Loading...
09 16 2010 CofA AgendaPage 3 -8 9 -43 44 -63 64 -76 77 -94 95 -115 116 -134 f) 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 a) Motion to Adopt Minutes 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley Avenue, Plan 626, Lot 105 Relief from minimum front yard, minimum exterior side yard, sight lines on a corner lot and setbacks for driveways. b) 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and George Armstrong Thompson 21 Patterson Road, Plan 1719, RP 51 R -9538, Part 1 Relief from minimum interior side yard setback. c) 201 0 -A -30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands Limited Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 4 Relief from temporary construction and sales. d) 2010 -B -28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townline - East Part of Lot 12, Concession 14, RP 51R-36312 Part 1 Boundary adjustment. e) 2010 -B -27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, Douglas Hardy Johnstone, Edna Eileen Ayers, Margaret Eileen Ayers, Norma Irene Harvie 451/421 Line 14 North, Concession 1, Part of Lot 12, Parts 1, 2, and 3, Registered Plan 51 R20203 Boundary adjustment. 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Companies Inc. Lot 27, Plan M -187, Lot 23, Concession 5 Boundary adjustment. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday, September 16, 2010 9:30 a.m. Page 1 of 134 Page Committee of Adjustment Agenda - Thursday, September 16, 2010 7. NEXT MEETING DATE Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT a) Motion to Adjourn Page 2 of 134 Present: Staff present: Bruce Chappell, Chair Roy Hastings Garry Potter Lynda Aiken Michelle Lynch 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:30 a.m. Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer /Intermediate Planner Alan Wiebe, 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. CA100819 -1 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment agenda for Thursday, August 19, 2010 be received and adopted. Carried. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST None declared. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment of meeting held on July 15, 2010. Motion No. CA100819 -2 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, July 15, 2010 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 1 of 6 Page 3 of 134 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — Thursday, August 19, 2010 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2010 -B -21 - Bryan and Daniel Lambert 839 Ridge Road West, Lot 26, Concession 5 Create a new residential lot. Application is in conjunction with 2010 -A -21. Daniel Lambert, applicant, and Wayne Lambert, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100819 -3 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment denies Consent Application 2010 - B-21, being to create a new residential lot fronting onto Ridge Road West, as the application does not conform to the Township of Oro - Medonte's Official Plan, the County of Simcoe's Official Plan or with applicable Provincial Policies. b) 2010 -A -21 - Bryan and Daniel Lambert 839 Ridge Road West, Lot 26, Concession 5 Relief from the minimum lot area and lot frontage. Application is in conjunction with 2010 -B -21. Daniel Lambert, applicant, and Wayne Lambert, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100819 -4 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes Carried. It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment denies Variance Application 2010 - A -21, being for relief from the minimum lot area and lot frontage requirements for the creation of a residential lot, as the application does not satisfy the four tests required for a Minor Variance under the Planning Act. Carried. Page 2 of 6 Page 4 of 134 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — Thursday, August 19, 2010 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes c) 2010 -B -25 - David and Sylvia Beard 872 Horseshoe Valley Road East, Concession 11, West 1 /2 Lot 1 (Former Township of Medonte) Technical severance to create a lot which once existed as a separate parcel of land. David and Sylvia Beard, applicants, and Shirley Partridge, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100819 -5 Moved by Lynch, Seconded by Potter It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment, at the request of the applicants, defers Consent Application 2010 -B -25 in order to allow the applicants to have discussions with the County of Simcoe regarding access to the property off of Horseshoe Valley Road. Carried. Page 3 of 6 Page 5 of 134 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — Thursday, August 19, 2010 d) 2010 -B -24 - 1802281 Ontario Limited 1099 Old Barrie Road West, Part of Lot 11, Concession 5 Create a new lot. Greg Gemmel!, applicant, and Cam Sellers, agent, were present. Motion No. CA100819 -6 Moved by Aiken, Seconded by Lynch 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional approval of Consent Application 2010 -B -24, being to create a new lot fronting onto Line 4 North. The land to be severed would have approximately 30 metres of frontage on Line 4 North, a depth of approximately 181 metres (594 feet), and an area of approximately 1.9 hectares (4.7 acres). The proposed retained lands would have a frontage on Old Barrie Road of approximately 396 metres (1299 feet), a depth of approximately 159 metres (521 feet), and an area of approximately 7.1 hectares (17.5 acres). The retained lands would be the balance of Plan of Subdivision Application 2006 - SUB -02, subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicant pay $2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 4. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; 5. That the applicant apply for a rezoning of the property to remove the holding provision; 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 4 of 6 Page 6 of 134 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — Thursday, August 19, 2010 e) 2010 -A -28 - Jesse McKerroll 3225 Line 7 North, Part Lot 1, Concession 8 Relief from minimum setback from front lot line for agricultural buildings. 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes Jesse McKerroll, applicant, was present. Roelof Knegt and Markus Schneider, neighbours, noted their support for the application. Motion No. CA100819 -7 Moved by Potter, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants approval of Variance Application 2010 -A -28, being for the construction of an agricultural building with a setback of 23 metres from the front lot line, subject to the following conditions: 1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the proposed agricultural building be located no closer than approximately 23 metres from the front lot line of the subject property; 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals from Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, if applicable; 4. 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 5 of 6 Page 7 of 134 Committee of Adjustment Minutes — Thursday, August 19, 2010 f) 2010 -A -29 - James Rogers 79 Stanley Avenue, Plan 626, Lot 105 Relief from minimum exterior side yard, minimum interior side yard, minimum rear yard and minimum first storey floor area. John Raimondi, agent, was present. The Committee received correspondence from Joanne Taylor dated August 18, 2010, Harold and Sue Regan dated August 19, 2010 and Marley and Jerry Greenglass dated August 18, 2010. Joanne Taylor, Harold Regan and Jerry Greenglass reiterated the concerns outlined in their correspondence. Motion No. CA100819 -8 Moved by Potter, Seconded by Hastings 4a) - Motion to Adopt Minutes It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defeats Variance Application 2010 -A -29 as it is not in keeping with the neighbourhood nor is the application considered minor. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. NEXT MEETING DATE Thursday, September 16, 2010, 9:30 a.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. CA100819 -9 Moved by Potter, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 11:39 a.m Carried. Carried. Bruce Chappell, Chair Steven Farquharson, Secretary Treasurer Page 6 of 6 Page 8 of 134 Application No: 201O-A-32 Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll #: 4346-010-010-16200 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Subject: Variance Application (James Rogers) Plan 636, Lot 105 79 Stanley Avenue (Former Township of Oro) i. 2.95 metres from the front lot line; and ii. 1.37 metres from the exterior side lot line; 58\ James Rogers Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Planner Motion # R.M.S. File #: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision, with respect to the construction of a single detached dwelling on the subject property: 1. that the setbacks from the interior side and rear lot lines for the dwelling and deck(s) be in conformity with Table B1 of the Township's Zoning By-Law 97-95; 2. that the setbacks from the front and exterior side lot lines for the dwelling and deck(s) be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. 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 deck(s) and the respective lot lines be no less than the following: 4. 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 single detached dwelling and deck(s) not encroach into the sight line on the corner lot any more than to the "line joining a point on the exterior side fot fine to a p0/nt on the front lot line, with each such p0/nt being [0.96 metres] from the hypothetical point of intersection of the exterior side and the front lot line"; 5. that the applicant obtain an Entrance Permit for the relocation of the driveway for access to the single detached dwelling on the subject property; 6. that an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by way of survey/real property report that the distance between the driveway and the rear lot line be no less than 1.5 metres; Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 1 of 11 Page 9 of 134 7. that the applicant obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if applicable; and 8. 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. I BACKGROUND: The subject property occupies an area of approximately 0.046 hentaros, has a frontage on Stanley Avenue of approximately 17.94 matven, and a depth of ranging between 28.02 metres and 27.29 metres. The applicant is proposing to construct a three-storey single detached dwelling with a first storey floor area of 101.33 square metres, standing 10.574 metres above grade, and located in compliance with the minimum required interior side yard setback (at 4.089 metres) and minimum required rear yard setback (at 7.953 metres). The proposed single detached dwelling is proposed to be located within the 7.5 metre minimum required front yard (at 2.95 motroo), within the 7.5 metre minimum required exterior side yard (at 1.37 nnetrcs), within the required sight line on a corner lot, and proposed to be accessed by a driveway located within the minimum the 3.0 metre setback from an interior lot line for driveways. The purpose of this report is to consider Minor Variance Application 2010-A-32. for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to the: 1. minimum required setback from the front lot line for single detached dwellings 2. minimum required setback from the exterior side lot line for single detached dwellings 3. construction of a building within the sight line on a corner lot 4. minimum required setback from an interior lot line for a driveway ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Table B1 of Zoning By-law 97-95: Zone: Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Reauired Proposed 1. Table Bi Minimum front yard 2. Table B1 Minimum exterior side yard 3. Section 5.34 — Si ht lines on a corner lot Buildings prohibited 4. Section 5.20.2.3 — Setbacks for dr 3.0 metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. 7.5 metres 7.5 metres 58\ James Rogers 2.95 metre 1.37 metres Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 2 of 11 Building within sight line 1.5 metres Page 10 of 134 POLICIES/LEGISLATION: 00 the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? 58\ James Rogers The subject property is designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.1 of the Official Plan states that the objectives of the Shoreline designation are: • "To maintain the existing character of this predominantly residential area. • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline • To ensure that existing development is appropriately services with water and sewer services." Section C5.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses on lands designated Shoreline ... are single detached dwellings .. .", and accessory uses. Therefore, on this basis, the four proposals for variances in the "Analysis" section, above, are considered to conform with the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-Law. Permitted uses in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings. Due to the effects of the dimensions and size of the subject property on the opportunity to construct a new single detached dwelling, the relief sought from Zoning By-Law 97-95 are evaluated in consideration of the minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage provisions of the Zoning By-Law. Table B1 of the Zoning By-Law requires a minimum lot area in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone of 0.2 heotmves, and a minimum lot frontage of 30 metres. The purpose for minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage provisions in the Zoning By-Law is to regulate the size and visual prominence of properties within specific zones, to ensure relative consistency in the character of properties on the basis of the respective zone(s) within which they are Iocated. At approximately 0.046 hectares in size, with a frontage on Stanley Avenue of approximately 17.94 metres, the subject property is deficient in the minimum required lot size and lot frontage for a property in the Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. With respect to''Non'connp|ying lots", section 5.17.1 of the Zoning By-Law states that "A lot in existence prior to the effective date of this By-law that does not meet the lot area and/or lot frontage requirements of the applicable Zone, may be used and buildings thereon may be erected, enlarged, repaired or renovated provided the use conforms with the By-law and the buildings or structures comply with alt of the other provisions of this By-law." 1. Minimum required setback from the front lot line for single detached dwellings, and 2. Minimum required setback from the exterior side lot line for single detached dwellings 3. Construction of a building within the sight line on a corner lot Table B1 of the Township's Zoning By-Law 97-95 requires single detached dwellings to be located no closer than 7.5 metres from both the front and exterior side lot lines, and Section 5.34 of the Zoning Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 3 of 11 Page 11 of 134 58\-2O1O-A-32- James Rogers By-Law prohibits the construction of buildings or structures in the sight line on a corner kd The purpose of the minimum required front yard setback is to ensure that a consistent character will be maintained within required yards that front on a Street and, in the case of a corner lot, the purpose of the exterior side yard setback is to ensure that this same character is maintained within yards that front on a street and to ensure that buildings and structures will not encroach into the required sight line for traffic approaching an intersection. The proposed variances request reductions in the minimum required front yard, from 7.5 metres to 2.95 mntnao, in the minimum required exterior side yard, from 7.5 metres to 1.37 nmetres, and in the required sight line on a corner lod, from a line between hypothetical points on the front and exterior side lot lines located 7.5 metres from the intersection of these points to a line between hypothetical points located 6.96 metres from the intersection of these points. Based on a site inspection and the Topographic Survey submitted dated June 23, 2010. the subject property has an existing dwelling located at approximately 170 metres from the front lot |/ne, at approximately 1.20 metres from the extehors/de lot line (with architectural features encroaching up to 1.53 metres over the exterior side lot line), and located within the sight line with the line crossing points on the front and exterior side lot lines located approximately 4.56 metres from the hypothetical point of ntersection of these lot lines. Section 5.16 of the Zoning By-Law considers "Non-Complying Buildings and 8tnuctur*o^, and provides direction for their "enlargement, repair, replacement or renovation", provided that such work: "a) does not further encroach into a required yard ... b) does not increase the amount of floor area or volume in a required yard, c) does not increase in any other way a situation of non-compliance; and, d) complies with all other applicable provisions of this By-Law." Although the proposed dwelling does not further encroach into required yards than the existing dwelling, it would occupy a larger floor area in the required exterior side yard. With the exception of increasing the amount of floor area in the required exterior side yard and potentially increasing the volume of a building in the required front and exterior yanja, the proposed dwelling does not in any other way increase a situation of non-compliance. Convense|y, the proposed dwelling would decrease situations of non-compliance by encroaching to lesser extents than the existing dvve||ing. into the required front and exterior side yards and into the required sight line. Thernfnna, on these basea, the proposed reductions in the minimum required front and exterior side yard setbacks and in the required sight line are considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. 4. Minimum required setback from an interior lot line for a driveway Section 5.20.2.3 of the Zoning By-Law requires d that cross a front or exterior side lot line to be no closer than 3.0 metres to the interior lot line. The purpose for a minimum required setback for driveways from interior lot lines is to ensure an appropriate degree of separation between accesses to dwellings on adjacent properties. ' "For the purpose of this By-law, a sight Jine on a corner lot is a line joining 5 p0/nt on the exterior side lot line to a point on the front lot line, with each such point being 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) from the hypothetical point of intersection of the exterior side and the front lot line." (extract from Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-Law 97-95, Page 44, Section 5.34) Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 4 of 11 Page 12 of 134 Based on a site inapeoUon, the driveway accessing the dwelling on the property to the south of the subject property appears to have a setback from the interior lot line that is less than the 3.0 metre. Lihevion, the driveway currently accessing the dwelling on the subject property, on Stanley Avenue, appears to be Iocated closer to the interior lot line to the west than the 1 .5 metre setback proposed for accessing a new dwelling. Further, based on line stakes inserted on the subjec property and in the drainage ditch between the subject property and the roed, denoting the proposed location of the drivovvmy, there would appear to be a reasonable degree of separation between the driveway to the neighbouring dwelling to the south, and the proposed driveway accessing the proposed dwelling on the subject property. Tharaho/g, on this beais, the proposed reduction in the minimum required setback for a driveway to the interior lot line is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. Are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? 58\ James Rogers The variances sought from points 1 through 3 above, specifically, the minimum required front and exterior side yard setbacks, and the encroachment into the sight line on the corner lot, decrease situations of non-compliance in terms of degree of encroachment into these areas, as well as in terms of the floor area occupied by the proposed dwelling in the required front yard, as compared with the existing dwelling. Hovvever, the proposed location of a new dwelling, as shown in Schedule 3 to this report, would increase a situation of non-compliance in terms of the floor area occupied in the required exterior side yard. Based on the "Front 3D" and "Rear 3D" drawings submitted, as shown in Schedule 4, and the "Third Floor Plan" drawing aubmitted, as shown in Schedule 5, the proposed dwelling stands three storeys above grade, with the third storey located above the northern most area of the western portion of the proposed dvvoUing, and occupying an area of approximately 33.98 square metres (365.75 square feet). Based on the building footprint information provided in Schedule 3, at 127.6 square metres (1,373.47 square #»ed, this third storey occupies an area equivalent to approximately 27 per cent of the footprint of the proposed dwelling. On the basis of the proposed location of the new dwelling shown in Schedule 3, the majority of the floor area and volume of this third storey would be located at greater than 7.5 metres from the exterior side lot line, and it would be entirely located outside of the 7.5 metre minimum required front yard. A site visit by Planning staff revealed that dwellings in the nearby area include single storey, one and a half storey, and two storey dwellings, many of which appear to be located within the required interior side yard(s). Thenahzna, as the majority of the third storey of the proposed dwelling would be located within the area of the property in accordance with the required aetbaoka, and the majority of the proposed dwelling located within the required front and exterior side yards occupies only two storeys, the proposed variances from the front and exterior side yard setbacks, and the required sight line are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. As the variance sought from point 4 above, speoifioe|k/, the minimum required setback for a driveway from an interior lot Une, would allow access to a dwelling while maintaining an appropriate degree of separation between the proposed driveway of the subject property and the adjacent property to the south, the proposed variance is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 5 of 11 Page 13 of 134 Are the variances minor? As the proposed variances listed in points 1 through 4, abovn, are considered to conform with the general intent of the Township's Official P|an, to comply with the general intent of the Township's Zoning By-Law, and are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, the proposed variances are considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Dnpartment sewage system meets minimum required setbacks as per Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. Engineering Department — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Topographic Survey Schedule 3: Site Plan Schedule 4: Front and Rear Preliminary Design Schedule 5: Third Floor Plan Drawing CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, the four proposed variances in Variance Application 2010- A-32, specifically, to permit a single detached dwelling to be constructed as near as 2.95 metres from the front lot line, 1.37 metres from the exterior side lot line, and within the sight line, and to permit a driveway to be located as near as 1.5 metre from an interior lot |ino, appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: A an Wiebe nanner Development Services Reviewed by: 58\ James Rogers Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2O1V'A'32 Page 6 of 11 Page 14 of 134 / -_-- / � ~ ( '~ / / / `` / / � � �� ' ` ` /� / ---` / .~ / / F;s \ \ \ \ \ ~' \ \ \ \ \ \ � \ � ` \ ) SUBJECT PROPERTY SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-32 (James Rogers) LAKE SIMCOE '-' 58\-2O1O-A-32- James Rogers - OA 0 0 25 50 100 .=1.~~ , ~.." meters Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 7 of 11 Page 15 of 134 RED PIAN 620 CULANT STU4 .. • . ' ./ / / / / / 1 ./.. •tt / / / • ./ v .,-.) - - --- — - — ' .. 1 ,,, -.!.`/ ,..•? - • - 2 2 . 3 c 63.69 1 I . o —.... LT. iia 17_9+ P (R.P. 028 - (am) .1 • 2 " 1 a , 1 8.36- rti m220.81 ' /L EOEj • n 1.7 — - - - r - FE 0,2 9 Development Services AvH41.1 SCHEDULE 2: TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 2010-A-32 (James Rogers) • srui Amu WAD CAMFLUNG 00 1-28 ' 1:a5g Oc- 1 ::4S 6,,,,, CAEINC W ..r■ .Vey 1:1 • N":"L 52. g .. . I 101 t P.I.N. 74040 - 0123(LT) , I.B. (0.0.) usuiREED (0.12 N.) -. 1049) ruotE 0.07 N. DRISC , DRILLED c,-;" ?; Wat. s • - • 0 7446' s 22/, 9 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... tS Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 8 of 11 Page 16 of 134 _ • , L, L'Wreuert UNI.aden requrernanle Faitlira lecidente to —1 "bp , onlapc1 mdrfloielr 4 - c roocsed - / •••• -.••• I - - 74040 0123( 11) ;15c.p7-3.c- texe SCHEDULE 3: SITE PLAN 2010-A-32 (James Rogers) STANLEY AVENUE '(13Y ReGISTER:w PLAN 64) ,•• • 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... „ .= - 1/qtas , 49 It) aea t a 4 — Fx:rilea SO' Rada. Fvon crbm2.10 . 0+4 to be warred Mow We .%; CO3010ly \ \ (1) .CE "'-.. f r;::;,..,'" , •-• -..., .i ,•- Site r Looend: Finished Flax: = 227.51Ern Bottom of Focting: = 224.324m Easement Ram: = 2245m — Finished Grede: = 226,000rn Lot Coverage: LOt Area: % Coverage: _ Bulking Footprint: =, 1276n' = 4E3 5rn' t Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 9 of 11 CL Prcposio Wax °New*, Page 17 of 134 SCHEDULE 4: FRONT AND REAR PRELIMINARY DESIGN 2010-A-32 (James Rogers) 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... f”" a a • E. 2 Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-32 Page 10 of 11 0 Page 18 of 134 Development Services Application No. 2010-A-32 SCHEDULE 5: THIRD FLOOR PLAN DRAWING 2010-A-32 (James Rogers) 58\-2O1O-A-32- James Rogers Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Page 11of11 Page 19 of 134 Date Printed: 27108/2010 108 38 PM File Path • RC:ADD RGadlCustom CADDIProjects110-30 - James RegerstRogers Residence-sug 25.mt Z 010 tO 10 < > < 73 9) f CD ID CD ID g 0 VE1. J OZ a t • AeluelS 6L sJa6oH sawer - ZE - (es Date Pf ifded: 27/08/2010 11 5654 AM Fe Pats : ACADD1 \ CanSCustom CADLAProjects31 0 30 James Rogersildogme Residence-aug 25,M VE1. Jo 1.Z a • : r1 J •-' s ! Af • AeluelS 6L sJa6oH sawer - ZE - (es _Sfsfddff:7:33:M .7.130PW7 . • sadfs " • aaaan -1'06 4.aa I„-- 20 00.0 Storm / 069 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... STANLEY AVENUE :9' lirl.;15TE11[11 PI 00 Pa-9c0213 New 0 I a,'• r- 3-Staav l .. -0-- r - . ( , Resafer.a0 --- 1040 I .. I• I 0 :74, H . I , ........i ..,irgfalra. i 1 • z ------J i' , ,s ,, 1 Vgt , -- ---- P -N 1 t-- 74040 -0123((T) / rki 'M 0202 - — 5&I0&dlt0l0L00 Now Well ata inhalation i eoend Ian:shed 0ca Rot :a anala. Rasenaat ram: anstad 010041- Lei Coverall,' Foolprat: Lot Area C...raeraa: 12.0az fina.--a3ta3paaj saffa?ralltaa 01002411- otapasaadau Gaya taastrapeaaaaa.0% :pa ea..; Page 22 of 134 co , 0 411002101 00.0 0,000004 Prom 221.510m = 224.324m 224.55a, . - 226.000m = 1276a/ - 463.54W = 27.50 . . VW 93:55'1. t 0/413150114 Nat - Id 00eu . 1 . ... East Elevation , 0.2 • 1 • 96 Preliminary Design 79 Stanley Ave. New 3-Storey Residence Elevations 61469intao _Th448969:9g1t 7 " 02 '?A`P.12- , Sw.ndflogit r 2 South Elevation 0.2 1146 1 , North Elevation 0.3 1 76 Preliminary Design 79 Stanley Ave. New 3-Storey Residence Elevations F..dpeint P59t,t, 233.::2;.■ Se9ono or 2$O 22 Grade 226.0(n 2 West Elevation 0.3 1 95 0005 5 550 South Cove Porch 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... .386 Living Room r C.set Page 25 of 134 One-aau@Pisau 508601:15.380E06 ra • oc-ousPaiwal aovo wqscotiorrauuutiukt ,41ed aod r a) L ._ VV Z 93 :1. 0 I 0?/90:4Z :5810 010C1 _ 7,0 Master taloa] Eremite • Terracc • .••• • • 1.1 n Closet 5 45P Master Bedroom Terract C Eremite 'a CZ( 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... SC3 Page 26 of 134 7r. c-oc• -or.sroVcv...ivo 5 t P.1.Pd C 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Look-ow: c;11 C.,11. 1:1 - 0E-OL1,1,1,1:11,110, 10:1/0 :41Li Page 27 of 134 1:Lag 11 010Z:ca.:a t11,,,„1 i / I i 7., ., , 4 i , ......, -i , , -- , , ,-- ■ 1.)) , A ( , , ! 0 \ \ , " ! A , , I \ , , I ,-- ■,\ 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... w 0 LL o 0 0 0 Page 28 of 134 1 0 w sin STANLEY AVE UE Low REINSTEREP PLAN NM 5a) - 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... ROM Ell Inhimeltrr Dena: MAW Floor: • 22T,612m Bohn al Faadhu ■ 224.9 Eel Mal Floor. ■ FfnhhedCirades =popcorn Lilt Y Bulld Fadert • 127.11 VI LaiAi. =C ■am. f . te .2711% Page 29 of 134 5a) - 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Page 30 of 134 5a) - 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... (1) 4D Hi 3 N Page 31 of 134 mim • -0∎. - • -_- 5a) - 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Page 32 of 134 • 5a) - 2010 -A -32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Page 33 of 134 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Page 34 of 134 7'7 • • - 2010-A-32 (Rogers) Proposed location of new driveway (from Simcoeside Avenue :. - ' 7. • •: ' .1: Proposed location of new driveway (from East side of subject property) 2010-A-32 (Rogers) 2010-A-32 (Rogers) View of proposed exterior side yard (from South side of property) 2010-A-32 (Rogers) Proposed front yard setback 2010 -A -32 (Rogers) Proposed front and exterior side yard setback, and sight line 2010 -A -32 (Rogers) Proposed front and exterior side yard setback, and sight line Proposed front and exterior side yard setback, and sight line : • ?r: • • • 2010-A-32 (Rogers) 5a) - 2010-A-32 - James Rogers 79 Stanley ... Page 42 of 134 2010 -A -32 (Rogers) Proposed interior side yard setback ........... rt. '17nenthlp of 00— 0 Application No: Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll #: 4346-030-012-26161 TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT To: Committee of Adjustment 5b\ Catherine Jo and Ge Subject: Variance Application (Catherine and George Thompson) 21 Paterson Road Plan 1719,RP51R-S5D8 Part 1 (Orillia) Prepared By: Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Motion # F.M.S. File it: D10 40862 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey/real property report so that: a) That the single storey industrial building be located no closer than approximately 2.0 metres from the east interior lot line 2. That the setbacks be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and/or mppruvals, if required, from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, if applicable 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 The purpose of this report is to consider a Variance Application 2010'A'31. for relief from the Township's Comprehensive Zoning By-law in relation to the minimum required interior side yard setback for a structure within the Economic Development (ED) Zone. The subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 33 metres on Patterson Road, a depth of 118 metres, and a lot area of 0.4 hectares. The subject property is currently vacant. The applicant is proposing to construct a single storey industrial building occupying an area of 553 square metres, to be located in the north-east corner of the lot. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-31 Page 1 of 5 Page 44 of 134 ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached industrial building, wfth a total floor area of 557 square metres (6000 square feet). The property is zoned Economic Development Exception 119 (EO*119) Zone. The applicant is requesting the following relief from Table B3 of Zoning By-law 97 Table B3- Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: | FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: 5b\ Catherine Jo and Ge Required Proposed 6.0 metres 2.0 metres Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Industrial in the Official PIan. Section C8 of the Plan states that the primary permitted use of lands within this designation shall be manufacturing, assembly, processing, fabrication, storage and/or warehousing uses and research establishments. Therefore, the construction of a single storey industrial building would constitute a permitted use in the Industrial designation. On this basis the proposai is considered to conform with the intent of the Official PIan. Does the variance with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject lot is zoned Economic Development Exception 119 (ED*119) Zone. The purpose for regulating the interior side yard setback for building in the ED 2ona, is to ensure that such buildings do not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. The neighbouring building located approximately 7 metres from the interior lot |ine, with a driveway separating the building from the interior lot line. A site inspection revealed that the proposed single storey industrial building would not adversely impact access to the rear of the property, as the property is a corner lot there is 15 metres from the west exterior lot line. In addiUon, the proposed building will otherwise meets with all other Zoning By-law provisions (such as maximum height, front and rear yard setbacks) for structures within the ED Zone. The zoning exception that is placed on the property specifies that the rear yard setback to be 7.5 metres, which is to act as the minimum setback for bui|dings, structures and septic system from the rear lot line serving as the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone boundary. The applicant is proposing the structure to be located approximately 72 metres from the rear lot |ine, which will not have any negative impact on the environmental feature. The subject property is regulated by the Lake Simcoe Conservation AuthVrity, which will require the applicant obtain any necessary permits/approvals for the LSRCA. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-31 Page 2 of 5 Page 45 of 134 CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Building Department- Engineehn0Department— Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority- ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan On the basis of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? A site inspection revealed that the pnopoaedsingle e�>reyinUustha|building vviUbek)neted approximately 9.0 metres from the nei hbouring building to the east. The site inspection also revealed that the subject lands are located in an area of the Township, where surrounding lands consist of mainly large industrial bui|ding, which are within the required 6.0 metre interior side yard setback. The proposed ocation is clear of significant tree vegetation, which wifl allow for the applicant to have minimal tree removal. Based on the site inspection, the proposed building would appear to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. The purpose for the applicant requesting a 2 metre setback from the interior side yard setback is to ensure that there is sufficient land for parking, and vehicle movement for large trucks that move product produced on site. 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, the variance is considered to be minor in nature. CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance application 2010-A-31 to grant an increase in the minimum interior side yard for a single storey industrial building from the required 6 metres to 2.0 metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Steven Farquharson, B.URPL Intermediate Planner Manager, Planning Services Development Services 5b\-2O1O-A-31- Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge— Reviewed by: Glenn White, MC|P, RPP Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-31 Page 3 of 5 Page 46 of 134 bject Lands 21 Paterson Road 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-31 (Thompson) PATERSON J 0 ft z Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-31 Page 4 of 5 0 20 40 80 120 160 Meters Page 47 of 134 D as) Development Services Application No. 2010-A-31 T 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... SCHEDULE 2: CONTEXT MAP 2010-A-31 (Thompson) —PL S.I B. N 59 °44 1?,' 2 35 00' o.00' 25 PL. 1.8 .0 - W 4NGLE of LOT , CONCESSION T I PL.I.8.0 125-00 N59°45' 50"E 235.00' FD ; 8 (DBS FD.I 8 OD s X Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Page 5 of 5 Page 48 of 134 rE: s HTL. ( . , T CC n • : - M .: !...... '.. ....:; ;....; ''.... ..,':. 0... ..., N, m: 1..M I :•::m. J..E=...:;:i'MP ; I i i..! ! FCI:S • aMM:I.: M.,....:' :!....; . .::•' ; .7.! ! L H„, I b .5.• • ....5 ---,- . I 0 .0 0 - s -- l? mm 4 ' NOTE 511r1N5 E :E iL . E.E Er; 1 5M 1iE E P L' • fs C! ...LC (5, 'TM: 51 55-1 00;51 iLLIEL: 0 15 S 5 mss,m, rj PCM: TL 5 Zr...L. 1 5.1 EL 55E:55 ,LL Css SLL - 55551555 555 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... 4 5EL L:3f. IS - 5 5 555551 4 Page 49 of 134 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... Page 50 of 134 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... Page 51 of 134 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... Page 52 of 134 W E z 0 111 co 0 W (.9 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... 1 Page 53 of 134 FOS 8.0.4ar;3 ..„ 11 . 4 1 4 1 4; 0;44 0 . f """”, ."..." a s ' • : . .4. 3 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... •",) ,;•‘" ("*.• •r",. :7000 g' 0, 0 ft •-•‘. 4 4 4 01! 144 4,;,..? . 1 0.4 4 Zi ' 4444 4 44, ? W iv LE4 o f Pi..„1.B. 0 1"*".; •••••••:;',..,/ 235°2,0 TZ, • L." . e 't , t •'•• Page 54 of 134 cu E z 0 LLI • co 0 a) 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... Page 55 of 134 L 0 W (.9 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... Page 56 of 134 5b) - 2010-A-31 - Catherine Jo-Anne and Ge... Page 57 of 134 2010-A-31 (Georgian Equipment) Distance between existing building on adjacent property and subject property 0% • • -- F ANL 41V • IIMEMEn- 01 0 N.) 5b) - 2010 -A -31 - Catherine Jo -Anne and Ge... gtgt1t41011' tk1b 9l+t o .Atitt T • th 19 11ritiqg ttitV Page 59 of 134 2010 -A -31 (Georgian Equipment) Proposed location of proposed building 01 Cr N w 2010-A-31 (Georgian Equipment) Proposed exterior side yard setback 2010 -A -31 (Georgian Equipment) Proposed distance from proposed building to interior lot line 01 0 N O O D w 2010-A-31 (Georgian Equipment) Proposed distance from proposed building to interior lot line • . . ••.•°.••• •••••••••- • +44111,44, filTntIfship qf (Yrco4Afiecto.fate Mold fieritage, Exerting FIctore Application No: 2010-A-30 Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll #: 4346-010-002-15901 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: To: Committee of Adjustment 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT Subject: Variance Application (Horseshoe Valley Lands Limited) Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 4, Reference Plan 51 R30671 Lots 37 and 56 (Former Township of Oro) Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Planner Motion # R.M.S. File #: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision, with respect to the construction of two mod& homes on the subject lots: 1. That the applicant apply for, and obtain, the removal of the Holding (H) Provision which currently applies to the lands in which Lot 56 is located prior to the use of this lot for the construction of a model home; 2. That the setbacks for the model homes be in conformity with the Residential One Zone with Exception 140 (R1*140), in Zoning By-Law 97-95, as amended; 3. That all other forms of development associated with the model homes be in conformity with the applicable Zoning By-Law 97-95, as amended; 4. That the applicant obtain any permits and/or approvals, if required, from Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, if applicable; and 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate(s) and building permit(s) 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. The applicant is proposing to construct two single detached dwellings to be used as model homes on lots within Phase II of the Plan of Subdivision originally known as Laurel View Homes. Model homes are proposed to be constructed on proposed Lots 37 and 56, Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 4, to allow the applicant to display variety in the home options available to prospective purchasers. Phase 1 of Laurel View Homes, which occupies lands to the north and to the east of the Phase II area, began following the execution of the Subdivision Agreement between the Township of Oro-Medonte Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-30 Page 1 of 5 Page 64 of 134 and Laurel View Homes (HV) Inc., authorized in By-Law 2003-009. A Subdivision Agreement for Phase II of the proposed development, currently in proposed red line draft format, has not been executed by Council. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97-95: Maximum Permitted Proposed Section 5.36 b) — Temporary Construction and Sales 1 model home 2 model homes FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? 5c\ Horseshoe Valley Lands L... The subject lands are designated Horseshoe Valley — Low Density Residential in the Official P|an, and are located within the Oro Moraine Boundary. Section C14.3.4.1 of the Official Plan states that permitted uses in this designation "are single detached dwellings ... and accessory uses". The lots on which the model homes are proposed to be constructed are located within a proposed plan of subdivision. Therefore, on this basis, the proposal for variance from the Zoning By-Law to permit the construction of two model homes on two separate lots is considered to conform with the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances comp!y with the general intent of the Zoning By-law? Lots 37 and 56, on which the two model homes are proposed to be constructed, are zoned Residential One Exception 140 (R1*140) Zone, and Residential One Exception 140 Holding Provision (R1*140(H)) Zone. The applicant 15 requesting a variance from Section 5.36 b) of the Township's Zoning By-Law, as amended, which states as foliows: "Section 5.36 Temporary Construction and Sales Uses b) Nothing in this By-law shall prevent the use of land for a sales offic and/or a model hom for the sale of dwelling units provided the dwelling units to be sold are to be Iocated on lands within the limits of the Township of Oro-Medonte." The number of model homes and/or sales offices to be constructed in an area is limited for various reasons, including: to limit the extent to which the character of a residential area is changed by the existence of buildings not being used as residences, and to limit the amount of traffic generated in an area by such non-residential uses. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-30 Page 2 of 5 Page 65 of 134 The applicant is proposing to construct two model homes, as opposed to two sales trailers/offices. Once constructed, the model homes could be converted into a future single detached dwelling when their use as model homes has been served. Since the model homes maintain a residential character, the proposed variance is considered to comply with the general intent of the Zoning By-Law. Are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? As model homes, and the properties on which they are nonatn/ctod, are commonly developed with a high degree of detail and to a high level of completion, and as a model home may be sold and used as a residence in the future, once its use as a model home has been fulfilled, the proposed variance is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the ots. Are the variarices minor? As the construction of model homes for sales purposes is common in new plans of subdivision, and the model homes are proposed to be constructed on lots which are reasonably separated from one another, the proposed variance is considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services- Buikdin0Dnpartment—Propnoa|mppearatomeetminimumatandonds.andaevverava|abi|hytVbo verified. Engineering Department — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Lot Development Plan CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2010-A-30, to permit the construction of two model homes on separate lots within a proposed plan of subdivision, appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Planner 5c\ Horseshoe Valley Lands L... Reviewed by: Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-30 Page 3 of 5 Page 66 of 134 A SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2010-A-30 (Horseshoe Valley Lands Limited) SUBJF :CT PROPERTIES 0 25 53 100 II 1 01111,, „1, Meters 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-A-30 Page 4 of 5 Page 67 of 134 u - l oin D5 - r ( -2377 3 ' 11 iF • rh I ! . I idriLakikak [In EY_ ) 36 5 30 Development Services Application No. 2010-A-30 27 SCHEDULE 2: LOT DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2010-A-30 (Horseshoe Valley Lands Limited) yr C5S 0 D:' !A' 30. CO 60 vi ,,,..-.., 1?, ,......._ 5; ,3• ° k g 30.00 C3 2B 310 0 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... -II 45.1 -19 48 307 fi rz • - 'jPk 7 - 23.00 0.3 TA NOLF\fr,' ORE SC Er\I f t- o 3 6g k. i ..–. Milr.151 i K6116 r-n' --.1 - _ 1,5-VMeJet , . RE45154TE ' ixi k - 4 m , z __ _._.... 11 r 4 rsc57 ...., (7_ ..?0 . co - Fr; 40 I h CP e2: 46 ..., 4.. 6 i Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Page 5 of 5 1..rt 1 ti..nti H LJ Page 68 of 134 :K co EF; b 5. '00 • 3 7 op L., 30.58 BLOCK 58 30.00 36 65 5 0 b 45 0 30.00 N .; N5816 N5816'35E N5816'35"E " * - 30.00 30.00 30.00 35 ,cx b cn 64 to 0 5 1 O in 44 . 0 9 0 0 30 „4 N58.3535E * N5816'35"E N5816'35"E .00 30.00 30.00 30.00 43 34 cn o 63 (0 0 N5B15'35"E 30.00 62 - 0 P. 6 0 0 • N58'36 30.00 30.00 33 30.00 cn cn O 61 1 . 0 o o co N583635E 32 i....., co 30.00 30.00 ,in 6 0 0 0 31 30.00 30 30.00 29 30.00 28 30.00 97 6:1 ( c0 (0 in 0 N5843 0 30.00 58 57 0 c:, 0673'20W 30.00 25.00 23.00 Nor, ..50`..)D t z 7.07 38 TANCLIWOOD k) i, (0 (D CRESCENT 30.00 N58•3635E _----/ 25.00 ko cD ,,' 5 6 - c. 3 9 9 N) 30.00 cc] - ..1 '55 N58 30.00 N5Ag5"E 30.00 4 0 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... OUU e:45 7.2 0 0 18.0 18.00 o m 52 N51:116'35 30.00 z 53 0 0 48 N54303 31.61 49 30.89 N5847'55 A=8.02 N5816 30.00 30.00 2 NJ 47 N5410'3 34.74 46 30.84 0 61.73 BLOCK 69 60.14 cn 0 N51316 N5816'40 30.00 30.00 0 54 . 0 41 0 N5836'35E N5836'35 30.00 30.00 55 0 0 40 b III 0 0 N5B16'35"E N5F3'36'35"E 30.00 30.00 0 0 30.14 N5B*36 30.00 42 20.00 Page 69 of 134 co 5; 17.11 \\_. 7 8. 29 1 7.1 0 0 37 36 4.00 23.00 12.87 :otai Wicith: 4 • et Depth ivian. flour: • rt : i 12.9m !1! !1! ■I; ■I■ .1. • ;dr '• 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... - 31.7.mn • r -- 25.16t,, 211.4.11.11, MS • ; • ■ (f! 1 h h 11111111111111111111 11111111111111 ? • , • m.,1;;./ . • • , Page 70 of 134 GROUND FLOOR AREA - 177.25 sq m GARAGE - 44.81 sq m 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... 25.00 M PROPOSED SINGLE STOREY HOME SCALE. 1 I m C 7 .; '1 Page 71 of 134 4 \ \ 1 \ ) \ -I \..- --- \ \ ■ 1 ,-- , V) 3 t _-- - \ C , C13 , , __ -, , \ \ >% --- \ \ \ ‘ , \ ___ L — N (10) ■- • Lot 37,1, \ -ti-t 0 Cr) Lot 56 ■ <11 0 1 SUBJECT PROPERTIES 0 25 50 100 Meters 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... 111 D z w 1— z 0 0 Att — Page 72 of 134 5c) - 2010 -A -30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... Page 73 of 134 5c) - 2010 -A -30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... Page 74 of 134 5c) - 2010-A-30 - Horseshoe Valley Lands L... Page 75 of 134 2010 -A -30 (Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd) Proposed Lot 37 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... : rcni;n:,1 Page 77 of 134 avmaassta........■ i Meters 0 25 50 100 To;m5Imp^^- Application No: 2010-B-2@ Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll #: 434602000620500 I REQUIRED CONDITIONS: I BACKGROUND: TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE REPORT To: Committee of Adjustment Subject: Consent Application Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townline Road East Part of Lot 12. Concession 14. (Former Township of Medonte) 5d\-2O1O-B-28- Gordon A[n8Ut 2600 Townl... Prepared By Glenn White, Manager of Planning Services Motion # R.M.S. File #: D10- The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That three copies of a Reference PIan for the subject Iarid 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 the 2508 Townline Road to the north (enhanced lands, per Schedule #2), 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. The purpose of Consent application 2010-B-28 is to consider a boundary adjustment. The severed land is Part of Lot 12, Concession 14, and it presently occupies an area of approximately 19 hectares (47 aonaa), has frontage on Townline Road of approximately 525 metres (1,722.4 hset), and a depth of approximately 328 metres (1.076 feed, and does not presently contain any buildings or structures. The lands to be retained would have frontage on Townline Road of approximately 90 metres (295.3 feeU, occupy an area of approximately 1.27 hectares (3.14 acres), and presently contain a residential dwelling. No new building lots are proposed to be created as a result of the proposed boundary adjustment. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 1 of 6 Page 78 of 134 ANALYSIS: The purpose of application 2010-B-28 is to permit a lot addition/boundary adjustment. No new building lot is proposed to be created as a result of the lot addition. FINANCIAL: Not applicable, POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan 5d\-2O1O-B-28- Gordon A[n8Ut 2600 Townl... The subject lands are designated "Rural", "Environmenta/ Protection One" and "Environmental Protection Two" by the Township's Official Plan. The severed Iands to be conveyed mostly contain Environmenta Protection One and Two !ands. The applicant intends to add the severed lands to the adjacent lands to the north which are also owned by the applicant. No new development of the severed lands are proposed rather only the consolidation with the applicants adjacent lands (2508 Townline Road). As a result of the consent, the ecological integrity of the natural heritage system is maintained by the consolidation of the lands and the keeping of the land in one ownership. No development is proposed and no new lot wifl be created. Since no development in terms of any new lots being created, an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is not required. The Nottawasaga VaIley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for boundary adjustment and the Authority has no objection to the application. A small portion of the severed lands and all of the retained lands are designated Rural which permits single detached dwellings. EJwellings are Jocated on the future enhanced lands and the retained lands. Section D2.2.2 of the Official Plan, "Boundary Adjustments", would apply to such a proposal, which states as follows: "A consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lot is created. In reviewing an application for such a boundary adjustment, 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. In addition, the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the agricultural parcels affected." Therefore, as the p boundary adjustment would not result in the creation of a new lot, nor does it propose to modify the use of the parcels affected, the proposed boundary adjustment is considered to conform to the intent of the policies of the Township's Official Plan. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 2 of 6 Page 79 of 134 County Official Plan The subject lands are designated Greenland designation in the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Section 3.3.4 of the County's Official Plan, "General Subdivision and Development Po|iciVa^, states that "Consents for the purpose of boundary adjustments and consolidation of land holdings are permitted but shall not be for the purpose of creating new lots except as otherwise permitted in this Plan. All lots created shall conform to all applicable municipal policies and bylaws." On this basis, the proposed consent appears to generally conform to the policies of the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement does not contain policies directly related to Lot adjustments (boundary adjustments) in the "Rural Areas" or "Nature Heritage" areas. The policies are related to the creation of a new lot or development, which are not proposed by this application. Zoning By-Law The severed lands are zoned Agricultural/Rural (AIRU) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone by the Township's Zoning By-Law. The lands to be enhanced and the retained lands are zoned Agricultural/Rural (AJRU) Zone. The proposed boundary adjustment would result in the enhanced lands occupying an area of approximately 21 hectares (52 acres), and the retained lands would occupy an area of approximately 1 .2 hectares (3 acres). Both the enhanced and the retained lands would comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-Law related to the minimum required lot area and frontage for single detached dwellings on lands in the AIRU Zone. On this basis, the appucation is considered to comply with the provisions of the Zoning I CONSULTATIONS: Public Works Department- Building Department — Proposal appears to meet minimum standards. Engineering Department — Nottawasaga VaIley Conservation Authority — No Objections I ATTACHMENTS: Schedule #1 Location Map Schedule #2- Context Map 5d\-2O1O-B-28- Gordon A[n8Ut 2600 Townl... Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 3 of 6 Page 80 of 134 CONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Consent application 2010-B'28. for a boundary eduatmerd, would appear to conform to the general intent of the Official Plans of the Township and the County of Simcoe, and would comply with the general intent of the Township's ZVningBy'Lem/. Respectfully submitted: �ru Glenn White, MCIP RPP Manager, Planning Services 5d\-2O1O-B-28- Gordon A[n8Ut 2600 Townl... Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 4 of 6 Page 81 of 134 3 FOX EAD, ROAD SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP (2010-B-28 Gordon Arnaut) OFO I ! Li SUBJECT LANDS 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... 0 70140 30 420 660 _ ,11.1wiri Meters Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-8-27 Page 5 of 6 TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN Page 82 of 134 Development Services RETAINED LANDS SCHEDULE 2: CONTEXT MAP (2010-B-28 Gordon Arnaut) ENHANCED LANDS LANDS TO BE CONVEYED TO 2508 TOWN LINE 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN C) 25 50 100 150 200 „ Meters Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 6 of 6 Page 83 of 134 • ,,t‘ N - rlON 4 ,... .•:?.,.: l.. 1 .::,; • " /if ) \ 7/ NG 50 ' 1■. Watershed Counties 11 11 ONTARIO September 9, 2010 Steven Farquharson, Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro-Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Farquharson; Re: Application for Consent 2010-B-28 Part Lot 12, Concession 14, 2600 Town Line Township of Oro-Medonte (Formerly Township of Medonte) The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for consent to facilitate a boundary adjustment and we have no objection to its approval. Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward a copy of any decision. Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Copy: Ralph Hough, NVCA Member, Oro-Medonte 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... ihhahr,AWASAhhl: VALLE': ‘..ihh:SERVATION („hohth:.. for hhhh3h..1h,=:i Chhtse AcirnirChthh (.....thhoerhath3r Ahht chi ail 110 hi,h; hi 14 Y') ?U 4:ohh 21 1 Weh: Page 84 of 134 • 5d) - 2010 -B -28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... Page 85 of 134 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... 5 1 1 . . Page 86 of 134 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... • Page 87 of 134 2010-B-28 (Arnaut) Proposed boundary of severance (approximate) 2010-B-28 (Arnaut) Existing dwelling on lands to be enhanced (to north) 2010-B-28 (Arnaut) Existing dwelling on lands to be enhanced (to north) 2010-B-28 (Arnaut) Existing dwelling on lands to be retained 5d) - 2010-B-28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... Page 92 of 134 . •. • • • •, 4 .; 2010-B-28 (Arnaut) Proposed lands to be conveyed 5d) - 2010 -B -28 - Gordon Arnaut 2600 Townl... Page 94 of 134 • -;4•:•••:"‘*••',•:',•:::••'N'-'5„ ) • • • A l„, , • • . . •.. . • „ . • Application No: 2010-B-27 Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll 1: 4346-030-012-00800 1 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: Development Services TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEOONTE REPORT To: Committee of Adjustment Subject: Consent Application Harvie Peter Johnstone, Douglas Hardy Johnstone, Edna Eileen Ayers, Margaret Eileen Ayers. Norma Irene Harvie 451/421 Line 14 North Concession. 1, Part of hot 12. Pars 2. and 3 FiegstereO Ptan 51R2020',71 (Foricirowm;hip of Ortiliu) 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... 1 Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Planner Motion tt R.M.S. File 4: 010- conditreits are r iniposeci 011 the Committee's decision: 1. I hal three .copies of Heference Hari for the 5LIbied land inciicatind the s parcel I pro:poci by en Ontario...) I...and Surveyor be su'brnitto6 lo the Ser.:R.:Limy-Tic:a:31,3 2 That the severed tanns oo merged in title with the 25 acre lot to the nor', 1 ("LAY. pOr Sch.edule ir3). and 7Llat the pmvis'ons of Subsection 3 or of Section 50 of The Planning Act ppy to any subsequent Con'/r il trai ir-aci:or ir Hie subioot lands: 01. That U app■icant 5 so!lotter orepare 10 submit a copy of tf proposed conveyance for the pa rr, severed. for review by 1 tvTrinicipatily, 4. Tli ry. the applicants soticitor er.o\ricte an undertaking that He severed tands and the lands to be enhanced will meroo 111 title: 5. That The condition:7, of consent imposed 1,,y the Committee ho fulfitted wihin one year from thR date of the gtvinq of the notice. I hoc purpose of Consent application 2010-B-27 is - .a consi.der a boundary adjustment. The subjoct 1and is Part o Lei 12, Concession 1. Pans 1. 2, and :3, and it w occupies an Pirea approxinlately 41.6 hectare 102 83 acres). has frontade Ori Line 14 Not of approxrrhateiy 405.6 metres 11,5',?/..tr, foot;, and a depth of appro 6:19.3 metres (2,0228.6 feet). The lands propose° to lo- conveyed have frontage on Lino 1/1 North of approximately 108_7 metres 1356.6 occupy Meeting Date. September 16, 2010 Application No. 2010-B-27 Page 1 of 7 Page 95 of 134 an area Of aophox 1 hectaros (17.8 i and do not presen:iy cent;- any On' Iffrigs or ucwies. 11 nds to be oI iriel would 1 frontage, on Line 14 North of approxithatcly 2;5'6.9 inelres (1,170.9 fectl). (occupy Elh, area of aporttximately ;34.5 nectams Eicres). and presently contain a ciwell'ng ant; a barn. No new rihildind lots are propcF,ed lo 1 erc.,..atoci as a iesult of the oroposeibouriclary tJJLIsrr ANALY I FINANCIAL: Not ,- ipplicable. I POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... Therefore!. a5 the proposed boundary adjustment no': result in the creation of a riew tut, nor doos it propose io modify ihe LtA.: of tile pnictofs nflocteal, the proposed boundary adjustment is considered to comform 1 The intent (If the the Township's Official Plan. Development Services Meeting Dale September 15 2010 Application No.. 201043-27 Page 2 of Page 96 of 134 The purpose of applicaiian 2010-13-27 is to pernii loi i-tdclitiochboundary .strnont. No budding fot h3propor,od to t)o orc.:tted P.r; fl'' I of thr:. lot addition. The SIJOjel:t larld5 t7fe.Sighilt6:;1 Restrict/xi Rum/ 1 the OVA1Ship's Officia: Plan, and tile are: also located 1 thir::. Oro .Vcrai(R..7.1- Atoo Pl..115 le Scction C6.1 of the Official Plan, the objeCtiVeS of IIi o Rest/infect' Rural designat:om aro tC CiiSCCUr;-.icio scattorod development arid 10 prevent Incompatible development in the re;.1 surrount Barrio ard OrTia. to mainian and ph thk rural characTer of lh area t.y.,/ clu defining tile_ tirbon bow of E3arrie and Ohliia. Scction C6.2 of the Official S;ati that th0 USE of Dirt wf thin this designation shad be : that srigle detached aric.1 other uses also permitted. With respect 10 the severance of land Sectitir C( '3 if the Official Plan deals with “Tho creation of ite lots for res'dont'ai purposes'', and statos that thc "orteation of riE-w in filling in 1110 desghat:on is not permitted" howev(_ r. the proposed severance and subsequent lot acicittior , ivouid not resuh In the e'eatIon of a new lot Section 12.2.2 of tne Plar•. - Bow ic.fLiry Adjustments", , ..vouitl ai,30/ to such a propas 11 vli oli shtles :As foliov,rs: A cc, 501 may be permitted for 111C2 pUrpose of modifying lot hoitridaries, p: no rev,: building lot is created. 11 re,vie.wing ith application for sucli a betindary aLf the Committee Of Adi shall be sat'stiffi that - he boundary ac.ijusimeht WiH not affed tne viability of the its, f the properties affected is ntended by this Plan. In iftddition.. the Conirnitiee of Acijustmeir. shali 511i01iet:1 that the boundary . :11 - iittsimeril wid not affect the viabdity of the (1)0 10)7 parcels at:cc:tel.' County Official Plan The arbjeci lands are cieSta iirated Rural 3 the 'Country* of Sirricrroo's Secilior ;),.6.6 ct tho Courit!,is Official Plan stair s that "Nev.( kits fp! agricultural osos stiould genora'iy ficd IOSS iliac 35 llecii-ues cr Oh? oriolool siirvey lot sla? 1 ,1/171C13eVe 1 lesser, or 4 iiii&rirjrritiries rc Sei 0 /Se d L Sper'ki?ty Section 3 the County Official Plan. (5enorai biocijv iii and 1.)eveiopmen1 Policies", however. states that liCotirsii,"His for Ehe purpost3 of boundary col isoliu'r loroi of /and 3,r0 03 oi2l1103 bLit :V1:1 001 ho Tor the pLirp0:30 of cr.... tie!) new lots e.voept ,dfherWIS■-.? permlifed 0 thiS Plan. Ail loi's c(oe shall d;.);ifOiri? 10 $p/J(/Ca .'nrirbCirli polcies Od Further. thin Planning Department tit thc Cicunty 71 Siincoc has rirdvised that it has I11 3o10 :11001. with respitt.el to this application. \Atilt.? a nova lot s not being created, the proposed boundary adjustment 0/11 lo result in the cull:a:gement of an extr.3ting parce. from apprOxiMately fleCtareS (160 acros) to approxithatoly 1:3 hectares (1 17.61 - .1cresii . anti the reduction of a 11 6 tleCtale 002.83 acre) parcel, to 3.1.5 hec.ares (35.2 ritcres). Therefore, ihe V rI Iii ly u o lands to lre enhanced throtign thc proposed conveyrance. for agricultural purposes will be enhanced. and the :rids propose(' lc he retained rwirll ccritinurr.} to Je of a sufficient size to he viable for agricultural eurposer.;. On this basis, the proposed COIISCrIt 'a7pear5 C[313 1/ ('319 cm to the policies of the County of Sin Official Plan. Provincial Policy Statement 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... Section 3 .3.4 of the Provincia -() C btr. rflc ni 2005. ot Creation Grind Lot ActjuStrir onts". ifitates inal 110] 01 311 31/1e Hyrfculitual disiGourrageO and may 0011; 0 permitted for: ait usittri. provided that tho lots , of a /7 ('3' approprirAte for t0 e. type of arAnculturtil 00 191 C19 '110311 ir the area and ry.irfl . sufficiently large lc mainlain l'extility for fultiri.7. iptianctos in dle type of aoricullural opc.4ation0 :. Sot or r)1 the i'roviricial PL cy Staten tent, stales that - I„of iridiustnitenfr3 1 pri1. agriCe/iLirfli are ,71,5 I1 perniatted for !i'3/ ori arid [lie Provincial PolioN °1( de teoliniodi reosoos" E)s "severances 'or purposes such as ... minor botindary adjUSIrrIrsrits. which do net iei..s in 131' creation of new lot." As stared abovu . the pier:resod bouri:Iwy ridjustmclit viii()uld rot result in the creaiiintio of a now lot, and tncis 13 ho reiainod 3/0 01 have an area 01 approximately 24 0 hectares (85.22 aciiest. and the iands to he enhanced would have ari area of appriryximately 47.13 hectares ( acres herefOre ale Viability of the lanes to :lie enhanced through roe proposed conveyancift, for adricultura: purposes, will Pe enhanced. and the lands proposeci 'rt.: retainen will continue to be of a sufficiert size to be vial**. for riiigricoltir rai purposes. (Dri thio. Pitts's, thcri proposed consent nfieets the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement. 2005. Development Services Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No 2010-B-27 Page 3 of . 7 Page 97 of 134 Zoning 8v-Law . st...13iect property is ; /NciiieLikiraiffRhiint (AIRU) .7onc 1 the foi,ivniship's Zoning ri.iy-1 the lauds enhanced are ?one. ,Lr■..cirieJlturaltriural M-,111c11 Zone ald Ciwiroilrueulai Pre:cc:ion Ile preposcd i..imuddary acijustrnent :'s It in flit hi lands hocuovilic aiir.N.-1 Ewproxiiinalely 47.13 (117.61 acres), and tfild rhtaincri ;anus OCE,i'ipv an aiioH of Fipiiroxirn frt? 54.5 i r85.27 Tioh t1 0 onhancecl and true retainer" I'ids would Curioly tI' provisions of Lie Zoning 13y- Lii reftbed :c required lot frociacr,i; 'or sidule detached dificilinius on land5 the. of 4:5 ineHir..:is. to in lot sizhs for varicus rtflSCIJ ti» I L15.5.7:: betweon 2.0 and 4.0 neehares, hwelliiigs on lo.tsi tile 0.4- hectares. Further. a sit:: inspectfon revealcrJ that the ' 1 lLfl rogil red setback frorn the interior .cide lot ilPC *to the solutlit of 1 1115C [Hi ids, for exis:ring Ihuil.Cinrcs and structures on tlic lands to be retatnii,:d.. not appear to ti;c acivrhiisoly ...;:ittectod by I u popssoI I;oundiary i sil . CONSULTATIONS: ATTACHMENTS: Schedule Location Nilap Sr tile #2.. Context Ni , p Schedule -43- ApplicHtion Drawing CONCLUSION: fle,soectfuily Al VJib F rier Development Services blic Works Debar hi- is Departirient Proposal apuhuis 1.0 meet !Hifilf! Engineering Deportmen! — Lake :Imbue Region Conse•vatior rAuthority- 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... On this basis. tric.; appliii, is considered to cornpiy the provisions of the Zoniric By-Law., it Cue opr on of Ihe that Consent applicatfon 2010-8-27. for bounciahy Hrilustinent, would appear V) cenforrn to the. general inter): cif :he Official Plans of the Teii.ivri.shib anc C.;ctinly of Stmcoe.. '15 tine Provincral Policy Stateirient and viiould appear to colinti.4 th e general intent of the TchAinsliipis Zoning By-Law. He \,l J(' hy: Gliinn 1 P RP Malagor Plarmnu Servichs Meeting Date September 16, 2010 Application No 2010-6-27 Page 1 of 7 Page 98 of 134 !I, !!„1:5,!1. ;IT: F • _ 7.! "•-• Development Services Application Nu, 2010-6-27 PI-?.n " *- I me te s SCHEDULE. 1 LOCATION 1■/LAP C20 10-E3-27 johnstenc:. 1-in rvic) 1 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... ;;;;;! 7 • .4;44 • Meeting Date September 16, 7010 Page 5 of 7 Page 99 of 134 xxi / • • OL D. E OAFEr c • 0 I R0 RIAEI 500 i Development Services Application No 2010-B-27 rvieirs SC.;1-1DUI F CON MAP (2010-0-27 Johnstonc. Ayers. 1-1 PROPOSED ANDS TO DE 1R.E TA I N ...- ,. f : PR(....q i A RDE TO BE ENI / R E • l i (...) 0-00:(..)NV 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... NE' Meeling Date September 16, 261U Paye 5 of 7 IT7 •-••••• •• • •=--- INT Page 100 of 134 22 at 5 Development Services Application No. 2010-6-27 • . 2o 1930 or WIftr as 22 triad atm. !:1:1(311EDULE 3: APPLICATION DRAVVING (2(11C-B-27 JohIsLIce. Aprs, 3,3,32,2 — oro2222t.tooto — atoot titt ttit 1) 2 .te 2.2?...¶ serf •;r ). _ .k••-••th .1 1 - 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... • SS s Ett72r12 rtZ , C2 12 t Se g wee e.r Woreitaven 2 oft tot 2.2 len, t , „ - , 11-2-•- t e, re1 fivr., 1 1.P-Temt - , - ,-_,c 2tra 1.1.,,tpt Jr2;wt,trr., 12 0.7 . 42 - 2 - [rty2trrq .51 ttrt2 S itri t221222te etTA-tte 02 bartn42* t3 , 22 „ • .. 222 . . con20- flotz imoloolp f. tonoto • rot.,..22)22,73E0fittatta Ares•s de „Teeters Norrota ffortor _ .ttond Mlro-poont ..2oratr._ Poreofated 1,2k 23 139I ° f onotooto to Venom game f.Otoo nrce 122tortss ono sofa lot TS not IL Ortlintl noolt 0,20 . 2.0 at Rretep gruth 0011 atte If I 2 22.2123 222 4,-12 Sdlter drettrp native twoo not rolh lot tir P st-2,2-tt011 k Mon-.y kod Nara . qz11 txf 1517. 11 3 1 2 . ..ktitmtlool trocch017d Lo Doc of ttat rbt nr rt. lot con224 tel btt &-22,221 ug2 Mau eh- Mont.! Med .2.29,1911V. Ifctrxt Itu Inkormool Parrrrur c f 2 2tte relax Till; arta I 21)eint2 tonthroll iloornt 1.5....15.alw Frrtm g boot 19;5 trtron.IGTI.W. bi214.L01 rt. OrWcal hotter IX to 115 */-2, tetrt-t11,1 1 12 2 ,rrtly flelert---notliAnn r,v I 22l. i JO !Meeting Date September 1 7010 Page, 7 of 7 Page 101 of 134 From: Farquharson, Steven To: Wiebe Alan Subject: FW: C of A Applications for September Date: September-03-10 10:23:16 AM Steven Farquharson Intermediate Planner Township of Oro-Medonte o jo ro ctsbel wnship t yi ec k hrite Prima' kfcrilage. Exchlrig Flaw, P:(705)487-2171 F: (705) 487-0133 148 Line 7s, Box 100 Oro, Ontario !CIL 2X0 wwworo-rnedontexa From: Hamelin, Rachelle [mailto:Rachelle.Hamelin@simcoe.ca] Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:05 AM To: Farquharson, Steven Subject: RE: C of A Applications for September 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... TH:ot r7f Yft...: ri:tttittiftt 1 iritOlitttli dtt t* Sit.tittt ttti. tttt ritt. From: Farquharson, Steven [mailto:sfarquharson@oro-medonte.ca] Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 3:31 PM To: Hamelin, Rachelle Page 102 of 134 Cc: Wiebe, Alan Subject: C of A Applications for September Rachelle, Can you please provide comments on the attached applications for Consent submitted to the Township. I will be on vacation next week, so if you have any questions please forward them the Alan or Glenn. Steven Farquharson Intermediate Planner Township of Oro - Medonte P kfcrilage. Exchlrig .Fxru.r This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner(l 1, and is believed to be clean. 5e) - 2010 -B -27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... P:1705)487-2171 F: (705) 487.0133 148 Line 7s, Box 100 Oro,, Ontario !QL 2X0 www.oro- rnedortte a Page 103 of 134 co a) C O C O N N O 0 N Q� 5e) - 2010 -B -27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... U) 0 Page 104 of 134 0 0 0 N,S[3\111 L 5e) - 2010-B-27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... Z z < I- I Z W Z 0 uJo Ujuiw 0 0 0 I- H U) (1) 000 Z Z Z < < < 000 W W 0 0 0 -0_0 0 aa 000 cr cr a. a. a. 0 0 Page 105 of 134 2010-B-27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) I RE S IN L ° C-• • N Lt.% 1 ARVIE . NST 4A O INTEREST I LOT 121w 117! HELO ttY EDNA AvERS, NORMA HARV1E ANC) FIC3/4RET .41 • T 1. I ANC) MAitGA fitaFt ° • ,•, nii••at r ° ° 1 eV ZION't)Neteet: 11,10 tiNate.4...iet the ite■ Writ 1,01 t A yet Thby :at >47 >1 :.ST.ELF.0 IN FART 12 f..VV '112i HELD ANO IICII)GLAS -OHNSIONE A UNA A P.4 t 11 7.1)(:t lei;eVkillrl;:/1.....,5 r1 5I,,Dr rtt 949 r t 11 a V 0 . t.t . tf:h I„ho r.:•I E1 Ayti.• N H,AtV,0 nd co 1 vi' ^ L W >% a co' C 0 +a 0 C _c 0 .., ....... N N (II th ‘-i 0 N 5e) - 2010 -B -27 - Harvie Peter Johnstone, ... Page 107 of 134 2010-B-27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) .4.414a aanat naertir atasca .,....amadaY • + lagatte a Sae' s any 'SUSS. aStianits 4,06 aro. asStOSSsas a 4,9,.. attrassasaass A, ass t Sawa saes 4...• C, LA, ; 14.1 Sass.. •sf rasseasstlas nat sets sssaa ass s sse 4,4 r 4„ .....rawara ametav a ast.Ortsmenfpr amp a 1.30aleaVtannnowft •*abn, aSsases SS *cry anamatat .410. taakka atate It me ca. aaa 0 "'at 4 . 4 3 , 44.4 .- du. bosernat *taw sass.. sr vs snag" Sasses sas Ss( SA sty att faaantel oat .4. saj0.4ars F fl,, toad 044, ..0avamre tear a,,,,, a.% *S44,0 a 3 a .0 g% a araast.,4044* aita a 'fla Saas s flataiftartcs rpr4.,44. a. ts - tlermartowtem Carman& aSettamtegas •■ttemiacemp sase,a4ate. 4.444.4 mew., ravaull *S44 *4 a Sam • aParteaataarmaxa, Tam talaati taaer sec. 4.00:44 be 44 a','.-, 4O4 Sialaetairm -404aotzarsatex4ataa. HU VA t 4aVtao, potteratalannemall Carts 1 4 • 00 *V( VW • *Stew. 44tar casatatva4ar...44nor est :ca.... kat 44, 4.44 ....so 4141.4 49*4* 0Taaa, o a, .aaaat • wateran aucat 444 oar. a. teatalt saf Weata. .05ats. var. .■■ t_a , atAst • mad miatiew tactaaaat #44 bairtn•amat sax la watt 42, a a:- . • ',ova "aa 4 a •40 ata ar. %W. aottata Startrarsogat, a 44-.tetssal Yaw "woe. ..04a13 4 93 4 taa0 § a a A* 44 ,4, a-aa aa, — aaAt star-ratia, asseasars assessaa aS■ .a9 at • •••••• Ca„,.Sa 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Existing dwelling on lands to be retained ............. • 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Proposed lands to be retained 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Existing buildings on lands to be retained 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Proposed lands to be retained ;::. u n ask 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Proposed lands to be retained ffas ...:.::... 2010 -B -27 (Johnstone, Ayers, Harvie) Proposed boundary of severance • • • • ree I ie Application No: 2010-a-26 Meeting Date: September 16, 2010 Roll #: 4348-010-008-09434 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... TOWNSHIP OF OR0-114EDONTE REPORT To: Committee of Adjustment Subject: Consent Application UCCI Consolidated Companies Inc. Lot 27, Plan M-187 (Lot 23 Concession 5) Winfield Drive West (Former Township of Oro) Prepared Fly: Steven Farquharson, Intermediate Planner Motion R.M.S. File tt: D10 40839 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: In reference to the Conch isinn section of this report, staff recommend that Application 22 1043 -26 be deferred, however should the Committee coerce to approve ApplicatIon 2010-13-26, the fol'ovi.ring cdrididons arc.; redtiirocl to be irripc.)-sed en the Committee's decision: 1. That three copies of a Deference Plan for the subject Hid indicating the severed parcel b prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor he slibinitted to the Secretar . -1 . reasurer: 2. 'That The severed lands be merged in :itiC vidth CON 5 FT LOTS 26 28 and that toe provisions of Subsection '3 or of Section 30 of The. Planning Act apply to any sthcsogJerit conveyance or Ira; teiior nr 0.;olviny the subject lands; .3. That the applicant's 5oUcjor prepare and sue 111 a copy of the probosed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicants solicitor provide en undertaking that the severed lands arid the lands 10 be enhanced vs I merge in - title; 5. That 4IO beIid!ttOrhS Of consent imposed by the Comindtee. he Unfilled Minh) one year front lhe date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: Tine a eplicant ns onepos ng a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.10 heota r OS (0.21 acres) tram the subject property 42 Wrifielci Drive West, In the nelehneuriro of to the north. fhe proposed ietairied lot, would c0f1SiSi of approximately 1.0 hectares (2.6 acres). and currently vacant. No new budding lots are proposed to be created as a result of the iot at:10Tel). ANALYSIS: Development Services Application No. 2010-0-26 Meeting Date: Septeinher 16, 2010 Page 1 of 7 Page 116 of 134 The purpose ofi application 2O 1O-B-25 is to 3i ri i boun( b,ry adjustment. He sot lb..CA land being 42 Winfield Dr lye West, - .0 convey Ihri having an area of approximately 0.10 hectares (0.2 acres) to be added to line adjacent land to the no•In 3*.....TIOCI by the applicant The hoonciary isidjustment piovido a metire v./icle access to the abuttind lands to the north front Winfiekii Drive, No nevi/ bulkiihrig if are proposed to 0 created CO r OSii I ul Mb io: addition. FINANCIAL; his appliccihie [POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Offici.:11PIan Tile subject iitnds arr: designated Shoreline by the Official Plan (OP) Section D2 of the OP contalns policies with respect to suhdivis on of Specifically, Section D2.2.2 -i ridary Adjustments', provides Ole following guidi-7.ince Couscol ApplicEttions in general: COeSerii 4'77,* p:-..-Vrnitteri for The p±.710 of rtiociii yin Jot 1,10Drlf.jahre.9. 0f0y0lied 00 S( i)oildim...7 ;0! IS croi-u'ecf... The Committee of A clios!rneot oh-2< IN 6. ,.. y.fisfieci ti the. bow 3daril ediUSteleHt Wi/j affeCt The 1 /13e. 1 .0 1 / (he use of the croperUcs : respect to the appication 0 hand, no itew building lots nre proposed ao,d it is ii ii anticii tnat the proposed i)duiRliiiry adjustment woibld aftsiot the viatillitv of the use at Inc properly, Thc subject or eurrently vacant. The proposed land that is I conveyed is to provide access to 111C e111 from Winfield Drive. As suen, tht- proposed eciunchry adjustment is generally keeping with tho intent of lho policies stated in I k. Official Elan, and othervinso conforms, the 'a(iji..istment policies contained in Sector Zortind liy-law Tho schjout property is currently zonod Riri Rosidoritiiiil Ono LCLU o j l HUI-i 4) Zone ii he ownship's Zoning By-liqw. Ourr.,sintly the suhjecothinds and the lands to bc onnancf- are vac.iiiint. The lot to be ertht is zoned Pr <i vi Heii:reational Exception I told', (PH Residential Cho Exception: 173 1-toild (R1 — 173(H)). ilrK! Eni Protecilion Exception 172 Hold (PR'172(H)) Zones. The enhanced lands have been approved for a rivixiniinm of bet:lc:her! Ci0fl 1110 % ti ail iiitssociated golf course. *vVith the tiands to tic. eonvoyed tho enhanced lot, the retained lands v,rould remajr, I 00 W tile minimum required liontage and lot <1 iequileiner its of no RIM I '84 of the Zoning By-lavv. Therefore. the woi I comply \ivith the pros si is as ui by he Zoning B, ac Provincial Policy Stateinehl The intort of the PIOVil ci,i PCIICy Statoincill IPPSt is to build stung and healthy communities while at iine siAffie tbno prdrnofino eifficient land urn i lid development patte(] IS. eevelopmeni Services 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Meeting Date: September 16. 2010 App1ica0on No 2010-B-25 Page 2 of 7 Page 117 of 134 Po[c' 1.1.1 u) that mmoohoQoKiciaoidamy|oi:.fn.eni and land Jou u:(i�/nu which sustain ;he financial well hei:; of the Pn)vin:e and munioipnNiex :)ye/ dle long tn1 .4|so found hn suhssctioo II SiciHS . 01' am:no appropriate range 'and mix ofresidential, o/np|npnmnt(|ncludi'/g industrial, cummercia| and industrial Ls*sl recreational a:oopen sfpa:ouues ioo`ee‘. long k+'m needs. Thcpron000d.5nvnrooce |ncntc) n//tvidurfv�u1Mnmcoirma.hosovo. meeio Section |] and is conside/ud to be coosistcn< vi/ist|' the Provincial Po'icy StaiexenL. Tne app lest Ueeo reviewed v.„ reference to the Place to Grow policies Ma: huve heez in p|aue since 20CG. In Policy 2.2.2- Managind Growth (|o encourages cities and towns to develop ao cmnp'*Ks cnmmLoikesmid' a divuoa mix Of land usaa. a /ah:ye ahid .nix of emp|oymeotand houoioy |ypes. high quality public open souoearu easy a() local u|u/ooDad AJuo found ir Policy 2.2.2,'Gcnesz| intensification Section 6(f)i, which slates iha1 aU munioipr|iheo will develop and impkmaniMruugk their Official Plans a dr/kzgynrd pn'ioies to p|nse in and achieve intensification. Subsection (i) uta|ds ',hat Ne will plan for range and mix cf housing. In Po'icy21S Rural Amas, them are F/ovisiooS |h allow Jr | ^osiUeobc| development occu/ouiside ,[oot||ermui axsauio site specific locations with approved designa)ox hi .1 p1 os to Ii'. aLlti'1q .I1(J 10 'P e north (Ts! enhanced Iandsh The Township's Official Plan a:fret sentains policies wh:ch permit staff and the Committee to consider a.pp|icu&on b.runmen| in the Shoreline Designation u/ovidon ti/x1 The proposed |oi /neeiing the policies of D7.22. Dee to meeting the required policies of UvsTnwnsUin Official f-flan |o/ boundary mdiun|nmn!n. the application |s considered tn meet, this policy. 0emsd or the above. 1hc Conoon1 upo|icodonv«ou!d goouu\1yconhoxn with the P|oco to Crow Cnuntvo'SimconOhda|Plan In analyzing this Conser| application. |ownskip staff reviewed flip County of 3xnccm Official Plan. The Cuu u Simcu* hao coxxnankad U/ai ihey have no ohjadion k) ihe p/00ozed boonCa/y u0jushma/it It is the npininr rd the Planning Department Um: the proposed *zoseotcoufnono in the policies of the Cot,nty c! Sioicoo O[fidn| Hoc [ Trenspnriatinn and Environmental Sepioes- �uiNiny Copxrhnonf- Eig|neerinyDepcomcot— Loko 3imnoo Region Coosep/atonAuthority- ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 41- LooaUonMup Schedule Co�1ex]Map CONCLUSION: Development Srmicer Meeting Date: September m.zo10 Page xu[7 Application No. ucnva-co 5f)-2010-B-26-UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 118 of 134 It IS ilIC 001Ilicin of the Planning Depw thitt Consent , :t.pplicntion 201043-26 . for a botindary ad;estment wouid 1L 00' te conform te the genera! intent 0! the Ott Han. Ar-1(1 maintains the use arid setlyack provisions et Ihe Zoning F3y- lv oov '. 5 riclear of the fir ai foal uSr; tI rmlrc. wiee 0 0 the •ands the. n(:)rth. The 1:- to the north rim i nattiml erWIFOrIlriental arca separating a proposed res:cioiliial condornintuiin altd rekttc!-O golf COUrSe frerfl the roistitic. lots on the north side of VVindlicid Orivo. The app icant s SC 1)51 a Site Plan app•iottion tor :110 uroposi....d condoininiUM and golf courso I1.01 rOCCIVCd :-.ipprOW1; 'r on Council. Tile site plan U aO MJS le n5 . sho any detail of init. oloposed acc(...ss connecting to a traj system throcon the environme 1tea.. 5tsh e:Attest Mat Application 2h1O-E-26 L deferred until 11 Er, .iS inforinalion has beer' pnie■Aded lc) staff claiifying the r , lIar Ut ltriu access to it connort 70 . for '.(..1 pktposit is the nccoss and Pitt: .telation to rho pfoodso(! development to Into north. .,t.g)CCt11..111V Cittnn MCiP, RFT rviattager or. Planning Sonitoc. 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Development Services Meeting Date: September 1 Ei, 2010 ApiJlication No 2010-E3-26 Page 4 of 7 Page 119 of 134 Development Services Application No. 2010-B-26 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... 7„leetiny Date: September 16, 201 0 Page 5 of 7 Page 120 of 134 LU • .`• • 1:".: f: I 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... SCHEDULE I: LoaraioN mAp 2p10-3-26 (UCC1', 2 ; l,;17., ROID • ''••• . i - .Th 'i • jtVj l I - r• 1 . J. I ! ':, Vv Cji 1 , , i LAIJf••,.1. R' Ei *I I i ; li :a• .. ' *--. • , ,,.... .11 I !„ J • J Development Services Meetjog Date: September 16, 2010 Application No, 2016-E3-26 Page b of 7 Page 121 of 134 . LI ., e1C...•••i•" , .1f . .7.• SCHEDULE. 2: CONTEXT MAP 20 I 0 2 UCCI 4 I -- 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... ■■■ It ' Ow Ego ■■■■■■■■■■=5. Re.■ Development Services Meeting Date: September 16. 2010 Application No. 2010-B-26 Page 7 of 7 Page 122 of 134 0 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... 6 S Page 123 of 134 o - 0 - V. ‘ r•rf Ir I ' I L . vii...LN L:7,i NCL - 5!.. -- :101\15.5 iv 13 v I 0 , —,,..,,, r , p.n., MI. .... ■k ...i V ..7 .NPIN,ITA Eel 1. , '' VI, •r-, Ea, n0:I en, 1.3 *ma •. raril we r r r r Ii I' 1 ; • • • r .;" *5' ; rr: "r•: - I • ' 1 • • I I .• •r• r rrts r.ro • tilt.t.• • „r • • ,.. tt't •• , 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... • (Tr (11 ' Page 124 of 134 I7C I. JO 9Z I. abed 05 , 72 2E5. , 'man. set =VS IIIVAMOWS0 1M WO 'rn# r , z lap usa 21 22 I•• taX 6 g - ,4 4 LOT SUMMARY LOT AREA (ha.) FRONTAGE (m.) LOT AREA ( ha.) FRONTAGE (m.) 1 a 1-16 37-4 21 0-91 61-0 2 0 68 46-5 22 1.00 63-0 3 0-59 1 1 4 23 1 09 71 5 44 0-58 36-6 24 1.08 67 8 5 4 0.61 37-0 25 1-14 78-0 5 0.63 51 1 26 1-03 74-7 7 * 0-80 42-8 27 1-10 85-3 8 A 0.65 41.0 28 0-97 68-6 9 't 0-57 34-9 29 1-00 77-7 10 0-57 35-7 30 0 98 74-7 II 0-58 36-4 37 0.71 30-7 12 0-29 3 I 2 38 0-86 30-7 13 0-95 97-5 14 1.04 93.0 WATER FRONT 15 094 83-8 16 0-87 76-8 20 0 96 52-2 — edwoo uowpiosuoD non - 9Z - (19 PART OF LOT 27 AND BROKEN TOWNSHIP OF Of COUNTY OF SIM( WiN LCS 7 1 ,1 11 II: ; :47:1 SF roik I I • • Nil ,fte 1 S//pf 6 • 4, 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... 1 Page 126 of 134 5f) - 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... trAwAsho ■ Page 127 of 134 •1 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... r Page 128 of 134 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 129 of 134 5f) - 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 130 of 134 5f) - 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 131 of 134 5f) - 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 132 of 134 5f) - 2010 -B -26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 133 of 134 5f) - 2010-B-26 - UCCI Consolidation Compa... Page 134 of 134