Loading...
06 17 2010 C of A AgendaTHE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE -°'`~ COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT A ~ MEETING AGENDA '~' ~ COUNCIL CHAMBERS ~Tow~t Thursday, June 17, 2010 nrvwd Herritage, F_xcitinR Futrere 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 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3-18 a) Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, May 20, 2010. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: 19-33 a) 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshore Road East, Lot 81, Plan 952 (Former Township of Oro) Relief from interior side yard setback. 34-43 b) 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd 280 Ridge Road East, Concession 8, Part of Lot 23 and 24 (Former Township of Oro) Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. 44-59 c) 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, Concession 9, Lot 13 (Former Township of Oro) Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. 60-72 d) 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, Plan M723, Lot 17 (Former Township of Oro) Relief from maximum floor area. 73-85 e) 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail, Plan 51 M-324 Lot 24 (Former Township of Oro) Relief from rural residential one exception 10 (RUR1*10) zone. 86-101 f) 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Forest Road, Plan 709, Lot 30 (Former Township of Oro) Relief from shoreline residential (SR) zone. 102-123 g) 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lots 1 and 2, Range 2 (Former Township of Oro) Page 1 of 164 Page 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: Relief from residential limited service (RLS) zone. 124-135 h) 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 North, East Part of Lot 11, Concession 11, 51 R-13066, Part 2 (Former Township of Medonte) Relief from setback to environmental protection (EP) zone. 136-145 i) 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Former Township of Oro) Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. 146-155 j) 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of Lot 4, Concession 13 (Former Township of Medonte) Boundary adjustment. 156-164 k) 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part of Block A, Plan M-30 Lot addition/boundary adjustment. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. NEXT MEETING DATE To be determined. 8. ADJOURNMENT a) Motion to Adjourn Page 2 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE ~~ ~ COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT To~t~rsLipv(~~ ,J MEETING MINUTES ~' '_.G'fLQf~~~ Council Chambers Prard Nrrir~r4e•, E.~ritia,E l=anur Thursday, May 20, 2010 TIME: 9:31 a.m. Present: Bruce Chappell, Chair Lynda Aiken Roy Hastings Michelle Lynch Regrets: Garry Potter Staff present: Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer/Intermediate Planner Marie Brissette, Deputy Secretary Treasurer/Committee Coordinator 1. OPENING OF THE MEETING BY THE CHAIR Bruce Chappell assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order. 2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda Motion No. CA100520-1 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment agenda for Thursday, May 20, 2010 be received and adopted. Carried. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST None declared. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, April 15, 2010. Motion No. CA100520-2 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, April 15, 2010 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 1 of 16 Page 3 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2010-B-12 -Ralph and Joyce Hayes, 1307 Line 3 North, Concession 4, East Half Lot 12 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Nyle Mcllveen and Shirley Partridge, agents, were present on behalf of the applicants. Motion No. CA100520-3 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to Consent Application 2010-B-12, being a technical severance, which proposes sever approximately 457 metres (1502 feet) of frontage along Line 4 North, with a lot depth of approximately 670 metres (2200 feet) and a lot area of approximately 39 hectares (98 acres), and the lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 20 hectares (50 acres), 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 and submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the applicant; 3. And 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 2 of 16 Page 4 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 b) 2010-B-13 -Ralph and Joyce Hayes, 1307 Line 3 North, Concession 4, West Half Lot 12 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Nyle Mcllveen and Shirley Partridge, agents, were present on behalf of the applicants. Motion No. CA100520-4 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to Consent Application 2010-B-13, being a technical severance to sever approximately 123 metres (403 feet) on Line 3 North, with a lot depth of approximately 414 metres (1360 feet) and a lot area of approximately 5.6 hectares (14 acres), and the lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 20 hectares (50 acres), 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 and submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the applicant; 3. And 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 16 Page 5 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 c) 2010-B-06 -Coulson Ridge Estates Ltd, Concession 7, Lot 3 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Bill Stonkus, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA100520-5 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010- B-06, in order for the applicant to complete an Environmental Impact Study (EIS), to the satisfaction of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. Carried. d) 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd, 280 Ridge Road East, Concession 8, Part of Lot 23 and 24 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Lynda and Doug Crawford, applicants, and Shirley Partridge, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100520-6 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010- 8-07 to obtain comments from the County of Simcoe regarding the existing entrance for the proposed severed parcel on Ridge Road East. Carried. Page 4 of 16 Page 6 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 e) 2010-B-08 -John and Pauline Warnica, 25 Baycrest Drive, Plan 1069, Lot 9 (Former Township of Oro), Boundary adjustment. Bernard Keating, agent, was present on behalf of the applicants. Motion No. CA100520-7 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to Consent Application 2010-B-08, being a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 9.5sq.m (103 sq.ft.) from the subject property being 25 Baycrest Dr. to the adjacent lot to the west being 35 Penetanguishene Road. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. The subject land contains a section of the armour stone retaining wall associated with the existing pool at 35 Penetanguishene Road, 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 Lot 8, Plan 1069, 35 Penetanguishene Road, roll #4346-010-006-10400, 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 provides an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. And 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 5 of 16 Page 7 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 f) 2010-A-12 -Catherine Cudmore, 35 Penetanguishene Road, Plan 1069, Lot 8 (Former Township of Oro), Recognize an existing pool that was constructed within the required rear yard setback. Bernard Keating, agent, was present on behalf of the applicants. Motion No. CA100520-8 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants Variance Application 2010- A-12, being to reduce the required minimum rear yard setback to a pool from the required 2.0 metres to 1.03 metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the pool 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. Carried. g) 2010-B-09 -Brian Strachan, 1247 Line 8 North, Concession 9, Lot 13 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Brian Strachan, applicant, and Shirley Partridge, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100520-9 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010- B-09 in order for proper notice to be given in accordance with the Planning Act. Carried. Page 6 of 16 Page 8 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 h) 2010-B-10 -Gordon Rankin, 3750 Line 10 North, East Half of Lot 3, Concession 10 (Former Township of Medonte), Boundary adjustment. Gordon Rankin, applicant, and Shirley Partridge, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100520-10 Moved by Aiken, Seconded Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to 2010-B-10, being to permit a lot addition/boundary adjustment. The proposed lot addition will result in an increase of approximately 34 metres on Line 10 North, a lot depth of approximately 94 metres and an area of approximately 0.6 hectares. The subject lands are proposed to be added to the adjacent lands to the north being 3776 Line 10 North. No new building lot is proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. An easement is also being placed on the enhanced lands being 3776 Line 10, for access to the mutual well, 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 3776 Line 10 North and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 3. That the applicant prepare and submit for review by the municipality a Reference Plan showing an easement for access to the mutual well located at 3776 Line 10 North. 4. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 5. That the applicant's solicitor provides an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 6. And That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Carried. Page 7 of 16 Page 9 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 i) 2010-B-11 - Claro Construction Ltd, 1441 Line 4 North, Concession 5, Part of Lot 12 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Darcy and Wilson Claro, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA100520-11 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010- 6-11, in order for the applicant to complete an Environmental Impact Study (EIS), to the satisfaction of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. Carried. Page 8 of 16 Page 10 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 j) 2010-B-14 -Allan Shelswell, 127 Line 12 North, Concession 13, Lot 9 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Allan Shelswell, applicant, and Shirley Partridge, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100520-12 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Consent Application 2010-B-14, subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor and submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant; 3. And That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Defeated. Motion No. CA100520-13 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment denies Consent Application 2010- 6-14, for the reason that it does not meet the technical severance polices of the Township and County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Carried. Page 9 of 16 Page 11 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 k) 2010-B-15 -Robert Drury, 661 Penetanguishene Road, Lot 12, Concession 1 (Former Township of Oro), Boundary adjustment. No one present on behalf of the application. Motion No. CA100520-14 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010-B-15, in order for there to be further discussions with the applicant in regards to the appropriate Planning application. Once this discussion with the applicant is completed, then the Planning Department can fully evaluate the proposed setbacks. Carried. Page 10 of 16 Page 12 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 I) 2010-B-16 -Michael and Katherine Vandergeest, 2555 Dunns Line, Concession 14, Lot 14 (Former Township of Medonte), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Michael and Katherine Vandergeest, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA100520-15 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to Consent Application, 2010-B-16 for a technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands to be severed would have a lot frontage along Dunn's Line of approximately 167 metres (550 feet), with a lot depth of approximately 670 metres (2200 feet) and a lot area of approximately 10.1 hectares (25 acres). The lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 58 hectares (143 acres), 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 and submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant; 3. And 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 11 of 16 Page 13 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 m) 2010-B-17 -Ronald Briggs, 834 Line 7 North, Concession 7, Part of Lot 14 and 15 (Former Township of Oro), Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. Doug Briggs and Shirley Partridge, agents, were present on behalf of the applicant. Motion No. CA100520-16 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval to Consent Application 2010-B-17, being for a technical severance to recreate a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along 15/16 Sideroad of approximately 343 metres (1126 feet), a lot depth of approximately 733 metres (2406 feet) and a lot area of approximately 25 hectares (62 acres). The lands to be retained would have frontage along 15/16 Sideroad West of 670 metres (2200 feet), and 603 (1980 feet) on Line 7 North, a lot depth of approximately 670 metres (2200 feet), and a lot area of approximately 40 hectares (100 acres), 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 and submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant; 3. And 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 12 of 16 Page 14 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 n) 2010-A-10 -Anna Gordon, 11 Stanley Avenue, Plan 626, Lot 6 (Former Township of Oro), Relief from setback from average high water mark of Lake Simcoe and front yard setback. Alex and Stan Gordon, agents, were present on behalf of the applicant. Motion No. CA100520-17 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2010-A-10, being to demolish the existing dwelling and to construct a two storey dwelling being located approximately 17 metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe and 1.5 metres from the west interior side lot line. The applicant is also proposing an attached deck to the rear of the dwelling which is proposed to be located approximately 15.2 metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe and to construct a detached accessory building, which is to be located approximately 3.7 metres from the front lot line, subject to the following conditions: 1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provides 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) That the proposed dwelling be located no closer than approximately 17 metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe; b) That the proposed dwelling be no closer than approximately 1.5 metres from the west interior side lot line; c) The proposed deck be located no closer than approximately 15.2 metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe d) That the proposed detached garage be located no closer than approximately 3.7 metres to the front lot line 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtains any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; 4. That the applicant obtains approval from the Township with regard to the sewage system prior to issuance of any building permit; 5. And That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 13 of 16 Page 15 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 o) 2010-A-13 -John Johnson Construction Ltd, Part of Lot 1, Concession 14, Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision 43T-93003 (Former Township of Oro), Relief from the required minimum lot frontage. No one present on behalf of the application. Motion No. CA100520-18 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants Variance Application 2010- A-13, being to reduce the required minimum lot frontage of proposed Lots 9 through 15 of Plan of Subdivision 43-OM-93003 from 30 metres to 28 metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the lot frontages be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 2. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13.; 3. That the applicant obtains any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; 4. And That the applicant applies for a Red Lined Revision Application to the Draft Plan approved Plan of Subdivision 43-OM-93003 reflecting the reduced minimum lot frontage as presented in Application 2010-A-13. Carried. Page 14 of 16 Page 16 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 p) 2010-A-11 -Dave and Valerie Hamill, 1868 Mount St. Louis Road E, Concession 13, Part Lot 9, RP 51 R2880 PT PART 1 (Former Township of Medonte), Relief from maximum height and maximum floor area. Dave Hamill, applicant, was present. Marika Csap, neighbour, noted that the property is lower than the highway and tree covered, therefore the proposal would provide privacy and would not be evasive. Motion No. CA100520-19 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants application 2010-A-11, being to grant an increase in the maximum floor area for an accessory building, from 100 square metres to approximately 120.4 square metres, and to grant an increase in the maximum height of an accessory building or structure, from 4.5 metres to approximately 5.6 metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That notwithstanding Section 5.1.6 and 5.1.4 of Zoning By-law 97-95, the structure shall otherwise comply with all other provisions for detached accessory buildings, as required under Section 5 of the Zoning By-law; 2. That the floor area of the detached garage not exceeds approximately 120.4 square metres; 3. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on the drawings submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the floor area of the detached accessory structure not exceed approximately 120.4 square metres and that the height of the detached accessory structure not exceed approximately 5.6 metres; 5. And That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 15 of 16 Page 17 of 164 4a) -Motion to Adopt Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeti... Committee of Adjustment Minutes -Thursday, May 20, 2010 q) 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown, 2299 Lakeshore Road East, Lot 81, Plan 952(Former Township of Oro), Relief from interior side yard setback. Michael Brown, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA100520-20 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Aiken It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Consent Application 2010- A-14, in order for proper notice to be given in accordance to the Planning Act. Carried. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. NEXT MEETING DATE Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT a) Motion to Adjourn Motion No. CA100520-21 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 1:39 p.m. Carried. Bruce Chappell, Chair Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer Page 16 of 16 Page 18 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... C4s~.,: ,.~~1 c~orite 1'mu,f H.riru.~r, E..riring Funvr TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-14 Alan Wiebe, Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (Michael and Kelly Brown) Plan 952 Lot 81 Roil #: , 2299 Lakeshore Road East R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-012-12300 D13-40440 REGIUIRED 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 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 distance from the portion of the dwelling proposed to be reconstructed be located no closer than approximately 1.5 metres from the interior side lot line to the east; 3. That a permit be obtained from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. 4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010-A-14, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to reducing the minimum required interior side yard setback provision in the SR Zone. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to demolish a portion of the existing dwelling and reconstruct that portion of the dwelling with a greater height than the existing portion to be demolished. The portion of the existing dwelling proposed to be demolished and reconstructed is currently located within the required interior side yard setback. The property is in the Shoreline Residential (SR} Zone. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Table B1 of Zoning By-law 97-95: Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-14 Page 1 of 7 Page 19 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... Required Proposed Table B1-Minimum Required Interior Side Yard Setback: 3.0 metres 1.5 metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.2 of the Plan states that "permitted uses on lands designated Shoreline ... are single detached dwellings". Therefore, the demolition and reconstruction of a portion of the existing 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 located in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. Permitted uses in the SR Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. The purpose of the interior side yard setback is to provide access to the rear yard of the property, and to provide a degree of separation between neighbouring dwellings. It is noted that there is an existing cedar hedge along the east interior side yard, with the exception of land between the existing dwelling and the east interior side yard. A site visit confirmed that the existing dwelling is located within the east interior side yard, which appears to be approximately 1.5 metres from the east interior side yard lot line. Table B1 of the existing Zoning By-Law (Zoning By-Law 97-95), which came into effect on November 5, 1997, requires a minimum interior side yard setback of 3.0 metres for lands in the SR Zone. The applicant, however, states that the portion of the dwelling proposed for demolition and reconstruction was initially erected in 1967, and that the portion of the dwelling to remain unmodified was initially constructed in 1977. Since the date of construction of the portion of the dwelling proposed for demolition and reconstruction precedes the date Zoning By-Law 97-95 came into effect, section 5.16.1 of this Zoning By-Law is applied, which states as follows: "5.16.1 Enlargement, Repair or Renovation A non-complying building or structure may be enlarged, repaired, replaced or renovated provided that the enlargement, repair, replacement or renovation: "a) does not further encroach into a required yard or into the setback area from the average high water mark of 15 metres (49.2 feet) from Bass Lake or 20 metres (65.5 feet) from Lake Simcoe. (see section 5.28) "b) does not increase the amount of f/oor area or volume in a required yard; "c) does not in any other way increase a situation of non-compliance; and, "d} complies with all other applicable provisions of this By-law." The portion of the existing dwelling proposed for demolition and reconstruction is not in compliance with Zoning By-Law 97-95 for the minimum interior side yard setback for lands in the SR Zone. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-14 Page 2 of 7 Page 20 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... The height of the existing dwelling, as viewed from the road, is approximately 4 metres (approximately 13 feet) and, as viewed from the lake, the height of the existing dwelling is less than 7 metres (approximately 23 feet). The proposed demolition and reconstruction of a portion of the existing dwelling seeks to add a third level to the dwelling and increase its height to approximately 7.4 metres (24 feet 4 inches), as viewed from the road, and to approximately 9.4 metres (30 feet 9 inches), as viewed from the lake. This proposed increase in height and its associated floor area on the third level would extend within the interior side yard setback, and would be partially hidden from the neighbor on the east side of the property by the row of cedar hedges . The reconstruction proposed includes the installation of windows on the second and third levels, and privacy issues for the neighbouring dwelling to the east are anticipated. This proposed increase in the height of the dwelling is in compliance with Table B1 of Zoning By-Law 97-95, for the maximum height of a dwelling within the SR Zone. Therefore, although the proposed demolition and reconstruction of the portion of the existing dwelling located within the east interior side yard setback would "increase a situation of non-compliance" pursuant to section 5.16.1 of Zoning By-Law 97-95, byway of the construction of a third level within the minimum required side yard setback, the variance requested is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law in that: a) the height of the proposed reconstruction of the dwelling is within the 11.0 metre maximum height for the SR Zone, per Table B1 of the Zoning By-Law; b) the proposed reconstruction of the dwelling does not increase the first storey floor area occupied by the dwelling on the property, per section 5.16.1 b) of the Zoning By-Law; and c) the proposed reconstruction of the dwelling complies with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-Law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the !ot? With the existing dwelling having a first storey floor area of approximately 131 square metres (1,408 square feet), and the proposed reconstructed dwelling having the same first storey floor area, the resulting dwelling wil! cover approximately 35 per cent of the lot. The Zoning By-Law is silent in regards to any lot coverage provision for single detached dwellings. The addition is proposed to be larger than the existing dwelling with the addition of a third floor, increasing the floor area of the dwelling while not exceeding the maximum height for single detached dwellings in the SR Zone. Based on the above, the application to further encroach and add volume to a building within the required interior side yard setback through the addition of a third Level on the existing dwelling appears to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Further, the cedar hedge between the rear yards of the subject property and the neighbor to the east would appear to contribute in addressing privacy concerns from the neighbor to the east. The applicant is proposing to maintain the 1.5 metre setback as the portion of the existing dwelling currently located within the minimum required setback. Is the variance minor? As this application is anticipated to not have an adverse affect on the character of the surrounding residential area, and the neighboring dwellings, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-14 Page 3 of 7 Page 21 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... I CONSULTATIONS: t Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department - Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) -Permit required from LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to issuance of a municipal building permit ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Exterior Elevations CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2010-A-14, to expand a non- conforming structure and to have an interior side yard setback reduced from the required 3.0 metres to 1.5 metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: ~ ~~~- ~~-~ ~ ©~ Alan Wiebe Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Planner Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-14 Page 4 of 7 Page 22 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-14 (Michael and Kelly Brown) ® SUBJECT LANDS ~ e- W Z J .~~ /~ /rJ! i i ~~~~Q . ~r i ~~ ,t i rJ\ ~' ! ,~ t 1 j 1~^ ,`l J ~ / ' fA~ l t ~~ ~~~/ `' ~ 2299 Lakeshore Road East ~~ f~ '`~ LAKE SI MCf?E 0 37.5 75 f 50 225 304 Meters Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Appiication No. 2010-A-14 Page 5 of 7 Page 23 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... ,...~, peg0 SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2010-A-14 (Michael and Kelly Brown} ~ ,.>~, + ~ sa.dn~ro.a _~. . 1 I ~- i OrnaMl I Gr+wl i K ~ 1 ~ ~ i~. I..ii $~ I + +' j j ( i , ~ snq ~ t~ • 1 ~ ~' ~ cep. ~ ~ ' i / I ' { j i ~ f i f rl ~ ~.--..__..._ _. L._ I ~ t onwee ~ !t w.~ f _... _ ; ,: ~ I ~~oh ` J i~ Zsk,ry. ~ I ( ~ .;...c ~ TT r enanrR I F .-~ ~{'~ Irl SgAic i I ~ , .. ... r ,si , Trek ~ s m i .....~ t.... .... L.._ I ~. ~) Partiond rrlmanoimsbw '~ j `:. roir en r~iouee wd reFyivai i ' ~ Fikk/ hA 0 _ _^Frb L y j ~.- ~ I ,... .~.~sn ~~ Skrp 6I . ~ 6nerwfrn f ~ t a i eoonia« ,___ W ._ ..._ _.k ._. i__ ~ ,. ~~ L Development Services Application No. 2010-A-14 Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Page 6 of 7 Page 24 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... SCHEDULE 3: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2010-A-14 (Michael and Kelly Brown) ~ ~ ~=~'y ;j i ~i i I i i i I i. i 23'-N' __. _..... 3tY-9.... . 1. ,, i ;: z., .> __- S1 Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-14 Page 7 of 7 Page 25 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... Page 26 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... Page 27 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... y,, . i~ ` ° "~ ~ ` $ _ r ... ,, O ~ ~* fi 'tfi ~ ~ '- a -, .... t,~ ~.i X.s". 3~3 ~ ~ k ~' ..lam' ; _ . ( r~n . L ~ ... x •~ ~1M ~~ ~[.N'~ ya. ~~ O ~ ~ ~~ ~ iM, ?~ ~F ae.... _ . ~ r 1 ~ 1~f1 ~ / ~~tr ~~ e4~~ ~ t ~i } ~ } y~ ® t p9 1 , T ~ iyy 7 ~X - ~r r f W ^ r. ~. ~~ + /~ ~ :~` 1~+` t _. Page 28 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... s' 6 a ~'~ d' ~- y ;~ ~ :~ i" L ~ v .y ~., {,i _ k : ~ . ~ ~~ ' ~". 7'€A .J~ I w~ '~, ~~~ ~ ~.. ~3 ~ 9 1~ ~ . ,. ~ ~ r av ~ ~ _ ~ S ~; } yis~a s.;~ r ~ ~ I ~ s ~ ~~{r,~~ , ,, - •~ ~~1", ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ 3`~~ i ~# i ' ~ $, ~ ~ r E )~~~~i ~ # ~ 71 ~ ~ ,i ~,1{ s ~y ~$ ~~ ~ , t i s ~ Y a ~: ~ i ,. ,. `,~ ~~ { ~~ ~ ~.d t~,... vi j O ~ i y ' f ~ ~ ~ , ~ i ~ ~ , ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~-~//~~ ~ ~~ " ~ ,.,~ A ~.:. •X W k4. ' ~: ~- ,~! i ~, . ,k ~.~ { ~~~:.. ,:~~.~=~ ~ Page 29 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... t `~ -~ ~ ~~ at ..... -. .s '~ ~} k'3~F ~.. " ~ ' e ; ,~ ~ `T' Y.. ~. 1 ~ i~ g~~ t~ a ~ c ~ P ~'t7 l A a ~: o ~: ,~ m ~--~ - ~~, ~; r,. i.. ' s Q~ ~ x } +~c++ x~ b N a ~ J ~ ~/~ {{ ~ rc.. e ~ f q~ ~~y' { O i ~ ~ \ / x y... N Y ~' Ff ~~ O ~ yyip ~ _ ~-'.}~, ~ ': d' k 1 ~~~~ ~ ~ . ~ N L. X '~ W ;` i ~ ~~ ~; 1% ~ ~ v ,~ , £ ~ ~ ~ f ;~% f ~ `,`s,`~ ~,. ~ '~ t~'f ~. - ~, i Page 30 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... Page 31 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... ~~ ~ ~.. ~. ~` •, w, , s. ~.~ °.. ~! ~ ~ t. < S, ].'. , 4 O .• ' ~ W rt t ~~ ~, ~..: ; . ~' ~ ', a ~~ r ~ ~ ~, ~ Q 0 ~ ~ ° £. ~ o o ~ w ~ ~ _ ~ W ~Y V / ~i ~ . ~,1~', Page 32 of 164 5a) - 2010-A-14 -Michael and Kelly Brown 2299 Lakeshor... U a ~: ~" .,.~ ;~' } ~, ~~ ;r; ~~ ,., *. ~~ ~ M W ~~ ~ c '~ l~ ~ "' f ~ ~~ c a . a ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a #. o - L . N ~ 3 ~~ ~ ,t. 0 ~ ~ . -~: . N 5: .X W -~ ~"}~k. 4 Zf' T f ~ Page 33 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 -Ridgoro Farms Ltd... ,. 73unrhip r( y~ (~~v~.~~~~c~onte 1'inud Hrnlaeq F...arlrinp Fuune TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-B-07 Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 Ridgoro Farms Ltd Concession 8 Part of Lot 23 and 24 Rall #: , (Former Township of Oro), R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-009-0890 280 Ridge Road East D10-40426 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent Application 2010-B-07 is for a technical severance to recreate a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along Ridge Road East of approximately 121 metres (398 feet), a lot depth of approximately 684 metres (2244 feet) and a lot area of approximately 24 hectares (60 acres). The application appeared before the Committee of Adjustment at the May 20, 2010 meeting however was deferred in order to receive comments from the County of Simcoe in regards to the existing entrance to the proposed severed lands. The County of Simcoe has since provided comments in regards to the entrance which have been included in this report for the Committee's reference. The lands to be retained would have frontage along Ridge Road East of approximately 693 metres (2273 feet) and on Line 8 North of approximately 450 metres (1476 feet), a lot depth of approximately 587 metres (1925 feet), and a lot area of approximately 38 hectares (96 acres). The retained parcel currently has an existing dwelling and agricultural buildings. The applicant has submitted a historical timeline of the property, which has been attached for the Committee's reference. The West half of Lot 24 (severed lands) was conveyed to Ridgoro Farms Ltd in 1977 at which point they merged in title under the applicants name. The summary of the deeds which support this timeline are attached to this report. ANALYSIS: The purpose of consent application 2010-B-07 is for a technical severance to re-create lots which previously existed as separate conveyable parcels of land. The Township's Official Plan contains policies (Section D2.2.3) which permit Planning Staff and the Committee to consider technical severances. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-07 Page 1 of 3 Page 34 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... FINANCIAL: Not POLICIES/LEGISLATION: OFFICIAL PLAN The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is currently zoned AgriculturaURural (A/RU} and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The proposed severed and retained lots would continue to comply with the provisions of the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone, as the minimum lot area and frontage have been met. CONSULTATIONS: Public Works Department- Building Department- Engineering Department - County of Simcoe -Comments Attached Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority- ATTACHMENTS: Schedule #1-Location Map CONCLUSION: At the request of the applicant Consent Application 2010-8-07 be deferred in order for there to be further discussions with staff in regards to the submission of a revised application. Respectfully submitted: -~ ~~ - ~ Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: ~'~ -~~ Andria Leigh, MCIP RPP Director of Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-07 Page 2 of 3 Page 35 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-B-07(Ridgoro Farms Ltd) ® Proposed Severed lands Proposed Retained~d a d5soll t Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-07 Page 3 of 3 Page 36 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... ~~ J tI? C~ a 0 ago ._ ~. o -~ m o N a N Page 37 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd Page 38 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... ~,~:: i~~ ^~ ~ ~~~ : ~ `~~ ~ L ~..L 0 h ~•~J ..... I..L ~ ~...~.~ N ~ m N o ~ o 1 "' c ~"~ cB ~ N Page 39 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd ~^~ ~..L ~ Q L ~ ~ o • - +~ ~ _ ~ `~ m i o __ - __ 0 N Page 40 of 164 5b} - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... . ~t \\ 1" f-.. o ~ ~ -. / P ~ ' 'J ~ O ~ ~ , ' , - `` :, y ' ~ _ E 1~1' t O ~~ > ~r + t }_ - ~ .) ~iin'~ ~ ~i 4~yWV • 1 ~4.~, ~ ` - - ~ +4 ~. i. A ' fi'a t .3 i- ~ - r • ~ ~ ' i. .. .. e c _5 4 ,.. 1~ ` a • ' ~ a ~ .~. ~ ~~ , ~ '~~ '' ; 3 ~ ~ ~ ,~ ,~ a ~ .'~ ~I ~ ~ ~ Page 41 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... ~~ 0 a ~ ~ ~~ 0 m 0 0 N ~ .~ `• ~ r ~ .4 ~ ~ ~, ,, -~~ o ~ ~;~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ oz ~ •~ ~ 0 ~•. ~ ~' ~~~~ ~i. a v - _~ 8 0 - ~ 1 4~ ~ i ~ ~~ f o o a c'a t k ~ a s z ~ ~~ ~ c%c`s c% ~s i ~ . ~~.~ ~~ ~1 1 ~~ • --~.-~« L c~ •.. M -{ ' • Q 1 {'~ ~=YZ I a~ i } OSLT• 73Q1B v .g ~~ ~~~ .~ • Page 42 of 164 5b) - 2010-B-07 - Ridgoro Farms Ltd... ct9t a ~ ~ S ` N ~ r ~ ~ f`1 " J ~ ~ Sf V1 ~ ~ ~; ~ ,~a~ ._ L ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~N 3 ~+ ~ ~ ~ o C s ~ ~ -~ ~ u ~~ 6 ~ c ,- ~~ ~~ ~~ ~-° ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ t ~-~ 6.. ~'~ ~2P~ -i'~~ . 7~it b-tf'vJ~j~j/ ' [I •~ i .' ~~ ~ - ` T O x ~M~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .]tea O / V c ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~+ `} ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ „~ ...._, ~ o, N ~ ~ `~ Page 43 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... .~-' .. T,~.~,~i,.~~ ~L~ C ~ ~ . ~ ~ 1 t. . r~ c lo. z t c !§..J Nm/n~~; Eicrrigy Furnre TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-B-09 Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 Brian Robert Strachan Concession 9 Lot 13 Roll #: , (Former Township of Oro), R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-004-0200 1247 Line 8 N D10-40427 I REGlUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That three copies of a Reference Ptan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor and submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; Furthermore, the legal description and the parcel description of the recreated parcels be identical to that contained in the original deed and must be so designated on a Reference Plan to be provided by the Applicant; 3. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The purpose of the consent application is for a technical severance to recreate a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along Line 8 North of approximately 279 metres (917 feet), a lot depth of approximately 749 metres (917 feet) and a lot area of approximately 21 hectares (52 acres). The lands to be retained would also have frontage along Line 8 North of 422 metres (1386 feet), a lot depth of approximately 759 metres (2493 feet), and a lot area of approximately 22 hectares (54 acres). The retained parcel currently has an existing agricultural building. The application appeared before the Committee on May 20, 2010, but was deferred until the proper notice of hearing requirements under the Planning Act was fulfilled. The application has since met these requirements and the application can now be heard by the Committee. The applicant has submitted a historical timeline of the property, which has been attached for the Committee's reference. The lots were separate conveyable lots until 1997, when they merged in title Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-09 Page 1 of 7 Page 44 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... under the applicants name. The summary of the deeds which support this timeline are attached to this report. ANALYSIS: The purpose of consent application 2010-B-09 is for a technical severance to recreate lots which previously existed as separate conveyable parcels of land. The Township's Official Plan contains policies (Section D2.2.3) which permit Planning Staff and the Committee to consider technical severances. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow the Committee to consider applications to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title maybe be permitted, provided that the Committee of Adjustment is satisfied that the following criteria have been met. Planning Staff's opinion of how the criteria have been met are outlined below. a) Was once separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act; As per the attached deed, in 1974 the two parcels were created by way of severance by the Township of Oro. Notwithstanding this the provisions in the Planning Act which ensure that once a lot created by consent always a lot were not incorporated into the Planning Act until March 1979. On this basis the subsequent acquisition of the proposed severed and retained parcels by Robert Strachan and conveyance to his son Brian Strachan has resulted in the technical merger of these parcels. b) The merging of the lots was unintentional and was not merged as a requirement of a previous planning approval; The parcels were merged together as a result of Robert Strachan having ownership of both parcels. c) Is of the same shape and size as the lot which once existed as a separate conveyable lot; A review of the deeds determined that the proposed parcels are the same size and shape that existed at the time they were separate lot. The Township will require that a surveyor confirm the new lots match the original description. d) Can be adequately serviced by on-site sewage and water system; The parcels should be of an adequate size to permit the establishment of private services, this would be further confirmed prior to the issuance of any building permits. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-09 Page 2 of 7 Page 45 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... e) Fronts on a public road that is maintained year-round by public authority; The parcels front onto Line 8 North, and is maintained year-round by a public authority. f) There are no public interest served by maintaining the property as a single conveyable parcel; The public interest would not be affected by this proposal. g) Conforms with Section D2.2. i of this Plan; and, Section D2.2.1 of the Plan is discussed below. h) Subject to the access policies of the relevant road authority At the time a building permit is applied for an entrance permit would also be required from the Township for access for the severed lands from Line 8 North Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains the policies required to assess the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: a) Fronts on and wil! be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed severed lands and retained lands would have frontage on Line 8 North, which are public roadways maintained year-round by the Township of Oro-Medonte. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; The properties will not have access to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; This application proposes to recreate a lot. Significant traffic volume will not be generated by any additional dwellings if located on the proposed lots. The applicant will be required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Public Works Department. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-la and is compatible with adjacent uses; The application proposes to recreate a lot that once existed, which has inadvertently been merged on title. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage along Line 8 North of approximately 279 metres (917 feet), a lot depth of approximately 749 metres (917 feet) and a lot area of approximately 21 hectares (52 acres). The lands to be retained would also have frontage along Line 8 North of 422 metres (1386 feet), a lot depth of approximately 759 metres (2493 feet), and a lot area of approximately 21 hectares (54 acres). The retained parcel currently has an existing agricultural building. The minimum required lot area for an agricultural use in the A/RU Zone is 2.0 hectares. It has been noted that the proposed severed lot does meet the lot area and frontage requirements of the A/RU Zone. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-09 Page 3 of 7 Page 46 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Any future development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, where the construction of new buildings may be subject to the completion of a lot grading and drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. g) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; The retained lands, will meet with the minimum required lot frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-law. No development applications are active adjacent to the subject lands, and as such no negative impacts with respect to access are anticipated as a result of this consent. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; The rear portion of the severed lands is regulated by Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, by letter dated May 12, 2010 planning staff has advised that have no objection to the application. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; Any future development would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. On this basis, the application is considered to be appropriate and generally conforms to the Official Plan. Countv Official Plan In analyzing this Consent Application 2010-B-09, Township staff reviewed both the County Official Plan currently in effect as well as the Official Plan adopted by County Council in November 2008. Specifically, Section 3.6 contains the Agricultural policies which are required to be considered in assessing the proposed technical severance application. Section 3.6.6 states that new lots for agricultural purposes should generally not be less than 35 hectares or the original survey lot size whichever is lesser. As stated above, these two lots merged in 1997 and prior to that time were separately conveyable as an approximate 21 hectare and approximate 22 hectare parcel utilized for agricultural purposes and therefore it is considered appropriate to re-create these parcels at the land size previously in existence. The proposed technical severance would be consistent with the surrounding land uses and has been determined that it conforms to the policies of the County Plan. The adopted County Plan continues to include the policies discussed above and therefore, it is our opinion that the proposed development generally conforms to the policies of both County Official Plans (approved and adapted). Provincial Policv Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Section 2.3 contains the policies applicable to prime agricultural areas. Specifically Policy 2.3.4 contains the policies to be considered for lot creation in prime agricultural areas. Policy 2.3.4.1 (a) Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-09 Page 4 of 7 Page 47 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... states that lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for agricultural uses provided that the lots are of a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use common in the area and are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations. The proposed Consent is intended to re-create a parcel of land which was previously separately conveyable and contains 21 hectares (52 acres) of land provide for a use that was intended on an existing lot. The proposed and retained lots for agricultural use have common lot areas as other lots of record in the surrounding area and provide sufficient lot area to ensure flexibility for future changes in the type of agricultural operation. In addition, the Township's comprehensive Zoning By-law requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 hectares for agricultural use and 4.0 hectares for a specialized agricultural use. The proposed lot size of the severed lands would be able to accommodate both of these types of agricultural uses as discussed further below in this report. In Policy 1.6, "Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities", addresses issues such as the use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities should be optimized, wherever feasible, before consideration is given to developing new infrastructure and public service facilities. The lot would be serviced by an individual well and private septic system at the time that any buildings were proposed to be constructed. The proposed Consent application which provides for the technical severance to re-create a lot which was separately conveyable and based on the proposed lot area of 21 hectares (52 acres) could be utilized for a variety of agricultural uses and is considered to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Places to Grow The application has been reviewed with reference to the Place to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. The proposed consent as stated above would re-create a lot which was previously separately conveyable and merged on title when acquired in the same ownership. As stated above, the Township's Official Plan currently contains policies which permit staff and the Committee to consider these technical severances in accordance with the existing policies provided for within the Official Plan, on this basis the consent for the technical severance to re-create the original lot would therefore conform to this policy. Based on the above, the Consent application would generally conform with the Place to Grow legislation. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) zone provisions require a minimum lot area of 2.0 hectares for agricultural uses and 4.0 hectares for specialized agricultural uses. As stated above, the proposed severed and retained lots would continue to comply with the provisions of the AgriculturaURural (A/RU) Zone, as the minimum lot area and frontage have been exceeded. In addition, both parcels contain lot areas for agricultural uses which are consistent with the surrounding agricultural uses. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-09 Page 5 of 7 Page 48 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... CONSULTATIONS: Public Works Department- Building Department- Engineering Department - County of Simcoe -Comments Attached Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority- No Objection (Comments attached) ATTACHMENTS: Schedule #1-Location Map CONCLUSION: By reviewing the timeline provided by the applicant, which confirms that #hese parcels previously existed as separate parcels, determining that the proposal appears to meet the criteria required by Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan and maintains the use and setback provisions of the Zoning By- law. It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2010-B-09 for a technical severance is appropriate. Respectfully submitted: Steven F arson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: ~~ 0 Andria Leigh, MCIP RPP Director of Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-09 Page 6 of 7 Page 49 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... Page 50 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... Page 51 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... t`~ ~ , ~~, ~~ V C~ L cn ._. on 0 m 0 a N •,,,ti {•.~ ~ . ••'; `~ ~' , c~ ,+• Ir7lF~JlS Ii!~7a- + ~ . ,~ ..* an (.~ o ~' ~ +~' '~°n ., r_~ . r ... a,+n~.)~i~ +,? ~~ ~u ~ { '~, ~: ..~ ~+~. as rt~~vni~~ l~ a++~,~~ ~ 1~+++4 +ia ~. i r+.+ ~ . ~"~ :. , ;:~~ .' . .ti i' r `~ I ~1 .. •~ i ~ 1 '~ . ~ , +'•~ + ~~~' ~ • ~F+ KK . ;~ .~ '.F, . .._ ~. ~ ~ ~~-~~~ ~u ;~ ~ . ... .,+ :~~.~ .~ . ~"~ +~ . I /f/(,d r !Y P Page 52 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... Page 53 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... '. ~~: ~Y . ~~ =:. ~~. ~ I~ f '~ V ~ = ~ ~~ . L +-~ , t~ ~ .~ ~ -__ ~ - .~~ n Ol ~ -~= _~ 4 ~~~. .X ~ 9Ay ~ ~ , w~ Y..~ '.W J ` ~ +_. ^^,, O W - O ~ ~.~ ~ ^ ' g~ _ ~~ ° - ~ ~ ~ ~_ _ ~X ~ W ~ I Page 54 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... '-'~~ ~ : ~ . ~: '~' - -•a... ~ `~-~ --• ~-- ~ . , f ` ~ ~ ~ N ~~, ~~~~ ~ { l •'.'~'ifu~' i ', ~ .. 'asp; J ~;.:. •. ~C°~ ~w~`• &~ ~ d J •~ 7, ! .' ,~ yi ~4 ~ t ?fit e "y: i ' ~ •ti. z ` ' ' ~ h ,~i ~ ~ ~ y i r t T..: ~~ ' . , ~ A , ~ ' .+ ~~~, ~ ~ ''~ - .t ~ ~ ~s ~' ~~ ~~j• :. _ t M' ~ ' ' ~ ~' . i ~ p~ y~~ .M1T ~ k ~:.- r ,_~~ uM ~~r k ~.rh, ~~ ~~ ~.:' . ° ~!~ y ~ ~r~. • .{~ . Page 55 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... s ~;~ \~ v .' z t t //~~ V i ..... O ~ DO -~ °' o ~ °' o N `~ ~ ~ ` E IY v f `I ` _ ~ ~~ ~ { 1, .~'i Page 56 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... ~~ I ~ ~~ i ~1 ,~-s - ~~ ~~ x ,. .,.. • d r ;i ' . .-d ~ l s V ~~ ~- - ~. t /1 ~_ .h , 01 &~ ~~ ~ ~ V;~ ~ . T , O ~. ~ ~~ L •~ ~ O ~~ ~ ;e T 6 O O , l4? . J ~ ,., ~ .~; ~a ~ ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~ ~ s Zi S ~-P ~' ~` ~. j ~. ~ fi ,~: y~y .~.. ky - t .. s: i # i.) ~ ~~~ % ~ yy q Page 57 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... Page 58 of 164 5c) - 2010-B-09 -Brian Robert Strachan 1247 Line 8 North, C... ~~~ -_ ~, ~ V ~~ , ~,~ ~~, ;` Ct3 L ; ~ `~,.. . . - . `.~ 0 m o o N J Page 59 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... ( zv~.Tf~clortt~ 14..aJ HMrogr, F.r(rine F.r~~.r TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPQRT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-16 Alan Wiebe, Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (Bruce and Manon Leibold) 42 Lauder Road East Roll #: (Former Township of Ora) R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-002-28500 D13-40528 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That notwithstanding Section 5.1.6 of Zoning By-law 97-95, the structure shall otherwise comply with all other provisions for detached accessory buildings, as required under Section 5 of the Zoning By-law; 2. That the floor area of the detached garage not exceed approximately 72.5 square metres; 3. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out in the application and on the drawings submitted with the application and approved by the Committee; 4. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by verifying in writing that the floor area of the detached accessory structure not exceed approximately 72.5 square metres; 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010-A-16, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to increasing the maximum floor area of an accessory building in the Residential One (R1) Zone. The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 41.1 metres on Lauder Road, and of approximately 80.84 metres on Line 4 North, and a depth of approximately 95.96 metres. The subject property contains a single detached dwelling, built in 2003. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Lauder Road and Line 4 North, and is surrounded to the east and the south by parcels of land in the Residential One (R1) Zone, and to the west and the north by parcels of land in the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-16 Page 1 of 6 Page 60 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Raad, PI... The applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building, occupying an area of approximately 72.5 square metres to be located within the required setbacks for detached accessory buildings or structures in the R1 Zone, at approximately 3.65 metres from the rear lot line, 18.29 metres from the interior side lot line, and 30.02 metres from the exterior side lot line, along Line 4 North. The proposed detached accessory building is also considered to comply with the 4.5 metres maximum height provision of the Zoning By-Law (section 5.1.4), proposed to stand 3.56 metres above grade. The applicant has indicated that the increased floor area of the detached accessory building is intended to accommodate storage within the building and a covered porch. ANALYSIS: PURPOSE OF APPLICATION: The applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building, to have a floor area of approximately 72.5 square metres. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Section 5.1.6 Maximum Floor Area The maximum floor area of any detached accessory building or structure, excluding boathouses, is 70 square metres (753.5 square feet}. PROPOSED floor area is 72.5 square metres (781 square feet). FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject property is in the Rural Settlement Area land use designation, in the Township's Official Plan. Section C3.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses in the Rural Settlement Area designation ... are low density residential uses, small scale commercial uses .., small scale industrial development ...". Therefore, the construction of an accessory building would be considered a permitted use. On this basis, the proposal is considered to be in conformity with the intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-!aw? The subject property is located in the Residential One (R1) Zone. The purpose for regulating the size, height, and location of detached accessory buildings and structures is to ensure that such buildings remain clearly secondary to the primary use of the lot. In this case, the primary use of the property is residential, with a single detached dwelling, and no other detached accessory buildings. The provision for the maximum floor area for detached accessory buildings is 70 square metres. In this case, while the detached accessory building is proposed to have an area of 72.5 square metres (781 square feet}, the existing dwelling on the subject property has a floor area of approximately 120.8 square metres (1,300 square feet). As such, the proposed size and use of the detached Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-i6 Page 2 of 6 Page 61 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... accessory building will enable the dwelling to remain the primary use of the property, with the detached accessory building being secondary to the dwelling. Aside from the maximum floor area provision of the Zoning By-Law, the proposed detached accessory building will otherwise meet the interior side yard, exterior side yard, and rear yard setbacks, setback to the dwelling, and maximum height provisions of the Zoning By-Law. Therefore, the variance is considered to maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? A site inspection revealed that the proposed detached accessory building will be located approximately 57 metres from the existing dwelling, in the rear yard of the property. As such, the proposed detached accessory building will be located closer to the rear lot line than to the existing dwelling, near a row of trees along the rear lot line, allowing the existing dwelling to maintain its visual dominance on the subject property. The site inspection also revealed that the subject lands are located in an area of the Township with large residential lots near large agricultural parcels. It was also noted that there is a significant vegetative buffer between the subject property and the agricultural parcel to the north, and the location of the proposed detached accessory building is at a significant distance from the interior and exterior side lot lines, reducing its visual impact from neighbouring properties, and from Lauder Road and Line 4 North. As such, these distances and the significant vegetative buffer along the rear lot line of the subject property would likely reduce any negative visual or aesthetic impact for neighbouring residences. On this basis, the proposal is considered desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lot Is the variance minor? As this application is deemed to be in conformity with the Official Plan, maintain the intent of the Zoning By-Law, and constitutes appropriate development of the lot, the variance is considered to be minor in nature. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Floor Plan Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-16 Page 3 of 6 Page 62 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2010-A-16 to grant an increase in the maximum floor area for a detached accessory building in the Residential One (R1) Zone, from 70 square metres to approximately 72.5 square metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: 1 ~~~ ~~~ Alan Wiebe Planner Reviewed by: ~~ Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-16 Page 4 of 6 Page 63 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... ATTACHMENTS: Schedule #1-Location Map CONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2010-8-19, 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. Respectfully submitted: i~~~- Steve rquha`rson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by, Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning Development Services Meeting Date: June 17, 2010 Appllcatlon No. 2010-B-19 Page 3 of 4 Page 148 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-8-19 (McHugh) ~1 y w ~ w ~ ~. ~ \ 9~ ~t~ t Z ~`~ O ,~ .i BOBB i INS DRIV i E r I ~ w z ,y~~ Y dR '~ F. p h~~r ~.a- h ® Retained Lands Lands to be conveyed to 3818 Line 13 North Enhanced Lands Being 3818 Line 13 North 0 35 T i40 210 260 Meters Developmen# Services Meeting Date: June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-19 Page 4 of 4 Page 149 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... ~~ V .... C71 O N ~~ I ~* ~- ~~ g . ~i• e ~~ ~ 'S~~ • _ } ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ .. ~~ . ~ • •a ~. ,' ~I . ~ y ~ -o J !n ~ ~ , ~ S ~, .e y I ~ • ~ ~ .' .. •. 7 sK~~` . ~ ~~ ~! Page 150 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... ~~~~° ~~ ~ yr 9f,2 t.~~Xkh'AT Y..r A~'.t -. ~ . - s ` ~j •.. ~ ~ ~ ' 1~' ' f! 3 `- F~ j ~,. ~ ~t i~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~~ ~q £k ~ J ; 'x~ .. ~ j ~ } ,ter i ~~ ~ ~ ~~` x it h i ' } n V } ~ ~ III _ . _._ _ , _ j'. ~ - i .ri' ,~ ~ u4P~ ^a * g IY! y. _ ~ _ ~ t 7~, '~", E't n '.,t ~ • ~~. ~ ' n v+ t~ . .a a r O ~ •Y O r' ' N ~ -~ 1 . ~o ~ . ~ ~:. . x W ~ ~. , ~~ ~~ ~~ -:~~; ~, _ ; ~ Page 151 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... ~~ Y ~,~ . . .~~ ~;: .~ o~~°° :~ ;_ ~~ ~:A'x t 1 f ~~~ .W ~/~ t V ~.. fi •...• .~: 41 ~~ ~ m ~ ~~. i o ~ ~ t~ 6: O N ~ ~ F ~• O k~ z S 14 A N ~ ~" ~ ~;. {. . Y t ~ J }!s S -: Page 152 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... l ..da~~Se~~G° ' .. ~r ~~ ^ `t ~ F.xYY ~ ~~~ ~ ~ m~ ~ a t ~ ~ V f ~~ . y `' ._.• ..~ ;~.. ~.. - Ol a i ~ ~ M U ~ W ~ ~ ~ 0 -~ p ~ ~'' \ ~ ~,; o N ~ ~ ~~ N ~ J > tl 0 ~~ ;;~ ~~, . , .Y ~~ ~~~ ~~NA Page 153 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... . ~ ~. ~~~ Y ~~~ s~3_. +.p 'iq« E' ; R¢- ~T~~ ~tI'M ,a. ~ _ - ; ti ;~ ffi-~ D ~ J`~ ~ ~ y~~~~ 4.ci;ii'i. "a.~ ~ ~x'r ' t ~ 5 7 , r.. ~, ~ @ " 3 i l _ t ,... °'E k r ' f y ~• V •... Ql rl x ~ ~ m ~ .~ ~ ~ ;+: o ~ ~ ~_ ~ o ~ ~ .,~ _ ~~ ~ . ~. x N ~ 3 ~ 3i. l4 -. a ~,$ ~ _ ~ ~, ~ ~~, ~ + i` _ y -~,, ~ ~ : ~ ~' ~. ~- i.. s °~~, T ~+ <+~";~ .E ~' ~Y"7 ~~ f7 £ r -~ n, ~_ r. `z ~~~' ~, :-' ~v1 ~'k 2 f .. .t~~'(~'i~ZAi !.r n. ., L _; ~ ~.:' Page 154 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... i~ V ., , ,r? _ ~;. * ..~ v ~ - ~ t =; _ :x ~ i ~ - ~ ~: 44 o N .. ~ ~ ~ o - ~ -. f ..... ` T N o CaA ~ ~, L- ~ ~ t ~, zt , ~. ~,r ~" - ~ ~~ s -~ ~} ~ ~ • ~ ..Q ~ ~ .t ~ t ~ ~ ; 4 ~s ! . ~ 3 0 _ ~ ,~ '~ ~~ ~_ ~ ~-= Y 1 4 -. ~ t'~ ?~ a ? r~ 1 -.~ t <_ ti rx w !~ 4~ f.~ ~~ ~°~ Page 155 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... ~`~~ W ~jM Tun.hip nl ~~.. (~1ri~ ~l~~clorzti~ I'nrvJ Hrriluy~; F...l/inQ F>trnrr TOWNSH/P OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-8-20 Alan Wiebe, Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (Indian Park Association) Cayuga Court Roll #: (Former Township of Oro) R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-003-14800 REGIUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the severed lands be merged in title with 15 Cayuga Court and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.09 hectares (0.22 acres) from the subject property to the neighbouring residential lot being 15 Cayuga Court. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. ANALYSIS: The purpose of application 2010-B-20 is to permit a lot addition/boundary adjustment. The subject land to be conveyed is Part of Block A, Plan M-31, having a depth of approximately 55 metres (180 feet) and an area of approximately 0.09 hectares (0.22 acres). The subject lands are proposed to be added to the adjacent lands to the east being 15 Cayuga Court. No new building lot is proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-20 Page 1 of 5 Page 156 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... FINANCIAL: Not applicable. I POLICIESILEGISLATION: I I Does the Consent conform to the genera! intent of the Offfcial Plan? The subject lands are in the Residential land use designation in the Official Plan. Section D2 of the Official Plan contains policies with respect to subdivision of land. Section D2.2.2, "Boundary Adjustments", provides the following guidance for Consent Applications: "A consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lof is created. In reviewing an application ... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected as intended by this Plan." Concerning application 2010-B-20, no new building lots are being proposed, and the proposed boundary adjustment does not affect the viability of the current use of the property from which lands are proposed to be severed. As such, the proposed boundary adjustment is generally in keeping with the intent of the residential policies in the Official Plan, and it is otherwise in conformity with the boundary adjustment policies contained in Section D.2.2.2. On this basis, the proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Official Plan. Does the Consent comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject property is located in the Private Recreational Zone, with exception 114 (PR*114) in Zoning By-Law 97-95, as amended. Permitted uses in the PR Zone include: bed and breakfast establishments, conservation uses, cross country and downhill ski facilities, forestry uses, golf courses, mountain bike facilities, and private clubs. Lands that are zoned PR"`114 permit a recreation centre that may include swimming pools, tennis courts, change facilities, meeting rooms, and so forth. None of the uses listed above appear to exist on the subject property proposed for conveyance to the property at 15 Cayuga Court. The lot to be enhanced, 15 Cayuga Court, is in the Residential One (R1) Zone, with Exception 113 (R1 "113). The lands zoned R1*113 address the minimum setbacks for buildings and structures, from the surrounding property lines and public streets. Pending approval of the application, the lot to be enhanced will still maintain the required lot area, and will comply with the minimum required setbacks for the R1''113 Zone. In the opinion of the Planning Department, the rezoning of the conveyed lands is not necessary at this time, however, it should be noted that no residential structures are permitted on lands with the Private Recreation Exception 114 {PR'`114) Zone. On this basis, the proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Zoning By-Law. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-20 Page 2 of 5 Page 157 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... CONSULTATIONS: Public Works Department- Building Department- Engineering Department - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Drawing CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent Application 2010-B-20 for a boundary adjustment would appear to conform to the policies of the Official Plan, and maintains the use and setback provisions of the Zoning By-law. Respectfu/lly~subm//fitted: Alan Wiebe Planner Reviewed by: <-~/ Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-i3-20 Page 3 of 5 Page 158 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-8-20 (Indian Park Association) w '~'' > -~ 0 in 0 0 0 z 0 o= r aNE- ~~,,,..----- \~ % ~~ ,1 t ~ ~~Gfl~~~ ~, t l~ ,,.- - ~, \,, f~ ` l !r `, ., ~\ FJ~anced Lands 6eirtg 15 Gayuga Court i ~ if Lands_ to 6e Conveyed 6 i5 BO 126 Meters Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-20 Page 4 of 5 Page 159 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... SCHEDULE 2: DRAWING 2010-B-20 (Indian Park Association) /~ 1, l ~ ~ ~ ~ 67 LAN 1 M ~ ` ~ '~ fib - t ~ 70 ~ 69 1 ~ I ~ ~ -~- .,.r ~ "i h'~S~ _pt4'2l ;~ '"' `` ~ °` i ~J ~ ~ . ~ ,, ptµ. wsr s w C : ot r `1 ~r ' ~ `~ 42 "' / / ~ Q n ''~~ ~ ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' / ~Q.Cd ~ q 0,, T" '* ~ • i i ~ "~' 1 ~4 ~ 1 ` ~V ~ ~ d ~h,e~ ra 'us's r .loco riiii~iit ~ +rwt - ~a~ X ~~ r ' ~ ~. ash Y ia~ ~,~ ~ ''~`~~s ~" g ~ ~ ,d; ~ ~~,. ~ aa~~ _t~1 ate ~ '~~ ,~`~' .,,, ,,,rs .~ ,,,. - ~ ia~ ~iP~ ~r.~~ ~.za ~~.{ . ~ ,~, ~~ '6. i a F!' 'i .y .-' r ' e 4,~'b .ii ~. 'i~ ~a, ~ gg3~ i ~ NRq~b~, l ~ ~~~ 44 ~ ~;;~.~ ~. !.~'' 3.~ „~ ~ s`;;s~ r~ ~ ~~ ?;~n~as''o ~ °r`s`st `~ Plty, 791157-- •44 ~ ~, r ~ ~ "~ `~.. "per ~ t- ~-~ I~A~1T~t~ M { M~dYSY~ I..3i.~Tt' /J ~ 4.~i '~ l~ iil L .. !' tl K 48 '~ C ~° ~ ~ `o t7 ~ ~ ~ 8 j`j a c9 ~ Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-20 Page 5 of 5 Page 160 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... ~~ o ~,~ ._ +~ ~~ .s~~ ~ , . µ R Y ~ ~ V ~`~~ x .-.-,.~ 4 9 , ^ O - ~ d ~ w ~ ~ , ~ t L ~ ~ ~i I~ fi 'ars V ~ /~ (r I ,~ 3 .~ V ` ~ f `~ ~. x ~`> ` ~' ~ a ~ a~ c ~ • ~• o ~~ ., a ~ ~. o N /~~ J W ~ o _~ 0 N Page 161 of 164 5k) - 2010-8-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... .~~. 0 .,- V 0 t/) c,/~ Q i m O N Page 162 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... i~ ~~ ~~ H -$ a ~, c~ ._ V ~ O ti *_, :t r ~~ k ~ n ~~ ~ ~ y 4: Y~ t t_ J F ~ ,~ ~ 3 ~.I~ !4 ~:.. ~ ~~ `~ Y .f N!df ~ rr- , a~ . $+ t ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ' a ~ ~i ~ , r ~" ~, x .~ f + :~. o ~ ^~'' W ~ ~ ~~~ ~ N o . .~ 1 ~ ~ c - n a m ~ a ~, o ~ ~ - °~ , o Y,_. ve, 4~ Page 163 of 164 5k) - 2010-B-20 -Indian Park Association Cayuga Court, Part... Page 164 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 119 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... x >. ~~ ~ ^ W ~ M W ~.i ~ 0 0 ~ t. N ~ ~ ~ ~. , ~ Q ~ ~ O ~ - • r"~ m .}..~ ~.. ,.. ~ ' ® ~ ~ ~ .. ~, _ ~ Y~ tw _ ~ 'x '~ ~; ~ w Page 120 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 121 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... .~~ ~~ W f. ;. w~ `' ~'. W ,dry ~. ~...~ 0 ', f` N ~.~ lM ~ Q o ~ ~: ~. . ~. ` ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ N O ~ k o ~ o ~ ~ x ;. ~~ N ~, ~ 3 a ,~ S r yy ~-~ _. k.i~~ t ~ 2 € y~~ f, 4F 1 X Wh'~'-*t ~ k4 K ~. . 1 ,r, Page 122 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... ~~ ~. -~~°° R j' ~~~_j~y.. ~5yt7s.;~ ~ .:~ ¢ e . r r as Wai _ ~ +~, ~. tt ~f~!Lh, ; ~? , `~ F.atY~ ~~ N ,~ o 4 , g .. . p f" F S. r. a _ a y ~ ~s~" ~~ \~/ N N ;~ 3 . L ~ ~ ~i ~ ~` ~ a ' t ~ t`h t,-~- nl L rti ~c~ r; ^, ~ ~~= ~x ; r,~" ~ 0 ~ d ~'• ~ O tJ') ~ t„ ~ ~~ "t ~~ ~ ~ ~" ~ n~ + ~ T Y # ~ ~ ~ ~ q~ ~ ~ [ f Y j y /~ y ~ J ,~ ~ } ~ ,. ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ .~ ~ r : ~r~~a ~.x S.. r t; ~ 2 Est: t ~ & -Y • ~. O a ~ '.%~ ~~ P ~ ?,: *} _a i+l ~ ~ o fi ~- '~h , ~ . ' w* {r 4 ~ I _ _ i ~: Page 123 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ~=' r.,,,kyrrr /~ D~r~.~1~rlo~zte 1'rouJ Hrnrar,•, F, urrin, Fmnrr TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-22 Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (John and Winifred Hewetson) East Part of Lot 1i Concession 11 Roll #: , , 51 R 13066, Part 2 R.M.S. File #: 4346-020-006-04400 4862 Line 11 North REQUIRED CONDITIONS: 1. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010-A-22, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to the required setback from the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to recognize an existing dwelling which is located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Section 5.28 of Zoning By- law 97-95: Setback to EP Zone Re uired 30 Metres (98.4 feet) FINANCIAL: POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent Setback to EP Zone Pro osed 0 metres (0 feet) Plan? The property is designated Agricultural in the Official Plan. Section C1.2 of the Plan states that "permitted uses on lands designated AgriculturaL..are single detached dwellings [and accessory buildings to such]". Therefore, the existing dwelling would be considered a permitted use. On this basis the proposal is considered to conform with the intent of the Official Plan. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Appfica#ion No. 2010-A-22 Page 1 of 4 Page 124 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... Does the variance comply with the general intent of the Zoning 8y-!aw? The subject property is zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Permitted uses in the A/RU Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings. The existing dwelling does not comply with the required 30 metres setback from the EP Zone. One of the purposes of regulating structures being built within the required Environmental Protection setback is to maintain and enhance the ecological integrity of the natural heritage system, to ensure that development does not occur on lands that are unstable or susceptible to flooding and to ensure that development does not occur on hazardous slope. The application was sent the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA). The Authority has commented it has no objections to recognizing the existing dwelling being within the EP Zone. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the !ot? Based on a site inspection, it was noted that the existing dwelling is anon-conforming structure in terms of setbacks to the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone boundary, therefore the any alteration to the existing dwelling would require a variance. Due to the applicant not proposing to alter the existing dwelling, the environmental features do not appear to be adversely affected. As stated above, the NVCA has no objection to the variance. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to be appropriate for the desirable development on 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: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department - No Concerns Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority- No Objection ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-22 Page 2 of 4 Page 125 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2010-A-22, to recognize an existing dwelling which is located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zonewith the required setback reduced from 30 metres to 0 metres, the request appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: ~~ Steven Fa rso `~-' Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-22 Page 3 of 4 Page 126 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-22 (Heweton) x `` : , y :: :,;. - ~~, y _ ~' ®Subjed Lands ~' "~ Subjed Lands ~`,;'•. 0 1020 ~0 60 80 Existing DwelBng Location ®Meters Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-22 Page 4 of 4 Page 127 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ~~ ~N 'm ~~ ~I NI Q ~/'~ ° r 46 3NI1 } 0 N r _ O 1 of t ''nn~ r ~' Vt ~ `; i `~ N ~z - N r { ~, i - o Q ~ ~ _ c-I ~ , N - _ C `' _ N ;T a .~; ~ Page 128 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... t 4 3NI ~ . . J r ;~ , rr r ~ < S ~~, 3 ~ 1' W Y ~ ~~. 0 e ~, ~ a i ~ ~~~ ii b ~ f mot.` ~~j { C d. Y ~ f f O ~ N r s ~ o ' o }- ~ . r r ~ ..~ ~ , ~ Y ~,,. r` r ; N i N J ~ ~ ~ _ z s - r ~ ~ } C O f Y i,~ _ p ! 1 i /? Q N - J '1 J ,~ r m a '~ ~ r C C 3 _ ~ J J r , C f ~ ~ T ~ :~ G, L~ m r i ~; l { - - .. _ - '1 ~ ~~ ~t` Page 129 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... __ -k---- ~ .. ti i 4 ~ < ~ ~ ''- o _ ~ ~ ~ ~` cn ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~' '~' ~ ~ u~C a~ _ ~,~ N i .~ ~ -~ N ~~ ' ~ Q ~ NI o °~ 0 N a c ~~~~ Page 130 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ~" ~; ; ~~ j~ _ .~ ~':~ Y ,~ p~ ~iMjv t l r ~~ S U O ~j nX ~ ~ ~- R ~: N ~ ~ . n W .y ~ 1 ~s ~_ s r' '~ , ~ ~~ N ~ F -/ t N . ~. e,. ~i Q ~ ~ C~- _ c--I ~ s O N ~~ - nl W M1 a fe E Y V S. Y <R-: ~~ F' h ~ Y ~ ,' _ .i ~ A` z , y ~ . ~., Page 131 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... Page 132 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ~, ,~ ,~ u ~,~ -{ '~ ~~~ _ ~{ 4~.~ ,. ~~ y jfi. 4{ y ~ ' ~ ' s ~~ ~ ~ ~C- A -. 9 T . } t ~ 4. ~ t /l~' r ~4 ~ ~°r. ~~ ' K ~~ *, 1 KR 4 Ihr .~. N ~~ ~ ~ 1 w1 V . ;+ ~~~..~ ~.~ qr ~~ Y ~e r ~ , + P t iY t 1. .., ~ N f \ f ~~ ~ ~PF N { 1. ~ _ ~~ ~; ~ ~ Q ~' ~ ~ - ,, O ° rl sP ~ ~~ : ~~ . ~ {~ ~ _ A. - -ji _% ~i ,< -.~ Page 133 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ; ~ .; ;', i ~~ _ ~ ` .~;:.a ~~ .Zi. Y ry ? e :- •~ :~ , ` t~ .~ o ~ ~, ~ ~ ~- ~ ,. W r ~ W ~~'" E : ~~ N ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ - ~~~ ~,~ ~~ 1 w ~ ~ ~ ` ^ ~ ~,~~' ti "~ ; = ~ ~ ~~ ` . ~~„ , ~; _~ ' ~ , 0 ~ ~ ~a - gar a ~,,~~; ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~Y ` ~; m e ,. ,pr a ..~. ~ .. . ~: h9 k ' '~` G z ~ ~' x ~'_ d Page 134 of 164 5h) - 2010-A-22 -John and Winifred Hewetson 4862 Line 11 No... ,,, ti, ~ ~, }a Y'~ f ~ ~ ~~ rh t~- .u. ~r ~. ~ IY ~ ~'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~V ~ y~ ~. }, e K t'! ~ ~' -~ , Ar; ~ ~. TTT N ~~ ^' ~ _~ ~. (~ o .~ ~ ;~: ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ c *° ~ l~'~ ~ _ _ 4 <. ,.. o ~1:. N,mMf. G-~ Y ~~~~ N ~ £ ~. s ~ ~~t ~~~k. ?y F ~. ,S ~t _J W i °` s`. ~ ~ ~~~~~ f F.. ~ p.! 7. ~ ~- f ` " F ~ a •'A~a' ~ . ~ Y ~~ e, ~~ ~ ~,1 ~. ~' a Page 135 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... r ~ n,xrr, J: ^^~~~" (~iv~ ~~~~r~iinte IinuJ Hnita,~v~ Fuirinq Fu~nrr TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-B-18 Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 James Partridge Concession 5 Part of Lot 16 Roll #: , (Former Township of Oro), R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-002-3250 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent application 2010-B-18 is for a technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage along the west side of Line 5 N of approximately 124 metres (408 feet), with a lot depth of approximately 330 metres (1085 feet) and a lot area of approximately 4.1 hectares (10 acres). The lands to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 44 hectares (110 acres) and currently contains a dwelling and various outbuildings. The applicant has submitted a historical timeline of the property, which has been attached for the Committee's reference. The lots were separate conveyable lots until 1970, when they merged in title under the applicants name. The summary of the deeds which support this timeline are attached to this report. ANALYSIS: The purpose of consent application 2010-B-18 is for a technical severance to recreate lots which previously existed as separate conveyable parcels of land. The Township's Official Plan contains policies (Section D2.2.3) which permit Planning Staff and the Committee to consider technical severances. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-18 Page 1 of 6 Page 136 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan provides a specific policy to allow the Committee to consider applications to correct a situation where two or more lots have merged on title. The creation of new lots maybe be permitted, provided that the Committee of Adjustment is satisfied that the following criteria have been met. Planning Staff's opinion of how the criteria have been met are outlined below. a) Was once separate conveyable lot in accordance with the Planning Act; As per the attached deed, in 1969 James Partridge had ownership of West Half of Lot 16 and East Half of Lot 16 was in joint ownership with Howard Partridge. In 1970 Howard Partridge transferred his holding to James Partridge, which caused the lots to merge, therefore the two were separately conveyable in accordance with the Planning Act. b) The merging of the lots was unintentional and was not merged as a requirement of a previous planning approval; The parcels were merged together as a result of James Partridge having acquired ownership of both parcels. c) Is of the same shape and size as the lot which once existed as a separate conveyable lot; A review of the deeds determined that the proposed parcels are the same size and shape that existed at the time they were separate lots. The Township will require that a surveyor confirm the new lots match the original description. d) Can be adequately serviced by on-site sewage and wafer system; The parcels should be of an adequate size to permit the establishment of private services, this would be further confirmed prior to the issuance of any building permits. e) Fronts on a public road That is maintained year-round by public authority; The parcels front onto Line 5 North, and is maintained year-round by a public authority. f) There are no public interest served by maintaining the properly as a single conveyable parcel,• It is the opinion of the Planning Department that it would be in the public's interest to maintain the parcel as one which does not fragment the environmental feature (Floodplain). This has been confirmed by the NVCA. g) Conforms with Section D2.2.1 of this Plan; and, Section D2.2.1 of the Plan is discussed below. h) Subject to the access policies of the relevant road authority At the time a building permit is applied for an entrance permit would also be required from the Township for access for the severed lands from Line 5 North Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-18 Page 2 of 6 Page 137 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains test for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be sa#isfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed severed lands would have access to Line 5 N and retained lands would have frontage on Line 5 North and 15/16 Sideroad West, which are public roadways maintained year-round by the Township of Oro-Medonte. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports fhe request; The properties will not have access to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; This application proposes to recreate a lot. Significant traffic volume will not be generated by any additional dwellings if located on the proposed lots. The applicant will be required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Public Works Department. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and is compatible with ad%acent uses; The application proposes to recreate a lot that once existed, which has inadvertently been merged on title. The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage along the west side of Line 5 N of approximately 124 metres (408 feet), with a lot depth of approximately 330 metres (1085 feet) and a lot area of approximately 4.1 hectares (10 acres). The lands to be retained would have The lands to be retained would also have frontage along Line 5 North of 505 metres (1658 feet) and 716 metre (2351 feet) on 15/16 Sideroad West, a lot depth of approximately 759 metres (2493 feet), and a lot area of 44 hectares (110 acres). The minimum required lot area for a agricultural use in the A/RU Zone is 2.0 hectares, and the minimum lot frontage for a single detached dwelling is 45 metres. It has been noted that the proposed severed lot does meet the lot area and frontage of the A/RU Zone. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Any future residential development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, where the construction of a new single detached dwelling may be subject to the completion of a lot grading and drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. g) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; The retained lands, will meet with the minimum required lot frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-law. No development applications are active adjacent to the subject lands, and as such no negative impacts with respect to access are anticipated as a result of this consent. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-18 Page 3 of 6 Page 138 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; The easterly portion of the retained lands and the entire severed lands are regulated by Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. They have commented stating that the proposed severance is located within two tributaries of Willow Creek and that the property currently exhibits wetland characteristics with areas of standing water. The new lot creation will result in the encroachment and bisecting of the watercourses, which could lead to further development on the lands and have a negative impact on the features of the area. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; Any future development would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. On this basis, the application is considered not to be appropriate and does not generally conform to the Official Plan. County Official Plan In analyzing this Consent Application, Township staff reviewed both the County Official Plan currently in effect as well as the Official Plan adopted by County Council in November 2008. Specifically, Section 3.6 contains the Agricultural policies which are required to be considered in assessing the proposed technical severance application. Section 3.6.6 states that new lots should be not less than 36 hectares or the original survey lot size, whichever is the lesser. As stated above, these two lots merged in 1970 and prior to that time were separately conveyable as a 4.1 hectare and 44 hectare parcel and therefore it is considered appropriate to re-create these parcels at the land size previously in existence. The proposed technical severance would be consistent with the surrounding land uses and has been determined that it conforms to the policies of the County Plan. The adopted County Plan continues to include the policies discussed above and therefore, it is our opinion that the proposed development generally conforms to the policies of both County Official Plans (approved and adopted). Provincial Policy Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Policy 3.1 contains the policies in Natural Hazards Areas in municipalities which directs development to occur outside areas of hazardous lands adjacent to river, stream, and small inland lake systems which are impacted by flooding hazards and or erosion hazards. Due to the proposed severance being located within two tributaries of Willow Creek and the NVCA comments in regards to the area being within an unevaluated wetland feature it can be considered not to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Places to Grow The application has been reviewed with reference to the Place to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. The proposed consent as stated above would re-create a lot which was previously Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-1$ Page 4 of 6 Page 139 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... separately conveyable and merged on title when acquired in the same ownership. As stated above, the Township's Official Plan currently contains policies which permit staff and the Committee to consider these technical severances in accordance with the existing policies provided for within the Official Plan, on this basis the consent for the technical severance to re-create the original lot would therefore conform to this policy. Based on the above, the Consent application would generally conform with the Place to Grow legislation. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. The proposed severed and retained lots would continue to comply with the provisions of the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone, as the minimum lot area and frontage have been met. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law. CONSULTATIONS: Public Works Department- Building Department- Engineering Department - County of Simcoe - Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority- Comments Attached ATTACHMENTS: #1-Location Map CONCLUSION: By reviewing the timeline provided by the applicant, it confirms that these parcels did previously exist as separate conveyable parcels. However, Planning staff have determined that the application does not appears to meet the criteria required by Section D2.2.3 of the Official Plan, and Provincial Policy Statements, therefore it is the opinion of the Planning Department, that Consent application 2010-B- 18for atechnical severance is not appropriate. Respectfully submitted: Steven arquhars~n, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: __~ / ~~ Andria Leigh, MGCIUP RPL P Director of Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-18 Page 5 of 6 Page 140 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... Page 141 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lvt 16 (Form... ~.~ i i ~ _ _ ~ { ~~ A ~ t§ ~~. Y~ t3 tr s ~ .~ ~ C~l 1' s' t ~~~+ ~.UW ', I i • C 1 O ~~ ~~.~ ~- ~; ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ ~` #Yi t _~ '# ~ ~ ~ !i yp~~tas ~ ~ ' ' ~ '~ s ~ -. _ ~ a 4 _ E L: .. j~,F ' ~ # ~ ~ 2 . Page 142 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... ~ ~ ~ J L ~J ~ ~~ G ~~` JJJ ~ • S. u ~l "~, `J' -.J `~ ~ x s . }~ ~ ~~ a JL1 YIM.O~I'I~ W a ~ ~ ~ ~ O s `~ ~~ ~, '' ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d. o N ~ ~- o ~ ~ q ~_... .~ .~ ~. n ~~ ~ '"~~4rrr'"' 4 -~ '. -r.~~ , tti.tn ~ti~-`r1~n~n~, ~ Vii Page 143 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... a ,... ~~ . D !tw Ayr k t s lj= :; { 111 ~., #~. Set M " ~ ~ O d ' is R tl ~ ~ . J r« J i c r .r . Z ~ ~ '~ ^- r ~~ ' /~~ r e. a w , d` k s< r t v h~ Y ~ ti J es.. ; .. I ~ ~ , 1 ENV t -°._° ,~,.___ ~.~..V..... ~ Y . + t * ay g .{ 0 Oa b ~ b ~ ~, T +~ O ` + ~ .,.. ~ 1 . ~ ~ a ~ ' 1 ~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~~~" • 1 ~+/y ~ pY ~~`~~~ ' ~ t ~ s C ... F ~ ,. , ., ..,...r • J' 1 ~ , ~ # 7 ~ " ~ ~ M W r ~ ~ ... i ~ C fY o 1 ~ r O ~ ~ ' a ~ r..i o'J ~` 20`'x: '$F:i e . r -4 Jn n =~ ~ ti~ ~ S f ~ r. ( ~ ~ h +1qQ~ . ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 1'l i3~~~:~ i bl ~~ k # 3~{ ~ ~S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7~ ~ Q ~ l.lll.:.`ct ~.~+ Q A ~ ~`e l to ~ rf f 1° t . 7i1 i ~piaf~l: ~7 . J ~ ~ '~+ ~ .: i .] ; I] i ~ _ 3 ~ ;a ~ .r :. ~ 6 ,~4 os .a a , .. i^~v4 asewrf.,4,4.. anat. ~' s~ ,,,v -.. _.:. ,. .~ -' ._ - ,...~..o .. ~ r. yam, '~ Page 144 of 164 5i) - 2010-B-18 -James Partridge Concession 5, Lot 16 (Form... ,~ ~~. I n^'~ W ~ ~ ~/ 1 a 0 N •~ ~i i~i i, 4 ' . J L _ _ _ 9 0~ S suss ~~ I ~ l"~t. ~' i I ra I ~t I ~ 1 I .~. ~~ e L ~ . .~ . fI I .' ; P~ ~?I .. • ~ ~ , • 1 . - ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ~. ~ ~ _ .. .~ ~~~. 4 ~ S OAM i SAptb'&3a6~7 N~~L3g _1 I ~ I . I • ~~~ ~ • g; e . . Page 145 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... ~m~~Tl ~/~.ate PrruJ HMI ~~ F.rrhi~ Fuuur TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-B-19 Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 Bernice McHugh Part of Lot 4 Concession 13 Roll #: , , 3870 Line 13 North R.M.S. File #: 4346-020-004-10300 (Former Township of Medonte) D10 I REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer; 2. That the severed lands be merged in title with CON 13 E PT LOT 4 EXCEPT RP;51 R28074 PART 1 and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject lands; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicants solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.69 hectares (1.7 acres) from the subject property 3870 Line 13 North, to the neighbouring residential lot to the south. The proposed retained lot, would consist of approximately 2.7 hectares (6.7 acres), and currently contains a residential dwelling and various outbuildings. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. ANALYSIS: The purpose of application 2010-B-19, is to permit a boundary adjustment. The subject land being 3870 Line 13 North, to convey land having an area of approximately 0.69 hectares (1.7 acres} to be Development Services Meeting Date: June 17, 2010 Application No. 20'10-B-19 Page 1 of 4 Page 146 of 164 5j) - 2010-B-19 -Bernice McHugh 3870 Line 13 North, Part of... added to the adjacent land to the south being 3818 Line 13 North. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: OFFICIAL PLAN The subject lands are designated Agricultural by the Official Plan (OP). Section D2 of the OP contains policies with respect to subdivision of land. Specifically, Section D2.2.2 =`Boundary Adjustments", provides the following guidance for Consent Applications in general: "a consent maybe permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lot is created...the Committee ofAdjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected." With respect to the application at hand, no new building lots are proposed and it is not anticipated that the proposed boundary adjustment would affect the viability of the agricultural parcel. The subject lands currently contain a two single detached dwelling with various outbuildings. By removing the dwelling from the retained lands and placing it on the enhanced lands the viability would not appear to be affected by the proposed boundary adjustment. As such, the proposed boundary adjustment is generally in keeping with the intent of the policies stated in the Official Plan, and otherwise conforms with the boundary adjustment policies contained in Section D.2.2.2. ZONING BY-LAW The subject property is currently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone in the Township's Zoning By- law. Currently the subject lands have two dwellings on the property which is not permitted in the Zoning By-law. The lot to be enhanced, is also zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone and currently vacant. With the lands to be conveyed to the enhanced lot, the retained lands would be brought into compliance with the Zoning By-law. The enhanced lot is proposed to have a new total lot area of 19.3 hectares, which would bring be in compliance with the minimum lot area requirements for a single detached dwelling in the A/RU Zone. The dwelling on the lands to be conveyed would be in compliance in terms of setbacks for a dwelling in the A/RU Zone. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By-law. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department - Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority- Development Services Meeting Date: June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-19 Page 2 of 4 Page 147 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... r~~ V / ~ r, t " y f, _.:* ~~:. W C31 c-I i Q ~, N ~ 3 o r'I ~ ,. O O 4 ~~ N J ~ M .~~t N C ~< ~°. ~ ~~~- s .r ~ f ,e J'r t r~~_ 1 ,~~ Page 99 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Page 100 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Page 101 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... `. -,. Pmxd Bnirngr, Lsxirixy hxnn< TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-20 Alan Wiebe, Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (Eggert Boehlau) Part of Lots 1 and 2 Range 2 Roll #: , 2251 Ridge Road R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-007-10100 (Former Township of Oro) REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision, with respect to the minimum required setback from a water course for a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building: a. that the setbacks for be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; b. that an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by: 1) pinning the footings, and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real property report that the distances from the single detached dwelling and the detached accessory building as set out on the application and sketches submitted be no closer than approximately 8.0 metres from the top of bank of the water course along the interior side lot line to the west of the subject property; c. that the applicant obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if applicable; and d. that the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider Minor Variance Application 2010-A-20, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to the: 1. uses permitted in a detached accessory building, 2. maximum height of a detached accessory building, 3. maximum floor area of a detached accessory building, and Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 1 of 10 Page 102 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... 4. minimum required setback from a water course for a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building, consisting of atwo-storey, two car garage. The single detached dwelling and the detached accessory building are proposed to be located approximately 8.0 metres (26.25 feet} from a water course. The detached accessory building is proposed to have a floor area of approximately 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet}, a height of approximately 4.75 metres (15.6 feet), the second storey of which is intended for human habitation. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97- 95: Zone: Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone 1. Section 5.1.1 Uses permitted in detached accessory buildings and structures No detached accessory building or accessory structure shall be used for human habitation or an occupation for gain, unless specifically permitted by this By-law. PROPOSED use of accessory building is temporary human habitation. 2. Section 5.1.4 Maximum height The maximum height of any detached accessary building or structure, except boathouses, is 4.5 metres (14.7 feet). PROPOSED height is 4.75 metres (15.6 feet). 3. Section 5.1.6 Maximum Floor Area The maximum floor area of any detached accessory building or structure, excluding boathouses is 70 square metres (753.5 square feet). PROPOSED floor area is 123.2 square meters (1,326.1 square feet), for two storeys. 4. Section 5.33 SETBACK FROM WATER COURSES Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, no building, or structure shall be located within 30 metres (98.4 feet) of the top of bank of any watercourse, with the exception of Lake Simcoe and Bass Lake which are dealt with by Section 5.31. PROPOSED setback from water course for the proposed single detached dwelling and detached accessory building is 8.8 metres (26.25 feet). FINANCIAL: POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of The property is designated Rural Settlement Area in the Official Plan. Section C3.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses in the Rural Settlement Area designation ... are low density residential uses ...", and accessory uses. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 2 of 10 Page 103 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Therefore, on this basis, the four proposals for variances listed in the "Analysis" section, above, conform with the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? Requests for variances from points 1 through 3, listed below, are evaluated collectively, as a result of their relation in achieving a cumulative effect related to the use of the second storey of the detached accessory building for human habitation. 1. uses permitted in a detached accessory building, 2. maximum height of a detached accessory building, and 3. maximum floor area of a detached accessory building The subject property has lands in multiple zones: the AgriculturaURural (A/RU) Zone, which covers a small portion along the north of the subject property, and the Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone with the Hold provision (RLS (H)), which covers the remainder and the majority of the subject property. The proposed single detached dwelling and detached accessory building are intended to be located in the RLS (H) Zone on the subject property. Permitted uses in the RLS Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. Permitted uses in the RLS (H) Zone are only those "which existed on the date this By-law was passed, until the (H) is removed', pursuant to Section 2.5.1 of Zoning By-Law 97-95. While single detached dwellings are a permitted use on properties in the RLS Zone, Section 5.1.1 of Zoning By-Law 97-95 states that "No detached accessory building or accessory structure shall be used for human habitation or an occupation for gain, unless specifically permitted by this By-law." Further, Section 5.25 c) of the Zoning By-Law, "Prohibited Uses", states that "The following uses are prohibited in any Zone ... c) The use of any accessory building or structure or boathouse for human habitation." The purpose of the permission and prohibition of uses in specific zones, and for the use of accessory buildings and structures, is to establish standards for the consistent use of land and to maintain and achieve a desired and consistent character in the development of (ands in the Township. Section 5.1.4 of the Zoning By-Law states that "The maximum height of any detached accessory building or structure, except boathouses, is 4.5 metres (14.7 feet)." The purposes of a maximum height for detached accessory buildings being established include the regulation of: • the maximum elevation and visual dominance of an accessory building or structure to ensure that it remains clearly secondary to the main building on the property, • the uses taking place within them to ensure the use(s) of the detached accessory building remain clearly secondary to the main use on the property, and • the number of storeys of detached accessory buildings, to accommodate the use(s) taking place within them. Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning By-Law states that "The maximum floor area of any one detached accessory building or structure, excluding boathouses, is 70 square metres (753.5 square feet)." The purpose of a maximum floor area for a detached accessory building being established is to regulate the area covered, and potential uses within, a detached accessory building. Further, its purpose is to regulate the visual dominance of an accessory building or structure to ensure that it remains clearly secondary to the main building on the property, and that its use(s) remain clearly secondary to the main use on the property. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 3 of 10 Page 104 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... In the proposals within the Application for Minor Variance for the subject property, the floor area proposed for the detached accessory building exceeds the 70 square metre maximum (753.5 square feet) as a result of the proposed detached accessory building consisting of two storeys. On the basis of the definition of "floor area" in Zoning By-Law 97-95, which "Means the total area of all floors in a building, measured between the exterior faces of the exterior walls of the building of each floor level' temphasis added), the floor area of the proposed detached accessory building consists of a first storey with a floor area of approximately 68.87 square metres (741.3 square feet), and a second storey with a floor area of approximately 54.31 square metres (584.6 square feet), equalling an approximate floor area of the detached accessory building of 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet). Further, the result of the intended construction of the detached accessory building with two storeys leads to the requested variance from the maximum height provision of the Zoning By-Law, with a requested increase in the maximum height from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 4.75 metres (15.6 feet). The cumulative effect of the requests for variances from the maximum height and maximum floor area provisions of the Zoning By-Law are reflective of the request for variance from the uses permitted in detached accessory buildings and structures which, in the subject application, is to permit the use of a proposed second storey above a garage, for human habitation. Their cumulative effect related to the request for variance fram the permitted uses in a detached accessory building lead them to not comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. Therefore, on this basis, the proposals for minor variances to: 1) permit a detached accessory building to be used for human habitation, whether permanent or temporary, 2) increase the maximum height of a detached accessory building from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 4.75 metres (15.6 feet), and 3) to increase the maximum floor area of a detached accessory building from 70 square metres (753.5 square feet) to approximately 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet), are not considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. 4. minimum required setback from a water course for a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building Section 5.33 of the Zoning By-Law states as follows: Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, no building, or structure shall be located within 30 metres (98.4 feet) of the top of bank of any watercourse, with the exception of Lake Simcoe and Bass Lake which are dealt with by Section 5.31. This provision shall also not prevent the expansion or replacement of building or structures that existed on the effective dafe of this By-law within this setback area, provided the expansion or replacement does not have the effect of reducing the setback from the top of bank of any watercourse or increasing the volume or floor area of a Building or structure in a minimum required yard. The purpose of the provision for a minimum required setback from a watercourse for buildings and structures is to preserve the integrity of the watercourse from erosion, and to prevent the erection of buildings or structures on lands that are subject to flooding, low-lying or unstable, or that act as a significant corridor. The subject property has a variable width, and neither of the two existing detached accessory buildings on the property, nor the existing dwelling on the property (estimated to Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 4 of 10 Page 105 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... have been constructed between 1960 and 1970), appear to comply with the above provision of the Zoning By-law. Therefore, on this basis, the proposal for a minor variance to permit a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building to be constructed as near as 8.0 metres (26.25 feet) from the top of bank of the watercourse on the subject property, is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. Are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lof? With respect to the proposals for variances from points 1 through 3, below, although they are considered to conform with the general intent of the Official Pian, since their cumulative effect is considered not to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law, variances from the associated provisions are not considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. 1. use a detached accessory building for human habitation; 2. increase the maximum height of a detached accessory building, from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 4.75 metres (15.6 feet); and 3. increase the maximum floor area of a detached accessory building, from 70 square metres (753.5 square feet) to 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet); With respect to the proposal for variance to decrease the required setbacks for buildings and structures from a watercourse, from 30 metres (98.4 feet) to 8.0 metres (26.25 feet}, since this proposal appears to conform with the the general intent of the Official Plan, and appears comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law, the proposed variance is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Are the variances minor? With respect to the proposals for variances from points 1 through 3, below, since their cumulative effect is considered to have an adverse affect on the character of the surrounding residential area, variances from the associated provisions are not considered to be minor. 1. use a detached accessory building for human habitation; 2. increase the maximum height of a detached accessory building, from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 4.75 metres (15.6 feet); and 3. increase the maximum floor area of a detached accessory building, from 70 square metres (753.5 square feet) to 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet); With respect to the proposal to decrease the required setbacks for the proposed single detached dwelling and the detached accessory building from a watercourse, from 30 metres (98.4 feet) to 8.0 metres (26.25 feet), since this proposal is not anticipated to have an adverse affect on the character of the surrounding residential area, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Enviror Building Department- Engineering Department - Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 5 of 10 Page 106 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA} - applicant required to submit to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) a restoration plan to re-naturalize the water course and the reduced setback between the single detached dwelling and the detached accessory building, and the water course, and the applicant to obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if applicable ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Floor Plans Schedule 4: Exterior Elevations CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, portions of Variance Application 2010-A-20, specifically, to permit a detached accessory building to be used for human habitation, to increase the maximum height of a detached accessory building from 4.5 metres (14.7 feet) to 4.75 metres (15.6 feet), and to increase the maximum floor area of a detached accessory building from 70 square metres (753.5 square feet) to approximately 123.2 square metres (1,326.1 square feet), do not appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. In the opinion of the Planning Department, portions of Variance Application 2010-A-20, specifically, to have the minimum required setback from a water course reduced from 30 metres (98.4 feet) to 8.0 metres (26.25 feet), for a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: 1 // }} ~~" 1 ~w Alan Wiebe Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Planner Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 6 of 10 Page 107 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-20 (Eggert Boehlau) I ~ti ,, . ~ _~ I ~ ~ ~ J ~-_ t ~ j t ~ ~ ' ~ 1 `` ° ~ ~ ~~ z ~ ~ 1--',---` %" I ,,,. ~~ ~ ~' `', ~ ` L~ __ , r~---_ ~.~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~. ~ \~ L ~L.., r 1 ~'`_ __.-- ~q Lake Simcoe ~'~?~ Subject Lands 0 50 100 20Q Mefers Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 7 of 10 Page 108 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2010-A-20 (Eggert Boehlau) ~ ~ ~_~ , ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ,~ ~ ~~ ~ .' ~' i t ~9°'' rr = / ~ 1 ~ N / n~ c~ / / ! ~'°~ "+' ~ ' ~ ~~'~~~w ! 'clad r l~ 4'~ /' ~~_ ~ ' y, ,~~ \\ ~$ ~ X06 ' u ~ ! ~ _, , o ~`'ti~~ 1 ... 0 -- '""._ i 1 ~ / '~ °'~c~~~ - to tom- m ~~...~~ -~. S ~ / ~ ~ / M ~(~b^r°di ~+ p$•i !^ I ~ ~\"K ~/ tit ~ ,~ :/ -n I '~ ,~ i ' r ~~ 9 -- ~ ~ g~ ~` ~ .- ttd3te~ct ~+,t ~ ':s'€r~ M'~'" ~ ~ ~~ ~SL't£-. YEN ~ i N~ \~ m Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 8 of 10 Page 109 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... SCHEDULE 3: FLOOR PLANS 2010-A-20 (Eggert Boehlau} 8690 1}I Q ~.! ~ QQ 1/ g y~,~ 869U l(~-------------` -- --- --- ------------ __-_ ---~ ------°--_ --_ ~ -- ~ i i; p ' I Q~ ~ f i , ~ j / ~ p ~ W '~jj o '~ ~ i -_.~..r..~._~ 1 ~ 1 ~ , t-------------,._-__-_---_-----.-.--_ Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-20 Page 9 of 10 Page 110 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 111 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 112 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 113 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... .__----------_~__._~.___ ~ _-___a--__-~ -------_. Y___._ ____--,.._---------- T~1 ~ ~ - A ,- _ _s___-__-_- ~. ~' _ ~ = ~~ ~, , . ~. R ~ `~ y - ~~ a F 1.~.--e.-.d-.-e-....~...................~ a...e..n.......a-~a,a..... -,~- .-s..a--~~ F A~`` f.---r----..tea----..--- ..~.-~-.. .-a~m.w.a .....~~-.~ W 0 m 0 N Q O O N _ i _. Page 114 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 115 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 116 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... Page 117 of 164 5g) - 2010-A-20 -Eggert Boehlau 2251 Ridge Road, Part of Lo... .; ~- . ~, ~~ ,~ 4 , f /~~A7 ~y ' ~~ t yS J9 ze ~ z ~~=4 ,. ~, «~ St' • ' 'gym,; a 4 ~ '~9~. ~ ~ 4 E i ~ O ~. 7~ ~_ _ ~~ ~ ~a• rte. - a~ .._ sx "~ ~ -:e.- A e ..;;,s .ec - „a y,,.a (~5. ~t°~~~ ,y... ~wo,® . ~4 WFI ~' _ °+e .~..TM,. .4... n ~` t * i.~,n. ~' e' *5. ~'+rh'~ dfmw5 . ~'~N-..fin y~y ~iF A FL.w ~ ~.1''lP ~ _ y" iL _ _. .. _.aw+. h s Fa s K~r ~ ~,., yep' `C - .Mw~~~~' ~ ma 1k- ^a ~.w ~ . p • k +~r.~". y.._. • .,y> 4'ycr~*%.~F+WA ~2 .Ns~:Ri'~„ . ~ *' .~ `~~. ,~' ~ i~ ^~' = fi~~"""8~'';' "fin ~ ~ ~ : N . . ,,~,.. . ~ o u P ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~~ o a N ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~- ~. ~: ~,~_ t Page 118 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-16 (Bruce and Manon Leibold) ' ~4• i i Vi Lt! _Z J ~~ ~L_ LAUDEFZ.ROAD ~~.--`"`-'- O~D_BARRlE_ROAD Subject Lends 0 2040 80 120 160 42 Lauder Road Meters Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Appllcatlon No. 2010-A-16 Page 5 of 6 Page 64 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... Page 65 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... II 11 N ------ 11 .. .. 11 11 Ii ~~ .. ~~ ,~ I p II ~~ ~~ ~~ 11 I 1 1, II 1 11 ~~ II ~~ II 11 I 1 II II 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 II II 11 11 II II 11 ~~ ~~ i' ° I I il I tl ~~ ~~ Ii q ' I I i l I I 2 _ I' ~ I 11 11 11 11 11 I I ~ II II 11 ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I~ 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 II ~~ ,~ 11 Il tl 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 I I + ~ 11 11 11 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 II II 1 1 ~~ ~~ II _ ~ ri li i i ~~ .. ~~ II 9 n 1 iu 1 i I ~--------------- ------ .. ------ ----------~----fit > - ~ ro X1 11 1 I ~ 11 d 11 h ~ ~ e ~ u u 11 ry 4 11 l ~ ~ n l ~ ~ ~ u n h h q~ r I ~~ Page 66 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... ~ ~~ . ~ , $. ' r ~ E ' ~ .. ~ x t +~ , x^1 ~ t - ~ ~° ~s F~" x ~:~ '~ k ~~ '~~ a Ff' _ 4. f . ~ !:: 3 .~' t +- .. _ ` ~ 'u n ''Y ...... ,. __.., .__.. ;~, ~ !rte `~. Y t~ i _ ~~; S ' ~ ~Y ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ _t ~, .4~ o {~~ ~ ~ ! ' M t ; 4 . 1 J ~ 4 { i ~ ~ g; ~ ~e, r i~~~ ~ ,R ~ . ~ t _ 'h_.,. _- T ~ _ ~• ti.1 x '+ti ~ .y *C'~ ~~ i . ~ ~~ ~_ I fi }~~. x ~( x I Af V/ J ~ ~ y~ ~ , ' ~~k. ~y ~` ~ ` o ~- R ~±! ~ i o ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a e ~ ~ ~ s~, r x 9 y F `~ti ~" i : v ,; P. "- * ~~ e YY i!~ z7 ~,.~. .. Page 67 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... ~ $; r ~. a' K ~ F?'~.,o S' i d f :':' ~G Aa .a. ti ~ ~{ ~ ~ ~JY~ F'~~ .! 5 ~I~ ~ P ~a..~ 4 ' ., ~t . } ~ O .:+_ ~ 1.~' a,r,~f . ;: ~~~ a b ~ •'AS~= ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ F-- ' ` O ~ ~ N ~Y ` h~~• f a ~ ~ ;.~~~ , ~ ~ ~a ;~ ~ ~ ~ ~. + +¢ ~~' ~aF~ #4 '~ ~~ , ~ i j ( 1' '~ t Page 68 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... Page 69 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... Page 70 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... - ~ n R- s O P C,~ W `t } K `i/ . c 6 ~< ~ ~~~ ~ ~~<~ ` ~ _T O L '~i~x ~ ` ~ r ' O O + ~ "~. ~ 1 1 ~~~ s t f af, 4 O O ~ ~ qSm r k N L } 0 a ~,~. ~~ -~ . Page 71 of 164 5d) - 2010-A-16 -Bruce and Manon Leibold 42 Lauder Road, PI... Page 72 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... ~t~ ,4. ru•i„h~i, I ~fJ~~/~~'~012te Proud Hrri~egr, F.rriring Fnuur TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-17 Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Variance Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (William and Carolyn Smith) 9 Trillium Trail Roll #: 51 M-324 Lot 24 (Medonte) R.M.S. File #: 4346-010.002-30248 I REQUIRED CONDITIONS: I 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: a} the addition be located no closer than approximately 3.9 metres from the north interior lot line 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010-A-17, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to the minimum required interior side yard setback for a single detached dwelling in the Rural Residential One (RUR1) Zone. The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 45 metres on Trillium Trail, a depth of 107 metres, and a lot area of 0.4 hectares. The subject property contains a single detached dwelling, built in approximately 1990. The applicant is proposing to construct an attached garage occupying an area of 67.8 square metres, to be located in the north corner of the existing dwelling. The applicant has indicated that the existing garage will be converted into living space. ANALYSIS: Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-17 Page 1 of 4 Page 73 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... The applicant is proposing to construct an addition (garage)onto the side of an existing single detached dwelling. The addition is proposed to have a total floor area of approximately 67.8 square metres (730 square feet). The applicant is requesfing the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Zone: Rural Residential One Exception 10 fRUR1*10) ~ Required Proposed Table 61 Standards for Permitted Uses: Minimum Required Interior Side Yard Setback 8.0 m (26.2 ft) 3.9 m (12.9 ft) FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general Intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Residential in the Official Plan. Section C4 of the Plan states that the primary permitted use of lands within this designation shall be single detached dwellings and home occupations. Therefore, the addition onto the existing dwelling unit would constitute a permitted use in the Rural Residential designation. 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 lot is zoned Rural Residential One Exception 10 (RUR1 *10) Zone. The site inspection revealed that the addition to the dwelling should not adversely impact access to the rear of the property, as the south interior side lot line is located over 10 metres (32 feet) beyond the south wall of the dwelling. The proposed side yard of 3.9 metres (12.9 feet) will still provide adequate access to the rear yard. In addition, the proposed expansion of the dwelling otherwise meets with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height, front and rear yard setbacks) for dwelling units in the RUR1 Zone. The zoning exception that is placed on the property specifies that the first storey floor area be 90 square metres, which the dwelling currently meets. On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? Based on the site inspection, the proposed addition would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Existing trees will provide the abutting dwelling with adequate buffering from the proposed addition. The Location of the proposed addition in the south side yard is hindered by the location of the septic system. The proposed addition in relation to the large lot will still maintain the character of the neighborhood. On this basis, the proposal is considered desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lot. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-17 Page 2 of 4 Page 74 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Is the variance minor? As this application is deemed to be inconformity with the Official Plan, maintain the intent of the Zoning By-Law, and constitutes appropriate development, the variance is considered to be minor in nature. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department - I ATTACHMENTS: I Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2010-A-17 to grant an increase in the minimum interior side yard for an attached garage from the required 8 metres to 3.9 metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: ~~~~, _ Steve arson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: .~" Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-17 Page 3 of 4 Page 75 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-17 (Smith) ~~ ui z J HOR5ESHOE-VAL-L-EY-ROAD l~ .` i W z ~~~ J ~-.~ ® SUBJECTLANQS 9 TRILLIUM TRAIL 01530 60 90 72D ~I ~7Meters j Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-17 Page 4 of 4 Page 76 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... ~L T I O 0 N ..... ... -..... as ...,erd t.r_rmac rc~la LIiYC Y.12 _ ~ . ~~~ •C O FF y~ ~~ Nz I "K ~ ~ 'a.sE. >r ,1 Q~ D a ~ Y QPK Q-q *~ Qz W ~ ,~ ., a _ o oa m W f W .g J~ _ Y ~ m Z O ~; M Y 1 J - t~- m 4~"1 z" 3 g u ~ L~::i. a z t7 N ui ~~~ ~ n ~ p J o .rt: . °w ~ ~ a j os ,.'~ ~ ~ 9 .U ~o ~~ y. yy .+ `...~ J • u7 ~ ~' 6 W Z ~ '.a .. i/ ~ Q D # ., _ ~ ' ~ ail,. . ~ .~~ •, a:, d. ;:~!.1.', c 'y, ~ m ~ ~, [YN~ . Y g. ~ ~ ~~ he to C 201 F: ~. ilroYl4 fat }'~ W •@qd$y~ ~ ~~ b ~r j f k M. sAv.CrN _ .• ~ ~ ~~ W 076;~:p 07g V •ie n 1.=p_Net z t ° d nl»+ueay~ ~ wnJ'~~1 ~~~ a~ ```----,..,,,~ S ~ W ~ ~ - ~~7~jj7ttO W $~ 'bi71 .7t, kOliW at!J7 yDI ~ p arlW 82 ~6FH rut*IlroelU 7cwWyS 1 i q SE I I _ ~_ ~ a1i17Ua7 ~ t f ~ IJ R~- ~) -~ ~ Z g ~ o °a ' s. ~ ~_ Page 77 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Page 78 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Page 79 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Page 80 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... ~~ .~ c 0 ~e i ~ '. ~ ~ ~ ' r t O ~ t r ; O .+.. ~ ~, , c;` ~ a '~ ~ -~:.~~~ ~ ~ } ~. O Q ~ x ~ ~ ~ t 4 N `~ O ~'~~r .~ ~ h z ~ z~ S ~ ~ k `~' t e '~ .. ~ ~~ s Page 81 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Page 82 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... i~ .~ ~i l~ 1 Q ~ ~ .-. _ •~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~,:: 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ o L ~~ t' ' ~, .~ ~ • T~ y' ~# f ~, 'd y r e ^~ Y _ ~ ~~. S y Page 83 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... ~. ~ ~i. ~ L T ~ ~ 1 ~` ~ "" :fir ~' ~- ~ o , ~ _1 ^ ,~~ O ~ ... ~ . 1 1 o z L f' Y =~ ~ o - ~- ~7 .~ ^W L ~ li ` 'i O } .1y rt, + j~3. ~~ ~, :x ~ ~ ~t Tom- pR 'i I1R~~C' g q:. . t i Page 84 of 164 5e) - 2010-A-17 -William and Carolyn Smith 9 Trillium Trail... Page 85 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... . Twnship rf Prnud He.impr, F,~risiq~ Fnuvc TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Application No: To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: 2010-A-19 Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Consent Application Motion # June 17, 2010 (Harry and Shirley Evans} Plan 709 Lot 30 Roll #: , 27 Greenwood Forest Road R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-008-20500 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: 1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real property report so that the attached garage be located no closer than approximately 2.4 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. 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if applicable 4. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010-A-19, for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to reducing the minimum required interior side yard setback provision in the Shoreline Residential {SR) Zone. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to construct an addition onto the side of an existing single detached dwelling. The addition is proposed to have a total floor area of approximately 40 square metres (439 square feet). The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning ay-law 97-95: Zone: Shoreline Residential fSR) Zone Table B1 Standards for Permitted Uses: Minimum Required Interior Side Yard Setback Required 3.0 m {9.8 ft) Proposed 2.4 m (7.9 ft) Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Applicatlon No. 2010-A-19 Page 1 of 4 Page 86 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... 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 the existing detached 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 Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone and Open Space (OS} Zone. Permitted uses in the SR Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, such as garages and storage sheds. The purpose of the interior side yard setback is to provide access to the rear yard of the property, and to provide for a degree of separation between neighbouring dwellings. A site inspection revealed that the proposed addition would not be closer to the west interior side yard lot line than the existing dwelling. The existing dwelling does not comply with the side yard setback requirement of the SR Zone. In addition, the property to the west of the subject lands is municipally owned open space, with no structures, and as such privacy issues are anticipated. The OS Zone is to the rear of the property along Lake Simcoe, which the proposed addition will maintain the existing setback and not encroach into the required setback. 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? Based on the site inspection, the proposed single family dwelling addition would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. A large existing hedge will provide the abutting open space lot to the west with adequate buffering from the proposed addition. The location of the applicants' driveway is situated on the west side of the property due to the location of the proposed septic bed being located north of the proposed dwelling. The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing interior side yard setback on the east side in order to be able to access the rear of the property. The lots in the area including the subject lands are generally similar in size, averaging in width of approximately 15 metres, making it difficult to meet the required setbacks. The proposed setback of 2.4 metres would be in keeping with the surrounding area and would maintain the character of the area. is the variance minor? As this application is not anticipated to have an adverse affect on the character of the surrounding residential area, and the neighboring dwellings, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-19 Page 2 of 4 Page 87 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineering Department- Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority- ATTACHMENTS: 1: Location Map CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2010-A-19, to construct an addition onto the existing dwelling and to have a interior side yard setback reduced from the required 3 metres to 2.4 metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: f-- „ sr~..iz---_ Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-19 Page 3 of 4 Page 88 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-19 (Evans} IEL-D~D ai ® Subject Lands 27 Greenwood Forest Road Lake Simcoe 0 ZO 46 80 1Z0 160 Meters Development Services Meeting Date June 17, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-19 Page 4 of 4 Page 89 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Q3t~H l+Oru+e++ sa~ueoe- cx~.us xe~ev wuca tuawvlou aiarsa- • nr~i ~tsf saeQwa- ~ 1L'Xy1- 1"Sbd A~Otl 9 3 ME L~ 3 tlIQ y~tl v~illplfl].. 6Y (6 97a77O1Q3 Sd ~M1Cd N/8 M(YY S3EL'StA.#- 101 '3Nrt` tYt'FU Zit Oro NDill fl1GN70- 8t tlK Mai AhRPPF/13 2y01s" S1Yt]f00- V!5 Y'N@ A11H3~ rrs wore ar~ris a7~a90- 96 mans ar~~~~ N __ -~- --- -J ~.- 'a _ ~g. s; ~' ~~~ l~ o a ~ r .~_. j ... ~. . W O .~-~-- ~"_ z N t;. ti '~ #a~... :k' !j a p! cS; i 2 ,•r ~~~~ ~~~~ ~ .,Y - -~ ~y I ~--- --- '~~. .:, :,, 3.:trtYfr /d r ~~aet `aot ~-V tl3S3(f4~J ~ nrwa sr o1Gtl irmetf YW1 1Q1 ll1tl1 41i~7Tf5 ;i}! Ekt G]1NI13tl 7i101K1tl1$~ lh -s~.aH .~.~ 9 ~~ n v °~ g~ .U ~? r ._, ~~ .. d~d ~ a71g65. !a M,, .48'R o t rrrs p.. rt' ~ v .. r~ ~ Page 90 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... ;~; ~' _~.___ ~..~r. r tr ~r- -~- ' e i`~ j i ~, ~ ~.. = "._ a ~"'V - ~ ~ .' ' ~..~.~ w~ ___. i ~•..i ~ .~ ~}~., # {~ Y, j 8 jt_~,,..,_ ~ - +~^~ ___.-. ._k_ r ~.. N ADC ENC. «.....o4.e.e..~. . - rram.v-k.vrrmm~.suwn. T EJ4S77NCi SRS~t~ta17' PL.kfV ~L ~~°~. ~` :~GRL~WWId1+OtU157rtttr L ADARfi=ABl~ b~S1GN G~.~3tJ~' ~a,~«~~-a,~~n, ~ f,~c~rm = ~,~r M1S47lAN Nyf4 i+"E R4 fb4MA[M~MA.iwi srt~+u~Icla~La.afrrrybY}r y~~ f4tl6(plq rt+dAi kN pt~ftll~iq~ tw~.nnr4sii/ •"P~`~.. PIeI OMi-' Page 91 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... TAKE 5U1COE .ewes eas: ~. an ~~... ~" ~ ~'`~ v a ~ ij ~. r'~ R F~ iI 5 j i i~ ~ ' ' ~~~ I f Sec s~T `I~ ` ~ CilL7l9 s i ~ , fa .~ ^- I ~ E E ,,,, ~ ~~ o 9~ ..~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ . '-- ~ ( API's t F ;, ~ iMz ~i ; ' N r f G AC£MPi000 FOR£fiS R(yRD ApC ~N~.ar,.a~tr „w~b~•~m®•~ SftEPLAN o~ ~~ rlR~eaa~.~%rr.ramgoa~a 27 ~tiV00®E~S4;rA0 r a.~ rrwa e,^r. wrr . n . .m.,_.~._ lk~APT~diBL£ DESiC3N UROUP ~/7~+0'Mt4n Gta~mrhwvr yak aascuww~+nrxammbwrn.aa-.a~ a~..orrsa~.~crsey.. aarswwmaa~..xa'alr~.aa~ uao.a•ok~ra ~ ~ a __ e_ _..,_... 1'•2Td I.Ki it4m~~ iI Wi C 6Dkl c 1 t:. ed• Page 92 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... ___ .______ _ T ~________. _. '= ~.: `~` ~~ ~ -- ~ ' a.., ,~ ~. }6y «.~ y ~ »f4.i P ~ ~ Q ~ f ~~ E ~e , ~~~ ~. #_1 . ..,. f ~~ y ~~ -.-~,, v1 fi'wyh~s"C ..,. 1 ~ ~ i ~ 'M TJ yyy. ! ; • ~~ ~' } L ~ ~~ ~~ ~~J\~ ~ ~ r ' ~ i ~ j v _`. 1 .~ { ` ra i I d Ma j~ ' O k ~- i s ~.~ # t ~ ~ 1 ~ E ~ f t 1~ 4 ~ T -! ~~~ o ~ ~...y( ,a !$ ! Lam. i ~ t~ rr. -e~ a F I 'r+i ~4~ • -~ N I fr. j ADC ~NC_,.~da~,,.~.,tr r4~aoia.:~ ra~be ~Pit8P8dED~1AII+1PL~50RpL,4AwA4 ~ ~1~APT-J18i.E DEStC3N t3RQUP ',.""~Os~~"'~•'°a"~' n~woa®~~rran A.~ra+~..geraKo.a~..r .~_ . mwne~wnra.wnex6,amn¢orw.~.. .•ac~,rr.,c#,.s,no.dtrr*~. ..sur. i~~a:v a.¢Re•a~ea ~r~o~uxrrvea~gn+sw umpsens!eebn na}nBC+ naoec tJ1D3ik: 6raJ (ur. ~dA Page 93 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... ~ ~~ r ~ f I~ ~~ ~~ ! Yi ~{ ~ ~1 1 t 1 f S '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~ .. ¢. ~ ~ ~~ ,~ I f~i W ~ I ~i11t~ -"e ~ ~~ ~ l~~p~ ,..., ~1 t71 ~ t ,~ ~~~ ~~ - ~ ~~ ~ C ~ ~ ~~D Q ! ~ 1 ; ~, v ~ ~ i i~~~~ i F,~ ~ ~ -~ ~~ ~ry t V O ~ y ~ k N r`~` ~~~ ~ ~...~ro.~~_ ~ i ~ ~ 6 i ~ !~ (` ! ~~ ~~~~ ,m~ ~~ ~w ~~°d' ~~ 5~ Page 94 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Page 95 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Page 96 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... i~ ~ ~: ~ ._~ s ~; ~, :;~~~' s# _~. ~..V t ~~~ ~ v ~ ~ a ~~ N +,r ~ a- §~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~ , F } ~ ~::~ O ~~ ~. ~' a -; s• ". ~ N ~ ~ a L ~ x~ -~ ~ ~_ ,~ ;.- f ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ t ;~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ y, l1 n ~ = 4, s 4 ~;• ;~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~. j ~ ~d. Page 97 of 164 5f) - 2010-A-19 -Harry and Shirley Evans 27 Greenwood Fores... Page 98 of 164