Respectfully submitted:
Steve n`Fi g64mrson, B.URPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-32
Reviewed by:
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director of Development Services
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3of6
Page 93 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-B-32
(Partridge)
<il
n
15116 S1DEROAD
C
Uj
z
®SUBJECT LANDS
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-32
CGJ
L1.1
z
i
i~
i
0 &0100 200 300 400
(deters
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 4 of 6
Page 94 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009-B-32
(Partridge)
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-32
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 5 of 6
Page 95 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
SCHEDULE 3: APPLICANTS FARM HOLDINGS IN THE AREA
2009-B-32
(Partridge)
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-32
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 6 of 6
Page 96 of 261
LEGEND FIGURE i -LOCATION
OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION
~ ► waosovmEOevueucwt A RICUMRIL SCOIe 1:30,000
LAND$TOBESEARED ENVI NTPLPROTE 1 P/N 2327 JULY 2009
ENVIRONI.E1 1. PROTECTION 2
CONSUL~GINE~ ~t$ S
SOIIRCE:ORO MEOONTE OFFICIAL PLAN IOOT uww TtiaD s'tu ~rt iW Y~sPdei~ tta mf
jenda Item
Q~
&
• a
31
T
tiEl
OIL'
Eke ~ ~
'
S
F 'YF
,
. , . " ~ ~ WEST p ART ~F 7
N$ TE
r
j ORE
" ~ „ .~",,i~,~'~.'~. , ~ NANCY'S FARM
as' ►u '4 ~ ► SCOiB 5-000
JULY 2C
2
P/N a^ yak 'u'&
t s
"A._'. h r w CONS 'gw W7
EE2w ° # V
1 .,R SST B so~urtaµs zoos an~~Ex{ - page 97 of 26
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-13-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
- ,.0,r
a 1 • a
.I. IL
of 0~0,
mo~
710
Rae, -:kO
r
LEGEND
LANDS TO BE SEVERED
LANDS TO BE RETAINED
SOURCE: FIRST BASE SOLUTIONS 2808 IMAGERY
WEST PART OF LOT 16
CONCESSION 7
ORO-MEDONTE
FIGURE 36
NANCY'S FARM
Scale 1:1,000
P/N 2327 JULY 2009
® S~bola Brtwu~il
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
W am net epee. Suit 107 erwa . OWM D LW 501
> p••I m-1141 rAX (M) rte-MI
Page 98 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-13-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
Page 99 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
Page 100 of 261
-o
QO
(D
-31
O
N
O
N
6
...r; nN SEVERED
T
ct~
CD
C3-
0)
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Box 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent Application
315 15/16 Sideroad East, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township File: 2009-B-32
We have no ction to the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to sever a 0.63 ha
lot inch d' g t existin residence from the above noted property.
g
Signature
Name
~r
Address
_,Signature Name
Address
`_,r% 5
1 1le li~roo-
Signature
9141
Name
-719 7x) 0,ec)
Address
Page 103 of 261
Agenda Item # 5e) - 2009-B-32 - Nancy Partridge Part of Lots 14 & 15, Concessio...
July 31, 2009
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
P.O. Box 100
Oro ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steve Farqhuarson, Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sir:
Re: Partridge Consent Application
315 15/16 Sideroad East, Township of Oro-Medonte
Township File: 2009-B-32
We have no objection to the application by Jim and Nancy Partridge for Consent to sever a 0.63 ha
lot including the existing residence from the above noted property.
}
Signature t Signature
Name Name J
Address Address
Signature Signature
Name Name
Address Address
Page 104 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
CYO `f.~?ctontc'
Proud Hertto?." E.er irinQ Fu~ive
Application No
2009-B-29
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-001-14300
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Prepared By:
Meghan Keelan, Planner
Subject: Consent Application
Ethan Angi & Robert Angi
1270 Line 1 North
Lot 22, Concession 1 (Former
Township of Oro)
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D10-39590
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 an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township by way of survey/real
property report that the existing drive shed is no closer to the new west corner of the enhanced
lot is no closer than approximately 7.3 metres;
3. That the severed lands be merged in title with Con 1, E Part of Lot 22, former Township of Oro
(1262 Line 1 North 4346-010-001-14400) and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of
Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving
the subject lands;
4. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the
parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
5. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be
enhanced will merge in title;
6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the
date of the giving of the notice.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 74sq.m (0.01 acres) from
the subject property to the adjacent lot being 1262 Line 1 North (Con 1, E Pt Lot 22). The proposed
retained lot would consist of approximately 45.7 hectares (117 acres). No new building lots are
proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-29
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 6
Page 105 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of application 2009-B-29 is to permit a lot addition/boundary adjustment. The proposed
lot addition will result in a parcel of 74sq.m (0.01 acres), being added to an existing residential lot.
The proposed enhanced lot will have a new total lot area of approximately 3,978sq.m (0.98 acres).
No new building lot is proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. The reason for the
application is to include the well associated with the existing dwelling on the enhanced residential lot
as opposed to the agricultural property.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN
The lands to be conveyed, the retained lands, and the enhanced lot are all designated Agricultural by
the Official Plan (OP). A small portion of the retained lands are subject to the Environmental
Protection One and the Environmental Protection Two Overlay but are not contained within the
enhanced lands. Schedule B of the Official Plan indicates that these designations pertain to
Significant Wetland and Significant Woodlands. As the lands to be severed are not considered
adjacent lands (over 120m from the wetland and over 50m from the woodland), these policies will not
be reviewed in detail. It is staff's opinion that the proposed boundary adjustment will not impact the
environmental features on the retained parcel.
For properties in the Agricultural designation it is the intent of the Plan that agricultural resources are
preserved, protected, and promoted, and further, that agricultural character of the Township is
maintained. The proposed severance will not reduce the agricultural viability of the retained parcel.
The Township's objectives for the agricultural designation will be maintained.
Single detached dwellings are permitted on lots designated Agricultural, therefore the enhanced lot
with the existing dwelling complies with the designation. The retained parcel currently operates as a
farm and this will not be changed as a result of the boundary adjustment. Agriculture is a permitted
use in the Agricultural designation and therefore the retained parcel continues to comply with the
policies.
Section D2 of the OP contains policies with respect to subdivision of land. Specifically, Section
D2.2.2 -"Boundary Adjustments", provides the following guidance:
"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."
The proposed boundary adjustment will not create a new building lot nor alter the existing permitted
uses on the retained or enhanced lot. The viability of both lots to operate as a farm or residential lot
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-29
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 6
Page 106 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
will not be negatively impacted. The proposed boundary adjustment will ensure that the well which
provides water to the residence will be located on the same property as the dwelling.
ZONING BY-LAW
The lands to be conveyed and to be retained are zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) in the Township's
Zoning By-law. The enhanced lot is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2).
The proposed retained parcel is currently being used for agricultural purposes which is a permitted
use in the A/RU Zone. The existing drive shed is 24ft from the closest corner of the existing enhanced
lot. Therefore the drive shed does not meet the required setback from agricultural buildings to interior
side lot lines of 15m (49.2ft). However, the new proposed corner of the enhanced lot will not further
increase the situation of non-compliance, by further reducing the setback. The dimensions of the
severed parcel have been chosen to ensure the existing driveway will be maintained on the
agricultural property thus protecting the agricultural use.
The current use of the enhanced parcel, residential, is permitted in the Rural Residential Two Zone.
Should the severed parcel be added to the enhanced lot, it would then be subject to split zoning.
While this is not an ideal situation, there are no provisions in the By-law or Official Plan which prohibit
this situation. Split zoning of a parcel only becomes an issue with regard to applying setbacks as the
zone boundaries act as property boundaries at the time of any future building consideration, should
another building be constructed on the property. It is planning staff's opinion that this will not cause an
onerous situation to the owner of the property.
Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law.
CONSULTATIONS:
Public Works Department-
Building Department- No concerns
Engineering Department - No concerns
ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule #1- Location Map
Schedule #2 - Location Map
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-29
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 6
Page 107 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
CONCLUSION:
It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2009-113-29, for a boundary
adjustment would appear to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, and maintains the use
and setback provisions of the Zoning By-law.
Resp?ctfully submitted: Reviewed by:
Meghan Keelan, B.E. S. Andria Leigh, M.C.I.P, R.P.P.
Planner Director, Planning & Building Services
Development Services Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Application No. 2009-13-29 Page 4 of 6
Page 108 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-13-29 (Ethan Angi & Robert Angi)
i
Q.
w
cs
in
rt
c5
c.t
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-29
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 5of6
Page 109 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-13-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
SCHEDULE 2: LOCATION MAP
2009-13-29 (Ethan Angi & Robert Angi)
LANDS TO BE ADDED
LANDS TO BE RETAINED
ENHANCED LOT
LINE 1
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-29
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 6 of 6
Page 110 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
p
41
,ETWEEN FRg1.8. CONS.l FD,S •8,I AND 2 E. P,
50 9.64' *"2-05.18~ 3 8 2.40'
N30000'W I N3000OW T N300OO,W t
W N 30°OC
W iy✓~I Ow 1 47.00'
..1 w M-- c4,94'5 7 M aY u q'
0 0% S;; * POST B x-' to W w Wes'.
N n.3 z IRE FENCE W 0
FDA B.I FD.1.8. Z w
tR.L.1 iR.L. 0 cr _
p
N33°'3T ~W-,' LB. U U 3
60.00 Lj
FENCE t~ P I.B. N 32°22'W N a°
FENCE I
OF LIMIT w R t2 T, T5'
O 0
Mw a
J
M
O
of ti L~
~ M
Z
W
W J w
4. W
^ r
J _W O
Q w Z e7
po tZ1 [o t~ 0 LI i D, W 04 4 a a A- `J
$E coNlJC fC-1) FA-0" ;
w N
u
l N o i It z
U. w G]
. z
wI Q
at At
_c
3:'M
'z N
Page 111 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-13-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
1 a7 ~i J%I/
PLAN OF SURVEY
OF PART OF
` o LOT 2 2, CONCESSION I E.P.R;
TOWNSHIP OF ORO
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
ROAD ALLOWANC-_ BETWEEN 'El'; c0!N5.JR.A1A11 ANp 217 o,P R, SCALE: I INCH=300 FEET
S. E. CORNER CO HER LOT 23, CON .I• I~.I CND T`«3o•oP4v yo•w LOT 21, CON. I EPR 1972
'c Cf/S<.N~[[[ a_ w J ~CrY 757
Ef?fe
6
0 61 !"711
A'5 T A
AREA = /12.448 Acs. i
i .'577 ive "Fill"
0 % 2.5
a J 0 % :i %
3
8
9
LINF RFTWFFN EI/2 ANn W.I/2 LOT 22
/7v/✓1. v'~ /Z AOry./
c` ~Sf
UIS'7- A/o 'Aig A'q
52356 °'4 '
LEGEND
■LB----DENOTES A 5/6'YO. IRON BAR 2' LONG.
01- ---DENOTES A I•SD. STANDARD IRON BAR 4'
LONG.
(RL.) ---DENOTES R. LEEPER, O.L.S.
FD.----DENOTES FOUND.
-E.RR,_-DENOTES Eu51 OFPIOVE-1 Ui-Z _
ROAD.
BEARINGS ARE ASTRONOMIC , DERIVED FROM
THE EASTERLY LIMIT OF LOT 22, CONCESSION
I E.P.R. SHOWN AS N30AOOW ON PLAN BY
R. LEEPER, O.L.S. DATED NOVEMBER 6,1964.
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT:
I. THIS SURVEY AND PLAN ARE CGRRECT AND
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS ACT AND
THE REGISTRY ACT ANO THE REGULATIONS
MADE THEREUNDER.
2. THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON THE IOft.
DAY OF MARCH , 1972.
R. KIRKPATRICK
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR
R . C. KIRKPATRICK
ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR
25 DUNLOP STREET EAST
BARRIE ONTARIO
PHONE: 728-t255
DRAWN: B.O.M. I CHK'O.: E.J.. B.
DATE: MARCH 16, 1972 JOB N9
SCALE: IINCH2300FECT RK•1494
Page 112 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
APPLICANT'S SKETCH SHOWING PROPOSED SEVERANCE
AND DRIVE SHED LOCATION
ec~c~SStu~J z P►2 ( LvT Zti
- -
~
M
~l
M
U boy
Z'
Dw ve (2'1 , 7 '
Stf ~ i7
Page 113 of 261
v
c~
(D
O
N
CF)
►zk
't d
~ ~Y'JF, a~u r}J. MX
y ' i lI
k
~ FF
41
~,g Y I
4
1S
P rJ iat _ '
-
■
D
cn
CD
v
CD
N
O
O
CD
W
N
CO
m
S
CQ
90
O
cr
CD
CQ
N
4
O
r
CD
Z
O
r
O
r-t
*0 4w
- t s ,ir . x °>Aa.,i v # am w'- rr ar~~ aN I f
x
i
~T ~ ~~~aPfY. FrF+ ~ off ~„ir" ~;•`~'t y s' . a
www
P
r
w
r
y
N3 39 Ol.LOI
, t13~NdH
^
J_
0
c9
m
a
I n
N3 3a Ql .L0^
JN~~~~' C~S~NdH
.Sam
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
Page 117 of 261
Agenda Item # 5f) - 2009-B-29 - Ethan Angi & Robert Angi 1270 Line 1 North, Lot...
Page 118 of 261
4~L ~ '
y
y. t.
:M~
~ ~ ~
J~.,,
~y
Y
~ ~
s.
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
Application No
2009-B-30
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-002-3000
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Subject: Consent Application
(Jim Drury)
West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5
(Former Township of Oro)
Prepared By:
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D10-39594
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision regarding Consent
applications 2009-B-30:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land
Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the
parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
3. That the applicant pay $2,000.00 for the lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland contribution;
4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte;
5. That the applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the County's Transportation and
Engineering Department a copy of the draft reference plan for the proposed consent, depicting
the County's standard 15 x 15 metre daylight (sight) triangle at the northeast corner of the
retained lands, corresponding to the proposed intersection associated with the proposed
subdivision on the proposed severed lands;
6. 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 application is to separate, by way of severance, a 9 hectare parcel that is
proposed for the development of a plan of subdivision from the applicant's overall 38.8 hectare land
holding.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-30
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 6
Page 120 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
The subject lands are located southeast of the intersection of Line 4 North and Old Barrie Road West,
partially within the Edgar Settlement Area. The lands are currently used for farming, and contain a
single detached dwelling. A watercourse bisects the property, located approximately 200 metres east
of Line 4 North, and flows southerly through both the proposed severed and retained lands, and
appropriately contains the overlying EP Zone. The "Lauder Road" Subdivision, is located directly
north across Old Barrie Road West from the subject lands. The lands are largely devoid of foliage,
where a small stand of trees is located in the extreme southeast corner of the subject lands; however,
this feature is not located on the lands proposed to be severed. The applicant was approved by the
Committee of Adjustment on April 17, 2008 for the same consent, but the application subsequently
lapsed. Therefore the applicant must reapply to the Committee of Adjustment for consideration on the
application.
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of application 2009-B-30 is to permit the severance of lands for a portion of the property
draft approved for a residential subdivision from the balance of the property which is agricultural land.
The lands to be severed have an area of approximately 9 hectares, and are proposed for the future
development of 15 residential lots, which are draft plan approved by Council. The lands to be
retained will have a lot area of approximately 32 hectares.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Does the Consent conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The subject property is contained within two land use designations: the proposed retained parcel is
wholly designated Agricultural, while the proposed severed lot is designated Rural Settlement Area.
For the purpose of this application, staff have discussed the issue of the partial land use designation
for the proposed severed lot, as the Agricultural designation would not permit the creation of a new lot
by way of severance. However, as the proposed severed lot and subsequent development of a
residential plan of subdivision will occur on lands within the Rural Settlement Area designation, it is on
this land use policy that the application is being considered. With respect to land use designation
boundary interpretation, the Official Plan provides for some flexibility when considering development
applications:
E1.8 - Interpretation of land use designation boundaries
The boundaries between land uses designated on the schedules of [the] plan are
approximate except where they meet with roads, railways ...lot lines or other clearly
defined physical features and in these cases are not open to flexible interpretation.
There the general intent of the document is maintained, minor adjustments to
boundaries will not require amendment to this plan ...where a lot is within more than one
designation... each portion of the lot shall be used in accordance with the applicable
policies of that designation.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-30
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 6
Page 121 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
The proposed residential development, in the form of a plan of subdivision, is being proposed on
lands completely within the Rural Settlement Area designation, and in accordance with the general
development policies of the Official Plan, will constitute a permitted and desirable form of
development.
With respect to both the proposed severed and retained lots, Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan
contains policies with respect to the creation of new lots by way of consent. In particular, the
"Committee shall be satisfied that the proposed lot:
a) fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained on a year-
round basis;
b) does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the
Province or the County supports the request;
c) will not cause a traffic hazard;
d) has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the
Comprehensive Zoning By-law and is compatible with adjacent uses;
e) can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal;
f) will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area;
g) will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land,
particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development
by this Plan;
h) will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature
in the area;
i) will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for
other uses in the area
Criteria a), b), and c) deal specifically with property access requirements and traffic. The proposed
severed lands, once developed, would contain a new municipal road for access to the 15 residential
lots. The retained parcel will continue to have frontage on both Line 4 North, and on Old Barrie Road
West. Therefore, road access requirements for the creation of the new lot and for the retained lands
will be maintained.
Criteria e), f) and i) deal mainly with the future development of a residential use. The criteria relating
to sewage, water supply, and drainage would be addressed during the engineering drawing
submission which is received to statfify the draft plan conditions, and any building permits would be
issued only when the requirements of the Building Code and any other applicable law are met to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. Criteria d) and h) will be discussed below.
Does the Consent comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law?
The proposed lands to be severed are zoned Residential One Hold(R1*H), while the retained lands
are zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone. The Residential One (R1) Zone requires a minimum lot
frontage of 30 metres (98.4 feet) and a minimum lot area of 0.2 hectares (0.49 acres). The Zoning
By-law includes a Holding provision that shall not be lifted until the Subdivision agreement has been
entered into between the Township of Oro-Medonte and developer. The proposed severed lot will
consist of 9 hectares, and will have 30 metres of frontage on Line 4 North, and 411 metres of frontage
on Old Barrie Road West. The proposed retained lands would consist of approximately 32 hectares,
and maintain approximately 445 metres of frontage on Line 4 South, and approximately 49 metres of
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-30
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 6
Page 122 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
frontage on Old Barrie Road West. The minimum lot size for an agricultural use is 2 hectares.
Therefore, the proposed severed and retained lands would continue to meet with all requirements of
lot area and frontage in the Zoning By-law.
CONSULTATIONS:
Transportation and Environmental Services -
Building Department
Engineering Department
NVCA- No Objection
County of Simcoe- No Objection
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Site Plan
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent application 2009-B-30 being to create a lot by
way of severance conforms to the Official Plan, and complies with the minimum lot area and frontage
as required by the Zoning By-law.
Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by:
Stev qu arson, B.URPL Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Intermediate Planner Director of Development Services
Development Services Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Application No. 2009-13-30 Page 4 of 6
Page 123 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-B-30 (Drury)
I~
i
i
I
L
z
J
C
SU BJ ECIT LANDS
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-30
0 80120 240 360 460 1
M--tees
III
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 5 of 6
Page 124 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
2009-B-30 (Drury)
1Is
g ca "n
G
3
'
z m ? CS
L
is
a
g g
A
o m
~ o
OR
CD
N
r
to
v
'
u ~ r
=r
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-30
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 6 of 6
Page 125 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
PLANNING ANALYSIS
CONSENT APPLICATION
West Part of Lot 11
Concession 5 (Oro)
Township of Oro-Medonte
Submitted To:
Township of Oro-Medonte
County of Simcoe
July, 2009
1.0 INTRODUCTION
MHBC Planning has been retained by Jim Drury to obtain consent for severance of his property
located at Part Lot 11, Concession 5, former Township of Oro, now in the Township of Oro-
Medonte in the rural settlement of Edgar.
The purpose of the consent application is to sever the portion of this property that has been
granted draft plan approval for a residential plan of subdivision, from the remainder of the site.
The severance to separate this portion of the property is being sought so that the owner may sell
the land subject to the draft plan of subdivision to a party that has the desire to register the
subdivision.
The effect of the proposal is to sever 9.011 hectares (22.3 acres) of land from the existing 41
hectare (101.3 acre) property. The boundary of the proposed severance coincides with the
southerly limits of the draft plan of subdivision boundary. The southerly boundary of the
subdivision has also been recognized by the Township as the southerly limit of the Edgar
settlement area. The land proposed to be severed is therefore, wholly within the settlement area
of Edgar, while the retained parcel which is used for agricultural purposes, is located outside of
the settlement area.
2.0 LOCATION AND SITE CONFIGURATION
The site is located partially within the south eastern quadrant of the rural settlement area of
Edgar, and the balance of the property is located just outside of this settlement area.
The property is rectangular in shape and is a total of approximately 41 hectares (101.3 acres).
The lands to be severed are 9.01 hectares (22.26 acres) while the lands to be retained are
approximately 32 hectares as indicated on Figure 1.
The site gently slopes toward the creek in the central area of the total land holding. There is
vegetation located adjacent to the creek within the proposed lot to be severed and also located in
the south east corner of the proposed lot to be retained.
MHBC Planning
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 126 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
The proposed lot to be retained is utilized for agricultural purposes by the present owner, and
will remain as agricultural. The lands to the northwest of the proposed severed parcel consist of
existing residential uses, and the community hall within the Edgar settlement area. Lands to the
north of the proposed severed parcel are existing residential uses located along the Old Barrie
Road, and the site of a residential plan of subdivision across Old Barrie Road West, all of which
are within the settlement area of Edgar.
The site consists of one residential dwelling, septic system and dug well, located on the lands to
be severed, all of which will be removed and decommissioned as part of the subdivision
development.
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN
The site is subject to the policies of the Official Plan (OP) of the County of Simcoe, as well as
the policies of the Township of Oro-Medonte's Official Plan.
3.1 Countv of Simcoe Official Plan
The portion of the property to be severed is located within a County "Settlement Area"
designation; with the balance of the subject lands being contained in the "Rural & Agricultural"
designation. The Settlement Area is denoted very generally on the County OP mapping and
references that more detail regarding settlement boundaries will be identified in local Official
Plans.
The County Official Plan contains policies which demonstrate a desire for development to be
directed toward settlement areas. Policy 3.1.1 for instance states:
"The County has numerous identifiable settlements. They are found in every municipality and
provide a basis for future urban forms of growth. A strategy of directing growth to settlements is
fully compatible with the Provincial Policy Statement,... "
The severed lands have already been draft approved for a residential subdivision in accordance
with this preferred development form. The current application for the severance of the draft
approved lands from the balance of the property is an initiative that will help facilitate
development on the subject lands in a manner already endorsed by Simcoe County.
The lands proposed for severance have previously been determined to be appropriate for urban
development through subdivision by plan, on the basis of the County Official Plan policies. The
proposed severance will enable this development to come to fruition by separating it from the
agricultural portion of the land holding so that it can be sold to a party that has the ability to see
the development through to completion. The severance proposed will not define the nature of
how the subject lands will be developed, as this has already been determined by the draft plan of
subdivision. Rather, the purpose of the severance is to facilitate development of land already
determined to comply with the policies of the County Official Plan.
3.2 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
MHBC Planning
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 127 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
The limit of the parcel proposed for severance coincides with the southerly boundary of the draft
plan of subdivision. The southerly boundary of the subdivision also represents the limit of the
settlement boundary of Edgar, as identified by the Township Official Plan. As a result, the lands
proposed for severance are within the settlement boundary, while the retained portion of the site
will be entirely outside of the settlement boundary. As a consequence, a division of the overall
subject lands already exists from a land use policy perspective. The lands to be severed are
designated "Rural Settlement Area" while the balance of the site proposed to be retained is
designated "Agricultural".
The split in the Township Official Plan land use designations creates a policy division on the
subject lands and establishes very different expectations as to what can be developed on each
portion of the lot. The severance proposed, seeks to utilize this pre-existing policy divide on the
site to "formally" separate the lot by dividing it into two autonomous parcels. The fixture use of
the lands to be severed and the lands to be retained have already been determined in large part,
and are clearly independent of one another.
The Township Official Plan clearly envisions two separate outcomes for the portions of the
subject lands proposed to be severed and those proposed to be retained. Council's prior decision
to approve a draft plan of subdivision on the lands proposed to be severed, and having the limits
of the draft plan coincide with the limits of the settlement area of Edgar is a clear and tangible
indication of what the intentions of the Official Plan are for the subject lands. Allowing the
proposed severance will further assist in the implementation of the planned intentions for the
subject lands, and will be consistent with the existing policies of the Township Official Plan.
The Township Official Plan sets out criteria that must be met when a severance is being
contemplated. The division of the subject lands, and determination that this division would be
appropriate, was previously contemplated and deemed appropriate by the approval of the plan of
subdivision. Although the severance application does propose the same division of the subject
lands, the outcome of the severance as it relates to lot layout however, will be different than the
outcome of the draft plan of subdivision. The severance will only create a single new lot if
allowed, whereas the registration of the draft plan of subdivision will result in 15 residential lots
with other blocks to be dedicated. Even though the goal of the proposed severance is only to
achieve an interim scenario in which to attain the registration of the draft plan of subdivision, the
fact is if the severance is approved a new single lot of 9.011 hectares will be created and will
exist until such time as the draft plan is registered. The creation of this single new lot (even if
only a temporary situation), must still be evaluated on the basis of the policies of the Township
Official Plan.
As a result, section D2.2.1 which outlines the policies to be considered when creating a new lot
by consent has been reviewed upon the parameters of the consent application brought forth. It is
the opinion of this office that the severance proposed can be supported by the consent policies of
the Official Plan outlined in the aforementioned section on the following basis:
a) That the retained and severed lots front on and will be accessed by a public road that is
maintained on a year-round basis.
MHBC Planning
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 128 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
■ Both the retained and severed lots will have frontage on to public roads that are
maintained on a year round basis;
b) That the retained and severed lots do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or
County Road.
■ Although access on to a County Road does exist, the severance itself will not
require an enhancement to this access;
c) That the retained and severed lots will not cause a traffic hazard.
■ Neither the severed nor retained lots will create a traffic hazard, as the current use
of the lands will not change as a result of the severance, and the current access
points to the adjacent public streets will not be used any differently than is already
occurring.
d) That the retained and severed lots have adequate size and frontage for the proposed use
in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and are compatible with adjacent
uses.
■ Both the severed and retained lots will comply with the Comprehensive Zoning
By-law.
e) That the retained and severed lots can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal.
■ Each lot can be serviced by private well and septic system. Ultimately the lot to
be severed will host 15 new residential lots, each of which has been determined to
be able to be serviced by well and septic by appropriately qualified consultants;
That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the drainage
patterns in the area.
■ The retained and severed lots will not be used for purposes other that that which
already exists. Ultimately the severed portion will be a registered plan of
subdivision, and the drainage related to this development has been determined to
be acceptable;
g) That the retained and severed lots will not restrict the development of the retained lands
or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are
designed for development by this Plan.
■ The result of the severance will not restrict the development of the retained lands,
since they are not contemplated for development and current policy would only
support limited development. It is not anticipated that other sites surrounding the
severed and retained parcel would be restricted from development in any way as a
result of the severance.
h) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the features and
functions of any ecological feature in the area.
■ Neither lot will negatively impact the features and functions of any ecological
feature of the area.
MHBC Planning 4
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 129 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
i) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the quality and
quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area.
■ Creation of the proposed new lot is not anticipated to negatively impact the
quality and quantity of groundwater as no new well or septic system is proposed t
support the severance. The new lot will be developed by the registration of the
draft plan of subdivision that exists on it, and this subdivision will not have any
negative impacts on groundwater quality or quantity, as determined by
appropriately qualified consultants;
j) That the retained and severed lots will conform to Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act.
■ A review of Section 51(24) of the Planning Act has been undertaken and it is the
opinion of this office that the severance will conform to the said policies of the
Act.
On the basis of the above, the proposed consent conforms to the Township's Official Plan
policies.
4.0 THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
This office has reviewed the Provincial Policy Statement as Planning Authorities are required to
have regard to the Policy Statement when exercising any land development authority. The PPS
was issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act and it is intended to provide policy direction for
land use matters which are of Provincial Interest. This section is intended to briefly outline how
the application is consistent with the Policy Statement.
The Provincial Policy Statement seeks to promote economically and environmentally strong
communities by providing a range of residential uses and by avoiding development that
jeopardizes agricultural lands, natural heritage features and other inefficient uses of land. The
purpose of the severance is to divide the subject site so that the portion of the property that has
previously been determined to be desirable for urban development can be separated from the
portion of the site that based on current policy is desirable for agricultural use. In doing so, the
severance will help to ensure that the determined limits of development area are further
entrenched through the division of lands. Establishing clear limits as to where development can
and cannot occur is critical to ensure that the goals of the PPS are actually implemented.
Development of residential lots within the settlement area of Edgar is the type growth that is
expected based on the policies of the PPS. The severance represents a step closer to realizing
development on the subject lands that is compliant with the PPS.
Overall, the Provincial Policy Statement was reviewed in the context of the proposal for the
proposed severance, and it is submitted that this initiative is consistent with the Provincial Policy
Statement.
5.0 PLACES TO GROW
MHBC Planning 5
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 130 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
The Places to Grow Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (the Growth Plan) was
produced by the Province to guide building stronger prosperous communities by managing
growth. In order to achieve a better use of land and infrastructure, the Growth Plan focuses on
directing growth to existing urban areas. There are policies of the Growth Plan which relate
specifically to built form even though it is a Provincial and Municipal wide document. The
document which provides the most protection prevails when there is a conflict where the natural
environment and human health are concerned; in all other cases the Growth Plan takes
precedence over the Provincial Policy Statement.
Directing growth to settlement areas of a community, intensification, transit supportive densities,
the efficient use of land, infrastructure and other resources that relate to the development of
complete communities are all issues dealt with by the Growth Plan.
As outlined in policy section 2.2.9, the Growth Plan requires rural settlement areas to be the
focal point of growth within rural regions in order to create areas that will serve the needs of
rural residents and area businesses. This policy section also states that new multiple lots for
residential development will be directed to settlement areas. The proposed severed portion of
the subject lands has been draft approved for 15 residential lots which is consistent with the
policies of the Growth Plan. The proposed severance is required to assist in the registration of
this draft approved subdivision, and as a result the severance is a necessary step in implementing
land development for the Township that is compatible with the Growth Plan.
6.0 ZONING BYLAW
The lands proposed for severance are zoned Residential One (R1) zone in the Township's
Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. A zoning by-law amendment to establish the (R1) zone was
approved by the Township of Oro-Medonte to implement the draft plan of subdivision for 15
residential lots. The balance of the lands proposed to be retained are zoned Agricultural/Rural
(A/RU).
Despite the fact that the zoning for the lands to be severed was implemented specifically for the
draft approved subdivision, the single large lot proposed for creation as a result of the severance
application, will also meet the standards of the R1 zone. The lands to be retained will remain as
agricultural lands, and will continue to comply with the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) zone.
The Zoning By-law has placed a holding provision on the lands that are draft approved for
subdivision and constitute the portion of the site proposed to be severed. The hold provision is
in place to ensure that an appropriate subdivision agreement is entered into by the land owner.
By integrating this hold zone, the Township has secured that development on the lands proposed
to be severed will be consistent with the approved draft plan of subdivision only. As a result,
this effectively reduces any risk that if the lands are severed into one lot prior to registration of
the subdivision, that this newly created single lot can be used in a manner which is not consistent
with what has already been proposed for development.
Overall both the severed and retained lots will conform to the zoning in place on site.
MHBC Planning 6
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 131 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
7.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis of the planning documents provided above, it is the opinion of this office
that the proposed severance is based upon sound planning principles. The intent of the severance
is rooted in the desire to develop the lands in a manner that has been endorsed by Township
Council through the approval of a draft plan of subdivision and related zoning by-law
amendment. This severance is intended to facilitate the sale of the portion of the subject lands
draft approved for subdivision to a party that is both interested, and has the ability to bring this
subdivision to registration. In order for this transaction to occur, the severance must be
completed so that the subject lands are divided, and the portion of the lands intended for
development can be transferred.
Our analysis has demonstrated that the proposed consent to sever the subject land is supportable
based upon all applicable policy found within the County and Township Official Plans, the
Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Grow. The severed and retained lots will conform to
the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95 and satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act.
For the aforementioned reasons we respectfully request that the severance be given favourable
consideration from the Township, and Committee of Adjustment.
Respectfully Submitted,
MHBC Planning
Dan Amadio, B.E.S
Planner
cc. J.Drury
MHBC Planning
Drury - Consent Application
July 2009
Page 132 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
COUNTY 01
SIAICOE
a s'
August 11, 2009
Steven Farquharson, Secretary-Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Oro, Ontario LOL 1X0
VIA EMAIL
RE: Consent Application File No. 2009-B-30 (Drury)
1099 Old Barrie Road West (Simcoe County Road 11), Concession 5, West Part of Lot 11,
geographic Township of Oro, Township of Oro-Medonte
Dear Mr. Farquharson:
Thank you for circulating the above-noted application to the County of Simcoe for review. County
Planning staff provides the following comments:
Draft plan condition #32 of the Drury Plan of Subdivision File No. 2006-SUB-02 requires that the Owner
transfer to the County of Simcoe at no cost, a fee simple, unencumbered interest in a 15 metre by 15
metre daylight triangle block at each limit of the proposed road intersection with County Road 11. The
proposed subdivision road and daylight triangle blocks are to align with the existing Lauder Road
intersection.
The County of Simcoe has no objection to the approval of the consent application, provided the
following condition is included:
1. The applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the County of Simcoe a copy of the draft
reference plan showing the required 15 x 15m daylight triangle lands on the severed parcel,
which align with the existing daylight triangles on the north side of County Road 11. A copy of
the signed deposited reference plan shall also be provided to the County of Simcoe.
Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
The Corporation of the County of Simcoe
Greg M. rek
Planner II
P: 705-726-9300 x1362
Cc: Jim Hunter and Paul Murphy, County of Simcoe
PLD-003-C01
County of Simcoe Main Line (705) 726 9300
Planning Department Toll Free 1 866 893 9300
1110 Highway 26, Fax (705) 727 4276
Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 Web: simcoe.ca
Page 133 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
D
Z
Q
J
O
W
w
W
y
W
tJ~
D
W
to
O
CL
O
w
a
Page 134 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
M
0
N
O
Z
0
W
Z_
Q
H
W
0!
Page 135 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
Z
a
J
D
W
Z_
Q
F
W
Page 136 of 261
Agenda Item # 5g) - 2009-B-30 - Jim Drury West Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 (Fo...
agenda Item # 59) -
- Page 138 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
s
ivf3ntc~
Prau1 I-fnvtag~, l:uifing Fu~~vi
Application No:
2009-B-25 to 2009-B-28
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-003-14800
4346-010-003-20900
REQUIRED CONDITIONS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Subject: Variance Application
(Indian Park Association)
Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-
9, Block A & Part of Lot 3,
Concession 6, Plan M-8, Block A &
Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-
30, Block A
(Former Township of Oro)
Prepared By:
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D10-39577
D10-39578
D10-39580
D10-39581
The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision regarding Consent
applications 2009-13-25, 2009-13-26, 2009-13-27 and 2009-13-28:
1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcels be
prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer;
2. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for each lot created as cash-in-lieu of a parkland
contribution;
3. That the applicant apply for a re-zoning to include a Holding provision, of the severed land to
accurately reflect the proposed residential land use;
4. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the
parcel severed, for review by the Municipality;
5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and,
6. 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 applications 2009-B-25 to 2009-B-28 is to permit the creation of 4 new residential
lots, within the Sugarbush Settlement Area. The lots are proposed to have a frontage ranging from
37 metres to 68 metres, and lot areas averaging 0.28 hectares.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-25 to 2009-13-28
Meeting Date July 16, 2009
Page 1 of 9
Page 139 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of applications 2009-B-25 to 2009-B-28 is to permit the creation of 4 new residential
lots, within the Sugarbush Settlement Area. The lots are proposed to have a frontage ranging from
37 metres to 68 metres, and lot areas averaging 0.28 hectares. The land proposed to be retained
would have a lot area of approximately 6.0 hectares.
Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 13 Lot 14
Proposed Lot Frontage 68 metres 37 metres 61 metres 52.7 metres
Proposed Lot Area 0.32 hectares 0.21 hectares 0.28 hectares 0.31 hectares
The land proposed to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 6.0 hectares.
FINANCIAL:
Not applicable.
POLICIES/LEGISLATION:
Does the Consent conform to the general intent of the Official Plan?
The subject property is designated Residential by the Official Plan. Permitted land uses within the
Residential designation include single detached dwellings, home occupation and private recreational
facilities. It is the intention of the Official Plan that all new development in the Sugarbush node be
serviced by municipal communal water systems and private septic systems. The proposed use of the
severed lands has been indicated by the applicant to be residential. Comments received by the
Manager of Engineering and Environmental Services have noted that any new water service will be
needed to be installed at the owners expense. For the purpose of this application, it is noted that the
creation of new lots by way of severance is permitted within the Residential designation, where the
tests of severance listed in Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan are met. The proposed severed and
retained lots would front on a municipal road, would not be located within an environmentally
sensitive area, and would comply with relevant Zoning provisions of the Private Recreational
Exception 114 (PR*114) Zone (discussed below). Based on these factors, the application to create
two new residential lots through severance maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. On this
basis, the policies of Section D2.2.1 have been satisfied.
Does the Consent comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law?
The property is currently zoned Private Recreational Exception 114 (PR*114) Zone.
Consent Application 2009-B-25 (Lot 2) will consist of approximately 0.32 hectares, and will have 68
metres of frontage on Huron Woods Drive. The Manager of Engineering and Environmental Services
has commented that the lot will require installation of water services by Indian Park Association and
that the septic requires 100 foot setback from well on municipal property. Staff is of the opinion that
the rezoning with a holding provision be included as a condition of consent for the proposed lot, in
order to satisfy the comments from the Engineering and Environmental Services Department.
Development Services
Application No. 2009-13-25 to 2009-8-28
Meeting Date July 16, 2009
Page 2 of 9
Page 140 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The second proposed lot Consent Application 2009-B-26 (Lot 3) would consist of an area of
approximately 0.2 hectares, and will have a frontage of 37 metres on Algonquin Trail. The owner is
required to provide water service to lot from watermain.
The third proposed lot to be created as a result of Consent Application 2009-B-27 (Lot 13), would
consist of approximately 52.0 metres along Huron Woods Drive and a total area of approximately
0.28 hectares. Owner will be required to provide water service from watermain to property line.
The fourth Lot proposed Consent application 2009-B-28, Lot 14, and would have a total area of
approximately 0.31 hectares and approximately 52.7 metres of frontage Oneida Avenue.
The required frontage for a lot in the PR Zone is 30 metres (98 feet), and the required minimum lot
area is 0.18 hectares (0.4 acres). The proposed retained lands would consist of 6 hectares,
therefore, the proposed lots and retained lands would meet with all requirements of lot area and
frontage for the Private Recreational Zone. It is also noted that the surrounding residential lots are
zoned Residential One Exception 113 (R1 *113) Zone. If the proposed lots were to receive the same
zoning, the lots would exceed the zoning standards in terms of lot frontage and lot area.
Staff is of the opinion that the rezoning with a holding provision be included as a condition of consent
for the proposed lots. This is due to the Private Recreation Exception 114 (PR*114) Zone, not
permitting residential uses. The rezoning of the proposed lots will allow for the intended residential
use. The Holding provision for the proposed is requested so lots can identify a building envelope to
maintain as much tree vegetation as possible, and to address the comments received from the
Manager of Engineering and Environmental Services, in regards to the servicing of the lots.
On the basis of the above, the application would appear to comply with the general intent of
the Zoning By-law.
CONSULTATIONS:
Transportation and Environmental Services
Building Department
Engineering Department
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
Location Map
2.
Proposed Site Plan
3.
Location of Proposed Lots
4.
2009-B-25- Lot 2
5.
2009-B-26- Lot 3
6.
2009-B-27- Lot 13
7.
2009-B-28- Lot 14
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-25 to 2009-13-28
Meeting Date July 16, 2009
Page 3 of 9
Page 141 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
CONCLUSION:
In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent applications 2009-B-25 to 2009-B-28 conforms to
the Official Plan, as the future development of residential uses would be in keeping with the
Residential designation policies
Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by:
Stever qufharson, B.URPL Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Intermediate Planner Director of Development Services
Development Services Meeting Date July 16, 2009
Application No. 2009-13-25 to 2009-13-28 Page 4 of 9
Page 142 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-B-25 to 2009-13-28 (IPA)
i~
_F y
T 77/7
I
Indian Park Association - Sugarbush Subdivision
Potential Lots
L.P.-
TreAT.PN.*.K Drat for Discussion
Nerirork
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-25 to 2009-B-28
l
z~
r--
1
Meeting Date July 16, 2009
Page 5of9
Page 143 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2409-8-25 (Lot 2), 2009-13-ZO lL"` 01' --w
E PLAN
SCHEDULE 2:
9-B2OPos2 (IPA)
t
\ \ ~.w
\
G
*P \
0
ash \
1
-
ORIGINAL ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN CONCESSIONS
6 AND 7 S
iv Sd ;
s P~ ~ I
y '
d
G
CD
O h
~ (D
Meeting Date July
page 6 16, 009
Development Services
Application No. 2009-B-25 to 2009•B-26
Page 144 of 261
o~ rn
O p
N r
CY)
O j2 i _Om LOT 141 \ ED PLAN M-9 73 a
~ +r `w~'U''g P1tS.7 4057-0081 ~ ` 1;C 1~, P:
r N
N \0,I
M
o \
CO NI
o o J Lot 3
C)
0 Zoning Requirements L 0 T 1 4 2
C\j
11. 1~ I Ir~7
,S, P E G I ? T a R ,oe
m (111 * 113) ct'1
W o Setbacks: \ BENCH MARK No. 1 P L
lop ELEVATI ofONsie97.86 ASSUMED
Ng~ f A N
Side Yard: 4.5m
\
N RearYerd: Urn sr'xo'E
~.oeo",-
4- \ LOS-W LE T 1AW R.P. M-8 L 0 T 1 4 3 f 00
W
-17 C, Front Yard: B.Om ° \ \ N
PIN. O
Legend: 4p5? _
-o 43p T , O
'a \ ~A~ \
Subject Property
-P A7s \ > a f L 0 T N
I_- 1
Y \ f
Surveyed 3:1 Slope \ j \ A s \ / V
! l > / O
- Building Envelope ~ Scale 1:500m O
II/X/ p
It 874 sq.m. ht 7,255 sq.ft.) N:10ro-MeifontelSugarbush -residential severance 0821130rawingsDraft PIan4MHBC - Lot 3 -July 18 2009.dw9 ~ O
0 \ C Z
O v
Q j CL
a, a
oa
(0
N
O
LO
N
0)
cB
CL
A3 Lot
ends
► offing ReAui~em
(Rj*JO)
Setbacks:
4.6m
• SkaYaccl: apm
p~arva~: Gam
z F~{Yard.
p'-~. ~egg~d:
guM^, propel"
Q
N Q- gurveYed 3:1 SbPa
0135 2,T,17 gy sc.1
a
aN
m
cY ~
W o
N
W
U)
I
LOT 144
LOT 45 Asa r5 w - 4
h dt `
LOT
e\w, ~aoe~-o1a7 \ f
a1
Ow
1r
~C
G
X/ E
B L O C K \.,..Pd~
um • " - cp's' y1R
0 0 D y,CE)=,sa" 18
~r PL• 4-30. 20j~?-~a 0 PPRT33068
ce 1
U R 0
~'Rr x \ ~"E CI ST EMEO PART 20 "1* gt~ 15"G 51R-
~/s R-33068 PART 14
J Yd _ -wnrmc{ \ , 57R-33068
414
PA IT 21_511?-33068 _ 6L K g 31 , oo •e~"~ -
I LOT
w~, LOT 32 - r--
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2409-8-25 (Lot 2), 2009-13-ZO lL"` 01' --w
1
1
1
t
1
1
\
\
SCHEDULE P 8OP S4 D SITE PLAN
B
I
i
t
1
\ tS~
\ o 1<
\4 -
LOS \'o
R
s~
w
0
0
4F ~
S
.o ~
a f°
T
µ S
A
x v,
m
-3 r 1
rt~Jl°~JIyJt
r
a m w
m;;
1V
O
O
gy
m
3
0
as m
i
to
w
W A
1
c
v
3 3 3
~
M
N
Meeting Date July 16, 2009
page 9of9
Development Services
Application No. 2009-8-25 to 2009-8-28
~WW
b
O N~
~ I
ILLLLLL ~r
I JukS
1 1
Page 147 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
Planning Analysis
Consent to Sever
Lot 2
az -
lan F. MacNaughton
MA, FCIP, RPP
Barnard R Herwsen
BES, MCIP, RPP
Pala R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP
W. Brcnt Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP
James D. Parkin
BES, MCIP, RPP
Carol M. Wicbe
BES
Kriz Menzies
BES, MCIP, RPP
David A. Mcl av
BES, MCIP, RPP
Brian A. &eman
BES, MCIP, RPP
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, ON N211 5C5
T: (519) 576.3650
F: (519) 576.0121
7050 Weston Road, #230
Woodbridge, ON L4L 8G7
T: (905) 761.5588
F: (905) 761.5589
630 Colborne Street, #202
London, ON N6B 2V1
T: (519) 858.2797
F: (519) 858.2920
10 Davey Crescent
Kingston, ON K7N 1X6
T: (613) 384,7067
F: (613) 384.8959
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, ON L4M 3N6
T: (705) 728.0045
F: (705) 728.2010
www.mhbcplan.com
Indian Park Association
Township of Oro-Medonte
July 2009
0821 D
Page 148 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
PLANNING ANALYSIS
CONSENT APPLICATION
SEVERANCE
Township of Oro-Medonte
Jid)) 24, 2009
(Lot 2)
T: (705) 728.0045 1.0 INTRODUCTION
F: (705) 728.2010
ww%v.mhbcplan.com
Indian Park Association, the ratepayer association for Phases 1 and 2 of the
Ian F. MacN""ghton Sugarbush development (M-8, M-9, M-30, and M-31) in Oro-Medonte has
MA, FCIP, RPP
retained MHBC Planning to review the planning merits of a severance to create a
Bernard P. Hermsen lot in the M-9 subdivision. The analysis provided herein of the planning merits of
MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP
the application has found that the proposal represents good planning.
Paul R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP 2.0 PROPOSAL
W. Brent Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP As the Committee is aware, the Indian Park Association is divesting its commonly
James D. Perkin held park lands. The Association was created in order to manage commonly held
BES, MCIP, RPP lands within the Sugarbush development when the subdivision was first
Carol M. Wiebe developed. The Association and its membership no longer require the commonly
BES held lands and they are proceeding forward to divest the commonly held lands in
Kris Menzies order to dissolve of the Corporation.
BES, BEd, MCIP, RPP
David A. A-tcxay
Prior to divesting themselves of the lands, the Association has an interest in
BES, MCIP, RPP
providing for more lots within the community from the commonly held lands.
Brian A. Zeman
This application is to sever one lot (know as lot 2) from part of Block A, an open
BES, MCIP, RPP
space block located in the north-eastern portion of the residential settlement . This
Offices in;
application is being made in tandem with three other applications for lot division.
• Kitchener
These applications will constitute the final applications for consent from the
• Vaughan
Association before it divests itself of the commonly held land holdings.
• London
• Kingston
• Barrie
The proposal is to create lot of 0.328ha (0.8 lac) identified as lot 2 on the attached
Consent Plan. There will be remnant parcels created being Block A of
City, Town and Rural Planning
approximately 15ha (37.07ac) in area. The lands are currently vacant.
Municipal Plans and Studies
Land Development
The subject lands will also require relief from section 5.32 of the zoning by-law.
This section, in effect states:
Urban Design /
Community Planning
Landscape Architecture
Natural Resource
and Aggregate Planning
Expert Evidence and Mediation
Project Management
Page 149 of 261
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, Ontario L4M 3N6
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Not withstanding any other provision in this By-law, no building or structure shall be located
within 23 meters (75 feet) of a slope or embankment that exceedv 33% or 3 to 1.
As the property is currently zoned PR* 114 and will require a residential rezoning. It is
anticipated that the Committee, should it approve the consent, will require a rezoning as a
condition of consent. It is this zoning application which would propose a site specific setback to
recognize the deficiency from the 3:1 slope. The merits of the land use and the setback from the
slope, will be addressed during the zoning stage
A Consent Plan which illustrates the proposal is attached to this report
3.0 LOCATION AND SITE CONFIGURATION
The site is located on the south side of the most north-east portion of Huron Woods Drive, within
the Sugarbush residential settlement. The Sugarbush settlement area is comprised of
approximately 90 hectares (223 acres) of land located south of County Road 22 (Horseshoe
Valley Road). The subject lands are legally described as Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-30,
Part of Block B, former Township of Oro, Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe.
The attached map shows the proposed lot within the context of the existing Sugarbush
development and also in relation to the other lots which are proposed for severance.
The Sugarbush subdivision has a rolling topography and the existing residential units were
designed to "fit" within this topography. There is additional opportunity to accommodate a small
amount of additional lots within the topography, including the subject lands.
As with most of the lots within the original Sugarbush, the lot is irregular in shape and the
remnant parcel is also irregular in shape.
The lot and the remnant host very little vegetation.
The lot is situated immediately north-west of the existing slope, with approximately one third of
the site subject to setback requirements included in the Township Zoning By-law.
4.0 THE PLANNING ACT
Section 53 of the Planning Act outlines the requirements for consideration of an application for
Consent and requires, in accordance with Subsection 53(12), that a municipality have regard to
the matters under Subsection 51(24) to determine whether a provisional consent shall be given.
The conformity of the consent application to these matters is discussed below:
(a) the effect of the proposal on matters of Provincial Interest;
2
r47HBC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Totvnship ol'Oro-!lfedonte
July 2009
Lot 2
Page 150 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The proposed severance does not have any negative effect on any matters of Provincial Interest
as stated in Section 6.0 of this report,
(b) whether the subdivision is premature or in the public interest;
As this proposal constitutes rounding out of a settlement area, is infilling within an existing
subdivision, and the site can be appropriately serviced the proposed consents are not considered
premature and are in the public interest.
(c) whether the plan conforms to the Official Plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if
any;
As outlined in Section 7.0 of this report, the application conforms to both the County and
Township Official Plans as the lands are within a settlement area, can be appropriately serviced
and will not negatively impact any natural features. The subject lands are part of the Sugarbush
Subdivision, which consists primarily of single detached dwellings. The proposal conforms to
this subdivision as the uses are already established. The creation of new lots will not adversely
impact the surrounding residential uses.
(d) The suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided;
The lot is of an appropriate size to host a substantial single detached dwelling and associated
septic system and there is sufficient table land to provide for the development of these uses. The
lot exceeds the minimum lot size, frontage and area required in the Zoning By-law. The lot is
deficient only as it relates to the required setback to a 3:1 slope however, as identified in Section
3.0 of this report, the lot remains suitable for the intended residential use and development.
(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the
adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision
with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;
The lot has access to Huron Woods Drive. The remnant parcel has access to Huron Woods
Drive, Iriquois Ridge, and Mohawk Heights. All roads are publically owned and maintained.
There are sufficient opportunities to site a driveway access onto the existing roadway.
(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;
The subject lands are irregular in shape. Many of the existing lots within the subdivision are
similarly irregular in shape; this is the nature of the original Sugarbush development as the
intention was to fit the lots, and homes, within the irregular topography of the area. The
dimensions of the proposed severed lots have been chosen in order to ensure the appropriate
zoning setbacks can be accommodated. The retained lands will continue to be irregular in shape.
(g) the restrictions on the lands to be subdivided or the buildings and structures
proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;
The entire Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands are subject to two easements; one
for water services to the Township and the other for gas services to Consumers' Gas.
3
AIMC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park ~Issocialiwi. Township of 0ro-Wedonie
July 2009
Lot 2
Page 151 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;
The creation of these lots will not cause an issue of flood control as there are no nearby water
courses and no major site alteration is anticipated to occur as a result of development on the
lands. As the development is an infill in an existing residential area, and the common lands are
not subject to any restrictive natural resources, the proposal is not anticipated to cause a negative
impact on any protected natural resource.
(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;
The Sugarbush settlement is serviced by municipal water, the severed lands will be able to
access this service. The retained parcels could also access this system, if required although it is
not the intention for these lands. The severed lands are of a suitable size to accommodate a
residential sewage system and the soils in Sugarbush are generally known to be good for septic
system use. The Sugarbush settlement is fully serviced in terms of utilities - gas, cable, phone,
etc.
0) the adequacy of school sites;
The proposal is to create one lot. Additional consents are being requested to a total of four lots. it
is submitted that the creation of a maximum of four lots is not anticipated to cause an adverse
impact on the school system. There are existing schools in the area should the rezoning be
granted and residential uses approved for the site. The subdivision is currently serviced by
existing school bus routes.
(k) the area of land, if any, exclusive of highways, to be conveyed or dedicated for public
purposes;
The Association has discussed the issue of dedication of the remnant lands with Council and it
has been mutually decided that the Association would pay cash-in-lieu of parkland for the lots;
as is the standard practice for the Township. No other dedications are required.
(1) The extent to which the plan's design optimizes the available .supply, means of
supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and
The creation of infill lot(s) within an existing subdivision which is already serviced with various
municipal and community services will assist in optimizing the existing services already enjoyed
by the subdivision.
(m) The interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and
site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also
located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41(2) of the
Planning Act or subsection 114(2) of the City of Toronto Act.
This is not applicable in this instance.
Based on the analysis provided above, the proposed consent application conforms to the
requirements of the Planning Act.
4
MI-IBC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Associathm. Township (.?1'Clro-_Medonte
Jtrty 2009
Iot2
Page 152 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
5.0 PLACES TO GROW - GROWTH PLAN
The Growth Plan sets out Province wide policies for how and where growth should occur. This
document directs growth to settlement areas and requires settlement areas to be complete
communities consisting of a balance of employment and residential uses as well as transit
supportive.
As the proposed lot creation is intended to create a lot within an existing settlement area and
constitutes an intensification proposal within an existing plan of subdivision which is
appropriately serviced, the proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.
6.0 THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) was issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act and it is
intended to provide policy direction for land use matters which are of Provincial interest.
Planning Authorities are to have regard to the Policy Statement when exercising any authority.
The PPS covers many issues such as proper infrastructure for development, affordable housing,
protection of natural resources, protection of agricultural lands, protection of mineral resources
and promotion of economically and environmentally strong communities. The PPS directs the
majority of growth to settlement areas. A review of the PPS has been undertaken and it is
submitted that the proposal is consistent with the Policy. Although the entire Policy has been
reviewed it should be noted that the proposal is within a settlement area and it does not adversely
impact any protected natural features. A review of the servicing policies of the PPS is
specifically outlined below.
The Sugarbush settlement is subject to partial services (municipal water and private septic
systems). Policy 1.6.4.5 of the PPS permits development on partial services in certain
circumstances. It is intended that the lot utilize the existing municipal water service or be
"partially serviced". One circumstance where partial services are acceptable within the PPS is
when the development is within a settlement area and where extension of the partial service
would be considered infilling and rounding out of existing development. This proposal
constitutes infilling of the Sugarbush subdivision. The PPS requires that there is reserve water
system capacity and site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services. The
Township's Official Plan identifies that limited development is permitted in the settlement on the
municipal water and with private septic systems; this is discussed in further detail in Section 7.2
of this Report.
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposal is consistent with the
policies of the PPS.
J1HBC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of Oro-Medonte
July :00.9
Lot 2
Page 153 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
7.0 OFFICIAL PLAN
Both the policies of the County of Simcoe Official Plan and the Township of Oro-Medonte
Official Plan apply to the subject lands. The policies of both plans are discussed in further detail
below.
7.1 County of Simcoe Official Plan
The Sugarbush subdivision is designated as a "Settlement" in the County Official Plan (OP). A
review of the OP has been undertaken including the applicable policy sections and how the
proposal conforms is outlined herein. The applicable sections include Section 3.5 - Settlements,
Section 4.1 - Settlement Form & Expansion, Section 3.3 - General Subdivision & Development
Policies, and Section 4.3 - General Development Policies & Guidelines. The local OP identifies
the subject land as a "Sand and Gravel Resource" on Schedule 5.2.1; therefore Section 4.4
Aggregate Development of the OP has also been reviewed.
Section 3.5, Settlements, generally speaks to directing growth to settlement areas, how
settlement areas should grow and how municipalities should manage growth in these areas.
These policies do not address site specific development but generally state that settlement areas
should accommodate a diversity of land uses, including residential and recreation. Based on the
addition of one lot (and four lots in total), as an infill proposal, it is submitted that the additional
lots will assist in contributing to the use of the settlement for residential purposes.
The County's subdivision policies are described in Section 3.3 of the OP. These policies permit
Plans of Subdivisions or Consents if the land use is permitted in the designation or if the intent of
the plan's goals and objectives are maintained. The subject lands are designated Settlement in
the County OP, which permits residential uses and development. The site is also designated for
residential uses and development in the local OP. The goals and objectives of the Plan have been
reviewed and it is submitted that the intent is maintained by the proposal.
Section 3.3.2 further stipulates that lots can only be created where they have access to and
frontage on a public highway; all parcels have access and frontage on a publically maintained
road. Lot 2 specifically fronts on to Huron Woods Drive.
Other requirements to be considered for development proposals are addressed in Section 3.3.
Specifically development should be located outside of wetlands or habitat areas; the maintenance
of views and vistas is encouraged; there may be a need for subdivision agreements between
developers and the municipality; protection of County and local greenland systems is required;
compliance with the Minimum Distance Separation Formula for nearby agricultural uses is
required; there are policies for development within the Niagara Escarpment Plan; protection of
prime agricultural areas is required; development in areas of environmental constraints such as
flood plains is discouraged; a Stormwater Management Report to support all plans of subdivision
A1HBC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Assocria ioii. Township of Oro-Medonte
Jub% 2009
Lot 2
Page 154 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
or industrial areas where large impervious areas or chemical storage is proposed is required; a
traffic study could be required; a noise, odour and dust studies could be required; and studies
addressing development adjacent to contaminated sites could be required.
This above criteria has been reviewed with regard to the proposal. The proposed development to
create one residential lot conforms to the County's subdivision policies based on the following:
wetlands are not located within or surrounding the subject lands; any existing views and vistas
can be maintained; the creation of one lot does not require a subdivision agreement; the County
does not identify any of the Greenland system on or near the subject lands); there are no
agricultural operations in the area; the subject lands are not within the Niagara Escarpment, the
lands are identified as Class 5, 6, or 7 therefore they are not prime agricultural lands (and would
be difficult to farm due to the topography and the proximity to residential uses); the proposal is
not within a floodplain; a Stormwater Management Report is not required as only one lot is
proposed in an area which stormwater can be appropriately handled though existing municipal
controls; traffic, noise, odour, and dust studies are not, in the opinion of this office, required for
the creation of one lot in an area of similar uses
The general development policies of the County Plan are outlined in Section 4.3, General
Development Policies and Guidelines. The criteria for the design and layout of developments are
detailed in this section and include: minimizing the removal of natural vegetation; protecting
and maintaining scenic resources; maintaining a scale of development which is compatible with
the character of the area; outdoor lighting which compliments the setting; development clustered
at the edges of significant open spaces; road patterns should fit the topography of the site;
reduction of visual impacts of signs; conservation of cultural heritage; connectivity of open
spaces; inclusion of a mix of housing types; a strong pedestrian orientation; and the integration
of trails and pathways. The remaining policies of Section 4.3 deal with development in rural
areas, the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine which are not applicable to this
application.
This application is seeking to create one new residential lot. Minimizing the removal of
vegetation will be considered; no scenic resources are intended to be affected; the creation of one
lot would be compatible with the surrounding residential lots as they are roughly the same shape
and size; there will be no new outdoor lighting; the retained parcels will generally remain as
open space; no new roads are proposed; nor are any new signs are proposed; there is no cultural
heritage to be conserved; the open space will remain connected to other spaces; as only one new
lot is being created, a mix of housing types could not be accommodated; the Sugarbush
subdivision has a strong pedestrian orientation due to the curvilinear streets and trail network
within the open space system and finally, the application is not in a rural area nor is the site part
of the Niagara Escarpment or the Oak Ridges Moraine.
Section 4.4 Aggregate Developments sets out the County's policies on aggregate resources.
Specifically this section speaks to the location of mineral aggregate operations; development in
d11fBC 11anning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township c'rf0ro-Medonte
July 2009
Lot 2
Page 155 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
areas identified as high potential; and other policies relating to the establishment and operation
of mineral aggregate facilities.
The majority of these policies do not apply to this application as it does not relate to the location
or operation of mineral aggregate facilities. However, Section 4.4.2 outlines policies with
regards to development for uses other than aggregate operations located in areas of high
potential. The Sugarbush settlement is located within an area identified for potential resources.
Section 4.4.2 states that development for alternate land uses may be permitted where it would
not preclude or hinder establishment of new operations or their access to resources; utilization is
not feasible because of natural or man-made constraints; or the proposal serves a greater long
term public interest; and provided any issues of public health, safely and environmental impact
are addressed.
The Sugarbush settlement predates the establishment of the County OP. It is an existing
subdivision which prevents the extraction of any resources and therefore the development of
additional residential lots will not further impede or hinder the establishments of new operations
or their access to resources. The proposal conforms to this policy section.
Based on the analysis above it is submitted that the proposed consent conforms to the County's
Official Plan.
7.2 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
The Township's Official Plan designates the Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands,
as "Residential". Schedule "A" also identifies the lands as being located within the Oro Moraine
Planning Area boundary.
Section C.14.2.4 sets out the land use policies for Sugarbush subdivision. This section states that
the residential designation applies to some of the lands within the settlement, including the
subject lands. The permitted uses include single detached dwellings, home occupations, private
recreational facilities, bed and breakfast establishments and open spaces uses. Therefore the
proposal conforms to these policies as both the existing (recreational) and proposed (residential)
uses are permitted. This policy also requires that all new development in Sugarbush be serviced
by the municipal communal water system and private septic systems. The severed parcels will
have the ability to connect to the municipal water system and contain sufficient land area to
accommodate a private septic system. The retained lands will remain vacant and used as open
spaces and will not require connection to the water services or septic systems.
Section A4.2.3 of the OP identifies the Sugarbush community as primarily residential, and as the
intent is to rezone the severed lands and permit their use for residential purposes the proposed
consent would confirm with this intent. Some growth can occur in this settlement area on the
municipal water system and with the utilization of private septic systems due to the suitability of
the soils and the anticipated limited scale of development (S.A4.2.3). The proposal constitutes
A11IBC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association. Township qf0ro-Afedonte
.Adv 2009
Lott
Page 156 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
limited development as only one lots is being created and with the inclusion of the proposed
additional three lots, it would still be considered limited development.
SA.4.3, Special Policy for Horseshoe Valley Road identifies the Sugarbush settlement area as a
location for new residential and institutional growth. The requirements to expand the boundaries
of this and other settlement areas are outlined in this section. These policies are not applicable as
this application is proposing the creation of lots within the current settlement area boundary.
Section B1 outlines the policies with respect to the Oro Moraine. There are two designations
within the Oro Moraine, "Oro Moraine - Natural Core/Corridor Area" and "Oro Moraine -
Enhancement Area". Neither of these designations apply as Schedule "A" of the Official Plan,
does not identify either designation on the subject lands. Therefore these policies are not
applicable to this application.
The Township's policies on the subdivision of land are outline in Section D.2.2. These policies
are to be considered for all applications for Consent.
Section D2.2.1, General Criteria, outlines the policies to be considered when creating new lots
by consent. This section requires that the Committee of Adjustment be satisfied that the
application conforms to the following policies:
a) That the retained and severed lots front on and will be accessed by a public road that is
maintained on a year-round basis.
The severed lot fronts on to Huron Woods Drive, which is public and maintained year round.
b) That the retained and severed lots do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or
County Road.
Neither the severed nor retained lands will have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County
Road.
c) That the retained and severed lots will not cause a traffic hazard.
Huron Woods Drive is flat and is slightly curved on its most eastern portion. The proposed lot
has sufficient frontage to accommodate driveways. Therefore neither proposed lot nor the
retained parcel will cause a traffic hazard.
d) That the retained and severed lots have adequate size and frontage for the proposed use
in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and are compatible with adjacent
uses.
As outlined in Section 8.0 of this report both the severed and retained lands comply with zone
standards set out in the Zoning By-law as it relates to size and frontage. The proposed lot is
compatible with adjacent residential uses as they are similar in size and shape and residential
uses are proposed on the lots. The existing uses are currently compatible and will remain
MHBC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association. Township of Qro-Medonte
July 2009
Lot 2
Page 157 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
compatible. Should a rezoning be sought for residential uses, the proposal is still compatible with
the adjacent residential uses.
e) That the retained and severed lots can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal.
The site is serviced by the municipal water system and the severed lot is generally of sufficient
size to accommodate septic systems. No future development uses requiring services are
contemplated for the retained parcels, therefore appropriate servicing is not applicable.
f) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the drainage
patterns in the area.
This application will not result in site grading which could adversely impact drainage patterns.
Once the home is constricted on the severed parcel, drainage will be required to be considered
as part of any building permit process.
g) That the retained and severed lots will not restrict the development of the retained lands
or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are
designed for development by this Plan.
This severance will not create a landlocked parcel or restrict the development of any other
parcels.
h) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the features and
functions of any ecological feature in the area.
The lots have been designed to provide for a flat building area, to be respectful to the existing
trail system and to not negatively impact the features and functions of any identified ecological
feature.
i) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the quality and
quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area.
The quality and quantity of groundwater is not anticipated to be impacted by the proposal as
development of one residential lot which are properly served in an area of similarly serviced
lands. Wells are not required in this area as the Subdivision is serviced by the municipal water
system. A proper septic system will be required to be designed at the time of building permit
issuance.
j) That the retained and severed lots will conform to Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act.
The severed and retained lots conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, as described in
Section 4.0 of this Report.
The remaining Section of D2.2 outlines policies for boundary adjustments, technical severances
and lots for utilities; which are not applicable to this proposal.
10
AHIBC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association. Tcm,nship ol'Oro-Medowe
Jadty 2009
Lot 2
Page 158 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The subject lands are identified as "Secondary Aggregate Resources" on Appendix 1 of the OP.
The OP sets objectives to protect resources identified on Appendix 1. Section C12.4.7 permits
other uses to be developed in areas identified on Appendix 1 in certain circumstances. Those
circumstances and how the proposal meets these criteria are outlined below:
a) resource use would not be feasible - no extraction could take place in the Sugarbush
settlement due to the existing residences and the area of the lot would be too small to
make an aggregate extraction operation viable.
b) the proposed use serves a greater long term public interest - it is in the public interest to
continue the rounding out of the development over using the lands for mineral aggregate
extraction.
c) issues of public health and safety are addressed - the proposal can be adequately
serviced, does not cause a traffic hazard and is compatible with the surrounding uses;
therefore issues of public health and safety have been addressed.
It is therefore submitted that the proposal conforms to this policy requirement.
On the basis of the above, the proposed consent to sever conforms to the Township's Official
Plan policies.
8.0 ZONING BY-LAW
Both the severed and retained lands are zoned Private Recreation Exception 114 (PR*114) on
Schedule A16 of the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The permitted uses for the
Private Recreation zone are found in Table A5, and include bed and breakfast establishments,
conservation uses, private clubs, and a variety of recreational facilities (skiing, mountain biking
and golf courses). Exception 114 adds additional permitted uses on the subject lands; specifically
a recreation center and associated uses as well as one dwelling unit for a care taker. The
provisions for the PR zone are found in Table B5 of the Township Zoning By-law. Exception
114 also lists three additional provisions: minimum first storey floor area, maximum building
height and minimum setback from a public street.
It is anticipated that a rezoning to a residential zone will be required as a condition of consent; it
is proposed that the remnant parcels remain in the PR* 114 zone.
It is anticipated that a rezoning for residential uses may be required on the severed lands (Parcel
C & D). It is the opinion of this office that the Residential 1 Exception 113 zone (RI * 113) is the
best zone for the severed lots as the balance of the residential lots in the subdivision are zoned
R1 * 113. We have ensured that these lots can meet the minimum lot area and minimum lot
frontage required by the RI * 113 zone as follows:
11
A111BC Planning - Consent to Server
Indian Pm* Association. Township (?f fro-A edonte
AN 2009
Lot Z
Page 159 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Minimum Lot Area 0.2ha 0.328ha
Minimum Lot Frontage 30m 68.07m
Setback from Slope 23m 8m
as per OP Section 5.32
The Zoning By-law also sets out setbacks from steep slopes (Section 5.32). The site lot hosts the
toe of a steep slope. It is proposed that relief be sought though an exception to the RI * 113 zone
(or some other means that the Township deems appropriate) to setback the lot to the slope to a
distance of 8m. The details respecting this shall be outlined in the rezoning application but
briefly stated, numerous of the existing homes in Sugarbush are closer to the toe of slope or top
of slope than the required 23 metres, the area is not know for slope instability and it is submitted
that 8m meters provides for an appropriate setback given other approvals that the Township has
provided. It is further submitted that notwithstanding the suggested setback that the lot also hosts
sufficient table land for a residence, septic system, driveway and amenity area.
9.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposed severance, , represents
good planning. The proposal conforms to both the County of Simcoe and Township of Oro-
Medonte Official Plans, it is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the
Growth Plan, satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act and complies with the Township's
Zoning By-law except for the matters outlined herein which, it is submitted, would not adversely
affect appropriate consideration of the Committee on the application. Therefore, on behalf of the
applicant, we respectfully request favourable consideration of the severance from the Committee.
Respectfully Submitted,
MHBC Planning
Kris 1v enzies, BES, BEd, l~v CIP RPP,
Partner
CC. Indian Park Association, Deborah Price-Sherman
12
.HHBC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian ParkAssociatior:, Township g1'0ro-Mee1on1e
.Iuly 2009
Lot 2
Page 160 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
Planning Analysis
Consent to Sever
C Lot 3
Ian F. ;vlacNaughton
MA, FCIP, RPP
Berard RHernnsen
BES, MCIP, RPP
Paul R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP
W. Brent Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP
Tames 1). Parkin
BES, MCIP, RPP
Carol M. Wiebe
BES
Kriz Menzies
BES, MCIP, RPP
David A. McKay
BES, MCIP, RPP
Brian A. Zeman
BES, MCIP, RPP
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, ON N2H 5C5
T: (519) 576.3650
F: (519) 576.0121
7050 Weston Road, #230
Woodbridge, ON L4L 8G7
T: (905) 761.5588
F: (905) 761.5589
630 Colborne Street, #202
London, ON N6B 2V1
T: (519) 858.2797
F: (519) 858.2920
10 Davey Crescent
Kingston, ON K7N 1X6
T: (613) 384.7067
F: (613) 384.8959
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, ON L4M 3N6
T: (705) 728.0045
F: (705) 728.2010
www.mhbcplan.com
Indian Park Association
Township of Oro-Medonte
July 2009
0821 D
Page 161 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
PLANNING ANALYSIS
CONSENT APPLICATION
SEVERANCE
Township of Oro-Medonte
Jidv 24, 2009
(Lot3)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Indian Park Association, the ratepayer association for Phases 1 and 2 of the
P: T: (705) os) ( 7as728.zolo .2045 Sugarbush development (M-8 M-9 M-30, and M-31) in Oro-Medonte has
www.mhbcplan.com retained MHBC Planning to review the planning merits of a severance to create a
lot in the M-9 subdivision. The analysis provided herein of the planning merits of
MA, P. IP, augha'n the application has found that the proposal represents good planning.
Bernard P. Hermsen
MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP
2.0 PROPOSAL
Patal R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP
As the Committee is aware, the Indian Park Association is divesting its commonly
w. Brent Clarkson held park lands. The Association was created in order to manage commonly held
MA, MCIP, RPP
lands within the Sugarbush development when the subdivision was first
lames D. Parkin developed. The Association and its membership no longer require the commonly
BES, MCIP, RPP held lands and they are proceeding forward to divest the commonly held lands in
Carol M. Wiebe order to dissolve of the Corporation.
BES
Kris Menzies
Prior to divesting themselves of the lands, the Association has an interest in
BES, BEd, MCIP, RPP
providing for more lots within the community from the commonly held lands.
David A. I%4cxay
This application is to sever one lot (know as lot 3) from part of Block A, an open
BES, MCIP, RPP
space block located in the northern most portion of the residential settlement,
Brian A. Zeman
behind houses fronting on to Iroquois Ridge, Mohawk Heights, and Algonquin
BES, MCIP, RPP
Trail . This application is being made in tandem with three other applications for
Offices in:
lot division. These applications will constitute the final applications for consent
• Kitchener
from the Association before it divests itself of the commonly held land holdings.
• Vaughan
• London
• Kingston
The proposal is to create lot of 0.218ha (0.54ac) identified as lot 3 on the attached
• Barrie
Consent Plan. There will be remnant parcels created being Block A, of greater
city, Town and Rural Planning
than 15ha (37.07ac) in area. The lands are currently vacant.
Municipal Plans and Studies
As the property is currently zoned PR* 114 and will require a residential rezoning.
Land Development
It is anticipated that the Committee, should it approve the consent, will require a
rezoning as a condition of consent. A Consent Plan which illustrates the proposal
Urban Design /
Community Planning
is attached to this report.
Landscape Architecture
Natural Resource
and Aggregate Planning
Expert Evidence and Mediation
MMC Planning Consent to Sever 1
Indian Pork Association, Township of Oro-ATedonte
Project Management
Jul, 2009
Lot 3
Page 162 of 261
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, Ontario L4M 3N6
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
3.0 LOCATION AND SITE CONFIGURATION
The site is located immediately between Lots 141 and 142, within the Sugarbush residential
settlement. The Sugarbush settlement area is comprised of approximately 90 hectares (223 acres)
of land located south of County Road 22 (Horseshoe Valley Road). The subject lands are legally
described as Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-30, Part of Block B, former Township of Oro,
Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe.
The attached map shows the proposed lot within the context of the existing Sugarbush
development and also in relation to the other lots which are proposed for severance.
The Sugarbush subdivision has a rolling topography and the existing residential units were
designed to "fit" within this topography. There is additional opportunity to accommodate a small
amount of additional lots within the topography, including the subject lands.
Unlike most of the lots within the original Sugarbush, the lot is a standard shape, although the
remnant parcel is irregular in shape.
The lot and the remnant host very little vegetation
4.0 THE PLANNING ACT
Section 53 of the Planning Act outlines the requirements for consideration of an application for
Consent and requires, in accordance with Subsection 53(12), that a municipality have regard to
the matters under Subsection 51(24) to determine whether a provisional consent shall be given.
The conformity of the consent application to these matters is discussed below:
(a) the effect of the proposal on matters of Provincial Interest;
The proposed severance does not have any negative effect on any matters of Provincial Interest
as stated in Section 6.0 of this report,
(b) whether the subdivision is premature or in the public interest;
As this proposal constitutes rounding out of a settlement area, is infilling within an existing
subdivision, and the site can be appropriately serviced the proposed consents are not considered
premature and are in the public interest.
(c) whether the plan conforms to the Official Plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if
any;
As outlined in Section 7.0 of this report, the application conforms to both the County and
Township Official Plans as the lands are within a settlement area, can be appropriately serviced
and will not negatively impact any natural features. The subject lands are part of the Sugarbush
Subdivision, which consists primarily of single detached dwellings. The proposal conforms to
this subdivision as the uses are already established. The creation of new lots will not adversely
impact the surrounding residential uses.
A1HBC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Associotiort, Totivnship cyf Oro-Wedonte
Aiv 1009
Lot 3
Page 163 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
(d) The suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided,-
The lot is of an appropriate size to host a substantial single detached dwelling and associated
septic system and there is sufficient table land to provide for the development of these uses. The
lot exceeds the minimum lot size, frontage and area required in the Zoning By-law.
(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the
adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision
with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;
The lot has access to Algonquin Trail. The remnant parcel also has access to Algonquin Trail,
Oneida Avenue, and the most western portion of Huron Woods Drive. Each road is publically
owned and maintained. There are sufficient opportunities to site a driveway access onto the
existing roadway.
(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;
The subject lands are regular in shape. Many of the existing lots within the subdivision are
irregular in shape; this is the nature of the original Sugarbush development as the intention was
to fit the lots, and homes, within the irregular topography of the area. The dimensions of the
proposed severed lots have been chosen in order to ensure the appropriate zoning setbacks can
be accommodated. The retained lands will continue to be irregular in shape.
(g) the restrictions on the lands to be subdivided or the buildings and structures
proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;
The entire Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands are subject to two easements; one
for water services to the Township and the other for gas services to Consumers' Gas.
(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;
The creation of these lots will not cause an issue of flood control as there are no nearby water
courses and no major site alteration is anticipated to occur as a result of development on the
lands. As the development is an infill in an existing residential area, and the common lands are
not subject to any restrictive natural resources, the proposal is not anticipated to cause a negative
impact on any protected natural resource.
(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;
The Sugarbush settlement is serviced by municipal water, the severed lands will be able to
access this service. The retained parcels could also access this system, if required although it is
not the intention for these lands. The severed lands are of a suitable size to accommodate a
residential sewage system and the soils in Sugarbush are generally known to be good for septic
system use. The Sugarbush settlement is fully serviced in terms of utilities - gas, cable, phone,
etc.
-UMCPhinning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of 0ro-Medorrte
Julv 2009
Lot 3
Page 164 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
0) the adequacy of school sites;
The proposal is to create one lot. Additional consents are being requested to a total of four lots. It
is submitted that the creation of a maximum of four lots is not anticipated to cause an adverse
impact on the school system. There are existing schools in the area should the rezoning be
granted and residential uses approved for the site. The subdivision is currently serviced by
existing school bus routes.
(k) the area of land, if any, exclusive of highways, to be conveyed or dedicated for public
purposes;
The Association has discussed the issue of dedication of the remnant lands with Council and it
has been mutually decided that the Association would pay cash-in-lieu of parkland for the lots;
as is the standard practice for the Township. No other dedications are required.
(1) The extent to which the plan's design optimizes the available supply, means of
supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and
The creation of infill lot(s) within an existing subdivision which is already serviced with various
municipal and community services will assist in optimizing the existing services already enjoyed
by the subdivision.
(m) The interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and
site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also
located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41(2) of the
Planning Act or subsection 114(2) of the City of Toronto Act.
This is not applicable in this instance.
Based on the analysis provided above, the proposed consent application conforms to the
requirements of the Planning Act.
5.0 PLACES TO GROW - GROWTH PLAN
The Growth Plan sets out Province wide policies for how and where growth should occur. This
document directs growth to settlement areas and requires settlement areas to be complete
communities consisting of a balance of employment and residential uses as well as transit
supportive.
As the proposed lot creation is intended to create a lot within an existing settlement area and
constitutes an intensification proposal within an existing plan of subdivision which is
appropriately serviced, the proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.
AIMC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian ParkAssociation, Toutwship of'Oro-kledonte
Juiv 7009
Lot 3
Page 165 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
6.0 THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) was issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act and it is
intended to provide policy direction for land use matters which are of Provincial interest.
Planning Authorities are to have regard to the Policy Statement when exercising any authority.
The PPS covers many issues such as proper infrastructure for development, affordable housing,
protection of natural resources, protection of agricultural lands, protection of mineral resources
and promotion of economically and environmentally strong communities. The PPS directs the
majority of growth to settlement areas. A review of the PPS has been undertaken and it is
submitted that the proposal is consistent with the Policy. Although the entire Policy has been
reviewed it should be noted that the proposal is within a settlement area and it does not adversely
impact any protected natural features. A review of the servicing policies of the PPS is
specifically outlined below.
The Sugarbush settlement is subject to partial services (municipal water and private septic
systems). Policy 1.6.4.5 of the PPS permits development on partial services in certain
circumstances. It is intended that the lot utilize the existing municipal water service or be
"partially serviced". One circumstance where partial services are acceptable within the PPS is
when the development is within a settlement area and where extension of the partial service
would be considered infilling and rounding out of existing development. This proposal
constitutes infilling of the Sugarbush subdivision. The PPS requires that there is reserve water
system capacity and site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services. The
Township's Official Plan identifies that limited development is permitted in the settlement on the
municipal water and with private septic systems; this is discussed in further detail in Section 7.2
of this Report.
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposal is consistent with the
policies of the PPS.
7.0 OFFICIAL PLAN
Both the policies of the County of Simcoe Official Plan and the Township of Oro-Medonte
Official Plan apply to the subject lands. The policies of both plans are discussed in further detail
below.
7.1 Countv of Simcoe Official Plan
The Sugarbush subdivision is designated as a "Settlement" in the County Official Plan (OP). A
review of the OP has been undertaken including the applicable policy sections and how the
proposal conforms is outlined herein. The applicable sections include Section 3.5 - Settlements,
Section 4.1 Settlement Form & Expansion, Section 3.3 - General Subdivision & Development
Policies, and Section 4.3 - General Development Policies & Guidelines. The local OP identifies
A1H&C P1a n hk,- - Consent to Sever
Indian .Park Association, Township of Oro-aWedonte
All, 20(J9
Lot 3
Page 166 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
the subject land as a "Sand and Gravel Resource" on Schedule 5.2.1; therefore Section 4.4
Aggregate Development of the OP has also been reviewed.
Section 3.5, Settlements, generally speaks to directing growth to settlement areas, how
settlement areas should grow and how municipalities should manage growth in these areas.
These policies do not address site specific development but generally state that settlement areas
should accommodate a diversity of land uses, including residential and recreation. Based on the
addition of one lot (and four lots in total), as an infill proposal, it is submitted that the additional
lots will assist in contributing to the use of the settlement for residential purposes.
The County's subdivision policies are described in Section 3.3 of the OP. These policies permit
Plans of Subdivisions or Consents if the land use is permitted in the designation or if the intent of
the plan's goals and objectives are maintained. The subject lands are designated Settlement in
the County OP, which permits residential uses and development. The site is also designated for
residential uses and development in the local OP. The goals and objectives of the Plan have been
reviewed and it is submitted that the intent is maintained by the proposal.
Section 3.3.2 further stipulates that lots can only be created where they have access to and
frontage on a public highway; all parcels have access and frontage on a publically maintained
road. Lot 3 specifically fronts on to Algonquin Trail.
Other requirements to be considered for development proposals are addressed in Section 3.3.
Specifically development should be located outside of wetlands or habitat areas; the maintenance
of views and vistas is encouraged; there may be a need for subdivision agreements between
developers and the municipality; protection of County and local greenland systems is required;
compliance with the Minimum Distance Separation Formula for nearby agricultural uses is
required; there are policies for development within the Niagara Escarpment Plan; protection of
prime agricultural areas is required; development in areas of environmental constraints such as
flood plains is discouraged; a Stormwater Management Report to support all plans of subdivision
or industrial areas where large impervious areas or chemical storage is proposed is required; a
traffic study could be required; a noise, odour and dust studies could be required; and studies
addressing development adjacent to contaminated sites could be required.
This above criteria has been reviewed with regard to the proposal. The proposed development to
create one residential lot conforms to the County's subdivision policies based on the following:
wetlands are not located within or surrounding the subject lands; any existing views and vistas
can be maintained; the creation of one lot does not require a subdivision agreement; the County
does not identify any of the Greenland system on or near the subject lands); there are no
agricultural operations in the area; the subject lands are not within the Niagara Escarpment, the
lands are identified as Class 5, 6, or 7 therefore they are not prime agricultural lands (and would
be difficult to farm due to the topography and the proximity to residential uses); the proposal is
not within a floodplain; a Stormwater Management Report is not required as only one lot is
proposed in an area which stormwater can be appropriately handled though existing municipal
controls; traffic, noise, odour, and dust studies are not, in the opinion of this office, required for
the creation of one lot in an area of similar uses
W IBC IBC Planning . Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association;, Township Uf Oro-Afedonte
July 2009
Lot 3
Page 167 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The general development policies of the County Plan are outlined in Section 4.3, General
Development Policies and Guidelines. The criteria for the design and layout of developments are
detailed in this section and include: minimizing the removal of natural vegetation; protecting
and maintaining scenic resources; maintaining a scale of development which is compatible with
the character of the area; outdoor lighting which compliments the setting; development clustered
at the edges of significant open spaces; road patterns should fit the topography of the site;
reduction of visual impacts of signs; conservation of cultural heritage; connectivity of open
spaces; inclusion of a mix of housing types; a strong pedestrian orientation; and the integration
of trails and pathways. The remaining policies of Section 4.3 deal with development in rural
areas, the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine which are not applicable to this
application.
This application is seeking to create one new residential lot. Minimizing the removal of
vegetation will be considered; no scenic resources are intended to be affected; the creation of one
lot would be compatible with the surrounding residential lots as they are roughly the same shape
and size; there will be no new outdoor lighting; the retained parcels will generally remain as
open space; no new roads are proposed; nor are any new signs are proposed; there is no cultural
heritage to be conserved; the open space will remain connected to other spaces; as only one new
lot is being created, a mix of housing types could not be accommodated; the Sugarbush
subdivision has a strong pedestrian orientation due to the curvilinear streets and trail network
within the open space system and finally, the application is not in a rural area nor is the site part
of the Niagara Escarpment or the Oak Ridges Moraine.
Section 4.4 Aggregate Developments sets out the County's policies on aggregate resources.
Specifically this section speaks to the location of mineral aggregate operations; development in
areas identified as high potential; and other policies relating to the establishment and operation
of mineral aggregate facilities.
The majority of these policies do not apply to this application as it does not relate to the location
or operation of mineral aggregate facilities. However, Section 4.4.2 outlines policies with
regards to development for uses other than aggregate operations located in areas of high
potential. The Sugarbush settlement is located within an area identified for potential resources.
Section 4.4.2 states that development for alternate land uses may be permitted where it would
not preclude or hinder establishment of new operations or their access to resources; utilization is
not feasible because of natural or man-made constraints; or the proposal serves a greater long
term public interest; and provided any issues of public health, safely and environmental impact
are addressed.
The Sugarbush settlement predates the establishment of the County OP. It is an existing
subdivision which prevents the extraction of any resources and therefore the development of
additional residential lots will not further impede or hinder the establishments of new operations
or their access to resources. The proposal conforms to this policy section.
MBC Planting Consent to Sever
Indian Park.;tssuciotion, Township gfOru-Medonte
Juiv '009
Lot 3
Page 168 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
Based on the analysis above it is submitted that the proposed consent conforms to the County's
Official Plan.
7.2 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
The Township's Official Plan designates the Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands,
as "Residential". Schedule "A" also identifies the lands as being located within the Oro Moraine
Planning Area boundary.
Section C.14.2.4 sets out the land use policies for Sugarbush subdivision. This section states that
the residential designation applies to some of the lands within the settlement, including the
subject lands. The permitted uses include single detached dwellings, home occupations, private
recreational facilities, bed and breakfast establishments and open spaces uses. Therefore the
proposal conforms to these policies as both the existing (recreational) and proposed (residential)
uses are permitted. This policy also requires that all new development in Sugarbush be serviced
by the municipal communal water system and private septic systems. The severed parcels will
have the ability to connect to the municipal water system and contain sufficient land area to
accommodate a private septic system. The retained lands will remain vacant and used as open
spaces and will not require connection to the water services or septic systems.
Section A4.2.3 of the OP identifies the Sugarbush community as primarily residential, and as the
intent is to rezone the severed lands and permit their use for residential purposes the proposed
consent would confirm with this intent. Some growth can occur in this settlement area on the
municipal water system and with the utilization of private septic systems due to the suitability of
the soils and the anticipated limited scale of development (S.A4.2.3). The proposal constitutes
limited development as only one lot is being created and with the inclusion of the proposed
additional three lots, it would still be considered limited development.
SAA.3, Special Policy for Horseshoe Valley Road identifies the Sugarbush settlement area as a
location for new residential and institutional growth. The requirements to expand the boundaries
of this and other settlement areas are outlined in this section. These policies are not applicable as
this application is proposing the creation of lots within the current settlement area boundary.
Section B1 outlines the policies with respect to the Oro Moraine. There are two designations
within the Oro Moraine, "Oro Moraine - Natural Core/Corridor Area" and "Oro Moraine -
Enhancement Area". Neither of these designations apply as Schedule "A" of the Official Plan,
does not identify either designation on the subject lands. Therefore these policies are not
applicable to this application.
The Township's policies on the subdivision of land are outline in Section D.2.2. These policies
are to be considered for all applications for Consent.
Section D2.2.1, General Criteria, outlines the policies to be considered when creating new lots
by consent. This section requires that the Committee of Adjustment be satisfied that the
application conforms to the following policies:
A1HEC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park-Association, Township of Oro-,lledonte
July 2009
Lot3
Page 169 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
a) That the retained and severed lots front on and will be accessed by a public road that is
maintained on a year-round basis.
The severed lot fronts on to Algonquin Trail, which is public and maintained year round.
b) That the retained and severed lots do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or
County Road.
Neither the severed nor retained lands will have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County
Road.
c) That the retained and severed lots will not cause a traffic hazard.
The proposed lot has sufficient frontage to accommodate driveways. Therefore neither
proposed lot nor the retained parcel will cause a traffic hazard.
d) That the retained and severed lots have adequate size and frontage for the proposed use
in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and are compatible with adjacent
uses.
As outlined in Section 8.0 of this report both the severed and retained lands comply with zone
standards set out in the Zoning By-law as it relates to size and frontage. The proposed lot is
compatible with adjacent residential uses as they are similar in size and shape and residential
uses are proposed on the lots. The existing uses are currently compatible and will remain
compatible. Should a rezoning be sought for residential uses, the proposal is still compatible with
the adjacent residential uses.
e) That the retained and severed lots can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal.
The site is serviced by the municipal water system and the severed lot is generally of sufficient
size to accommodate septic systems. No future development uses requiring services are
contemplated for the retained parcels, therefore appropriate servicing is not applicable.
fi That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the drainage
patterns in the area.
This application will not result in site grading which could adversely impact drainage patterns.
Once the home is constructed on the severed parcel, drainage will be required to be considered
as part of any building permit process.
g) That the retained and severed lots will not restrict the development of the retained lands
or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are
designed for development by this Plan.
This severance will not create a landlocked parcel or restrict the development of any other
parcels.
h) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the features and
functions of any ecological feature in the area.
AM BC Planning - Consent to Sever
Indian ParkAssocicrtion. Totivnship gJ Oro-Wedonte
Jcrly 2009
Lot 3
Page 170 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The lots have been designed to provide for a flat building area, to be respectful to the existing
trail system and to not negatively impact the features and functions of any identified ecological
feature.
i) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the quality and
quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area.
The quality and quantity of groundwater is not anticipated to be impacted by the proposal as
development of one residential lot which are properly served in an area of similarly serviced
lands. Wells are not required in this area as the Subdivision is serviced by the municipal water
system. A proper septic system will be required to be designed at the time of building permit
issuance.
j) That the retained and severed lots will conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act.
The severed and retained lots conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, as described in
Section 4.0 of this Report.
The remaining Section of D2.2 outlines policies for boundary adjustments, technical severances
and lots for utilities; which are not applicable to this proposal.
The subject lands are identified as "Secondary Aggregate Resources" on Appendix I of the OP.
The OP sets objectives to protect resources identified on Appendix 1. Section C12.4.7 permits
other uses to be developed in areas identified on Appendix 1 in certain circumstances. Those
circumstances and how the proposal meets these criteria are outlined below:
a) resource use would not be feasible - no extraction could take place in the Sugarbush
settlement due to the existing residences and the area of the lot would be too small to
make an aggregate extraction operation viable.
b) the proposed use serves a greater long term public interest - it is in the public interest to
continue the rounding out of the development over using the lands for mineral aggregate
extraction.
c) issues of public health and safety are addressed - the proposal can be adequately
serviced, does not cause a traffic hazard and is compatible with the surrounding uses;
therefore issues of public health and safety have been addressed.
It is therefore submitted that the proposal conforms to this policy requirement.
On the basis of the above, the proposed consent to sever conforms to the Township's Official
Plan policies.
8.0 ZONING BY-LAW
Both the severed and retained lands are zoned Private Recreation Exception 114 (PR* 114) on
Schedule A16 of the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The permitted uses for the
:1iii}3C Plnnt:ing - Consent to Sever I t)
Indian Park Association, Township (?f Oro-Wedonte
AN ?009
Lot 3
Page 171 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Private Recreation zone are found in Table A5, and include bed and breakfast establishments,
conservation uses, private clubs, and a variety of recreational facilities (skiing, mountain biking
and golf courses). Exception 114 adds additional permitted uses on the subject lands; specifically
a recreation center and associated uses as well as one dwelling unit for a care taker. The
provisions for the PR zone are found in Table B5 of the Township Zoning By-law. Exception
114 also lists three additional provisions: minimum first storey floor area, maximum building
height and minimum setback from a public street.
It is anticipated that a rezoning to a residential zone will be required as a condition of consent; it
is proposed that the remnant parcels remain in the PR* 114 zone.
It is anticipated that a rezoning for residential uses may be required on the severed lands (Parcel
C & D). It is the opinion of this office that the Residential 1 Exception 113 zone (RI *113) is the
best zone for the severed lots as the balance of the residential lots in the subdivision are zoned
R1*113. We have ensured that these lots can meet the minimum lot area and minimum lot
frontage required by the R 1 * 113 zone as follows:
Minimum Lot Area 0.2ha 0.218ha
Minimum Lot Frontage I 30m I 37.71m
9.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposed severance, , represents
good planning. The proposal conforms to both the County of Simcoe and Township of Oro-
Medonte Official Plans, it is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the
Growth Plan, satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act and complies with the Township's
Zoning By-law except for the matters outlined herein which, it is submitted, would not adversely
affect appropriate consideration of the Committee on the application. Therefore, on behalf of the
applicant, we respectfully request favourable consideration of the severance from the Committee.
Respectfully Submitted,
MHBC Planning
Kris iV enzies, BES, BEd, CIP RP_
Partner
CC. Indian Park Association, Deborah Price-Sherman
MHBC Phimtinb - Consent to Sever 11
Indian Park Association, Township of Oro-Medonte
Julv 2009
Lot3
Page 172 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
htn F. MacNaughton
MA, FCIP, RPP
Bernard R Henusen
BES, MCIP, UP
Paul R. Brittau
BES, MCIP, RPP
W. Brent Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP
James 1). Parkin
BES, MCIP, RPP
Carol M. Wiebe
BES
Kris Menzies
BES, MCIP, RPP
David A. ,McKay
BES, MCIP, RPP
Brian A. Zeman
BES, MCIP, RPP
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, ON N2H 5C5
T: (519) 576.3650
F: (519) 576.0121
7050 Weston Road, #230
Woodbridge, ON UL 8G7
T: (905) 761.5588
F: (905) 761.5589
630 Colborne Street, #202
London, ON N632V I
T: (519) 858.2797
F: (519) 858.2920
10 Davey Crescent
Kingston, ON K7N1X6
T: (613) 384.7067
F: (613) 384.8959
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, ON UM 3N6
T. (705) 728.0045
F: (705) 728.2010
www.tnhbcplan.corn
PLANNING ANALYSIS
Consent to Sever
LOT 13
Indian Park Association
Township of Oro-Medonte
July 2009
0821D
Page 173 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
PLANNING ANALYSIS
CONSENT APPLICATION
SEVERANCE
Township of Oro-Medonte
July 24. 2009
(Iv1 13)
T: (705) 7280045
P: (705) 728.2010
ww V.n,hbcPlau.com
hill fl. Macllaughlon
MA. PCIR RPP
Bernard E I leruuen
BF:S, MCIP, RPP
Paut R. Britton
BBS, M(-[]; RPP
W. Brent Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP
lames 1). Parkin
BEE, ,MCIP, RPP
Carol M.3viebe
BES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Indian Park Association, the ratepayer association for Phases 1 and 2 of the
Sugarbush development (M-8, M-9, M-30, and M-31) in Oro-Medonte has
retained MHBC Planning to review the planning merits of a severance to create a
lot in the M-30 subdivision. The analysis provided herein of the planning merits
of the application has found that the proposal represents good planning.
2.0 PROPOSAL
As the Committee is aware, the Indian Park Association is divesting its commonly
held park lands. The Association was created in order to manage commonly held
lands within the Sugarbush development when the subdivision was first
developed. The Association and its membership no longer require the commonly
held lands and they are proceeding forward to divest the commonly held lands in
order to dissolve of the Corporation.
KiisMenzies
Prior to divesting themselves of the lands, the Association has an interest in
BES, MCIP RPP
providing for more lots within the community from the commonly held lands.
David A. nlcKay
This application is to sever one lot (know as lot 13) from part of Block A, an open
BES, MCIP RPP
space block located in the southern most portion of the residential settlement. This
Briar, A. Zeman
application is being made in tandem with three other applications for lot division.
I11s, MCIP RPP
These applications will constitute the final applications for consent from the
Association before it divests itself of the commonly held land holdings.
Office's ill:
Kitchener `
•
Vaughan
The P' proposal is to create lot of 0.28ha (0.69 ac) .
Identified as lot 13 on the attached
London
Consent Plan. There will be remnant parcels created being Block A of
Kingston
approximately 15ha (37.07ac) in area. The lands are currently vacant.
Barrie
City, Town and Rural Planning
As the property is currently zoned PR* 114 and will require a residential rezoning.
Municipal Plans and Studies
It is anticipated that the Committee, should it approve the consent, will require a
rezoning as a condition of consent. A Consent Plan which illustrates the proposal
land INvelopment
is attached to this report.
Urban Design I
Community Planning
Landscape Architecture
Natural Resource
and Aggregate Planning 1111BC Phillning C wnelu to Sever
]
Expert Evidence Mtliwl Park Associutiorl. Township ??f 0i•o-Ate dorrle
~
and Medill io,r .fill); 2009
Lol 13
Project Manageu,eut
Page 174 of 261
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, Ontario LAM 3N6
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
3.0 LOCATION AND SITE CONFIGURATION
The site is located north of Huron Woods Drive, and between existing Lot 45 and 49, within the
Sugarbush residential settlement. The Sugarbush settlement area is comprised of approximately
90 hectares (223 acres) of land located south of County Road 22 (Horseshoe Valley Road). The
subject lands are legally described as Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-30, Part of Block B,
former Township of Oro, Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe.
The attached map shows the proposed lot within the context of the existing Sugarbush
development and also in relation to the other lots which are proposed for severance.
The Sugarbush subdivision has a rolling topography and the existing residential units were
designed to "fit" within this topography. There is additional opportunity to accommodate a small
amount of additional lots within the topography, including the subject lands.
As with most of the lots within the original Sugarbush, the lot is irregular in shape and the
remnant parcel is also irregular in shape.
The lot hosts very little vegetation, while the remnant hosts some along Huron Woods Drive.
4.0 THE PLANNING ACT
Section 53 of the Planning Act outlines the requirements for consideration of an application for
Consent and requires, in accordance with Subsection 53(12), that a municipality have regard to
the matters under Subsection 51(24) to determine whether a provisional consent shall be given.
The conformity of the consent application to these matters is discussed below:
(a) the effect of the proposal on matters of Provincial Interest;
The proposed severance does not have any negative effect on any matters of Provincial Interest as
stated in Section 6.0 of this report,
(b) whether the subdivision is premature or in the public interest;
As this proposal constitutes rounding out of a settlement area, is infilling within an existing
subdivision, and the site can be appropriately serviced the proposed consents are not considered
premature and are in the public interest.
(c) whether the plan conforms to the Official Plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if
any;
As outlined in Section 7.0 of this report, the application conforms to both the County and
Township Official Plans as the lands are within a settlement area, can be appropriately serviced
and will not negatively impact any natural features. The subject lands are part of the Sugarbush
Subdivision, which consists primarily of single detached dwellings. The proposal conforms to
All-ITC Planning Consent to Serer
Indian Park Assoaialion, :Township of Pro-Nledowe
JW3, 2009
Lot 13
Page 175 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
this subdivision as the uses are already established. The creation of new lots will not adversely
impact the surrounding residential uses.
(d) The suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided;
The lot is of an appropriate size to host a substantial single detached dwelling and associated
septic system and there is sufficient table land to provide for the development of these uses. The
lot exceeds the minimum lot size, frontage and area required in the Zoning By-law.
(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the
adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in tite proposed subdivision
with the established highway systent in the vicinity and the adequacy of then;
The lot has access to Huron Woods Drive. The remnant parcel has access to Huron Woods Drive
to the south and Oneida Avenue to the North. Both roads are publically owned and maintained.
There are sufficient opportunities to site a driveway access onto the existing roadway.
(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;
The subject lands are irregular in shape. Many of the existing lots within the subdivision are
similarly irregular in shape; this is the nature of the original Sugarbush development as the
intention was to fit the lots, and homes, within the irregular topography of the area. The
dimensions of the proposed severed lots have been chosen in order to ensure the appropriate
zoning setbacks can be accommodated. The retained lands will continue to be irregular in shape.
(g) the restrictions on the lands to be subdivided or the buildings and structures
proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;
The entire Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands are subject to two easements; one
for water services to the Township and the other for gas services to Consumers' Gas.
(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;
The creation of these lots will not cause an issue of flood control as there are no nearby water
courses and no major site alteration is anticipated to occur as a result of development on the
lands. As the development is an infill in an existing residential area, and the common lands are
not subject to any restrictive natural resources, the proposal is not anticipated to cause a negative
impact on any protected natural resource.
(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;
The Sugarbush settlement is serviced by municipal water, the severed lands will be able to access
this service. The retained parcels could also access this system, if required although it is not the
intention for these lands. The severed lands are of a suitable size to accommodate a residential
sewage system and the soils in Sugarbush are generally known to be good for septic system use.
The Sugarbush settlement is fully serviced in terms of utilities - gas, cable, phone, etc.
(j) the adequacy of school sites;
The proposal is to create one lot. Additional consents are being requested to a total of four lots. It
is submitted that the creation of a maximum of four lots is not anticipated to cause an adverse
All-IBC Planning - Consem to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of Oro-Medonte
July 2009
Lot 13
Page 176 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
7.2 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
The Township's Official Plan designates the Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands,
as "Residential". Schedule "A" also identifies the lands as being located within the Oro Moraine
Planning Area boundary.
Section C.14.2.4 sets out the land use policies for Sugarbush subdivision. This section states that
the residential designation applies to some of the lairds within the settlement, including the
subject lands. The permitted uses include single detached dwellings, horne occupations, private
recreational facilities, bed and breakfast establishments and open spaces uses. Therefore the
proposal conforms to these policies as both the existing (recreational) and proposed (residential)
uses are permitted. This policy also requires that all new development in Sugarbush be serviced
by the municipal communal water system and private septic systems. The severed parcels will
have the ability to connect to the municipal water system and contain sufficient land area to
accommodate a private septic system. The retained lands will remain vacant and used as open
spaces and will not require connection to the water services or septic systems.
Section A4.2.3 of the OP identifies the Sugarbush community as primarily residential, and as the
intent is to rezone the severed lands and permit their use for residential purposes the proposed
consent would confirm with this intent. Some growth can occur in this settlement area on the
municipal water system and with the utilization of private septic systems due to the suitability of
the soils and the anticipated limited scale of development (S.A4.23). The proposal constitutes
limited development as only one lot is being created and with the inclusion of the proposed
additional three lots, it would still be considered limited development.
SA.4.3, Special Policy for Horseshoe Valley Road identifies the Sugarbush settlement area as a
location for new residential and institutional growth. The requirements to expand the boundaries
of this and other settlement areas are outlined in this section. These policies are not applicable as
this application is proposing the creation of lots within the current settlement area boundary.
Section B 1 outlines the policies with respect to the Oro Moraine. There are two designations
within the Oro Moraine, "Oro Moraine - Natural Core/Corridor Area" and "Oro Moraine -
Enhancement Area". Neither of these designations apply as Schedule "A" of the Official Plan,
does not identify either designation on the subject lands. Therefore these policies are not
applicable to this application.
The Township's policies on the subdivision of land are outline in Section D.2.2. These policies
are to be considered for all applications for Consent.
Section D2.2.1, General Criteria, outlines the policies to be considered when creating new lots by
consent. This section requires that the Committee of Adjustment be satisfied that the application
conforms to the following policies:
'WHBC Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of Oro-Medonte
Jnly 2009
Lot 13
Page 177 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
a) That the retained and severed lots front on and will be accessed by a public road that is
maintained on a year-round basis.
The severed lot fronts on to Huron Woods Drive, which is public and maintained year round.
b) That the retained and severed lots do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or
County Road.
Neither the severed nor retained lands will have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County
Road.
c) That the retained and severed lots will not cause a traffic hazard.
Huron Woods Drive is flat, and is slightly curved to the immediate east and west of the lot. The
proposed lot has sufficient frontage to accommodate driveways. Therefore neither proposed lot
nor the retained parcel will cause a traffic hazard,
d) That the retained and severed lots have adequate size and frontage for the proposed c(se
in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and are compatible with adjacent
uses.
As outlined in Section 8.0 of this report both the severed and retained lands comply with zone
standards set out in the Zoning By-law as it relates to size and frontage. The proposed lot is
compatible with adjacent residential uses as they are similar in size and shape and residential
uses are proposed on the lots. The existing uses are currently compatible and will remain
compatible. Should a rezoning be sought for residential uses, the proposal is still compatible with
the adjacent residential uses.
e) That the retained and severed lots can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal.
The site is serviced by the municipal water system and the severed lot is generally of sufficient
size to accommodate septic systems. No future development uses requiring services are
contemplated for the retained parcels, therefore appropriate servicing is not applicable.
f) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the drainage
patterns in the area.
This application will not result in site grading which could adversely impact drainage patterns.
Once the home is constructed on the severed parcel, drainage will be required to be considered as
part of any building permit process.
g) That the retained and severed lots will not restrict the development of the retained lands
or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are
designed for development by this Plan.
This severance will not create a landlocked parcel or restrict the development of any other
parcels.
h) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the features and
functions of any ecological feature in the area.
AIRBC Planning - Consent if) Sever 9
hulia n fork Association, Toss~nship of Oro-Akdonte
July 2009
Lot 13
Page 178 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The lots have been designed to provide for a flat building area, to be respectful to the existing
trail system and to not negatively impact the features and functions of any identified ecological
feature.
i) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the quality and
quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area.
The quality and quantity of groundwater is not anticipated to be impacted by the proposal as
development of one residential lot which are properly served in an area of similarly serviced
lands. Wells are not required in this area as the Subdivision is serviced by the municipal water
system, A proper septic system will be required to be designed at the time of building permit
issuance.
j) That the retained and severed lots will conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act.
The severed and retained lots conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, as described in
Section 4.0 of this Report.
The remaining Section of D2.2 outlines policies for boundary adjustments, technical severances
and lots for utilities; which are not applicable to this proposal.
The subject lands are identified as "Secondary Aggregate Resources" on Appendix 1 of the OP.
The OP sets objectives to protect resources identified on Appendix 1. Section C12.4.7 permits
other uses to be developed in areas identified on Appendix 1 in certain circumstances. Those
circumstances and how the proposal meets these criteria are outlined below:
a) resource use would not be feasible - no extraction could take place in the Sugarbush
settlement due to the existing residences and the area of the lot would be too small to
make an aggregate extraction operation viable.
b) the proposed use serves a greater long term public interest - it is in the public interest to
continue the rounding out of the development over using the lands for mineral aggregate
extraction.
c) issues of public health and safety are addressed - the proposal can be adequately
serviced, does not cause a traffic hazard and is compatible with the surrounding uses;
therefore issues of public health and safety have been addressed.
It is therefore submitted that the proposal conforms to this policy requirement. On the basis of
the above, the proposed consent to sever conforms to the Township's Official Plan policies.
8.0 ZONING BY-LAW
Both the severed and retained lands are zoned Private Recreation Exception 114 (PR*114) on
Schedule A16 of the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The permitted uses for the
Private Recreation zone are found in Table A5, and include bed and breakfast establishments,
conservation uses, private clubs, and a variety of recreational facilities (skiing, mountain biking
and golf courses). Exception 114 adds additional permitted uses on the subject lands; specifically
dltil3C Planning - Consent to Sever 10
Indian Park Associalion, Township of Oro-Medonte
Au v 2009
Lot 13
Page 179 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
a recreation center and associated uses as well as one dwelling unit for a care taker. The
provisions for the PR zone are found in Table B5 of the Township Zoning By-law. Exception
114 also lists three additional provisions: minimum first storey floor area, maximum building
height and minimum setback from a public street.
It is anticipated that a rezoning to a residential zone will be required as a condition of consent; it
is proposed that the remnant parcels remain in the PR* 114 zone.
It is anticipated that a rezoning for residential uses may be required on the severed lands (Parcel
C & D). It is the opinion of this office that the Residential 1 Exception l 13 zone (RI * 113) is the
best zone for the severed lots as the balance of the residential lots in the subdivision are zoned
R1 * 113. We have ensured that these lots can meet the minimum lot area and minimum lot
frontage required by the R1 * 113 zone as follows:
Minimum Lot Area I 0.2ha I .28ha
Minimum Lot Frontage I 30m I 61.7m
9.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposed severance, , represents
good planning. The proposal conforms to both the County of Simcoe and Township of Oro-
Medonte Official Plans, it is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the
Growth Plan, satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act and complies with the Township's
Zoning By-law except for the matters outlined herein which, it is submitted, would not adversely
affect appropriate consideration of the Committee on the application. Therefore, on behalf of the
applicant, we respectfully request favourable consideration of the severance from the Committee.
Respectfully Submitted,
MHBC Planning
Kris Menzies BES BEd,MCIP RPP
Partner
CC. Indian Park Association, Deborah Price-Sherman
311113C Plannhig - Omsenf to Serer 1I
lndiati Parr.'tssoeiulion, Totoiship gf0ro-hledoole
Juh' 2009
Lo! 13
Page 180 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
Planning Analysis
Consent to Sever
° Lot 14
a a a a
Ian F. MacNaugh ton
MA, FCIP, RPP
Berriard E Hcnnsen
BES, MCIP, RPP
Paul R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP
W. Brent Clarkson
MA, MCIP, RPP
James R Parkin
BES, MCIP, RPP
Carol 11. Wiebe
BES
Kriz iMenzies
BES, MCIP, RPP
David A. -';icKav
BES, MCIP, RPP
Brian A. Zeman
BES, MCIP, RPP
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, ON N2H 5C5
T: (519) 576.3650
F: (519) 576.0121
7050 Weston Road, #230
Woodbridge, ON L4L 8G7
T: (905) 761.5588
F: (905) 761.5589
630 Colborne Street, #202
London, ON N6B 2V I
T. (519) 858.2797
F: (519) 858.2920
10 Davey Crescent
Kingston, ON K7N 1X6
T: (613) 384.7067
F: (613) 384.8959
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, ON L4M 3N6
T: (705) 728.0045
F: (705) 728.2010
www.mhbcplan.com
Indian Park Association
Township of Oro-Medonte
July 2009
0821 D
Page 181 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
PLANNING ANALYSIS
CONSENT APPLICATION
SEVERANCE
Township ofOro-Mcdonte
July 24, 2009
(Lot 14)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Indian Park Association, the ratepayer association for Phases 1 and 2 of the
T: (705) 728.0045
E: (705) 728.2010 Sugarbush development (M-8, M-9, M-30, and M-31) in Oro-Medonte has
www.mhbcplan.com retained MHBC Planning to review the planning merits of a severance to create a
lot in the M-8 subdivision. The analysis provided herein of the planning merits of
Jan MAP. I` RPP ht°° the application has found that the proposal represents good planning.
Bernard P. Hermsen
MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP
2.0 PROPOSAL
Paul R. Britton
BES, MCIP, RPP
As the Committee is aware, the Indian Park Association is divesting its commonly
W. Brent Clarkson held park lands. The Association was created in order to manage commonly held
MA, MCIP, RPP
lands within the Sugarbush development when the subdivision was first
James D. Parkin developed. The Association and its membership no longer require the commonly
BES, MCIP, RPP held lands and they are proceeding forward to divest the commonly held lands in
carol M. wiebe order to dissolve of the Corporation.
BES
Kris Menzies
Prior to divesting themselves of the lands, the Association has an interest in
BES, BEd, MCIP, RPP
providing for more lots within the community from the commonly held lands.
David A. Nlcxay
This application is to sever one lot (know as lot 14) from part of Block A , an
BES, MCIP, RPP
open space block located near the centre of the residential settlement. This
Brian A. Zeman
application is being made in tandem with three other applications for lot division.
BES, MCIP, RPP
These applications will constitute the final applications for consent from the
Offices in:
Association before it divests itself of the commonly held land holdings.
• Kitchener
• Vaughan
• London
The proposal is to create lot of 0.313 ha (0.77 ac) identified as lot 14 on the
• Kingston
attached Consent Plan. There will be remnant parcels created being Block A of
• Barrie
approximately 6.Oha (14.83ac) in area. The lands are currently vacant.
City, Town and Rural Planning
As the property is currently zoned PR* 114 and will require a residential rezoning.
Municipal Plans and Studies
It is anticipated that the Committee, should it approve the consent, will require a
Land Development
rezoning as a condition of consent. A Consent Plan which illustrates the proposal
is attached to this report.
Urban Design
Community Planning
Landscape Architecture
Natural Resource
and Aggregate Planning
Expert Evidence and Mediation
iVHBC Planning - Consent to Sever 1
Indian Parkdssociation, Township gfOro-Vtedonle
Project Management
A v 2009
Lot 14
Page 182 of 261
13 Poyntz Street
Barrie, Ontario L4M 3N6
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
3.0 LOCATION AND SITE CONFIGURATION
The site is located on the north side of Oneida Avenue, across the street from Lots 65 and 55,
within the Sugarbush residential settlement. The Sugarbush settlement area is comprised of
approximately 90 hectares (223 acres) of land located south of County Road 22 (Horseshoe
Valley Road). The subject lands are legally described as Part of Lot 3, Concession 6, Plan M-30,
Part of Block B, former Township of Oro, Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe.
The attached map shows the proposed lot within the context of the existing Sugarbush
development and also in relation to the other lots which are proposed for severance.
The Sugarbush subdivision has a rolling topography and the existing residential units were
designed to "fit" within this topography. There is additional opportunity to accommodate a small
amount of additional lots within the topography, including the subject lands.
Unlike most of the lots within the original Sugarbush, the lot is a standard shape, although the
remnant parcel is irregular in shape.
The lot and the remnant host very little vegetation.
4.0 THE PLANNING ACT
Section 53 of the Planning Act outlines the requirements for consideration of an application for
Consent and requires, in accordance with Subsection 53(12), that a municipality have regard to
the matters under Subsection 51(24) to determine whether a provisional consent shall be given.
The conformity of the consent application to these matters is discussed below:
(a) the effect of the proposal on matters of Provincial Interest;
The proposed severance does not have any negative effect on any matters of Provincial Interest
as stated in Section 6.0 of this report,
(b) whether the subdivision is premature or in the public interest;
As this proposal constitutes rounding out of a settlement area, is infilling within an existing
subdivision, and the site can be appropriately serviced the proposed consents are not considered
premature and are in the public interest.
(c) whether the plan conforms to the Official Plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if
any;
As outlined in Section 7.0 of this report, the application conforms to both the County and
Township Official Plans as the lands are within a settlement area, can be appropriately serviced
and will not negatively impact any natural features. The subject lands are part of the Sugarbush
Subdivision, which consists primarily of single detached dwellings. The proposal conforms to
this subdivision as the uses are already established. The creation of new lots will not adversely
impact the surrounding residential uses.
; RIBC Planning - Consent to Sever
indicrn Park.Associatioii. Township of Oro-Wedonte
luty 2009
Lot 14
Page 183 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
(d) The suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided;
The lot is of an appropriate size to host a substantial single detached dwelling and associated
septic system and there is sufficient table land to provide for the development of these uses. The
lot exceeds the minimum lot size, frontage and area required in the Zoning By-law.
(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the
adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision
with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;
The lot has access to Oneida Avenue. The remnant parcel also has access to Oneida Avenue and
Algonquin Trail. Both roads are publically owned and maintained. There are sufficient
opportunities to site a driveway access onto the existing roadway.
(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;
The subject lands are regular in shape. Many of the existing lots within the subdivision are
irregular in shape; this is the nature of the original Sugarbush development as the intention was
to fit the lots, and homes, within the irregular topography of the area. The dimensions of the
proposed severed lots have been chosen in order to ensure the appropriate zoning setbacks can
be accommodated. The retained lands will continue to be irregular in shape.
(g) the restrictions on the lands to be subdivided or the buildings and structures
proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;
The entire Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands are subject to two easements; one
for water services to the Township and the other for gas services to Consumers' Gas.
(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;
The creation of these lots will not cause an issue of flood control as there are no nearby water
courses and no major site alteration is anticipated to occur as a result of development on the
lands. As the development is an infill in an existing residential area, and the common lands are
not subject to any restrictive natural resources, the proposal is not anticipated to cause a negative
impact on any protected natural resource.
(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;
The Sugarbush settlement is serviced by municipal water, the severed lands will be able to
access this service. The retained parcels could also access this system, if required although it is
not the intention for these lands. The severed lands are of a suitable size to accommodate a
residential sewage system and the soils in Sugarbush are generally known to be good for septic
system use. The Sugarbush settlement is fully serviced in terms of utilities - gas, cable, phone,
etc.
0) the adequacy ofschool sites;
The proposal is to create one lot. Additional consents are being requested to a total of four lots. It
is submitted that the creation of a maximum of four lots is not anticipated to cause an adverse
impact on the school system. There are existing schools in the area should the rezoning be
411IBC Pttnxfung - consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of oro-Wdonte
Juiv 2009
Lot 14
Page 184 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
granted and residential uses approved for the site. The subdivision is currently serviced by
existing school bus routes.
(k) the area of land, if any, exclusive of highways, to be conveyed or dedicated for public
purposes;
The Association has discussed the issue of dedication of the remnant lands with Council and it
has been mutually decided that the Association would pay cash-in-lieu of parkland for the lots;
as is the standard practice for the Township. No other dedications are required.
(1) The extent to which the plan's design optimizes the available supply, means of
supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and
The creation of infill lot(s) within an existing subdivision which is already serviced with various
municipal and community services will assist in optimizing the existing services already enjoyed
by the subdivision.
(m) The interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and
site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also
located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41(2) of the
Planning Act or subsection 114(2) of the City of Toronto Act.
This is not applicable in this instance.
Based on the analysis provided above, the proposed consent application conforms to the
requirements of the Planning Act.
5.0 PLACES TO GROW - GROWTH PLAN
The Growth Plan sets out Province wide policies for how and where growth should occur. This
document directs growth to settlement areas and requires settlement areas to be complete
communities consisting of a balance of employment and residential uses as well as transit
supportive.
As the proposed lot creation is intended to create a lot within an existing settlement area and
constitutes an intensification proposal within an existing plan of subdivision which is
appropriately serviced, the proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.
6.0 THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) was issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act and it is
intended to provide policy direction for land use matters which are of Provincial interest.
Planning Authorities are to have regard to the Policy Statement when exercising any authority.
IJIBC I'tanning - Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township gf'Oro-Medonte
JuIv 2009
Lot 14
Page 185 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The PPS covers many issues such as proper infrastructure for development, affordable housing,
protection of natural resources, protection of agricultural lands, protection of mineral resources
and promotion of economically and environmentally strong communities. The PPS directs the
majority of growth to settlement areas. A review of the PPS has been undertaken and it is
submitted that the proposal is consistent with the Policy. Although the entire Policy has been
reviewed it should be noted that the proposal is within a settlement area and it does not adversely
impact any protected natural features. A review of the servicing policies of the PPS is
specifically outlined below.
The Sugarbush settlement is subject to partial services (municipal water and private septic
systems). Policy 1.6.4.5 of the PPS permits development on partial services in certain
circumstances. It is intended that the lot utilize the existing municipal water service or be
"partially serviced". One circumstance where partial services are acceptable within the PPS is
when the development is within a settlement area and where extension of the partial service
would be considered infilling and rounding out of existing development. This proposal
constitutes infilling of the Sugarbush subdivision. The PPS requires that there is reserve water
system capacity and site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services. The
Township's Official Plan identifies that limited development is permitted in the settlement on the
municipal water and with private septic systems; this is discussed in further detail in Section 7.2
of this Report.
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposal is consistent with the
policies of the PPS.
7.0 OFFICIAL PLAN
Both the policies of the County of Simcoe Official Plan and the Township of Oro-Medonte
Official Plan apply to the subject lands. The policies of both plans are discussed in further detail
below.
7.1 Countv of Simcoe Official Plan
The Sugarbush subdivision is designated as a "Settlement" in the County Official Plan (OP). A
review of the OP has been undertaken including the applicable policy sections and how the
proposal conforms is outlined herein. The applicable sections include Section 3.5 - Settlements,
Section 4.1 - Settlement Form & Expansion, Section 3.3 - General Subdivision & Development
Policies, and Section 4.3 - General Development Policies & Guidelines. The local OP identifies
the subject land as a "Sand and Gravel Resource" on Schedule 5.2.1; therefore Section 4.4
Aggregate Development of the OP has also been reviewed.
Section 3.5, Settlements, generally speaks to directing growth to settlement areas, how
settlement areas should grow and how municipalities should manage growth in these areas.
These policies do not address site specific development but generally state that settlement areas
should accommodate a diversity of land uses, including residential and recreation. Based on the
MHW Planning Consent to Sever
Indian Park Association, Township of 0ro-Ifedonte
Jarly 7009
Lot 14
Page 186 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
addition of one lot (and four lots in total), as an infill proposal, it is submitted that the additional
lots will assist in contributing to the use of the settlement for residential purposes.
The County's subdivision policies are described in Section 3.3 of the OP. These policies permit
Plans of Subdivisions or Consents if the land use is permitted in the designation or if the intent of
the plan's goals and objectives are maintained. The subject lands are designated Settlement in
the County OP, which permits residential uses and development. The site is also designated for
residential uses and development in the local OP. The goals and objectives of the Plan have been
reviewed and it is submitted that the intent is maintained by the proposal.
Section 3.3.2 further stipulates that lots can only be created where they have access to and
frontage on a public highway; all parcels have access and frontage on a publically maintained
road. Lot 14 specifically fronts on to Oneida Avenue.
Other requirements to be considered for development proposals are addressed in Section 3.3.
Specifically development should be located outside of wetlands or habitat areas; the maintenance
of views and vistas is encouraged; there may be a need for subdivision agreements between
developers and the municipality; protection of County and local greenland systems is required;
compliance with the Minimum Distance Separation Formula for nearby agricultural uses is
required; there are policies for development within the Niagara Escarpment Plan; protection of
prime agricultural areas is required; development in areas of environmental constraints such as
flood plains is discouraged; a Stormwater Management Report to support all plans of subdivision
or industrial areas where large impervious areas or chemical storage is proposed is required; a
traffic study could be required; a noise, odour and dust studies could be required; and studies
addressing development adjacent to contaminated sites could be required.
This above criteria has been reviewed with regard to the proposal. The proposed development to
create one residential lot conforms to the County's subdivision policies based on the following:
wetlands are not located within or surrounding the subject lands; any existing views and vistas
can be maintained; the creation of one lot does not require a subdivision agreement; the County
does not identify any of the Greenland system on or near the subject lands); there are no
agricultural operations in the area; the subject lands are not within the Niagara Escarpment, the
lands are identified as Class 5, 6, or 7 therefore they are not prime agricultural lands (and would
be difficult to farm due to the topography and the proximity to residential uses); the proposal is
not within a floodplain; a Stormwater Management Report is not required as only one lot is
proposed in an area which stormwater can be appropriately handled though existing municipal
controls; traffic, noise, odour, and dust studies are not, in the opinion of this office, required for
the creation of one lot in an area of similar uses
The general development policies of the County Plan are outlined in Section 4.3, General
Development Policies and Guidelines. The criteria for the design and layout of developments are
detailed in this section and include: minimizing the removal of natural vegetation; protecting
and maintaining scenic resources; maintaining a scale of development which is compatible with
the character of the area; outdoor lighting which compliments the setting; development clustered
at the edges of significant open spaces; road patterns should fit the topography of the site;
1111BC Planning - Consent to Sever
Jnctian PurkAssociatiort. Toivtashil~ of Oro-;tilectonte
July ?009
Lot 14
Page 187 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
reduction of visual impacts of signs; conservation of cultural heritage; connectivity of open
spaces; inclusion of a mix of housing types; a strong pedestrian orientation; and the integration
of trails and pathways. The remaining policies of Section 4.3 deal with development in rural
areas, the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine which are not applicable to this
application.
This application is seeking to create one new residential lot. Minimizing the removal of
vegetation will be considered; no scenic resources are intended to be affected; the creation of one
lot would be compatible with the surrounding residential lots as they are roughly the same shape
and size; there will be no new outdoor lighting; the retained parcels will generally remain as
open space; no new roads are proposed; nor are any new signs are proposed; there is no cultural
heritage to be conserved; the open space will remain connected to other spaces; as only one new
lot is being created, a mix of housing types could not be accommodated; the Sugarbush
subdivision has a strong pedestrian orientation due to the curvilinear streets and trail network
within the open space system and finally, the application is not in a rural area nor is the site part
of the Niagara Escarpment or the Oak Ridges Moraine.
Section 4.4 Aggregate Developments sets out the County's policies on aggregate resources.
Specifically this section speaks to the location of mineral aggregate operations; development in
areas identified as high potential; and other policies relating to the establishment and operation
of mineral aggregate facilities.
The majority of these policies do not apply to this application as it does not relate to the location
or operation of mineral aggregate facilities. However, Section 4.4.2 outlines policies with
regards to development for uses other than aggregate operations located in areas of high
potential. The Sugarbush settlement is located within an area identified for potential resources.
Section 4.4.2 states that development for alternate land uses may be permitted where it would
not preclude or hinder establishment of new operations or their access to resources; utilization is
not feasible because of natural or man-made constraints; or the proposal serves a greater long
term public interest; and provided any issues of public health, safely and environmental impact
are addressed.
The Sugarbush settlement predates the establishment of the County OP. It is an existing
subdivision which prevents the extraction of any resources and therefore the development of
additional residential lots will not further impede or hinder the establishments of new operations
or their access to resources. The proposal conforms to this policy section.
Based on the analysis above it is submitted that the proposed consent conforms to the County's
Official Plan.
AMBC Phuming Consent to Sever
ineliern Park Association, Totmship of'Oro-Afedonte
Julv 2009
Lot 14
Page 188 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
7.2 Townshin of Oro-Medonte Official Plan
The Township's Official Plan designates the Sugarbush settlement, including the subject lands,
as "Residential". Schedule "A" also identifies the lands as being located within the Oro Moraine
Planning Area boundary.
Section C.14.2.4 sets out the land use policies for Sugarbush subdivision. This section states that
the residential designation applies to some of the lands within the settlement, including the
subject lands. The permitted uses include single detached dwellings, home occupations, private
recreational facilities, bed and breakfast establishments and open spaces uses. Therefore the
proposal conforms to these policies as both the existing (recreational) and proposed (residential)
uses are permitted. This policy also requires that all new development in Sugarbush be serviced
by the municipal communal water system and private septic systems. The severed parcels will
have the ability to connect to the municipal water system and contain sufficient land area to
accommodate a private septic system. The retained lands will remain vacant and used as open
spaces and will not require connection to the water services or septic systems.
Section A4.2.3 of the OP identifies the Sugarbush community as primarily residential, and as the
intent is to rezone the severed lands and permit their use for residential purposes the proposed
consent would confirm with this intent. Some growth can occur in this settlement area on the
municipal water system and with the utilization of private septic systems due to the suitability of
the soils and the anticipated limited scale of development (S.A4.2.3). The proposal constitutes
limited development as only one lots is being created and with the inclusion of the proposed
additional three lots, it would still be considered limited development.
SA.4.3, Special Policy for Horseshoe Valley Road identifies the Sugarbush settlement area as a
location for new residential and institutional growth. The requirements to expand the boundaries
of this and other settlement areas are outlined in this section. These policies are not applicable as
this application is proposing the creation of lots within the current settlement area boundary.
Section B1 outlines the policies with respect to the Oro Moraine. There are two designations
within the Oro Moraine, "Oro Moraine - Natural Core/Corridor Area" and "Oro Moraine -
Enhancement Area". Neither of these designations apply as Schedule "A" of the Official Plan,
does not identify either designation on the subject lands. Therefore these policies are not
applicable to this application.
The Township's policies on the subdivision of land are outline in Section D.2.2. These policies
are to be considered for all applications for Consent.
Section D2.2.1, General Criteria, outlines the policies to be considered when creating new lots
by consent. This section requires that the Committee of Adjustment be satisfied that the
application conforms to the following policies:
- ffl IBC Planting Consent to Sever
Indian Park 4ssociatiota, Towt?Aip of 0r-a-Medonte
Julv 2009
Lo! 14
Page 189 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
a) That the retained and severed lots front on and will be accessed by a public road that is
maintained on a year-round basis.
The severed lot fronts on to Oneida Avenue, which is public and maintained year round.
b) That the retained and severed lots do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or
County Road.
Neither the severed nor retained lands will have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County
Road.
c) That the retained and severed lots will not cause a traffic hazard.
Oneida Avenue is flat and is slightly curved along several points. The proposed lot has
sufficient frontage to accommodate driveways. Therefore neither proposed lot nor the retained
parcel will cause a traffic hazard.
d) That the retained and severed lots have adequate size and frontage for the proposed use
in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and are compatible with adjacent
uses.
As outlined in Section 8.0 of this report both the severed and retained lands comply with zone
standards set out in the Zoning By-law as it relates to size and frontage. The proposed lot is
compatible with adjacent residential uses as they are similar in size and shape and residential
uses are proposed on the lots. The existing uses are currently compatible and will remain
compatible. Should a rezoning be sought for residential uses, the proposal is still compatible with
the adjacent residential uses.
e) That the retained and severed lots can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and
means of sewage disposal.
The site is serviced by the municipal water system and the severed lot is generally of sufficient
size to accommodate septic systems. No future development uses requiring services are
contemplated for the retained parcels, therefore appropriate servicing is not applicable.
That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the drainage
patterns in the area.
This application will not result in site grading which could adversely impact drainage patterns.
Once the home is constructed on the severed parcel, drainage will be required to be considered
as part of any building permit process.
g) That the retained and severed lots will not restrict the development of the retained lands
or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are
designed,for development by this Plan.
This severance will not create a landlocked parcel or restrict the development of any other
parcels.
h) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the features and
functions of any ecological feature in the area.
AUMC Ptnnning - Consent to Serer
Indian Purk Association, Township of 0ro-XIedonte
Julv 2009
Lot 14
Page 190 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
The lots have been designed to provide for a flat building area, to be respectful to the existing
trail system and to not negatively impact the features and functions of any identified ecological
feature.
i) That the retained and severed lots will not have a negative impact on the quality and
quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area.
The quality and quantity of groundwater is not anticipated to be impacted by the proposal as
development of one residential lot which are properly served in an area of similarly serviced
lands. Wells are not required in this area as the Subdivision is serviced by the municipal water
system. A proper septic system will be required to be designed at the time of building permit
issuance.
j) That the retained and severed lots will conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act.
The severed and retained lots conform to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, as described in
Section 4.0 of this Report.
The remaining Section of D2.2 outlines policies for boundary adjustments, technical severances
and lots for utilities; which are not applicable to this proposal.
The subject lands are identified as "Secondary Aggregate Resources" on Appendix 1 of the OP.
The OP sets objectives to protect resources identified on Appendix 1. Section C12.4.7 permits
other uses to be developed in areas identified on Appendix 1 in certain circumstances. Those
circumstances and how the proposal meets these criteria are outlined below:
a) resource use would not be feasible - no extraction could take place in the Sugarbush
settlement due to the existing residences and the area of the lot would be too small to
make an aggregate extraction operation viable.
b) the proposed use serves a greater long term public interest - it is in the public interest to
continue the rounding out of the development over using the lands for mineral aggregate
extraction.
c) issues of public health and safely are addressed - the proposal can be adequately
serviced, does not cause a traffic hazard and is compatible with the surrounding uses;
therefore issues of public health and safety have been addressed.
It is therefore submitted that the proposal conforms to this policy requirement. On the basis of
the above, the proposed consent to sever conforms to the Township's Official Plan policies.
8.0 ZONING BY-LAW
Both the severed and retained lands are zoned Private Recreation Exception 114 (PR* 114) on
Schedule A16 of the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The permitted uses for the
Private Recreation zone are found in Table A5, and include bed and breakfast establishments,
conservation uses, private clubs, and a variety of recreational facilities (skiing, mountain biking
and golf courses). Exception 114 adds additional permitted uses on the subject lands; specifically
AIMC Planning Consent to Sever 10
Lrclicrn ParkAssoeiation, Township of Oro-Nledonte
July ?009
Lot 14
Page 191 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
a recreation center and associated uses as well as one dwelling unit for a care taker. The
provisions for the PR zone are found in Table B5 of the Township Zoning By-law. Exception
114 also lists three additional provisions: minimum first storey floor area, maximum building
height and minimum setback from a public street.
It is anticipated that a rezoning to a residential zone will be required as a condition of consent; it
is proposed that the remnant parcels remain in the PR* 114 zone.
It is anticipated that a rezoning for residential uses may be required on the severed lands (Parcel
C & D). It is the opinion of this office that the Residential 1 Exception 113 zone (R1 *113) is the
best zone for the severed lots as the balance of the residential lots in the subdivision are zoned
R1*113. We have ensured that these lots can meet the minimum lot area and minimum lot
frontage required by the R1 * 113 zone as follows:
Minimum Lot Area I 0.2ha 1 0.313 ha
Minimum Lot Frontage I 30m I 52.78m
9.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis provided above, it is submitted that the proposed severance, , represents
good planning. The proposal conforms to both the County of Simcoe and Township of Oro-
Medonte Official Plans, it is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the
Growth Plan, satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act and complies with the Township's
Zoning By-law except for the matters outlined herein which, it is submitted, would not adversely
affect appropriate consideration of the Committee on the application. Therefore, on behalf of the
applicant, we respectfully request favourable consideration of the severance from the Committee.
Respectfully Submitted,
MHBC Planning
A
Kris Iv enzies, BES, BEd, I CIP RPP,
Partner
CC. Indian Park Association, Deborah Price-Sherman
MHBC Planning; - Consent to Sever 11
Indian Park Association. Township qf0ro-Medonte
AN ?009
Lot 14
Page 192 of 261
■
E
4 ~ O p ~sl ~ c°,~i
~ ~ o{a0 ~ ~ 3
F ~c7,
t. ~.a^d ~ C ~ ~x *h
07
N <i
~yy ~r
66~..g{++..`~ t l`~: ~ 33vJ "m R~P•$ i1'~` r # ~ t ~1
3, fi a
j
AN,
M q~f
i
44
f Y
140
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 194 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 195 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
,NS
6~ e
pace 197 0
Contour
Information
2
Lo
co
07
a
Lot 3
OF PART OF BLOCK A, RECiMrMD PLAN M-9
(GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF ORO)
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
Legend:
4 i Subject Property
Lot Area: t 2,405 sq.m. f t 25,887 sq.tt w
0
00
Lot Frontage: 39.4m 00
0)
rn
N
D_
Date.. August 20, 2009
Scale 1:1,000 ;a orv„-~ iana avc
DWG No. 108211DI2009XContours-Lot3.dwg
-4
A,
F
P~'7
m
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 200 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-6-21 (LOi 10) a. .u...
a
w
4411
co
m
J
wa
}
LL.
jg~
f3 t~~t~~k
i~ P
y
A
r
5
W
W X.
a
~~L - ~
o- d :h4 F
Z
~~{WWW }
w 6~
l
~
l
LL..
r
W
- =t
V
Page 201 of 261
a~
~ Date: Ass~'2049
Scatc 1: 1, ,x., _
Aot
oViG W 08211D~2~9 -
3 C
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-t5"
O
J
rrlAA
VI
~Q
r
V
r
N
page 203 of 261
too
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 204 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
ar
14
II•
0
J
W
Z
J
IF-
0
J
A
9
r
t "
"
~
y~ Y 3
k
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
r
z o C. p o
N'. S s zro o O l J
G µ 0F e O p
N 14 o o
14
~M
~ 3 oaf ~ p'"t
O ~ ~ O
A N ~ v ~
Page 206 of 261
Agenda item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot "
E
It
r
H
O
J
4
0 ~`No
E
h Z M
Q
O
Z
0
a
q~ wm
Page 207 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 208 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Page 209 of 261
jenda Item 'T o" ) `
d'
Vol
M-
0
N
O
page 2 ip of 2
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
Ann Budge
OVo
9, I, 2 oo9
13 Oneida A e., RR#4 Coldwater, ON LOK 1 EO
J ~4 ax-~ I I ~
0-&W J cwt ` ~e ~c Q l u
Y CL
40AA,6( -
-k/3 41 If 15-1A
0 p
A Wou,,,o 05u- ~k,
Auk
At~ `rte 4
Fit to Eat
Wholesome Recipes for Active People
C qn Sp- V....... AJ~i%;lom-"
DfOC2cO' to benefit JI 1!)l inmmaro.,d,mrsorianw,i-y,n.»
'PORT MEDICINE COUNCIL OF CANADA
Page 211 of 261
V-A 0-
e c lcl~
Olt-
-4a -
k.A
A-C
~ ~r ~ ~
cL~
Q~)
~co
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
0
"Ji 4"1,.k AO '0 1 wt),-41 ~
OL,3 ark Az AO'Q-
yv-as ~w V-~ ltbr cjl~ TQ-~.
A- - ~ uAaSL
d
tk~
A4~1,j AZ
C~,r1tit,c,~r....~.~ V~-~+-~-;? 1/~~t.-~•-~ lrl V~1.7 `/1.~}~CLk?~V.I , W a~ Ce~vti'
Q-~~~ CL
U~ ~ rntiD .
Page 213 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
t / ~ r t
j ~
~ ~t.t ~w~iwewm
~4 !
F r,
.1e I
~ _ t s `~lj t
1
liar
j
t1-
a ~ c s
tt n,
Indian Dark Association - Su arbush Subdivision seeavsmaoml~lar,o
Potential Lots , _ r . L Sf.j A _r r .
11
Trnfqewm* Draft for Discussion
Page 214 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
iW
Page 11
WE REMEMBER HIM was the theme on September 31ps family and friends gathered to dedicate a
trail to Hans Waldvogel who passed away in March of this yda'r. in a touching and moving ceremony,
Mary Waidvogel read aloud an epitaph and thanked everyone for the memorial to her husband.
Thanks to Don and Ann Budge of Oneida Avenue who were instrumental in the gesture to commemorate
our past treasurer. The trail extends from Oneida Avenue to the Recreation Centre.
We Remember Him
(adapted from Roland B. Glltelsohn)
M the rising of bye sun and In its going down
We remember him
In the blowing of the wind and in the cfiiff of winter
we remember him
In the opening of buds and in the rebirth of spring
we remember him
In the blueness of the sky and in the warmth of
summer
We remember him
In the rusting of leaves and in the beauty of autumn
We remember him
In the beginning of the year and when It ends
We remember him
When we are w+sary and in need of strength
We remember him
When we are lost and sick at heart
We remember him
When we have pys we yelyn to share
We remember ern
So long as we fine, he too shall live
For now, he is a part of us
As we remember him
Page 215 of 261
Mary Waldvogel reads the eulogy We Remember Him"
Mary Waldvogel (centre) with friends and
neighbours Ann and Don Budge
Family and friends attend the dedication of
the Hans Waldvogei Trail on Oneida Avenue
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
Neil and Brenda Knelsen
142 Huronwoods Rd RR#4
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
Aug 15th, 2009
Secretary of the Commitee
148 Line 7 South, PO box 100
Oro, On, LOL 2X0
Dear Secretary of the Commitee:
4, t6 7 ?Ogg
i
We would like to express our reservations regarding Application's 2009-B-25, 2009-B-
26, 2009-13-27 and 2009-B-28 as filed by the Indian Park Association.
Our first concern has to do with the safety of Sugarbush Residents and the safeguarding
of our property. Since we moved here in 2000 we have been denied access to our
property on several occassions for the following reasons. Vehicle accidents at the
intersection of the 6th and Horseshoe Valley road blocking access to Sugarbush and
adverse winter weather making the hill on Horseshoe Valley at the 6th too slippery for
cars to climb, thus creating a long line of vehicles parked at the bottom waiting for snow
removal crews, again blocking access. Both of these conditions create a hazard to the
residents in the event of a fire or a medical emergency since there is only one way into or
out of Sugarbush. These conditions could/would affect the response times of our
emergency personnel.
Our second concern has to do with the original design of the Sugarbush area. It was
designed and sold as a low density "nature retreat", offering a very natural setting which
is why many of the residents currently living here purchased their property. Adding new
lots wherever they happen to fit is not in keeping with the original design philosophy.
Our third concern has to do with the water supply. Does the sugarbush aquifer have the
necessary capacity to supply these additional houses? I would like to know if the
Township has any information on this that we could study. If the water system needs to
be upgraded to accommodate these new houses then who would pay the cost of this
work? I would like to think that the development fees charged would cover any possible
work needed in the future so that existing residents wouldn't have to foot the bill for the
upgrade.
Our fourth concern has to do with the "Oro Moraine" that needs to be protected, as this
land is inside the boundary of this area. Development inside this area should be very
carefully examined by the proper experts.
Page 216 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-13-27 (Lot 13) and...
For these reasons we strongly disagree with the creation of any more building lots in
Sugarbush. Until we have two separate entrances, the addition of any new residents or
houses would be a safety risk (without two separate entrances, it is already risky enough).
We also need to know that the current water system and aquifer are capable of supplying
the new houses and still provide adequate water pressure for the fire department in the
event of a fire. And we would like to request that any new houses being built in
Sugarbush or anywhere else in the Oro-Medonte "Morraine" utilize the most
environmentally friendly building methods and material available while keeping their
environmental footprint as small as possible, keeping with the character of Sugarbush and
not clearcutting the land of most trees like the last few houses built here.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to express our concerns
We trust the the Council will keep all of these issues in mind when
decision on this issue and all future issues regarding development.
Sincerely,
r -1
Neil and Brenda Knelsen
regarding this matter.
they make their
Page 217 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-B-25 (Lot 2), 2009-B-26 (Lot 3), 2009-B-27 (Lot 13) and...
l ,
l 3J-l-
vties S~rl foy ~~U~~~.
~i IJ 1~gl~ _ 7 U/ ~`CL(r a
c/Ul-
lvt5
-9/0 c
.
g 17
Page 218 of 261
Agenda Item # 5h) - 2009-t5"
THE TOWNSHIP OF OKO"MEDONTE
THE CORPORATIOo wo, ono, ON. Lor (705)-487-2171
NOTICE of HF'ARING,
121
r ~ - 1
Stetiert Furqltftur.'
Sec rettlrp-ireauret
page 219 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
(tlrrr~~%~f clo~te
PravJ Fl~,itng~~, Eixiri~y F~i.nic
Application No
2009-A-08
Meeting Date:
August 20, 2009
Roll
4346-010-006-00800
ANALYSIS:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
To: Committee of Adjustment
Subject: Variance Application
Rob Butler
Plan 1, Part of Lot 15
67 Barrie Terrance
(Former Township of Oro)
Prepared By:
Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Motion #
R.M.S. File
D13-39084
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
appeared before the Committee of Adjustment on June 18, 2009. The Committee deferred the
application, in order for the issue of the right of way to be resolved. Attached please find a copy of the
report from Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and Environmental Services in regard to the
reconstruction of Barrie Terrace and the resolution of Council authorizing the reconstruction to occur
this year. The re-constructed road will provide a year round municipally maintained road. The
Planning opinion on the application has not changed and attached is the staff report in regards to the
requested variance for front yard setback.
Respectfully submitted:
i
Steven arquharson, B.URPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Reviewed by:
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director of Development Services
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 3
Page 220 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-A-08(Butler)
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 3
Page 221 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
SCHEDULE 2: PROPOSED LOCATION
2009-A-08(Butler)
F9'11. 111E
WA15A
9.9tlEllE
'te`n i.@fi
^F~l~ 0E
AIA Y91
❑ 8Cik1
CW`RfiNI
-.Erte::•.pF,-tan
'rC+f a ifF'GKi'k)xL:CP1~JFS
Y \ nCiltDJt. P.wM'iiC*~Fil~
4FF~ ~ Ytt.%>~`
F #F,~ ~•A 1f,Y t"
in H[eTa m. ~rr+c+..ff fM*
yl~~
YY
152
._..T.
_._~.._.TIT-*
-
s
REGISTERED ,
2'h EBl,U--~
2 p , +
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
A•01 SITE PLAN
A-02 FOUNDATION PLAN
FLOOR PLAN
I LOFT PLAN
SECTIONS
A-03 ELEVATIONS
A-04 DETAILS
~a
PET OF La 15 M THE BAY
9TlFWO LOT 15IN To'(fLOT 15
xm u"'s V
USI RM PLAN 1
R PART (f NEIIMT MI 110
WHIP ff Ci?O-Cal
rA
C'SATY a S!NA
aaMPPa4N6.wip YY
tlYh1YY~ Ya Mii}c1(a+a
!e S19i
-.10 . I
DVS
i_-- I
DESLGIIA Dwrimi
PN. hSAFtlI! FAl ~ +N
maz -
Roe INIIER
CATNE FRO MX
I lO In OEM. ]WOO FROFOSEO P CAR 4wa
FM YAPD 115 I----4+f5 ow°~lao
I~FHf l5 ~
~
Ul' ;AGE 30 I E _ _
PID VhST#
So P. -
-
_
EITF PLAN
I
YAD EA
Sq
T
%LOTFFY%rAl
I AWYEICI
IMtN64TrILOT A`EA
r~~a
02 _ - ~'r to o
YAXMI LOT CMFPGf
kilt AA:A
IMIRHGiT IU
Meeting Date: August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 3
Page 222 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Agenda Item # 10c) - Report No. TES 2009-21, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportati...
f~ Township of
REPORT
Proud Heritage, Exciting Future
Report No. To: Prepared By:
TES2009-21 Council Jerry Ball
Meeting Date: Subject: Motion #
June 29, 2009 Barrie Terrace Reconstruction
Roll R.M.S. File*:
RECOMMENDATION(S): Requires Action For Information Only
It is recommended that:
1. Council receives and adopts Report TES2009-21;
2. That Barrie Terrace be reconstructed and paved from Colbourne Street westerly to
the dead end.
3. That this expenditure be considered an overrun to the budget.
4. That the residents of Barrie Terrace west of Colbourne Street be notified of Council's
decision.
BACKGROUND:
In 2004 the six (6) existing residents on Barrie Terrace west of Colbourne Street deeded
the rail bed to the Township for the purpose of constructing a road.
Staff at the time agreed with to the transfer and also committed to upgrades to provide a
municipally assumed road for the residents.
Hydro One has removed the existing pole live off private property and buried a new
under ground service to the six (6) at their cost.
All existing lots have now been developed and residents are requesting that the
municipality now complete the necessary construction work and require year round
maintenance.
Transportation and Environmental Services June 29, 2009
Report No. TES2009-21 Page 1 of 2
Page 15 of 412
Page 223 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Agenda Item # 10c) - Report No. TES 2009-21, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportati...
ANALYSIS: 1
A budget and detail cost of $28,500.00 has been prepared for this construction work. 1
This work will include sub excavation, ditching, gravel and pavement as well as removal
of the fence located at the intersection of Colbourne Street and Barrie Terrace west,
FINANCIAL:
$28,500.00
POLICIESILEGISLATION:
None.
CONSULTATIONS:
Manager of Transportation
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
I CONCLUSION: I
Complete the construction and paving in order to bring Barrie Terrace up to municipal
standards for maintenance purposes.
Respectfully submitted:
Jerry Ball, CRSS
Director or Transportation and Environmental Services
SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments:
Transportation and Environmental Services June 29, 2009
Report No. TES2009-21 Page 2 of 2
Page 16 of 412
Page 224 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Council Meeting Minutes - June 29, 2009.
c) Report No. TES 2009-21, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Barrie Terrace Reconstruction.
Motion No. C090629-06
Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Evans
Be it resolved that
1. Report No. TES 2009-21, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Barrie Terrace Reconstruction be received
and adopted.
2. That Barrie Terrace be reconstructed and paved from Colbourne Street
westerly to the dead end.
3. That this expenditure be considered an overrun to the 2009 budget.
4. And Further That the residents of Barrie Terrace west of Colbourne
Street be notified of Council's decision.
Carried.
d) Report No. TES 2009-22, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Warminster Sideroad Signage.
Motion No. C090629-07
Moved by Agnew, Seconded by Crawford
Be it resolved that
1. Report No. TES 2009-22, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Warminster Sideroad Signage be received
and adopted.
2. That additional 50 km signs be erected, 30 km speed signs be erected
on existing curve signs and delineator markers be erected on the north
and south side of Warminster Sideroad within the horizontal curve.
3. That Mary Sheppard be notified of Council's decision.
4. And Further That the OPP be requested to provide additional patrol on
the Warminster Sideroad.
Carried.
e) Report No. TES 2009-23, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Bass Lake Water Quality.
Motion No. C090629-08
Moved by Allison, Seconded by Coutanche
Be it resolved that
1. Report No. TES 2009-23, Jerry Ball, Director of Transportation and
Environmental Services re: Bass Lake Water Quality be received and
adopted.
2. And Further That no further action be required with regard to Bass Lake
Water Testing.
Carried.
Page 4 of 22
Page 225 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
fruarakirf~
REPORT
C~iv~~~~r.~rmtc'
I',-d H,v*gr, F,,Ntq Fnrrne
Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By:
2009-A-08 Steven Farquharson,
Intermediate Planner
Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion #
August 20, 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 B1- Minimum Front Yard Setback:
Reauired Prooosed
7.5 metres 4.8 metres
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 1 of 4
Page 226 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
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 of the Plan states that
"permitted uses on lands designated Shoreline... are single detached dwellings [and accessory
buildings to such]". 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 of the Official Plan.
Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law?
The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service*Hold (RLS*H) Zone. Permitted uses in the
RLS*H Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and
storage sheds. The property is zoned "limited service" to reflect that access is provided by Barrie
Terrace, being an unassumed or private road. The *Hold provision ensures that further development
on such properties will require a Site Plan Agreement, to be approved by the Township and
registered on title. For the application at hand, it is appropriate that site plan approval be imposed as
a condition of variance.
With respect to the 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 property, and serves as a laneway to provide
access for the subject and neighbouring properties to Colbourne Street. As a result of the site
inspection, concerns were raised by staff regarding the proposed garage potentially being located
partially on the easement. The applicant has subsequently had a surveyor verify that the proposed
garage is in fact setback 4.1 metres from the front lot line, and will not encroach on the easement.
While the Zoning By-law does not have a setback requirement to the easement boundary, the
Transportation and Environmental Services Department has indicated that structures are not permitted
on this right-of-way, as it currently serves as an access route for properties along Barrie Terrace. The
Director of Transportation and Environmental Services, has submitted a report to Council at the June
29, 2009, which was approved, recommending that Barrie Terrace be 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. metres, and the proposed
attached garage of 51 sq. metres, the proposed total floor area of the dwelling will be approximately
144 sq. metres. 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
Application No. 2009-A-08
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 2 of 4
Page 227 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
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- a report 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.
Respectfully submitted:
Steve Farquhar on, B.URPL
Intermediate Planner
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Reviewed by:
Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP
Director of Development Services
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 3 of 4
Page 228 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP
2009-A-08 (Butler)
Development Services
Application No. 2009-A-08
Meeting Date August 20, 2009
Page 4 of 4
Page 229 of 261
COPYRIGHT
s imaw~r~ w.w,
NOTES~,ro caet~nc i
W
(D
N
W
C)
O
N
CD
i
F
v~ v
r,
Lft L -
An~
_ f
I jc"lol o,li _ ~A I'_I If ' I~
I«~._ -
t1
FRONT ELE_VATION,, VI
A G r'. ( ~
U VJ 1
am.. ux.M. a.
I o~iE
PEVISIONS
DFSLGN ~ Dr~r-rum I.
n. msavMoa®Iynp~aFg~iv:~r.,-
ROB SUTLER
CHRISTINE SRO! ICK
PROPOSEC GARAGE ADDITION
LT 9ARRIE TEFRACE
GGkO-".EOONTE
Ae MCINTY- ~nrt:rrn Ar
H,~~ 084'
COPYRIG:T
NOTES
5 _
1 (s I 1.
N ea O&AD %
RE'JISIONS
W
(D
N
W
O
N
CF)
a I
M~eu
I'J
-
FRONT ELEVATIO'N!1
DESIGN F DRAFTING
saw Sena.
6 - h opi~w. ioaim~
vx. man'rn.:aowa~aa9~m i-~sn
ROB BUTLER
CHRISTINE FROLICK
- 'ROPOSED GARAGE ACIDTION
~I P BARRIE TERRACE
ORO~HEWNTE
NNprco BV.
BMCINT"RE
084'
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Page 232 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
I f,-
z
k
v
l
C WEI. -
T A.
f
N ti
V
f~~v r ors
14, fl ~ 4 4
r
Y Y 1»..
Y 5
0.
r # qa a ~
1 S ( ~
P Af
la ]
~v ++1I
4.
y~ 1
» R w q
pp i
yyv » g r
V!v
fbA Y
} t
WNWIL
Page 233 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
P-'
, ' "t x +X dC7
O i X44 e~~
r v. '
/O~
ii - py I ~ a a d~F$` c,a Y
C M7
'`gy'm M
v
.x
r ~ . J a
.
^
n r4
v
s
of
'S
e n
q *y` .Erb.
~ c
444
fir
R
Page 234 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Page 235 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Page 236 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
148 Line 7 South
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
Attention: Mr. Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer
Re: Submission No. 2009-AO8, Butler
Dear Sir,
June 12, 2009
RECEI iI
JUN 1tIM
ORO-MEDONT F
TOWNSHIP'
Need we remind everyone that it is against the law to build on or block a right of way
easement without consent of the stakeholders?
We do not want our unique cul de sac to be further contaminated by monster homes.
There seems to be a great deal of urgency to get rid of this historic lakeside road, but
the roadway has existed for about 75 years and there is no hurry.
There was never a time when we were going to consent to the removal of the
Right of Way road called Barrie Terrace, with the ensuing loss of our forest and the
natural privacy it offered. Regarding these "improvements" to our neighbourhood, we
have never been given a plan to consider or approve. We have trusted the professionals
to look after our concerns. Because of other peoples' interests, we are being loaded with
the costs of their real estate adventures and investments. We have lost some enjoyment
of our habitat in exchange. We paid extra for our property because of its special status on
a quaint private road. On my deed, we have specific property rights relating to the use
and existence of Barrie Terrace. My title insurance contract specifically states that if
there is a threat to our deeded rights then we are obligated to immediately advise the title
insurance company so they can commence legal action without delay. If others wish to
eliminate their right of way over our property then they should do so.
Regarding the septics for the applicant, please see the attached "change of use" for the
existing building permit. Please notice the written corrections to the changes in number
of baths, sinks, etc., and the notation "only two bedrooms". It appears there is some
confusion regarding the loading of the septic system in the face of continued growth of
the house. If there is a next building permit offered to Mr. Butler then it will surely place
more load on his septic system. As adjoining neighbours we are dependant on our well
for fresh water. We are again requesting an engineering review of this septic system.
Thank you very much.
Yours v truly,
- iar and Linda Ambrose-Roe
0224t J : Af Me.ff7w e-1 7 P, uvRL s .
Page 237 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
to t ~o
TBS ?V COttPONATTOrr Or lw
a . aq,~po
-~~P.~O~ ROrrr. a tG - aoL
o.rrme N ay S rn-s
Chopp of Ws
Pbnnit Appllatlbn fe6 mr4 na
PLC MCJttr tats WpftWm is for &Mft s ! roomodoet that wM NO m"ke unad ft of aA eldsgas sewase
rpom it ea qWn& wW be "h%4 a etm M be acad. u rou we aftom
corlatb an b spefter baton abo ttl a 61% App6sarlea.
a,
-
Addrea+ of Ornef J.
Now &W Ad4ere of KGOWWW 0600- Nose ed. a AuU6oAUq A"
~7 ~~+sdf '`.sa d .
lr6le.~ee." m fi' ae..
low
fwwq Aee00ew0et faN 1100
Mwdr}i7 Nrr rase
040 jF60i.vre
' SMW NOW Aatd c A
Rod" wes heaer T Me. re. d heoaw edp q hedr reewas-4 21
tee. W d bodreor6100pm4 dr ft=m"m4 11
Tom I mows"
rerar.nr+~ l ,irr..awlwr►aooaiuu►w.+r1 1a..4e.t I/~S4
w.wdw. l l C r bd00 9 S6 d1n 4 Sd
arr. now bdmw q J"'6 .en 9 6 r
aawM view ed0.r . A AAA dlr Q 9'v
6„eq, aM.M.. = MA M n.u bolove ,f..,i r mow levo or
to e' O ld* / oer0 e6rwr .en
A.r.dk %WW1 Am b'or" 191A d hen ;Zoos
10m00taMdrwrl Iadtaeawwrf.R+w1Y1MaY lros.wwn~rr hrtlroma.w -
VAUUS "b I dq+d94 1 Y00d.a.1 1 000.1 IlM.am01-
The sl+aAae awTar w rrrre r J7 0,ooe.w• e..r mn... AZEO ai 30.E -04-e
NOMN a "MOW 0ea ddrad bee 00 an • Ir drove 60 pr0/0q aW p wr•e+eek M bad orkmo 406 we..
- MrWmgi a.rM.rer0e0rM4ppomMOMW00M.Mrr4We.m gftLWW41-0010--006 w•er.461000 d
as wu.ec+r r6 ar r over r rrw06tlw.
r....r010w1rwrp.rYrrdd.a.sryrF~arTartlar+..dm6ie■amladdO.M.rr.10maw ir.e►lNrmry..00
aderM a0lq d. rr6.r 0.r 00 yMwd de10 ~ OM.Mderewr,.6rm. rr r040r 1046 N M.6atwer hems r ~10re Y6 vr.dr 00
d0 booms moor her w.ea.w e. r.. era 0600 rdtalb l0r 0.a>t.s 0+er .her w..caewu aM M arm. e~rrr Cor..e Y NplrMn
*WON"
atUAaMra
1 herrr 0reyar t hew rr46fa 4010 ererie6 6666.w.e r d6 r+nes a10r000016 0001.aN10rr d.d100 er 0...0040661 .OUT map@%INW a0r
rel0vr.eMMrb.sd4r.00Mewadb sd.akrel.ri0rebTMdrAMDC.00e.WWWOAs
sat.
wasor ar AV" Motown*
slp.err.
her t♦tlrwrsr.l to 1 b. Ift b wkaA 1e I b tld0
Unbse to approve, ra was bdm-l }
Grant es propoead..4 1 Groot v ft oaolklsss bdow.
vot
ftlosoure Date 410 (a-~
oa.r.. r1r+
Note: Re-lnsoecdon Fee Is S50.00
Page 238 of 261
Melldp* am Now Larreaawl0e Tq, tee N0. Is Its e~ lar as.
dr. q~{ fg.r
(Jqo 1 I~/99. i~p
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
S& l~c.tn4~ off. }wm~
Page 239 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot l t-ial l 1 v
Page 240 of 261
Agenda item # bi
~~3
R''ilja-3m>
VA ° c~L
Page 241 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
A, it,
Page 242 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Page 243 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot l t-ial l 1 v
RA
JL-
Page 244 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
~A k~
OWZI-
Page 245 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
N•R - 't "A
x„.
4-Z
Page 246 of 261
a
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
M
s<"
(9-1 &-f-rtp--
'#_7
Page 247 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Brissette, Marie
From: Leigh, Andria
Sent: June-15-09 9:08 AM
To: Brissette, Marie
Subject: FW: release of right of way and building on the right of way "Barrie Terrace"
Andria Leigh
Director Development Services
Township of Oro-Medonte
From: Leigh, Andria
Sent: June 15, 2009 8:54 AM
To: i GARRY POTTER; Lynda Aiken; Michelle Lynch; Rick Webster
Cc: Farquharson, Steven
Subject: FW: release of right of way and building on the right of way "Barrie Terrace"
Please see comments received from Mrs. Roe regarding Minor Variance Application 2009-A-08 (Butler)
Thanks,
From: Leigh, Andria
Sent: June 15, 2009 8:50 AM
To:
Cc: Farquharson, Steven
Subject: RE: release of right of way and building on the right of way "Barrie Terrace"
Mrs. Ambrose Roe,
In regards to the timing for review of the application, the circulation of applications is legislated through the Planning
Act and is required to be sent 10 days prior to the hearing.
Unfortunately Staff are not in a position to defer the application, this is a request which needs to be considered by the
Committee of Adjustment members. Accordingly, we will be providing your comments to the Committee members for
their consideration at the hearing this Thursday.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: June 15, 2009 7:43 AM
To: Leigh, Andria
Subject: release of right of way and building on the right of way "Barrie Terrace"
Good Morning Andria I am representing a few concerned neightbours on Barrie Terrace and surrounding area
with the non stop development.on a right of way road.. lack of reforestation ..and green space Our main
concern right now is the lack of time needed to look at this application (committe meeting sign was not posted )
re pics..sent to Steven Farquarson. We also need our lawyers to look at the supposed release on the historical
right of way..l appreciate any attention you give to this and hope you can deter this until we have proper time to
prepare. I can be reached at i Thank-you for your time Linda Ambrose
Page 248 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
7057269197 Klaus Jacoby Law Off ice
02:52:38 p.m. 06-17-2009
1 11
KLNUS N. J RCOBY
barrister & solicitor
June 17, 2009
VIA FAX ONLY TO: 487-0133
The Corporation of the
Township of Oro-Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
148 Line 7 South
ORO, ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Mr. Steven Farquharson
Secretary -Treasurer
Dear Sirs:
RE: BUTLER Application for Minor Variance
Submission No. 2009-A-08
1 67 Barrie Terrace I
Please be advised that I am the owner of 73 Barrie Terrace and as
such have received copy of Notice of Hearing scheduled for tomorrow. Mr. Butler seeks
relief from the minimum front yard setback requirement 7,5 metres to allow the
construction of an attached garage with a setback of 4.8 metres.
It is my understanding that the Township is in the process of bringing
the extension of Barrie Terrace (lying West of Colborne Street and which the Township
now owns) to municipal standards to ensure safe access for residents abutting thereto.
This would eliminate the use of the existing 12-foot laneway providing access to such
residences.
Upon reviewing the Application as submitted, it would appear that
same does meet the four tests of the Planning Act. I therefore see no reason, at law or
otherwise, why the Application should not be granted at this time and therefor fully
support the Application. With the construction of my home nearing completion, and Mr.
Butler completing his garage, the completion of the roadway by the Township will finally
bring to an end the inconveniences of construction for all residents affected thereby.
Your very truly,
KNJ:mr KLAUS N. JACOBY
P.Q Box 350, 34 Clapperton Street, Barrie, Ontario L4M 4T5 Tel (705)726-0238
Fox (705)726-9197
Page 249 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
C. April Stewart
300 Shanty Bay Road
Barrie, ON
L4M 1 Eb
Via Fax: (705) 487-0133
June 15, 2009
Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner
Township of Oro Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Oro, ON
LOL 2X0
Dear Mr. Farquharson:
Re: Barrie Terrace - Butler Prooosal
The purpose of this letter is to share my objection to the proposed addition to the Butler property on
Barrie Terrace. I understand that the Committee will be addressing this matter on June 18, 2009
and I do hope to attend In person.
I have three young daughter; that walk and bike along Barrie Terrace regularly. My youngest two
daughters catch the school bus every day at the comer of Barrie Terrace and Shanty Bay Road.
My concern is for the safety of my daughters, first and foremost.
Construction traffic onto Barrie Terrace is increasing. As a mother, I am uncomfortable about
numerous heavy vehicles travelling so closely to my children while they await the bus, not to
mention unknown tradesmen driving past my young daughters, which makes them feel vulnerable.
I have watched with concern this lovely historical road become a constant construction zone. The
noise is disruptive. The trees are disappearing. The houses keep getting bigger and the land looks
stripped.
I fail to see the benefit of the Butler home extending its footprint further onto an already tiny section
of Barrie Terrace. My youngest dau-qhter has lost her favourite playground, a little treed area she
enjoyed with her best friend i , who lives beside the Butler property. We do not have a
park for the girls and they enjoyed this little "fort" a great deal. The trees disappeared without
warning, replaced by construction mess, a deep hole, and a hazard to the children.
I thank you for considering my objection.
Rego s,
C. April Stewart
TiT'A P;'TPI)Rb:01 C)Fr,F, TRCMJ 1HG171 rAn1nJH1-Wn.1J 7rA-OT [roam r•r kinn
Page 250 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
GERALD E. NORMAN
LAW OFFICE
99 Bayfield Street, Box 732
Barrie, Ontario L4M 4Y5
Telephone: (705) 726 2772
FAX: (705) 734 1942
E-mail: geraldnorman@normanlawoffice.ca
June 12, 2009
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South, Box 100
Oro, ON LOL 2X0
Attention: Steven Farquharson
Dear Mr. Farquharson
RE: Committee of Adjustment Application by Rob Butler
Submission No. 2009-A-08
In connection with the above referenced minor variance application and our recent
telephone conversation this is to confirm that I am in agreement with application
provided that the Right of Way running in front of the properties owned by Norman,
Rowe, Butler, Whelan and Paige over Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 on Plan 51R-15199 be
abandon and access to all of the properties be provided directly to the extension of
Barrie Terrace being Part 1 on Plan 51R-32684.
As a matter of record in the event that a similar reduction of the minium front yard set
back is requested by Mr. and Mrs. Rowe at 65 Barrie Terrrace, I would be in
agreement with same as well but subject to the same condition as aforestated.
If further clarification is required please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you very much.
Y ery truly
GERALD E. NO~~
GEN: ds
Page 251 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
6117/2009
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Re: Butler/Frolick application for minor variance re front-yard
setback
I am the owner of the property at 291 Shanty Bay Road.
I am aware that Mr. Butler and Ms Frolick are asking for a variance
respecting their front-yard setback so that they can add a garage to their
house.
I have no objections to these plans.
Yours truly,
Carol Meissner
Page 252 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
6/17/2009
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Re: Butler/Frolick application for minor variance re
front-vard setback
I am the owner of the property at 71 Barrie Terrace.
I am aware that Mr. Butler and Ms Frolick are asking for a
variance respecting their front-yard setback so that they can
add a garage to their house.
I have no objections to these plans.
Additionally I will be releasing my right of way over their
property and others as these are not needed to get access to
c/" SiVcoe Building Centre
e1
Page 253 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
13 Apr 2009 11:14nM BERNICE WHELRN REALITY 1-705-739-8001 P•2
412/2009
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Re: Butler/Frolick a9plication for minor variance re
front-vard setback
I am the owner of the property at 69 Barrie Terrace, Mr.
Butler and Ms Frolick's immediate neighbour to the west.
I am aware that Mr. Butler and Ms Frolick are asking for a
variance respecting their front-yard setback so that they can
add a garage to their house.
I have no objections to these plans.
Additionally I will forego my right to an casement over their
property as it is no longer needed now that we have a public
road to service our properties.
Yours sincerely,
Yl
Bernice Whelan
Tel
Page 254 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
7/29/2009
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Re: Butler/Frolick application for minor variance re front-vard
setback
We are the owners of the property at
We are aware that Mr. Butler and Ms Frolick are asking for a variance
respecting their front-yard setback so that they can add a garage to their
house.
We have no objections to these plans.
Yours truly,
Signature
tom' M'l,~-' L
Signature
Page 255 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
August 19, 2009.
i At;G 1 9 2G09
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte ~
148 Line 7 South, Box 100 1
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
Attn: Steven Farquharson
Dear Mr. Farquharson,
RE: Committee of Adjustment Application, Mr Rob Butler, Christine Frolick
Submission No 2009-A-08
We are concerned citizens of our neighbourhood and environment. Community safety has become
an issue in the discussion of the 12' Right of Way road.
Following the Committee's recent decision to defer the Butler application pending resolution of the
deeds of Right of Way there was immediately a reaction from Mr. Butler. I have attached here an
email from Mr. Butler advising us to keep his Right of Way clear so that his contractors can use the
Right of Way road.
We recently stopped the trucks of several contractors who were attempting to use the 12' Right of
Way to drive their vehicles across our land to access the Butler's property, rather than using the new
municipal road. When we queried them as to why they would chose to use this rather small laneway
they each said they had received explicit instructions from the Butler's that the contractors should
use the laneway as much as possible. In other words, to enforce the Butler's Right of Way across
our land, but more so, to specifically harass us, in a dangerous and callous manner, because we have
long objected to the development on our road.
This is bullying of the lowest order, and community safety, and my daughter's safety are at risk.
Our children have access to the Right of Way road and with continued construction on both roads,
municipal and right of way, there is no green space or privacy for anyone to safely enjoy.
Although we have held out our hopes to retain continued use of the Right of Way we now plan to
release our Right of Way, and hope that Mr. Butler, as requested by Committee, will do the same.
Until Mr. Butler provides legal documentation of the release and abandon of their Right of Way we
ask the Co ittee to again deny or defer this application for variance.
Yours e t y,
L' a ose-Roe
65 Barrie Terrace
Attachment
Page 256 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
Page 1 of 1
Linda Ambrose
From: "Robert Butler"
To: "Linda Ambrose, "Hal Roe" _
Cc: "Christine Frolick"
Sent: June 30, 2009 3:21 PM
Subject: RE: C of A
Dear Ms Ambrose and Mr. Roe:
Until further notice kindly ensure that passage over our deeded right of way over 65 Barrie
Terrace is available at all times, in order that we and others, including visitors, family and
contractors, etc., have unobstructed access to our property.
Yours truly,
Rob Butler
Christne Frolick
Page 257 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
August 19, 2009.
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte i 7 Q9
148 Line 7 South, Box 100
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
Attn: Steven Farquharson
Dear Mr. Farquharson,
RE: Committee of Adjustment Application, Mr Rob Butler, Christine Frolick
Submission No 2009-A-08
The request for variance in no more than a request to use land that is not otherwise to be built upon.
The proposed addition is of such a large scale that it is not in keeping with the neighbourhood values
on our cul de sac road.
We specifically object to the second story living space above the garage. We object to the balcony
above the garage entrance.
We do not believe the small lot can support such a plan of a large structure. We believe the septic
systems are not up to the task of providing service for this plan. Although this property is currently
described as "two bedrooms" we believe that future owners might perceive opportunities to exceed
the allowable limits of the septic system and extend their living space into the "storage space with
loft" that now exists in the main house and will be extended into the "garage" loft second story.
Yours ry truly
~Har oe Linda Ambrose-Roe
65 Barrie Terrace
Page 258 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
August 19, 2009.
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South, Box 100 n_v 1 2109
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
I
Attn: Steven Farquharson
Dear Mr. Farquharson,
RE: Committee of Adjustment Application, Mr Rob Butler,
Submission No 2009-A-08
With the development of the new road at Barrie Terrace it is important that the municipality show
strong leadership in planning in order to minimize disruption and strife among those who directly
access the new road.
The former private road uses a system of easements and a Right of Way on private land.
Although the Township can build a road, even if it takes 10 years, that is nothing in the life of these
easements which last forever on our deeds.
If the new road is to be adopted, the easements must be eliminated. If the township is in charge of
allowing access to the new road, it must also be in charge of ensuring that each subscriber to the road
remove their Right of Way on the old road from their deed.
As a suggestion, the mechanism for removal of the Right of Way might involve an Application for a
Driveway Permit to connect to the new road. As part of the Driveway Permit process, the applicant
must show documented evidence to each deed showing the removal of the Right of Way.
The Township has a real opportunity to show leadership by enforcing and limiting access for each
driveway until the easement issues are eliminated.
Civil order and good governance are at stake in our neighbourhood.
We are asking the Committee of Adjustment and the Planning Department to recommend and adopt
a process o eliminate these Rights of Way.
Yo ery truly,
arold and Lin a oe
Page 259 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
08/f7/09 14:16 FAX 705 734 1942 GERALD NORMAN 4001/002
GERALD E. NORMAN
LAW OFFICE
99 Bayfield Street. Box 732
Barrie, Ontario L4M 4Y5
Telephone: (705) 726 2772
FAX: (705) 734 1942
E-mail: geraldnorman@normanlawoffice.ca
August 17, 2009
Via FAX Only To: 487-0133
The Towasbip of Oro-Medonte
Committee of Adjustment
148 Line 7 South
Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0
Attention: Mr. Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer
Dear Sir:
RE: Bustler/Frolick Application for Minor Variances
Submission No. 2009-A-08
Part of Lot 15, Registered Plan 1(67 Barrie Terrace)
Please be advised that I am the solicitor handling the registration of the Transfer,
Release & Abandonment of Easements ("Releases") along the Southerly 12' of the
Barrie Terrace Extension, as shown on Reference Ilan. 5IR-15199 and other plans.
This letter is to confirm that I have registered Releases from all parties with the Right
of Way over the Easement up to, but not including the property owned by Robert
Butler and Christine Frolick ("Butler/Frolick" In other words, the Right of Way has
been abandoned and extinguished by all parties over the Butler/Froliak property.
As you are aware, my wife, Carol and I own 57 Barrie Terrace, being one (1) of the
properties over which the Right of Way still exists. Butler/Frolick have a Right of
Way over the property owned by Harold Roe and Linda Ambrose-Roe ("Roe"), as
well as over ours and Roe has a Right of Way over our property.
Page 260 of 261
Agenda Item # 5i) - 2009-A-08 - Rob Butler 67 Barrie Terrace, Lot 15, Plan 1 V...
08/17/09 14:16 FAX 705 734 1942 GERALD NORMAN 0 002/002
Page 2.
The registered Releases are as follows:
ReleasorlTransferor: Instrument No.:
Bernice Whelan SC759470
Paige Custom Domes Inc. SC759471
Klaus Nick Jacoby SC759472
Township of Oro-Medonte SC759473
Carol Meissner SC759474
The respective mortgagees registered on title with respect to the aforesaid Releases
have consented. If you require copies of the registered Releases, please give my
assistant, Yvette a call.
With respect to the herein Application for Minor Variance, I have no objection
to same insofar as the Right of Way over the SutlerfFrolick property is
abandoned and it is clearly minor in its nature.
If you have any questions with respect to any of the foregoing, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Thank you very much.
Yo very truly,
i
Gerald B. Norman
ye
cc: Alf Dick, solicitor for Butler/Frolick (by fax)
Page 261 of 261