Loading...
06 21 2012 Committee of Adjustment AgendaPage 3 -8 9 -63 64 -79 80 -90 91 -103 L11111■ THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS ip of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Thursday, June 21, 2012 10:00 a.m. 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES: a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, May 17, 2012. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concession 2, Part Lot 2 Application for the creation of a new residential lot. To be heard in conjunction with: 2009 -B -08 (APT Operational Management Inc.) 2981 Ridge Road West, Concession 2, Part Lot 2 Application to permit a boundary adjustment /lot addition. b) 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and 400 Line 9 North, Concession 9, Part Lot 18 Application for relief from increase in situation of non - compliance and non- conformity of use of buildings and structures. c) 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North, Concession 11, North Part Lot 19 Application for relief from maximum height and setbacks from limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. d) 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, Plan 702 Application for relief from minimum required exterior side yard, maximum height and maximum floor area. 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 South, Plan 104, Part Lot 9 Application for relief from: 1) For "Carport" (revision to 2008- A -21): accessory 104 -118 e) Page 1 of 141 Page 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: building in front yardand minimum required front yard setback; 2) For "Garage" (new application): maximum height and maximum floor area. 119 -129 f) 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, Plan 1, East Part BlockA Application for relief from accessory building in front yard, maximum height and maximum floor area. 130 -139 g) 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, Concession 5, Part Lot 17 Application for relief from maximum height and maximum floor area. 140 -141 6. NEW BUSINESS: a) Correspondence dated June 14, 2012 from the Ontario Municipal Board, re: Appointment of Hearing, Thursday, September 27, 2012 - Coulson Ridge Estate's Ltd. (2010- B -06). 7. NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, July 19, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Page 2 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... TOtlhiSlll�) Oj Proud Heritage, Exciting Future THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers Thursday, May 17, 2012 Time: 10:04 a.m. Present: Scott Macpherson, Vice -Chair Bruce Chappell Roy Hastings Allan Johnson Regrets: Larry Tupling, Chair Staff present:Alan Wiebe, Secretary Treasurer /Intermeciate Plat. er Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Scott Macpherson assumed the Chai' called the meeting to order. a) Appointment of Chair. Motion No. CA120517 -1 4 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the appointment of the Chair in accordance with Section 6.0 of the Committee of Adjustment Procedural By -Law No. 2011 -013 for the 2012 term be deferred to the June 21, 2012 meeting of Committee of Adjustment. -4N,Motion No. CA120517 -2 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Johnson Defeated. It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that Scott Macpherson be appointed as Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for remainder of the 2012 Term. Carried. b) Appointment of Vice Chair. Motion No. CA120517 -3 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Macpherson It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that Roy Hastings be appointed as Vice Chair for the Committee of Adjustment for the remainder of the 2012 Term. Carried. Page 1 of 6 Page 3 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 17, 2012. 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. CA120517 -4 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the agenda for the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, May 17, 2012 be received and adopted. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERES None declared. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES: a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, April 19, 2012. Motion No. CA120517 -5 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Hastings Carried. It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, April 19, 2012 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 2 of 6 Page 4 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 17, 2012. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2012 -A -14 (Robin Patricia Lee) 55 Lakeshore Road East, Lots 3 & 40, Plan 798, RP 51 R- 37485, Part 2 Relief from minimum required interior side yard (for dwelling), minimum required front yard (for private garage), minimum required interior side yard (for private garage), maximum height (for private garage) and maximum floor area (for private garage). Robin Lee, applicant, and Andrew McIntyre, designer, were present. Albert Farrell noted concern over the removal of existing vegetative buffer and requested that the vegetative buffer be replaced. Motion No. CA120517 -6 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2012 -A- 14, specifically, to permit the replacement of an existing attached garage within the minimum required front and interior side yards, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the single detached dwelling shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 2. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.3 a), 5.1.3 d), 5.1.4, and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the detached private garage shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that: a) The single detached dwelling be located no closer than approximately 1.75 metres from the interior side lot line to the east; b) The detached private garage be located no closer than approximately: i. 5.0 metres from the front lot line; and ii. 1.5 metres from the interior side lot line to the west. c) The detached private garage not exceed approximately: i. 5.0 metres in height above grade; and ii. 90 square metres in "floor area ". 4. That the setbacks for the proposed single detached dwelling, and the setbacks, floor area, and height for the detached private garage, be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 5. That a shoreline planting plan be submitted to the satisfaction of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; 6. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 7. 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 3 of 6 Page 5 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 17, 2012. b) 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392/400 Line 9 North, Concession 9, Part Lot 18 Relief to increase in situation of non - compliance and for non - conformity of use of buildings and structures. Darryl and Alfred Simpson, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA120517 -7 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Variance Application 2012 -A- 15. c) 2012 -A -16 (Evelyn Helen Lennox) 1520 Line 1 North, Concession 1, East Part of Lot 24 Request for enlargement of non - complying building, relief from setback from limits of Environmental Protection Zone and setback from water courses (top of bank). Carried. Paul and Fred Naughton, agents, were present. Motion No. CA120517 -8 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that he Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2012 - A-16, specifically, to permit the construction of an addition to a single detached dwelling 0 metres from the top of bank of a watercourse and the boundary of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the setbacks for the proposed single detached dwelling be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 2. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; and 3. 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. Carried. Page 4 of 6 Page 6 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 17, 2012. d) 2012 -A -17 (Steven Anderson) 256 Lakeshore Road East, Lot 32, Plan 589 Relief from minimum required front yard, minimum required interior side yard (to north), minimum required rear yard and increase in the amount of floor area or volume in a required yard through the replacement and enlargement of a non - complying building. Steve Anderson, applicant, was present. L. Roxborough, neighbour, noted concern over the survey provided by the applicant. Staff noted that anonymous correspondence was received and kept on file and not provided to the Committee as it did not meet the requirements of Section 14.0 of Procedural By -law 2011 -013. Motion No. CA120517 -9 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2012 - A -17, specifically, to permit the replacement of a non - complying dwelling in the same footprint and in a manner that increases the amount of floor area and volume occupied by the previous dwelling, subject to the following conditions: 1. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the single detached dwelling: a) be located no closer than approximately: i. 3.22 metres from the front lot line; ii. 2.68 metres from the interior side lot line to the north; and iii. 5.69 metres from the rear lot line. b) Not have a floor area exceeding approximately 180 square metres. 2. That the setbacks for the proposed single detached dwelling be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; and 3. 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. Carried. Page 5 of 6 Page 7 of 141 4a) - Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 17, 2012. 6. NEW BUSINESS: a) OACA April 2012 Newsletter. Motion No. C120517 -10 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that the OACA April 2012 Newsletter be received. 7. NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, June 21, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. CA120517 -11 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 11:57 a.m. Carried. Carried. Scott Macpherson, Vice -Chair Alan Wiebe, Secretary Treasurer Page 6 of 6 Page 8 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Consent Applications (APT Operational Management Inc. and Mark Porter) Parts 3, 4, and 6, Plan 51 R -28938 & Parts 1 and 2, Plan 51 R -33292 2981 & 3003 Ridge Road West (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010- 007 -07000 (2981 Ridge Road W) 4346- 010- 007 -07020 (3003 Ridge Road W) R.M.S. File #: D10 -39027 (2009 -B -08) D10 -39025 (2009 -B -07) REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Application 2009 -B -08: 1. That one copy of a Registered Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the severed lands, with an area of approximately 0.4 hectares, be merged in title with the property at 3003 Ridge Road West, and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject land; 3. That the conditions stated in the letter from staff for the County of Simcoe, dated June 12, 2012, be completed (per Schedule 5 to this report); 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 provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; and 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Application 2009 -B -07: 1. That one copy of a Registered Reference Plan of the subject lands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the conditions stated in the letter from staff for the County of Simcoe, dated June 12, 2012, be completed (per Schedule 5 to this report); 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcels severed and retained, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant pay a $2,000.00 cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution for the lot created; 5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; 6. That all conditions of consent imposed by the Committee on Consent Application 2009 -B -08 be fulfilled; and 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -8 -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 1 of 22 Page 9 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... BACKGROUND: The lands subject to Consent Applications 2009 -B -07 and 2009 -B -08 are municipally known as 2981 and 3003 Ridge Road West, respectively, whose zoning requirements and existing configurations are outlined in Table 1, below. TABLE 1 Property Zoning 2981 Ridge A/RU *134 and 6.9 hectares Road W SR *134 (17.05 acres) 3003 Ridge 0.95 hectares Road W (2.35 acres) Minimum Lot Area Required' A/RU*133(H), SR*133 (H), and EP*214 (H) Existing Lot Minimum Lot Area Frontage Required' 7.47 hectares (18.47 acres) 1.85 hectares (4.58 acres) 180 metres (590.55 feet) 20 metres (66 feet) ' Subject to receipt of any appeal(s) of By -law 2012 -106 not later than June 181h, 2012. "A/RU" = Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone "SR" = Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Existing Lot Frontage 196.16 metres (643.6 feet) 45.72 metres (150 feet) In 2009, Zoning By -law Amendment Application 2009 - ZBA -05 proposed the amendment to the zoning of the properties at 2981 and 3003 Ridge Road West, respectively, to facilitate the creation of a new residential lot. Concurrent to the submission of this application, the applicant also submitted Consent Application 2009 -B -08, which proposed a boundary adjustment to convey approximately 0.4 hectares of land from the larger 7.47 hectare lot (2981 Ridge Road West) to the smaller 1.85 hectare lot (3003 Ridge Road West), setting the stage for Consent Application 2009 -B -07, which proposed to sever a new residential lot from the enlarged 2.25 hectare property (3003 Ridge Road West). Since the submission of Zoning By -law Amendment Application 2009 - ZBA -05 and Consent Applications 2009 -8 -07 and 2009 -B -08, the applicant has engaged in discussions with the County of Simcoe and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority in the resolution of comments provided. By way of By -law 2012 -106, Council has enacted the amendment of the zoning of these lands with minimum lot area and lot frontage requirements summarized above, and additional amendments as contained in Schedule 5 to this report. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this report is to consider Consent Applications 2009 -B -08 and 2009 -B -07, as outlined below, for the properties located at 2981 and 3003 Ridge Road West, as illustrated in Schedules 1 and 2 to this report. The purpose of Consent Application 2009 -B -08 is to permit a boundary adjustment/lot addition. The subject property being 2981 Ridge Road West, which occupies an area of approximately 7.47 hectares (18.47 acres), has frontage along Ridge Road West of approximately 196.16 metres (643.6 feet) and contains a single detached dwelling, two detached accessory buildings, and a boathouse. As illustrated in Schedule 3 , Consent Application 2009 -8-08 proposes to convey approximately 0.4 Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 2 of 22 Page 10 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... hectares (0.99 acres) of land from the property at 2981 Ridge Road West to the property at 3003 Ridge Road West, inclusive of approximately 15.45 metres (50.7 feet) of frontage along Ridge Road West. The result of the proposed boundary adjustment would be: a) the property at 2981 Ridge Road West occupying approximately 7.07 hectares (17.47 acres) and having approximately 186.56 metres (612 feet) of frontage on Ridge Road West; and b) the property at 3003 Ridge Road West occupying approximately 2.25 hectares (5.56 acres) and having approximately 63.15 metres (207.2 feet) of frontage on Ridge Road West. The purpose of Consent Application 2009 -B -07 is to permit the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residential use. Subject to the disposition of Consent Application 2009 -B -08, the lands subject to application 2009 -B -07 would have approximately 59.87 metres (196.4 feet) of frontage on Ridge Road West, 24.29 metres (79.7 feet) of frontage on Line 1 South, and would occupy an area of approximately 2.31 hectares (5.49 acres). The results of: 1) Zoning By -law Amendment 2009- ZBA -05, and 2) Consent Applications 2009 -B -08 and 2009 -8-07, would be as outlined in Table 2, below: TABLE 2 Property Zoning 2981 Ridge A /RU *134 and Road W SR *134 3003 Ridge Road W (this configuration A/RU *133(H), SR *133 (H), and EP *214 (H) Minimum Lot Proposed Minimum Lot Proposed Lot Area Required' Lot Area Frontage Required' Frontage 6.9 hectares (17.05 acres) 7.07 hectares (17.47 acres) 180 metres (590.55 feet) 186.53 metres (612 feet) on Ridge Road West would be the result of boundary adjustment application 2009 -B -08) 0.95 hectares (2.35 acres) 1.32 hectares (3.04 acres) 20 metres (66 feet) 59.87 metres (196.4 feet) on Ridge Road West A/RU *133(H), 0.95 hectares 0.99 hectares 20 metres 24.29 metres Proposed SR *133 (H), (79.7 feet) on New Lot and EP *214 (H) (2.35 acres) (2.45 acres) (66 feet) Line 1 South (this configuration would be the cumulative result of boundary adjustment application 2009 -B -08, and consent application 2009 -B -07 for the proposed creation of a new lot) Subject to receipt of any appeal(s) of By -law 2012 -106 not later than June 18`", 2012. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 3 of 22 Page 11 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... POLICIES /LEGISLATION: TOWNSHIP OFFICIAL PLAN The subject lands have portions of land in the Rural and Shoreline designations in the Township's Official Plan, and are entirely located within the Environmental Protection Two Overlay designation which, pursuant to Schedule B to the Official Plan, reflects its location within a Significant Woodland. With respect to the subject properties having portions of land in multiple designations, Section E1.8 of the Official Plan states that the "boundaries between land uses designated on [its] Schedules ... are approximate" and continues to state that "[where] a lot is within more than one designation on the Schedules to [the Official Plan], each portion of the lot shall be used in accordance with the applicable policies of that designation". CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -08 (BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT) With respect to the proposed boundary adjustment, it is noted that the policies of neither the Shoreline nor the Rural designations contain specific provisions related to the modification of lot boundaries. On this basis, Planning staff defers to Section D2.2.2 of the Official Plan, which states that "[a] consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lot is created [and] 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". As previously stated, the result of the proposed boundary adjustment would be: a) the property at 2981 Ridge Road West occupying approximately 7.07 hectares (17.47 acres) and having approximately 186.56 metres (612 feet) of frontage on Ridge Road West; and b) the property at 3003 Ridge Road West occupying approximately 2.25 hectares (5.56 acres) and having approximately 63.15 metres (207.2 feet) of frontage on Ridge Road West. As outlined in Table 2, the proposed boundary adjustment would result in the retained lands and the enhanced lands continuing to comply with the minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage provisions of the Township's Zoning By -law, and the boundary adjustment would therefore be considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan for the Township. CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -07 (CREATION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL LOT) Shoreline Designation Policies Section C5 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Shoreline designation. Specifically, Section C5.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses on lands [in this designation include] ... single detached dwellings ... ". Section C5.3 of the Official Plan "Residential Development Policies" contains policies related to "New residential Plans of Subdivision" (Section C5.3.3), and related to the "Limits of Shoreline development' (Section C5.3.4), however, the scope of policies contained in these sections is limited to either the creation of multiple lots by Plan of Subdivision, or to the expansion of the Shoreline designation in Schedule A to the Official Plan. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 4 of 22 Page 12 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Rural Designation Policies Section C2 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Rural designation and, specifically, Section C2.2 states that "Permitted Uses on lands in [this] designation .., are agriculture, single detached dwellings ..." Regarding the proposed creation of a new lot, Section C2.3 of the Official Plan contains "Development Policies" related to "The creation of new lots for residential purposes". These policies state that "[in] accordance with the intent of this Plan to maintain the rural character of the Township, only a limited number of new lots for residential purposes can be created in the Township ... only one new lot can be severed from a lot in the Rural designation that has an area of at least 36 hectares or is the whole of an original Township lot ... ". Based on the provisions of Section C2.3, Planning staff notes that the policies of this designation would not, in and of themselves, support the form of development proposed through application 2009 - B-07. However, the Planning Department is of the opinion that the site- specific zoning applying to the subject lands prohibiting the construction of buildings and structures within the Rural - designated portions maintains the intent of the Rural designation, and therefore directs Planning staff to evaluate the proposal for the creation of a new residential lot within the context of all other applicable policies. Environmental Protection Two Overlay Designation Policies Section B3 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land within the Environmental Protection Two Overlay de signation and, specifically, Section B3.3 states that the "uses permitted in [this designation] shall be those permitted by the underlying designation ..." Additionally, Section B3.4 of the Official Plan provides "Conditions under which development may occur" and states that "development ... in [this] designation that requires ... an amendment to the Zoning By -law ... shall also be subject to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) ... ". It is noted that the applicant has provided a submission from an environmental consultant in association with Zoning By -law Amendment Application 2009- ZBA -05. Following the receipt of this submission, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) provided comments as outlined the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan section of this report, and Schedule # 7 to this report. Section 02.2.1 — Subdivision of Land Policies In the event of any application for consent for the creation of a new residential lot, Planning staff must defer to Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan, which contains test for such a proposal. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed ... ": a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed retained lands have frontage on Ridge Road West, and the proposed severed lands would have frontage on Line 1 South. Therefore, each would have frontage on public roads maintained on a year round basis. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 5 of 22 Page 13 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; As previously noted, the proposed retained lands would have frontage on Ridge Road West (County Road # 20). In this regard, the application has been circulated to staff at the County of Simcoe, who have provided comments dated June 12, 2012, as contained in the County Official Plan section of this report, and attached in Schedule 6, within which they state that "[the] County of Simcoe has no objection to the approval of the application[s], provided ... [specific] conditions are included'. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; The subject application was circulated to Transportation staff for the Township and the County, who have respectively stated as outlined below: • County Comments: see Schedule 7 to this report • Township Comments: Transportation and Environmental Services staff recommended by way of Report No. TES2010 -22, on December 8, 2010, that an entrance be granted via Line 1 South (south of Ridge Road West) to the proposed severed lands. By way of Motion # C101208 -7, Council received and adopted this recommendation. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; The subject lands are zoned Agricultural /Rural Exception 133 Hold (A/RU *133(H)) Zone, Shoreline Residential Exception 133 Hold (SR *133(H)) Zone, and Environmental Protection Exception 214 Hold (EP *214(H)) Zone, with site - specific provisions as outlined below. a) Accessory buildings or structures are prohibited in the portions of the lands in the Agricultural /Rural (AIRU) Zone; b) The site - specific Exception 133 (" *133 ") provision reduces: i) the minimum lot frontage from 45 metres (147.6 feet) to 20 metres (66 feet); and ii) the minimum required setback from the boundary of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, from 30 metres to 0 metres c) The site - specific Exception 214 (" *214 ") provision permits one boathouse per residential lot within the Environmental Protection Exception 214 Hold (EP *214(H)) Zone. Therefore, on the basis that the proposal in Consent Application 2009 -B -07 for the creation of a new residential lot, as outlined in Table 2, above, would result in severed and retained lands which would each individually comply with the minimum lot area (size) and frontage provisions of the Zoning By- law. With respect to whether the proposed use of the severed and retained lands would be compatible with adjacent uses, it is noted that the immediate area is surrounded by lands containing single detached dwellings with frontage on public roads and the shoreline of Lake Simcoe and, therefore, the proposal would be considered compatible with adjacent land uses, having various configurations for lot frontages and lot areas. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; At the time of construction of dwellings on the lands proposed to be severed and retained, the applicant would be required to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. In this regard, the Township's Zoning By -law provisions for the Agricultural /Rural Exception Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 6 of 22 Page 14 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... 133 (NRU*133) Zone and Shoreline Residential Exception 133 (SR*133) Zone require a minimum lot area of 0.95 hectares (2.35 acres), to reflect the development of private services on lots requiring private services. 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 buildings and /or structures may be subject to the completion of a lot grading 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; As proposed, the lands to be retained and lands to be severed comply with the minimum lot frontage provision of the Zoning By -law. Therefore, the proposed severance would not appear to restrict the development of the lands subject to this application for consent for the creation of a new lot. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; As previously noted, through the processing of Zoning By -law Amendment Application 2009- ZBA -05, the applicant has provided a submission from an environmental consultant in association with the proposed development of the subject lands. Following the receipt of this submission, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) provided comments as outlined the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan section of this report, and Schedule # 7 to this report. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; It is noted that any future development on the subject lands would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure that it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. On the basis of the above evaluation, the proposal in Consent Application 2009 -B -07 is considered to conform to the Official Plan for the Township. COUNTY OFFICIAL PLAN Pursuant to Schedule 5.1 of the County of Simcoe's Official, the subject lands are designated Rural & Agricultural in the County's Official Plan. CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -08 (BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT) Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan contains policies for lands in the Rural and Agricultural designation; however, this Section does not contain specific policies related to boundary adjustments for lands within this designation. Therefore, the Planning Department refers specifically to the policies of Section 3.3 of the County's Official Plan, for the subject proposal. Section 3.3 of the County's Official Plan contains "General Subdivision and Development Policies" and, specifically, Section 3.3.4 states that "[consents] for the purpose of boundary adjustments and consolidation of land holdings are permitted." On the basis that the subject application does not propose the creation of a new lot, and that the proposal is considered to generally conform to the Official Plan policies of Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 7 of 22 Page 15 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... the Township, and to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By -law, the proposal is considered to conform to the policies of the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -07 (CREATION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL LOT) Section 3.6.7 of the County's Official Plan states that "[in] rural areas, uses permitted are ... residential lots created by consent ... ". Further, Section 3.6.11 of the Official Plan contains additional provisions related to lot creation and states that "In rural areas, country residential development through subdivision by Plan, rather than consent, is preferred. However, lots may be created by consent according to the following guidelines" "a) Lots should be restricted in size in order to conserve other lands in larger blocks for agricultural or environmental purposes. Consent lots should be developed to an approximate maximum size of one hectare, except where larger sizes may be suitable because of environmental constraints or design considerations." "c) In geographic areas set out in local official plans, provision may be made for residential lot areas larger than 1 ha. where required for servicing purposes, environmental considerations, or to maintain established lot and development patterns." On the basis that Consent Application 2009 -B -07 proposes to create a new lot with an area less than 1 hectare, in a configuration and size that it consistent with the rural character of the surrounding area, it is the opinion of Planning staff for the Township that the subject application conforms to the applicable policies of Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan. Further, Planning staff for the Township have circulated the Consent Applications 2009 -B -08 (boundary adjustment) and 2009 -B -07 (creation of a new lot) to staff at the County of Simcoe, who have provided comments by letter dated June 12, 2012, as contained in Schedule 6 to this report. Specifically, staff for the County have stated that "The County of Simcoe has no objection to the approval of this application, provided the following conditions are included: "1. The applicant shall transfer to the ... County ... [a] road allowance widening along the entire frontage of the subject property ... [and] a daylight (sight) triangle measuring 10 metres east - west x 10 metres north -south at the North West corner of the property adjacent to County Road 20 (Ridge Road) and Oro Line 1 ..." "2. ... Any new buildings and other structures must be located 15 metres from any requested road allowance widening ... [and] The applicant shall enter into a legal agreement with the County ... [requiring] the applicant [to] remove the stone fence along County Road 20 ..." Therefore, the application is considered to conform to the policies of the County's Official Plan. 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. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 8 of 22 Page 16 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -08 (BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT) Section 2.3.4.2 of the PPS states that "[lot] adjustments ... may be permitted for legal or technical reasons", which the PPS defines as "severances for purposes such as .., minor boundary adjustments, which do not result in the creation of a new lot." While no new lot is being created, the proposed boundary adjustment would result in the conveyance of approximately 0.4 hectares (0.99 acres) from a 7.47 hectare (17.47 acre) parcel to a lot with an area of 1.85 hectares (4.58 acres). As previously noted, through the proposed conveyance, the lands to be retained will continue to meet the minimum required lot area for the existing use, and the lands to be enhanced will continue to meet the minimum required lot area for a residential use. It is anticipated that the viability of the lands to be conveyed, retained, or enhanced, for their respective uses will not be adversely impacted through the proposed boundary adjustment. On this basis, the proposed boundary adjustment is considered to conform to the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. CONSENT APPLICATION 2009 -B -07 (CREATION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL LOT) Section 1.1.4 of the PPS contains policies related to "Rural Areas in Municipalities" and, specifically, Section 1.1.4.1 of the PPS states that "a) permitted uses and activities shall relate to ... limited residential development and other rural land uses ... b) development shall be appropriate to the infrastructure which is planned or available, and avoid the need for the unjustified and /or uneconomical expansion of this infrastructure ... Section 1.6.4.4 of the PPS contains policies related to "Sewage and Water" and states that "[individual] on -site sewage services and individual on -site water services shall be used for a new development of five or less lots where municipal sewage [and water] services ... are not provided ... ". It is noted that further development of the proposed severed lands would require appropriate provision of water and sewage services. On the basis of the above policies, the proposed Consent Application is considered to generally be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. PLACES TO GROW The purpose of the Places to Grow policies is to provide direction to municipalities in Ontario for managing growth to ensure the efficient use of land and infrastructure resources, and to protect agricultural lands and other natural resources from incompatible development. Section 2.2.2 of the Places to Grow document contains policies for "Managing Growth ", and states that "[population] ... growth will be accommodated by ... a) directing a significant portion of new growth to the built -up areas of the community through intensification ... 1) directing development to settlement areas ... ". Further, Section 2.2.9.3 of these policies state that "New ... lots ... for residential development ... may be allowed in rural areas in site - specific locations with approved zoning or designation that permits this type of development in a municipal official plan". While it is noted that the Places to Grow policies do not contemplate and provide direction for applications for boundary adjustments (as proposed in Consent Application 2009- B -08), the direction provided in the above captioned policies defers to municipal planning policies in determining the Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 9 of 22 Page 17 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... appropriateness of applications for the creation of a new lot in rural areas. As previously stated, Consent Application 2009 -B -07, for the creation of a new lot, is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plans for the Township and the County, and to the Township's Zoning By -law. Therefore, Consent Application 2009 -B -07 is considered to maintain the general intent of the Places to Grow policies of the Province. LAKE SIMCOE PROTECTION PLAN The subject lands are within the Lake Simcoe watershed and, as such, the Consent Applications are subject to policies passed under the authority of the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, as contained in the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP). The general purpose of the LSPP is to preserve the long -term wellbeing of Lake Simcoe, and to natural features within the Lake Simcoe watershed, while minimizing the impacts of development on these features. The applicable policies in the LSPP, with respect to the proposed boundary adjustment and creation of a new residential lot, include that: • "development or site alteration outside of existing settlement areas is not permitted in Lake Simcoe ... except in relation to ... [stewardship], conservation, restoration and remediation undertakings ... [law]- intensity recreational uses including access to the Lake that require very little terrain or vegetation modification ..." (6.1 -DP); and • "[the] minimum vegetation protection zone in a shoreline built -up area is 30 metres from the Lake Simcoe shoreline ..." (6.2 -DP). The LSRCA has advised that it has no objection to the consent applications, subject to the following conditions: 1. "... the owner shall successfully amend the Zoning 8y -law by zoning the Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (MVPZ) Environmental Protection (EP) "; 2. "... a permit be obtained under Ontario Regulation 179/06 from the LSRCA, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit for any proposed development or site alteration within the regulated portion of the ... property'; and 3. "... the proposed development be made subject to Site Plan Control to the satisfaction of the LSRCA". In this regard, Planning staff notes that the amendment to the zoning of the subject lands has applied an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone to a 30 -metre setback from Lake Simcoe (representing the MVPZ area of the property) for the proposed severed and retained lands subject to Consent Application 2009 -B -07, and has imposed the requirement for a Site Plan Control agreement in relation to proposed development on the lots. Therefore, based on the above points, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposed boundary adjustment and creation of a new residential lot are considered to conform to the policies of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 10 of 22 Page 18 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services - Building Department — Engineering Department — County of Simcoe — see Schedule 6 Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — see Schedule 7 ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: 2981 and 3003 Ridge Road West (Current Configuration) Schedule 3: Proposed Boundary Adjustment (Consent Application 2009 -B -08) Schedule 4: Proposed Creation of New Lot (Consent Application 2009 -B -07) Schedule 5: Township of Oro - Medonte By -law 2012 -106 Schedule 6: County of Simcoe Letter dated June 12, 2012 Schedule 7: Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Letter dated November 8, 2011 CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Consent Application 2009 -B -08, for a boundary adjustment, is considered to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By -law, and to conform to the general intent of the Official Plans for the Township and the County of Simcoe, as well as the Provincial Policy Statement. Further, it is also the opinion of the Planning Department that Consent Application 2009 -B -07, for the creation of a new residential lot, is considered to comply with the provisions of the Township's Zoning By -law, and to conform to the policies of the Official Plans for the Township and the County, and to Provincial policies. Repectfully submitted: i/ Alan Wiebe, 'B.A. Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP Director, Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 11 of 22 Page 19 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 12 of 22 Page 20 of 141 5a) - 2009-B-07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Rood West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 2: 2981 AND 3003 RIDGE ROAD WEST (CURRENT CONFIGURATION) 2009-B-08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009-B-07 (PORTER) CURRENT OP DESIGNATION CURRENT ZONING 0 >- < j-- 0 w 2 Z WW 0_ 2 ef5 Development Services Application No. 2009-B-08 & 2009-B-07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 13 of 22 Page 21 of 141 5a) - 2009-B-07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Rood West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 3: PROPOSED BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 2009-B-08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) RETAINED LOT OST BOUNDARY ADJ US LANDS TO BE. CONVEYED z Lands to be severed from 2981 Ridge Road West, and merged with 3003 Ridge Road West Development Services Application No. 2009-B-08 & 2009-B-07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 14 of 22 Page 22 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 4: PROPOSED CREATION OF NEW LOT 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) = w w i-0 Luo o 0 WW c.) c 84 0,, DoILI p o ce 0 0 )O 00 0C 0 N 0 0 5 0 K 0, 5 U F 2m II II 1% BO E.3 IW li 1211 1667 `. 0 !0000 Jm 00000 J0000000.- V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0063.540000000005. 0000000 ^0 \ 00000( w 000 qp 0000 000�'hry b'e 0 0 N ;-)Z Eli 0 CC ' 0 w 0I w o.• c7 `, -.. z Q 28,53 Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 15 of 22 Page 23 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 5A: TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE BY -LAW 2012 -106 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE BY -LAW NO. 2012 -106 A By -law to amend the zoning provisions On lands described as follows: Parts 3, 4, and 6, Plan 51R- 28938, and Part 1, Plan 61R- 33292, 3003 Ridge Road West, and Part 2, Plan 51R- 33292, 2981 Ridge Road West Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe Roll # 4346 -010- 007 -07000 and 4346 -010 -007 -07020 WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro - Medonte is empowered to pass By -laws to regulate the use of land pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13. AND WHEREAS Council deems it appropriate to rezone the subject lands, in accordance with Sections C2 and C5 of the Official Plan; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro - Medonte enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 'Al' to Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone symbol applying to the lands being Parts 3, 4, and 6, Plan 51R- 28938, and Part 1, Plan 51 R- 33292, 3003 Ridge Road West, and Part 2, Plan 51 R- 33292, 2981 Ridge Road West, in the former geographic Township of Oro, now in the Township of Oro - Medonte, as outlined below, and as shown on Schedule 'A' attached hereto and forming part of this By -law: a. From the Agricultural /Rural Exception 133 (A/RU *133) Zone to Agricultural /Rural Exception 133 Hold (A/RU *133(H)) Zone; b. From the Shoreline Residential Exception 133 (SR "133) Zone to Shoreline Residential Exception 133 Hold (SR-133(H)) Zone; c. From the Agricultural /Rural Exception 134 (A/RU'134) Zone to Agricultural/Rural Exception 133 Hold (A/RU *133(H)) Zone; d. From the Shoreline Residential Exception 134 (SR "134) Zone to Shoreline Residential Exception 133 Hold (SR "133(H)) Zone; and e. From the Shoreline Residential Exceptions 133 (SR "133) and 134 (SR-134) Zones, respectively, to the Environmental Protection Exception 214 Hold (EP`214(H)) Zone. 2. Section 7.133 — Exception 133 to Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended is hereby further amended by deleting in its entirety and replacing with the following subsection: "7.133 '133 — PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, CONCESSION 2 (FORMER ORO) "Notwithstanding any other provision in this By -law: a) the minimum lot frontage required is approximately 20.00 metres (66 feet), and minimum lot area required is approximately 0.95 hectares (2.35 acres) on the lands denoted by the symbol *133 on the schedule to this By -law, b) accessory buildings or structures are prohibited on the lands zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) and denoted by the symbol "133 on the schedule to this by -law. For the purposes of this Section such buildings or structures may include a swimming pool, a tennis court, change facilities, and garage /storage buildings, provided such buildings or structures are accessory to a residential use on the same lot. c) The provisions of Section 5.28, "Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection Zone ", do not apply to the lands denoted by the symbol "133 on the schedules to this By -law Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 16 of 22 Page 24 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 5B: TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE BY -LAW 2012 -106 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) 3. Section 7.134 — Exception 134 to Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended is hereby further amended by deleting in its entirety and replacing with the following subsection: "7.134 *134— PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, CONCESSION 2 (FORMER ORO) "Notwithstanding any other provision in this By -law: "a) the minimum lot frontage required is approximately 180.00 metres (590.55 feet), and minimum lot area required is approximately 6.9 hectares (17.05 acres) on the lands denoted by the symbol *134 on the schedule to this By -law. "b) accessory buildings or structures are prohibited on the lands zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) and denoted by the symbol *134 on the schedule to this by -law. For the purposes of the Section such buildings or structures may include a swimming pool, a tennis court, change facilities, and garage /storage buildings, provide such buildings or structures are accessory to a residential use on the same lot. "c) The provisions of Section 5.28, "Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection Zone", do not apply to the lands denoted by the symbol *134 on the schedules to this By -law 4. Section 7 — Exceptions to Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended is hereby further amended by the addition of the following subsection: "7.214 *214— PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, CONCESSION 2 (FORMER ORO) "Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Zoning Bylaw, one Boathouse per residential lot shall be permitted, in accordance with Section 5.6, "Boathouses "." 5. THAT the 'Hold' (H) provision shall only be lifted upon completion of an appropriate Development Agreement to the County of Simcoe's satisfaction for considerations such as a road improvement agreement for the intersection of Oro - Medonte Line 1 South and Simcoe Road 20, and an encroachment agreement for the existing stone fence to be registered on title. A site plan agreement to regulate the development on each lot must also be secured with the Township of Oro - Medonte prior to the Hold (H) being lifted. 6. This By -law shall come into effect upon the date of passage hereof, subject to the provisions of the Planning Act, as amended. BY -LAW READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME, AND PASSED THIS 23RD DAY OF MAY, 2012. THE CO RAT NO Mayor, H.S. Hugh :s THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE Cie- , J �a1as Irwin Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 17 of 22 Page 25 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 5C: TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE BY -LAW 2012 -106 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) Schedule 'A' to By -Law No. 2012 -106 This is Schedule 'A' to By -Law 2012 -106 passed the 23" da it 2. �f , 1 t 1 Mayor �, . Clerk 1T ■Ated,e4 H.S. Hughe ORO LINE 1 (OPENED) Doug in 241.88 RIDGE ROAD —s Co O Co W LANDS TO BE REZONED FROM SHORELINE RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (SR -1341 TO SOONELM E REM- 44,TUL EXCEPTi014 504.14 (5R 133 (HA LANDS TO BE R[2ONEO mom AGRCULTLIRA; RURAL EXCEPT ION (NRU 134)10 AGRICLi,T1RAL t RURAL EXCEPTION NOLO (AR514- 13345) LANDS TO SE REZONED FROM SHOAELIl RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (SR- 733)(0 SHORELINE. ROSIOENR% EXCf, PT:ON H000 (SR-(33 (H)) LANDS TO 81 REZONED FROM AGR;GSY.'URAL RURAL EXCEPTION 4NRU -133) TO AORMLR.TURAL I RURAL EXCEPTION 1 IOLD ;A,R11-733 (H)) J VU.00 TORE REZONES FROM AG*4004 TUHAi lj _I �� J1541440 EkCEPTICw fARD- 13,4)TO AGRY.,IT.TURALt RURAL EXCEPTION fAA44 -7)4) C ❑ ❑ C LAANOB TO BE REZONED FROM 5140RELIN£ RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION ;S45.733150 I G 73 ❑ ❑ SHORELINE RESIOENTVZi. EXCEPTION (S2 -434) L11405 TO 9P REZONED PROMSIIO ELI^.E REE IVENTL4. EXCEPT ICN R :59) TO ENVIRDV \!ENTAI- RROTECTCOV F.zOpp(Ibfl 214110'd TOWNSHIP OF ONO- MEDONTE Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 18 of 22 Page 26 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 6A: COUNTY OF SIMCOE LETTER DATED JUNE 12, 2012 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) SI COE t County of Slmcoe Transportation and Engineering 1110 Highway 26, Midhursl, Ontario LOL 1X0 Main Line (705) 726 9300 Toll Free 1 866 893 9300 Fax (705) 727 7984 Web: slrncoee.ca TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING Alan Wiebe Secretary- Treasurer Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro, Ontario LOL 1X0 Dear Mr. Wiebe, June 12, 2012 'Via: E -Mall' RE: Consent Application File No's: 2009-6 -07, 2009 -B-08, and 2009-6 -09 (Porter & APT Operational Management INC.) 2981 & 3003 Ridge Road (County Road 20), Lot 1 and 2, Concession 2, Geographic Township of Oro, Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe Thank you for circulating the above -noted applications to the County of Simcoe for review. The existing right -of -way on County Road 20 adjacent to the subject property is approximately 15.25 metres wide. In accordance with Schedule 5.5 of the Simcoe County Official Plan, the required basic right -of -way width for County Road 20 Is 20.0 metres. County staff has reviewed this requirement and feel that the full right -of -way width is necessary for future road maintenance, road improvements and stormwater flow from County Road 20. In order to meet this right -of -way requirement, the County will require a road widening of approximately 2.37 metres. The Simcoe County Official Plan also states the requirement for daylight (sight) triangles. The County standard for daylight (sight) triangles is 15 metres X 15 metres. The applicant has applied for and has received a variance to this size of daylight (sight) triangle. These dimensions are applied to the limit of the right-of -way. The County of Simcoe has no objection to the approval of the application, provided the following conditions are included: 1. The applicant shall transfer to the Corporation of the County of Simcoe ("County"), at no cost, a fee simple, unencumbered interest in the following: • A road allowance widening along the entire frontage of the subject property adjacent to County Road 20 to provide a 10.0 metre right -of -way from the centre line of County Road 20. • A daylight (sight) triangle measuring 10 metres east -west x 10 metres north- south at the North West comer of the property adjacent to County Road 20 (Ridge Road) and Oro Line 1. The applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the County's Transportation and Engineering Department a preliminary reference plan (2 copies) which sets out the road widening to be transferred to the County. Upon approval, the County will instruct the surveyor to deposit the reference plan in the Land Registry Office for Simcoe County Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 19 of 22 Page 27 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 6B: COUNTY OF SIMCOE LETTER DATED JUNE 12, 2012 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) County Transportation & Engineering Comments - 2 and request the surveyor provide the County with 2 copies of the deposited reference plan. All costs associated with the land transfer, including costs relating to surveying, legal fees, and disbursements, agreements, HST, etc. shall be fully borne by the applicant. The applicant shall employ a Solicitor, entitled to practice law in Canada, being a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada to facilitate the transfer of the real property and in effect represent both parties in the subject transaction, at no cost to the Corporation of the County of Simcoe. The Solicitor shall carry transfer insurance that will indemnify the transfer. The applicant must contact the County for detailed transfer specifications. Prior to stamping of the deed by the Township of Oro - Medonte, the Applicant shall obtain written clearance from the County for the above -noted condition. The County of Simcoe is requesting the road widening pursuant to section 53(12) of the Planning Act and such land will form part of the highway to the extent of the designated widening in accordance with section 31(6) of the Municipal Act, 2001. The widening of County Road 20 is required pursuant to the County's standards for the construction of roads and is consistent with proper safety standards. 2. The County of Simcoe Setback By -law No. 5604 regulates the location of buildings and other structures on lands adjacent to County Roads. Any new buildings and other structures must be located 15 metres from any requested road allowance widening, The applicant shall enter Into a legal agreement with the County, registered on the title of the property. The agreement will require the applicant remove the stone fence along County Road 20, at the County's request and at no cost to the County. Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sin ely. Corporation of he County of Simcoe Paul Mu •hy, B.Sc. Engin ring /Planning Technician (705) 26 -9300 ext. 1371 C.0 X: 2981 & James Hunter, County of Simcoe Rachelle Hamelin, County of Simcoe Cameron Sellers, Innovative Planning Solutions ;amen! & Planning D1D0710 014 Development CorrespandenulQro-Msdonb1D10 Severance & 013 Verlences1200912009 -B -070800 Pater • Rae1Q.T&E Carenenb, her 12. 12.doe Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 20 of 22 Page 28 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 7A: LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2011 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Sent by email sfarquharsonCr7oro- medonteca Noveinher 8, 2011 File No 2009 -B -07, 08 & 09 Ifv1s No.: PLDC906C4, 909 & 910 Mr. Steven Farquharson Secretary- Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Corpor ation of the Township of Oro- Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr Fargrharson: RE: Application for Consent — Creation Of A New Lot, Boundary Adjustment & Easement Mark Porter & APT Operational Management, Owners Part of Lots 1 & 2, Concession 2 (FornnerTownship of Oro) 2953 & 3003 Ridge Road West Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe This letter is further to our previous correspondence of December 21, 2009 and February '1, 2011. 'the subject property is included within the Significant Woodland overlay as found on Schedule 0 of the Township of Oro- Medonte's Official Plan (OP). The background report used to create this mapping was completed by Lcoplans Limited (December 1995), entitled 'Township of Oro- Mecfonte Official Plan Review Background Report Summary ". This report lists the features that make up the Natural Core Areas in the Township's Natural Heritage System (NHS), and allows for two policy categories within it (i.e. Category 1 and Category 2j. Significant woodlands, as per this report, are recommended as a Category 2 feature and development would only be permitted within these features, subject to an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) and a Management Plan (MP). This is also reflected in the Township's current OP. According to the 1995 report, all woodlands that include old growth stands (Le. older than 100 years), all woodlands within the Kirkfleid /Simcoe Loamy Plain Landscape larger than 40 ha in si; and all woodlands within the rest of the Township that are larger titan 240 he in size would qualify as Significant Woodlands. As per the small scale map provided in the Draft Report (1995) and in the Official Plan, the subject property falls just south and outside of the Kirk(ield /Simcoe Loamy Plain soils area. As the woodland is aporoximai:iIy 41 ha in size, this woodland would not qualify as Significant, based on the Official Plan. 1. Parkway - Co>. market. Ontario 1_3Y 4X1 is 1281 1,800.465.0437 F +x.: 9r7,.5`3 5881 :ica.nn ca Weh, v,. . -nn.. -. Page 1 of 2 �4`f1.2p1i Proud P. Fc lrsed Futtne. Development Services Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 21 of 22 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 29 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... SCHEDULE 7B: LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2011 2009 -B -08 (APT OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT) & 2009 -B -07 (PORTER) Lake 5Innmcoe Region Conservation Authority November 8, 2011 File No.: 2009 -B -07, 08 & 09 IMS No.: PLDC906C4, 909, 910 Mr. Steven Farquharson Page 2 of 2 Based on the above noted information and our review of the proposed Consent application, the LSRCA has no objection to the above noted Consent application, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall successfully amend the Zoning By -law by zoning the fvlinirnum Vegetation Protection Zone (NIVPZ_) Environmental Protection (EP). 2. That a permit be obtained under Ontario Regulation 179/06 from the LSRCA, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit for any proposed development or site alteration within the regulated portion of the above noted property. 3. That the proposed development be made subject to Site Plan Control to the satisfaction of the Township of Oro- Medonte and LSRCA. 4. That all development fees ($400.00) be paid to the LSRCA in accordance !v•th the Planning and Development Fees Policy (April 23, 2010). Please advise the applicant that in accordance with the LSRCA's Planning and Development Fees Policy (April 23, 2010), the total fee for this application is $100.00. The applicant should be advised that currently this fee is outstanding and to please forward the above mentioned fee to the LSRCA as soon as possible. If you have any questions, comments, or require anything further from the LSRCA, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 905 - 895 -1281, extension 287, or by e -mail at i.walker f4llsrea.on.ca. Please reference the above file numbers in future correspondence. I trust this meets your requirements at this time. Please advise us of your decision in this matter_ Yours truly, ■rLJ Ian Walker, BSc. Environmental Planner IW /ph e. Darren Vella, Agent, rivellaceipsconsultinginc,cam Rochelle Hamelin, rar:he11r.h7melincissv1coe.ca Charles Burgess, Senior Planning Coordinator, LSRCA 5:1�nv P1.11\ pppls \ Pia n ninr Let crsi,Con son is \Ciro. 51 sicrtol 23i]\ PLe'' sa i3 2e Co- 5f) Z3p03AideigTn ntiWesrPorte,.IAW- 3.doc.: Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2009 -B -08 & 2009 -B -07 Page 22 of 22 Page 30 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... 2009 -B -08 (APT Operational Management) Entrance to Proposed Retained Lands ro y.. Cpl t , lc* Ax,;t: . y -e- .1; ,r .- ,, :44";* r 'A .Pi. "*ai "'§ 1,- - ,e.,:-;.- .;ate 4: III s "'"- ` i #xa r •' —. _ _ .: '.0 r, rR � 45.--; ,P. ' 1 Page 31 of 141 5a) - 2009-B-07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 32 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 33 of 141 5a) - 2009-B-07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 34 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 35 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 36 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Donald R. Nixon, M. D., FRCS C Eye Physician and Surgeon 190 Memorial Ave., Suite D Orillia, ON L3V 5X6 (705) 327 -5776 June 19th, 2011 To Committee of Adjustment: Thursday June 21' 10:00 AM Dear Committee members, O 1.e ECEIVED JUN 2 0 2012 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP 190 Cundles Rd E, Suite 100C Barrie, ON L4M 4S5 (705) 737 -3737 bettAcz,6 I would present on my behalf but I am in the operating room at Royal Victoria Regional Health Center caring for my patients and unfortunately my legal representative had a conflict and could not attend. The key issue to be discussed associated with the creation of this new lot in severing Concessions 2 Part Lots 2 is really its access to the Ridge Road which is controlled by the County. In Mr. Porter's initial plan he was to have the 2 lots created to have a joint drive way at the end and access the County road as a single exit but this was blocked by Simcoe County. As a result, an end around option to still get the two lots instead of one larger one is to have the second lot access to the unopened road allowance adjacent to it and then to the county road. This unfortunately runs counter to the promise made to me and carried out in January of 2005 by Township council that the "original unopened road allowance" to be "closed to vehicular traffic and signed accordingly ". This undertaking was made by council after exhaustive work performed by myself and members of the different departments of Oro Medonte and a lengthy presentation to the full council on November 24th 2004 (See deputation motion #5 Council of the Whole).The resulting closure with metal barriers completely eliminated all the problems that both Mr. Porter and I were experiencing from vandalisms and trespassing as well as squatters. It also significantly reduced the potential for liability and litigation due to the unsafe slope of the road leading down to the water. One year after the barriers were set up, and 16 years after I had purchased the lot, I was convinced that this solution would work I built my family's home and we live here and pay taxes and have fully enjoyed bringing up our children in a safe enriching environment. Recently without my notification the metal barriers were moved back more than 40 feet and it took only 3 weeks before we had 3 separate incidences of trespassers parking their cars now on the open road allowance and walking down towards the water. Finding the access treacherous due to erosion damage and constant open springs they move onto my adjacent property and try to access the water there. This is very concerning as it bring back the serious problems we faced before and even yesterday as I was off to work I saw a car parked deep in the access road difficult to see and I have no idea what they were doing. I would ask that a decision related to the subdivision of the lot be put on hold until a review of the council decision of 2005 be reviewed and try to find a solution to respect both as it is obvious that the present initiative will not work and will have a negative result for all stakeholders. Yours Sincerely, Don R Nixon MD FRCSC DABO NBME Assistant Professor NOSM Page 37 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... COVER Donald Ray Nixon, M.D., FRCS C Eye Physician and Surgeon 190 Cundles Rd. E Suite 1OOC Barrie, ON L4M 4S5 705 -737 -3737 Fax: 705 - 727 -7605 This is a confidential message, intended solely for the person to whom it is addressed. If you receive this message in error, please forward it to the correct person, or mail it back to us. Thank you Date: 3LM L z. Number of Pages Including Cover: 3 TO: r;-1 (id . RE: FROM: (gyp .) DOB i / HC: Page 38 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... January 25, 2005 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOW Mr. Donald and Ms. Pat Nixon c/o 6 Parker Court Barrie, ON L4N 2A6 FIIP Re: Request for Closure and Sale of Road Allowance Between Concessions 1 and 2, South of Ridge Road 148 Line 7 S., Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Phone (705)487 -2171 Fax (705) 487 -0133 www. o ro -medo nte. ca Dear Mr. and Ms. Nixon: Further to our telephone conversation yesterday, please be advised that your request to close and purchase the above -noted subject land was brought before the Committee of the Whole on January 12, 2005. The following resolution was recommended at the Committee of the Whole meeting of Wednesday, January 12, 2005 and adopted at the Council meeting held on January 19, 2005. "It is recommended that Report ADM 2005 -003, Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk, re: Request for Closure and Sale of Road Allowance Between Concessions 1 and 2, South of Ridge Road (Nixon), be received and adopted; That the original unopened road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2, South of Ridge Road, be retained by the Township; That the original unopened road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2, South of Ridge Road be closed to vehicular traffic and signed accordingly; That the Public Works Department and O.P.P. be requested to regularly monitor this property; Thal the Clerk bring forward the appropriate by -law for Council's consideration; And Further that the applicant be advised of Council's decision." If you have any further questions, please contact the undersigned. Marilyn ennycook Clerk /jt cc: Mayor and Members of Council Jerry Ball, Public Works Superintendent Page 39 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 1 of 2 From: To: "Mark Porter" <rfporter @allstream.net> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 9 :03 PM Subject: Attn: Julie Misner Julie, Don was speaking to Mark and they discussed a few changes to the letter. Mark indicated Don should e mail those changes to you and that you would kindly forward to the Mayor and Members of Council. We think that if you could get it e mailed out on Friday, it wouki give the council members a chance to digest the information over the weekend and visit the site if they so wish. Thanks for your help! Pat Nixon - -- Original Message — From: Dori Nixon To Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:57 PM Subject: RE: To the Mayor and Members of Council, My name is Mark Porter and I own the waterfront property located immediately east of the unopened road allowance between Concession 1 & 2, south of Ridge Road. It Is my understanding that Council will be considering at next week's meeting a request from Dr. Nixon that the Township permanently close and sell the unopened road allowance. I am unable to attend that Council meeting and wish to provide you with my comments at thls time. !share Dr. Nixon's concerns with respect to the current use of the unopened road allowance as a place for people to park, drink and party, and the illegal dumping of garbage, used tires, etc. These illegal uses are not only a nuisance, but also present serious potential liability issues for the.Township and the adjacent property owners. I also wish to add the following. While I understand and generally agree with the Township's policy to retain unopened road allowances with access to lake, however in this particular instance, this unopened road allowance does not, and In all Likelihood, can not provide access that is reasonable and safe given that steep topography that exists along the shoreline. I have attached for your reference several photographs that I recently took to emphasize this point. Photo A was taken from Ridge Road looking south down the road allowance towards Lake Simcoe. From Ridge Road, the unopened road allowance appears to be relatively fiat. Photo B was taken closer to the shoreline where the lands begin to fall quite steeply down to the water's edge. A recent survey on the adjacent land shows the difference in elevation between the table lands and the water's edge to be over 26 feet. This photo shows the significant gully that has eroded into the steep slope as a result of the active springs and loose soil. Photo C was taken standing on the ice looking north up the unopened road allowance. The steep slope meets the water's edge abruptly with no beach or fiat area along the shoreline. The walk down the slope towards the water is difficult and hazardous. This particular unopened road allowance does not and can not provide safe public access to the water. Given that the existing topography severely limits access to the water from the road allowance, it is my opinion that the Township's policy should be reconsidered in this Instance. Furthermore, the substantial proceeds from the sale of this unopened road allowance could be utilized to improve or enhance other public access points to the Lake, which do not have the limitations that this access possesses. 1/20/05 Page 40 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... November 11, 2004 Mayor Neil Craig, and Council of Oro - Medonte P.O Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 RECEIVED NOV 127004 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Re: Location 03041 Ridge Rd. West, Con 1 S PT LOT 1 Dear Mayor and Members of Council, Further to my conversation with the township planner, I would like to request Council's consideration to look at the future of the road allowance between Concession 1 & 2 that runs adjacent to my property on Ridge Road. The adjoining landowner, Mark Porter and I have met to discuss the issues related to the access road and are in complete agreement of the liabilities and concerns associated with it in it's present state (see attached letter #1). This road allowance has continued to remain a liability not only to the Township of Oro - Medonte but also to the adjacent landowners. The land has become a haven for teenagers to park, drink and occasionally have fires. The area has been intermittently littered with broken glass (mostly beer and liquor bottles) and trash. Over the years it has required multiple clean ups by the township because it is a site for people to dump refuge and old tires. I posted "No Trespassing" signs only to have them torn down. Over the years I have had problems with vandalism and squatters and a contributing factor has been the inability to monitor these undesired activities because of poor visibility from Ridge Road. In addition, due to erosion and the effects of Hurricane Hazel, the unstable slope to the water makes it difficult for anyone to safely traverse to the shoreline. Approximately 5 years ago Mr. Ball, at the request of your Council, evaluated the usefulness of this land. There was a general agreement because of the steep fall -off towards the water as well as numerous springs active throughout the year at the base of the slope it was concluded the water access was unsatisfactory. Also, given the proximity of boat ramp and water access at Johnson's Beach and Shanty Bay there is no need for boat launching capabilities at this site. Water access at Black Forest Lane, which is only 1- kilometer away, is more suitable for pedestrian and snowmobile traffic, with it's gentle, straight grade and space for parking off Ridge Road. I understand that this access point was also chosen for snowmobile and walkers associated with the walking trail. I have owned this piece of property for 15 years and have been reluctant to build a permanent structure because of the aforementioned problems. Recently Dr. Bruce MacNicol had purchased the land east of the road allowance. However, given Dr. MacNicol's concerns regarding the future and liabilities associated with being beside this road allowance and the potential deterioration of property value forced him to change lots away from this site. Page 41 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... I would ask Council to give due consideration to closing this road allowance and offering 50 % of the width to the adjacent landowners thereby removing this liability. This would ensure that these 2 tracts of lands would have houses that fully merit their location thereby entirely utilizing the land and maximizing the tax revenue to the Township of Oro - Medonte. As tax - paying landowners we must be entitled the right to build a permanent structure on our land, free of concerns and liabilities that the Township has been unable to monitor or resolve since I first addressed these concerns to council in September 1989 (see attached letter #2). The direct negative effect on the adjoining landowners that have invested in their properties must outweigh the concerns of those people whose own property is not depreciated because of the access road. In addition, the majority of people who are now using the access road are the same people who are generating the liabilities. I request a chance to speak with council to provide them with any more information that would help with their deliberations. Any assistance you can provide in this matter would be sincerely appreciated. Yours truly, (1-;V:5"L"-- Dr. Donald R. Nixon Page 42 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... October 12, 2004 Township of Oro- Medonte Mayor Neil Craig Council of Oro- Medonte P.O Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Attention: Ms. Marilyn Pennycook, Township Clerk RECEIVED NOV 1 2 7004 ORO- PAE.D0 NTE TOWNSHIP Mr. Mark Porter and I have discussed the existing road allowance between our two properties. We are both in agreement that this tract of land is a liability and nuisance to the adjacent land - owners (Nixon and Porter) and the Township. We are also in agreement to request from Council the consideration of closing this road to public access, thereby reducing the liabilities to the Township and the adjacent land - owners. Mr. Porter has agreed that I, Donald R. Nixon, will assume all costs associated with this effort and if agreed to by the Township to sell the land, I would purchase the above - mentioned tract of land in its entirety. Thank you for your efforts as we move forward in this endeavor and we look forward to your response. Sincerely, Donald R. Nixon Mark Porter Page 43 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Donald R. Nixon, M.D., FRCS(C) EYE PHYSICIAN AND SURGEON 190 MEMORIAL AVENUE, SUITE D ORILLIA, ONTARIO L3V 5X6 TELEPHONE (705) 327 -5776 September 7, 1989. Mr. Robert Small Administrator Clerk P.O. Box 100 Oro Station RE: ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN CONCESSION 1 AND 2 SOUTH OF THE RIDGE ROAD TO THE LAKE Dear Bob: Further to our discussion of August 17th. I wish to go on record regarding the above road allowance that abuts the east boundary of my property. As you are aware this road allowance has and is currently being used for a variety of activities that create a nusiance, including noisy nightime parties with open fires, loud music and excessive drinking. In addition it is a common location for people to dump their garbage. The most southerly 140 feet of the approximate 750 feet is a steep walled narrow ravine that has been created by surface run -off water progressively eroding the steep Lakeshore bank in the area. The shoreline in this area of the lake is very steep and unstable with a rocky narrow beach. In the water, about ten feet from the shoreline, is a sudden and deep "drop -off" which creates a very dangerous situation for bathers and other users'. Because of the lack of adjacent lands for parking, the steep topography, the narrow beach and the ongoing bank erosion, it would not appear to be a good site to develop from the Township's point of view. Its pf•ese t use ct-aatos <i nuisance and.the open fires, broken glass and the sudden "drop -off" close to shore are safety hazards. Since recently Acquiring the adjacent property to the west of this road allowance I have become aware of the foregoing nuisance and hazards and wish to resolve them as soon as possible. I am planning to establish my home in the Township where a lot of the residents have become my patients. If this road allowance could be closed and sold to the adjacent land owners it would enable them to stabilize the shoreline bank erosion and thereby eliminate the risk that it could extend onto their present properties, Page 44 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... I have discussed this situation with the abutting land owner on the east side of this road allowance and he has indicated that it is also his desire to have this road allowance closed. I am prepared to purchase the whole or half of this road allowance from the Township of Oro at its fair market value as soon as possible. I request that this letter be presented to your Council in a Committee of the Whole discussion, and that I be advised of the Council's interest in the proposed. Yours sincerely, 1 � Donald R. Nixon, M.D., FRCS C DRN:js • Page 45 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... • • � Tc� /0 I would like to thank Council for giving me the opportunity to discuss this issue. •9 .t I have owned and paid taxes on my land since 1989. The issues in 1989, that caused me to request to council to close this unassumed road allowance before I build have not changed and in fact have gotten worse over the ensuing 15 years. I approached council with my concerns in 1997 and again now in 2004. In spite of my efforts to increase security on my property with locked gates, front and side ( #1) people still access my property via the road allowance and that of Mr. Porter's. I have had to deal with squatters, vandalism, evidence of drinking and drugs and fires in both existing structures on my land ( #2). This road allowance is a liability to the 3 parties adjacent to it; the township of Oro - Medonte, Mr. Porter and myself. The vast majority of people that are using the road are not there to access the water but use it to dump garbage ( #3), set fires, use drugs, consume alcohol and then get back on a public road. Whether they drive down the road allowance or walk down, these are not the people the township want on their land. Dr. Bruce MacNicol who had purchased a lot from Mr. Porter started to develop the adjacent land but abandoned his plans because of his sincere concerns for the security of his property. To describe this unassumed road allowance, as water access is clearly a misrepresentation of what it truly is. This is a very poor and potentially hazardous choice because of the obvious land features of steep and unstable slope. If one truly wanted water access a much easier and safer water access is within a kilometer off the 5th /6th sideroad, directly adjacent to the walking trail ( #4). From an accessible, safety and liability point of view the 5a' /6th sideroad is true water access, with safe parking that is not on Ridge Rd. and one does not have to risk crossing Ridge Road Point #1 - Anyone who would be willing to look at my position for the last 15 years and what I have had to put up with would see that there is no other conclusion from a safety, security and liability point to deem the unassumed road allowance as redundant and offer it for sale to the adjacent land owners. Page 46 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... • • Point #2 - If someone really wanted to access the water there is an excellent and safe point off the 5th /6th sideroad, with ample parking and in addition there is Johnson Beach and Shanty Bay for safe swimming and boat launching. Point #3 - For a period of 4 months over the summer a large boulder was placed in the center for the road allowance and although this did decrease the vehicular traffic it did not stop the littering and trespassing. Until I told the Mayor of the boulders existence no one requested that the boulder be removed. and I wondered if this was a sign that the township was fmally responding. Even though it was not my request it was moved the next day after I spoke to Mayor Craig. If this boulder had been impeding people's true water access there would have been complaints and it would have been removed. The people who are wrongfully using the road wouldn't complain and now that the rock is gone the wrong people are there again. Point #4 - The people who may be voicing concerns about closure are not in anyway suffering from it being open, nor is their land depreciated because of it. All land adjacent to the road allowance on both sides of Ridge Road are owned by either the township, Mr. Porter or myself. Page 47 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 48 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 49 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 50 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 51 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... 17OO 'TZ ncituoA© JupunS u3 )Jel sonno!d °s3plo .T30q pug 3SucpuR ‘sou p jo 5uidwn Page 52 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 53 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 54 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 55 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 56 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) Page 57 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... aau1MOjJ1'mai wog SSiOWW JoivAk p13O JapJS 9/ Oaf SSOOOt -IOWA Page 58 of 141 5a) - 2009-B-07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Rood West, Concessi... amemoir p10.1 WOJJ SS003V JtM puonpts 1110.4 SSO3O ..101EM Page 59 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority Sent by email awiebe @oro- medonte.ca June 20, 2012 Mr. Alan Wiebe Secretary- Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Corporation of the Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Wiebe: (\k0._Ct O(0 2 •' Z Watershed for Life File No.: 2009 -B -07, 2009 -B -08 & 2009- ZBA -05 IMS No.: PLDC906C5, PLDC909 &1320A202 RE: Applications for Consent & Zoning By -law Amendment — Creation Of A New Lot, Boundary Adjustment & Supporting Zoning By -law Amendment Mark Porter & APT Operational Management, Owners Part of Lots 1 & 2, Concession 2 (Former Township of Oro) 2953 & 3003 Ridge Road West Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe This letter is further to our previous correspondence of November 8, 2011, and our email of April 27, 2012 (attached). The owner has successfully amended the Zoning By -law by zoning the Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (MVPZ) as Environmental Protection with exception (EP *214(H)) which will allow for the construction of a boathouse, subject to Site Plan Control. Based on the above noted information and our review of the proposed Consent applications, the LSRCA has no objection to the above noted Consent applications, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a permit be obtained under Ontario Regulation 179/06 from the LSRCA, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit for any proposed development or site alteration within the regulated portions of the above noted retained and severed properties. 2. That any proposed development on these lots be made subject to Site Plan Control to the satisfaction of the Township of Oro - Medonte and LSRCA. Page 1 of 2 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 I Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca Newmarket, Ontario BY 4X1 Fax: 905.853.5881 I E -Mail: Info @LSRCA.on.ca Proud winner of the International Thiess Riverprize Member of Conservation Ontario Page 60 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority June 20, 2012 File No.: 2009 -B -07, 2009 -B -08 & 2009- ZBA -05 IMS No.: PLDC906C5, PLDC909 & PZ0A202 Mr. Alan Wiebe Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions, comments, or require anything further from the LSRCA, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 905 - 895 -1281, extension 287, or by e -mail at i.walker @Isrca.on.ca. Please reference the above file numbers in future correspondence. I trust this meets your requirements at this time. Please advise us of your decision in this matter. Yours truly, Ian Walker, BSc. Environmental Planner IW /ht Encl. (1) c. Darren Vella, Agent, dvella@ipsconsultinginc.com Rachelle Hamelin, County of Simcoe, rachelle.hamelin @simcoe.ca Charles Burgess, Senior Planning Coordinator, LSRCA S: \ENV PLAN \PLAN APPLS\ CONSENTS \ORO- MEDONTE\ 2012 \PLDC906. 2009- B- 07.3003RIDGEROADWEST.PORTER.IW - 4.DOCX Page 61 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Ian Walker From: fan Walker Sent: April -27 -12 12:46 PM To: 'Darren Vella' Cc: Charles Burgess; 'Cameron Sellers' Subject: RE: 2009- B- (07 -09) & 2009- ZBA -05 - Consent & zoning by-law applications for creation of a new lot - 3003 Ridge Road West, Oro Attachments: 2010 - BOD Approved.pdf; BILD Letter - 2010 Fees Policy.pdf; OSSGA Letter - Fees Policy - 2010.pdf Categories: Oro - Medonte, Attached Files Hi Darren, Charles and I have discussed the proposal, and I have verbally discussed the file with Township staff. I would note in reviewing the file that the landowner or agent has not yet paid the LSRCA review fee of $300.00 requested on the consent file(s). Per the current LSRCA Schedule of Fees (which I have attached for your reference), there were no changes made to the 2008 Schedule of Fees (in regards to consents and/or zoning by -law amendments). These files are reviewed under the 2008 Schedule, therefore the applicable fee(s) would be the same as the attached 2010 Schedule (if you require a copy of the previous Schedule, 1 can track it down and scan and email you a copy). We consider our review of the files to be concurrent, and therefore only charge the largest fee (1 fee) for all the files together. The total of the outstanding fees for review of the consent ($300.00) and zoning ($400.00) files would therefore be a total of $400.00 (Zoning by -law amendment review fee). Payment can be done by credit card over the phone to expedite preparing and sending comments to the Township on the application. In the meantime, I understand that you will need to prepare the appropriate map(s) for the proposed zoning to formally submit to the Township. This would be based on the reduced setback to EP and to allow a boathouse on each property (note that a dock would be on Crown Land and would therefore go through the permit process for approval, so would not be relevant to the zoning). LSRCA staff will support those provisions (EP with Om setback and boathouse). For LSRCA to finalize comments to the Township (once the final application is circulated), the agent or landowner should provide payment to the LSRCA of the outstanding fee. Regards, Ian .take Shincoe Region conservation authority Ian Walker Environmental Planner LSRCA 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282, Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 905.895.1281 x 287 11.800.465.0437 i.walker @LSRCA.on.ca 1 www.LSRCA.on.ca The information in this message (including attachments) is duecteo in confidence solely to the person {st named above and ;nay not be nther:vrse thstnhuted, coped or disclosed. The message may contain informa tion that is povife,c ±. cenMleonal and exempt from disclosure under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Frotectrun of t.!neacy Act and by the Personal Informer /on Pr'etecttor+ Elecror c 6ncurrents act ft yoo have received Mrs message in error please notify' the sender .n9ntediately and delete the message srithou: making a copy. Thank you. From: Darren Vella [ maifto :dvella @ipsconsullinginc.com] Sent: April -27 -12 9 :08 AM To: Ian Walker Cc: Charles Burgess; 'Cameron Sellers' Subject: RE: 2009- B- (07 -09) - Consent applications for creation of a new lot - 3003 Ridge Road West, Oro Page 62 of 141 5a) - 2009 -B -07 (Mark Porter) 3003 Ridge Road West, Concessi... Page 63 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... r i er/ iite TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -15 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Darryl, Alfred and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and 400 Line 9 North Concession 9, Part Lot 18 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010 -004 -07000 R.M.S. File #: D13 -42970 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The subject property occupies an area of approximately 55.5 acres (22.4 hectares), has frontage on Line 9 North of approximately 310 metres (1,017 feet), and a depth of approximately 724 metres (2,375 feet), and presently contains one single detached dwelling constructed in 1949 (identified as 392 Line 9 N), and a smaller single detached dwelling which was relocated to the property in 1954 (identified as 400 Line 9 N), The applicant is proposing to retain the larger of the two dwellings (392 Line 9 N), which has a floor area of approximately 860 square feet, and to demolish the smaller of the two dwellings (400 Line 9 N), which has a floor area of approximately 592 square feet, and to replace it with a new two - storey dwelling that would have a footprint of 1,000 square feet, and a floor area of approximately 2,000 square feet. The property also contains detached accessory buildings that are not proposed to be altered as part of the applicant's current proposal. Variance Application 2012 -A -15 was originally presented to the Committee of Adjustment at its meeting on May 17, 2012. During this meeting, the Committee decided to defer making a decision regarding the variances being sought. Since that time, the applicant has advised Planning staff of their desire for the Committee to consider the design initially presented. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97- Zone: Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone Required 1. Section 5.16.1 c) — increase in No increase permitted situation of non - compliance 2. Section 5.18 — non - conformity of use of buildings and structures 95: Proposed Increase in floor area Existing: 55 square metres (592 square feet) Proposed: 186 square metres (2002 square feet) Unless pre- existing, Expansion of non - conforming use of building must use within building conform FINANCIAL: Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -15 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 11 Page 64 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject property is designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. Section C1 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in this designation and, specifically, Section C1.2 of the Official Plan states that "[the] principle use of land in the Agricultural designation ... shall be agriculture ", and continues to state that "[other] permitted uses include single detached dwellings ... ". With respect to "Non- Conforming Uses ", Section E1.5 of the Official Plan contains provisions in this regard. Section E1.5.1 states that "[as] a general rule, existing uses that do not conform with the policies of this Plan should gradually be phased out ". Section E1.5.2, contains provisions on the "Role of the Committee of Adjustment' and states that "the Committee of Adjustment may ... allow extensions to a non - conforming use ... [in consideration of] the following:" "a) The size of the extension in relation to the existing operation," The proposed replacement of the non - conforming dwelling on the property (being the second of two) would result in a 418 square foot increase in the footprint of the building, and a 1,418 square foot increase in the floor area of the dwelling unit, as compared to the footprint and floor area of the existing building. Therefore, the proposed work would constitute the replacement and extension of the existing non- conforming use, in a manner that would increase the footprint of the existing building by 71 per cent, and the total floor area of the existing building to 338 per cent of its current floor area. "b) Whether the proposed extension is compatible with the character of the surrounding area,' Planning staff notes that, although the proposed replacement and expansion of the dwelling is moderately obstructed from sight, as viewed from Line 9 North, the subject property is located in an area that is predominantly rural and agricultural, and surrounded by lots which appear either vacant, or contain one single detached dwelling. Therefore, the proposed replacement and expansion of the non - conforming dwelling would be considered out of character with the surrounding area. "c) The characteristics of the existing use in relation to noise, vibration, fumes, dust, smoke, odours, lighting and traffic generation and the degree to which any of these factors may be increased or decreased by the extension," The variances requested proposed to permit the replacement and expansion of an existing non- conforming residential use, being one of two dwellings on the lot, which would not be anticipated to result in a net increase in the potentially adverse characteristics listed in Section E1.5.2 c), above. However, it is the position of the Planning department that, through the replacement and expansion of the existing non - conforming use, the existing potentially adverse characteristics of the non - conforrning second dwelling unit would be enhanced and, therefore, not "phased out", as contemplated in Section E1.5.1 of the Official Plan. "d) The possibilities of reducing these nuisances through buffering, building setbacks, landscaping, Site Plan Control and other means to improve the existing situation, as well as minimize the problems from extension; and," Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 2 of 11 Page 65 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... As provided in the applicant's submission, the proposal consists of the demolition of one of the two dwelling units on the property (400 Line 9 N), and to replace it with a dwelling with a floor area of more than 330 per cent the floor area of the existing building. While imposing requirements such as buffering, setbacks, and landscaping may assist in reducing the visual impact of such a non - conforming use, it is noted that no other site alterations have been proposed as part of the applicant's submission. "e) The conformity of the proposal with the applicable by -laws and policies of the County of Simcoe." Pursuant to Schedule 5.1 of the County of Simcoe's Official Plan, "Land Use Designations ", the subject property is in the Rural & Agricultural designation in the County's Official Plan. Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan contains provisions related to the use and development of and in this designation, and Section 3.3.9 states that "This Plan is not intended to prevent the continuation, expansion, or enlargement of legally existing uses which do not conform ... [and] [expansion] or enlargements shall include consideration of ... local official plans and by -laws ... ". Therefore, conformity of the proposed variances with the County of Simcoe's Official Plan is dependent on the Committee's determination of whether they meet the intent of the Township's Official Plan and Zoning By -law. On the basis that the proposed variances seek to enable the replacement and expansion of a non- conforming use in a manner that would enhance its non - conformity, and compromise the non- conforming use's ability to be "phased out', the proposed variances are not considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law, and Variance Application 2012 -A -15 proposes the replacement of a non - complying and non - conforming dwelling, in a manner that: a) increases a situation of non - compliance, by increasing its floor area from 592 square feet to 2,000 square feet (Section 5.16.1 c); and b) expands the floor area used in association with a non - conforming use within the building (Section 5.18). 1. Section 5.16.1 c) — Non - Complying Buildings and Structures With respect to the proposed increase in floor area in the replacement of the previously existing building, Section 5.16.1 of the Zoning By -law contains provisions related to the "Enlargement, Repair or Renovation" of non - complying buildings, and states that "[a] non - complying building ... may be enlarged, repaired, replaced or renovated provided that the enlargement, repair, replacement or renovation ... c) does not ... increase a situation of non - compliance; and, d) complies with all other applicable provisions of this By- law." The purpose for this provision includes to ensure that buildings and structures that existed on the effective date of the Township's Zoning By -law 97 -95 can be modified from their original form, provided that such work does not result in an increased impact on the natural feature, character, or visual prominence of buildings and structures in the immediate area, through such modification. 2. Section 5.18 — Non - Conforming Uses With respect to the proposed expansion of the floor area used in association with a non- conforming use, being a second dwelling unit on a property, Section 5.18 of the Zoning By -law Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 3 of 11 Page 66 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... contains provisions related to "Non-Conforming Uses ", and states that "No lands shall be used and no building or structure shall be used except in conformity with the provisions of this By -law unless such use existed before the date of passing this By -law and provided that it has continued and continues to be used for such purpose, and that such use, when established, was not contrary to a By -law passed under Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O 1990, cP. 13 or a predecessor thereof that was in force at that time." The intent of Section 5.18 of the Zoning By -law is to ensure that existing non - conforming uses on properties in the Township may not be expanded, such that such expansion may result in an increase in a degree of incompatibility or in any adverse impacts, and that such expansion may not take place without appropriate buffering and mitigation of any negative impacts between such a use, and neighbouring land uses. The proposed replacement dwelling would significantly increase the floor area beyond the existing floor area of the dwelling proposed to be demolished. During a site visit of the subject property, Planning staff observed that other properties in the immediate area significantly maintain a rural and agricultural character, which either appear vacant, or contain only one single detached dwelling, in addition to accessory buildings. Therefore, a property containing two dwelling units would be considered out of character with the surrounding area. As the property is located along Lake Simcoe, and is within an area regulated by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA), this application has been circulated to staff at the LSRCA, who have stated that have "no objection to the ... Variance application, subject to [specific] conditions", including "That the proposal will not permit a new on -site sewage system or subsurface sewage works within 100 metres of any permanent stream, expect in accordance with ... the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan". On the basis that the proposed variances would result in the replacement and expansion of a non- complying and non - conforming building in a manner that would: a) significantly increase its floor area to over 330 per cent of the existing building; b) increase its footprint by over 70 per cent; and c) enhance the non - conformity of its use, the proposed variances are not considered to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, nor are they considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Are the variances minor? As the proposed variances are not considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to not meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are not considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and since they would result in more than a 330 per cent increase in an existing situation of non - compliance and non - conformity, the proposed variances are not considered to be minor. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 4 of 11 Page 67 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department — Engineering Department — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — see Schedule 5 to this report ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Drawing Schedule 3: Floor Plan Drawings Schedule 4: Exterior Elevation Drawings Schedule 5: Letter from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, dated May 10, 2012 CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, the proposed variances in Application 2012 -A -15, specifically, to permit the replacement and expansion of a non - complying and non - conforming second dwelling unit on the property, do not appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. The proposed replacement dwelling would be significantly larger than the existing non - complying and non- conforming dwelling. Res ectfully submitted: .r.1 Alan Wiebe Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: 'L//j6) Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -15 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 11 Page 68 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) N Ol 3N171 IiI 0 0 w 0 IV63NI1 inota Itaiavivo icy ■ %Q 1- 0 N 8 3N171 N -L -3NI 1 CSI :1— S'6 = -1, I �yI W (D D. fi 0 re 11�0- ■ co 0 Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -15 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 6 of 11 Page 69 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN DRAWING 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) existing 392 91h Line North d existing 400 9th Line North dwellr 392 and... Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 7 of 11 Page 70 of 141 5b) - 2012-A-15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... SCHEDULE 3: FLOOR PLAN DRAWINGS (EXISTING AND PROPOSED) 2012-A-15 (Simpson) t bi 3 1 8 2 ;4 re Figure 4a: 400 9th Line North Existing Floor Plan o be demolished) Figure 7: Building Floor Plan (Proposed) Development Services Application No. 2012-A-15 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 8 of 11 Page 71 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... SCHEDULE 4: EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWING (PROPOSED) 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) ueZ*— — - wise Building Elevation Plan Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 9 of 11 Page 72 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... SCHEDULE 5A: LETTER FROM LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, DATED MAY 10, 2012 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) Lake 5imi.t Regioti conservation ,nuthority Sent by email awiebeeoro- medonte.ca A Watershed for Life May 10.2072 File No.: 2012 -A -14 IMS No_: PV0C952C4 ivtr Aian Wietse Secretary- Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Corporation of the Township of Oro Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Wiebe: RE: Application for Minor Variance... Reduce Minimum Front and Side Yard Setbacks and increase Height and Floor Area Robin Lee, Owner Part of Lot 27, Concession B (Former Township of Oro) 55 Lakeshore Road East -- Plan Lots 3 8i 40, Plan 798 Township of Oro- Medonte, County of Simcoe iharik you for conferring, with the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 11SRt:Ai with regard to the ahoy noted Mina, Variance application_ It is our understanding that the purpose and effect of this application will allow for the demolition of the existing residence, and construction of a new single family dwelling and detached garage on an existing lot of record. We have reviewed this application for consistency with the Public Health and Safety Policies (Natural Hazards) of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS , conformity with the take Sin' oe Prntection Plan (LSPP ), and in accordance with Ontario Regulation .179/06 made under the Conservation Authorities Act, AS you are aware, the subject property is located within the jurisdiction of the ISRCA, and is partially located within an area regulated under this Authority', Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 179/06) made under the Conservation Authorities Act. This property !; regulated for shoreline erosion allowance with associated 100-year flood level and wave uprush (F£ = 220.58 mast). A permit will be required for any future development within the regulated portions of the above noted properly, prior to issuance of a municipal building permit. Based on our mapping, a permit will be required for the demolition of the existing residence, and 1 he construction of the proposed residence. Polity 6.45-DP of the Lake Simcoe Protection 1,1an (LSPP) permits development in relation to existing uses, as long as it does not expand into a key natural heritage feature, key hydrologic feature and any Minimum Vegetation t'rotastion Zone (MVPI_} associated with a feature or the take Simcoe shoreline. The Plan will permit this development within the 30 metre MVP/ 1 there is no alternative to the alteration, in which case the use shall be directed away from the feature to the maximum extent possible and limited in scope. Policy 6.11 DP of the LSPP wit! permit the development if it will enhance the ecological features and functions associated with the Lake. Page 1 of 2 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 Tel: 905.895,1281 1.800.465.0437 I Web: www.LSRCA.on,ca Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4XI Fax D05.853.5881 , L- -Mail: lnfo@LSRCA.on.ra Proud winner of the International 3 hiess Riverprtze Member of Curia t'alion Ontario Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -15 Page 10 of 11 Page 73 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... SCHEDULE 5B: LETTER FROM LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, DATED MAY 10, 2012 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) Lake Smcoe Region Lonserv,ttion isIhorily May 10, 2012 [pile No.: 2017 -A -14 INtS No.: PVOC9S2C4 Mr. Alan Wiebe Page 2 of 2 Based an the site plan drawing, the proposed replacement dwelling is located partially within the minimum 30 metre MVPZ, but has been kept within close geographic proximity to the existing development. Policy 6.27 -OP of the LSPP requires the establishment of natural self- sustaining vegetation for new development within the above noted MVPZ. LSRCA staff recommend that for any development encroaching within the 30 metre MVPZ to take 5imcoe, a planting plan be prepared for the shoreline area at a 2 :1 ratio (Le. 2 metres of planting for 1 metre of encroachment), If this planting plan is provided and implemented, this proposal would help meet the intent of the LSPP. Please advise the applicant that in accordance with the tSRCA's Planning and Development Fees Policy (April 23, 2010), the total fee for this application is $200.00. The applicant should be advised that currently this fee is outstanding and to please forward the above mentioned fee to the LSRC,A as soon as possible. Based upon this review the LSRCA has no objection to the above noted Minor Variance application, subject to the fotlowlnR conditions: Thal a permit be obtained under Ontario Regulation 179/06 from the LSRCA, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit for the demolition of the existing residence, and construction of the proposed single family dwelling, and any other proposed development or site grading within the regulated portion of the above noted property. 2- That a shoreline planting plan be submitted to the satisfaction of the Township and LSRCA staff. 3. That all development fees ($200.00) be paid to the ISRCA in accordance with he Planning and Development Fees Policy ( April 23, 2010). If you have any questions, comments, or require anything further from the LSRCA, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 905 -895 -1281, extension 287, or by email at Lwalker@lsrca.on.ca. Please reference the above file numbers in future correspondence. I trust this meets your requirements at this lime. Please advise us of your decision in this matter. Yours truly, QLiIL- lan Vlialker, BSc. environmental Planner tw/ph c. Andrew Niclntyre, Arent, me nivre.designerogers.com Charles Burgess, Planni Coordinator, ISRCA Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -15 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 11 of 11 Page 74 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) 7, -3 ,r ' - - -N ati7 VN.. P-- ' -� swe 11 'ON INIF 11111 ill W II IIE alor 1 I It Figure 3b: 400 9th Line North - East Face Page 75 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... Page 76 of 141 5b) - 2012-A-15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... 2012 -A -15 (Simpson) ......-.- ._ , ,; ►:A s - 4 ) I 40,9 _ ,,. . .11hi , Adr.._ _ w-,, - ei ; ii __,..pli I . i t 1 ' e I •l 8.s; r Figure 3e: 392 9th Line North - East Face Page 77 of 141 5b) - 2012 -A -15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... Page 78 of 141 5b) - 2012-A-15 (Darryl, Alfred, and Marilyn Simpson) 392 and... AciwkAlia ,ort Page 79 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -18 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Steve & Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North Concession 11, North Part Lot 19 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 004 -15200 R.M.S. File #: D13 -43146 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The subject property occupies approximately 50 acres (20.2 hectares) of land, has frontage of approximately 1,000 feet (305 metres) along Line 10 North, and a depth of approximately 2,100 feet (640 metres). It has portions of land zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, and is presently used for residential and agricultural purposes. It presently contains a single detached dwelling and a detached accessory building, both of which are located in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone portion of the property. The applicant is proposing to construct a new detached accessory building with a floor area of approximately 223 square metres (2,400 square feet) and a height of 5.69 metres above grade, to also be located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone portion of the property. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning development of the subject property: Zone: Environmental Protection (EP) Zone Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height Section 5.28 — Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone By -law 97 -95, with respect to Required 4.5 metres No building within 30 metres of boundary of EP Zone the proposed Proposed 5.69 metres Building within EP Zone FINANCIAL: Not applicable. Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -18 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 6 Page 80 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Official Plan The subject property has portions of land designated Agricultural and Environmental Protection One, respectively, in the Township's Official Plan. Based on the information provided by the applicant, the existing buildings and structures and the proposed new building are located in the Agricultural designated lands. Zoning By -law The subject property has portions of land in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone and in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. As previously noted, all existing buildings on the property are, and the proposed detached accessory building proposed would be, located in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone portion of the property. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department — Engineering Department — County of Simcoe — see Schedule 4 to this report Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Drawings Schedule 3: Exterior Elevation Drawing Schedule 4: Letter from County of Simcoe, dated June 11, 2012 CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2012 -A -18, specifically, to permit the construction of a detached accessory building with a height of 5.69 metres above grade and located within the boundary of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, should be deferred subject to the applicant's submission of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) as per the policies of the Official Plans for the Township and the County. As of the writing of this report, comments from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) regarding the anticipated impact(s) of the proposed development have not been received. Respectfully submitted: Ian W ebe Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -18 Page 2 of 6 Page 81 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -18 (Campbell) Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -18 Page 82 of 141 5c) - 2012-A-18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN DRAWINGS 2012-A-18 (Campbell) Environmental Protection (EP) Zone fe poi. ()ice i3e tA-c.o, 9e- 0 A 77, L5 Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012-A-18 Page 4 of 6 Page 83 of 141 5c) - 2012-A-18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... SCHEDULE 3: EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWING 2012-A-18 (Campbell) 8 2 w LU 0 0 0) :7C I r-- L : .a- 0 Li D 0 El DE DIE I IL 0 0 Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012-A-18 Page 5 of 6 Page 84 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... SCHEDULE 4: LETTER FROM THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE, DATED JUNE 11, 2012 2012 -A -18 (Campbell) County of Simone '.i ^ Line (705) 726 -9300 cotmTvoor Planning Tr.' tree 1- 868 -893 -9300 1110 SI" ` ]�/� � 1 Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 Im ae5)727 -4278 June 11,2012 Mr. Alan Wiebe Secretary- Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro-Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Wiebe, RE: Minor Variance Application 2012 -A -18 (Campbell) North Part of Lot 19, Concession 11, (257 Line 10 North) Former Township of Oro, now Township of Oro-Medonte Thank you for circulating the minor variance application to the County of Simcoe. In response to your request for comments, County planning staff have conducted a cursory site -visit and have reviewed the above -noted application. The proposed location of the detached accessory building (new) on the subject property is designated Agricultural and Environmental Protection One In the Township's Official Plan and designated Greenlands in the County Official Plan, therefore the application is subject to the General, Agricultural and Greenlands policies of the County of Slmcoe Official Plan. The applicant Is requesting a minor variance from the maximum height of the building, and of interest to the County, from the Environmental Protection zone setback. The subject lands are within an area identified as the Oro Moraine (0M4) Upper Nottawasaga River unit. This unit contains the upper portion of the Nottawasaga River within Slmcoe County but its actual headwaters He further to the southwest. A well defined, U- shaped valley with rather steep valley walls and a level bottomland Is present. In particular a portion of the Hawkestone Wetland Complex is also located in proximity to the proposed building. County of Simcoe Official Plan policies 3.3.5 & 3.7.5 state "Development or site alteration shall not be permitted within Class 1, 2, or 3 Wetlands (Schedule 5.2.2), the habitat of threatened or endangered species, or hazardous lands. Development or site alteration may be permitted within 120 metres of these features where such development is otherwise permitted by this Plan and local municipal Plans and where an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) can demonstrate that there will be no negative impact on the natural features or on the ecological functions, including water resources, for which the area is identified.' Therefore, the County of Simcoe does not object to the proposed minor variance application, provided an EIS demonstrates that the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the natural features and associated ecological functions of area. Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require additional information, do not hesitate to call, 726 -9300, ext.1315, or email rachelle.hamellnfdtsimcoe.ca. Sincerely, The Corpoj tjon of the Cqunty of Simcoe Rac'tibIle Hamelin Planner II cc. Bruce Hoppe, Manager of Development Planning Ian Walker, LSRCA PLD-003 -001 Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -18 Page 6 of 6 Page 85 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... Page 86 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... Page 87 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... Page 88 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... 2012 -A -18 (Campbell) Location of Proposed Detached Accessory Building 40. lK, .s Are: N D 1i f h " WV," • • aP yam`, �.,� '.�^;�, °,. �r �- Tom. «.:� . L �.n [ ♦ :;�._: •...� Page 89 of 141 5c) - 2012 -A -18 (Steve and Joanne Campbell) 257 Line 10 North... Page 90 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... tiro .ec%rzte TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -19 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street Lot 28, Plan 702 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010 - 007 -19000 R.M.S. File #: D13 -43147 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.3 c), 5.1.4, and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the detached accessory building shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 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 detached accessory building: a) Be located no closer than approximately 3.0 metres from the exterior side lot line; b) Have a height not exceeding approximately 5.28 metres above grade; and c) Have a'floor area not exceeding approximately 96.8 square metres. 3. That the detached accessory building, be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 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 by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property presently contains a single detached dwelling and a shed, and the applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building on the property. The proposed detached accessory building would have a footprint of 62.43 square metres (672 square feet) and have a second storey floor area of 33.79 square metres (363.7 square feet), for a cumulative floor area of approximately 96.8 square metres (1,042 square feet). It would also have a height above grade of 5.28 metres (17.4 feet) and be located at 3.0 metres (9.84 feet) from the exterior side lot line. The applicant has stated that their desire for a detached accessory building of this size, and in this location, is for the purpose of storage space on the first and second storeys of the proposed building, inclusive of recreational and lawn maintenance equipment, and to preserve as large as possible an area within their rear yard. Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -19 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 8 Page 91 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Residential One (R1) Zone 1. Section 5.1.3 c) — Minimum required exterior side yard 2. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height 3. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum floor area Required Proposed 4.5 metres 3.0 metres 4.5 metres 5.28 metres 70 square 96.8 square metres metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Settlement Area in the Official Plan. Section C3.2 of the Official Plan states that "[permitted] use in [this designation] ... are low density residential uses". Therefore, the proposed construction of a detached accessory building which will be incidental to the residential use of the lot would constitute a permitted use in the Official Plan. On this basis, the proposal is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is located in the Residential One (R1) Zone and, pursuant to Table Al of the Township's Zoning By -law, permitted uses in this zone include single detached dwellings. With respect to detached accessory buildings, Section 5.1 of the Zoning By -law contains provisions regulating the location, size, and use of detached accessory buildings and structures. As previously noted, the applicant is requesting specific relief from the Zoning By -law, as it relates to the minimum required exterior side yard setback, and the maximum height and floor area for a detached accessory building, as evaluated below. 1. Section 5.1.3 c) — Minimum Required Exterior Side Yard Section 5.1.3 c) of the Zoning By -law requires detached accessory buildings to maintain a setback from the exterior side lot line of a property that is equal to the minimum setback required for the main building on that lot. In this case, the property is zoned Residential One (R1) Zone, and Table B1 of the Zoning By -law therefore requires an exterior side yard setback of 4.5 metres for the dwelling and any detached accessory building or structure on the property. The purpose for regulating the location of buildings and structures in relation to the exterior side lot line of a property includes: to maintain a consistent character of the visual prominence of buildings or structures in relation to lot lines fronting on transportation routes, to ensure that buildings or structures on corner lots do not encroach within a minimum line of sight for traffic, and to reduce their visual impact as viewed from neighbouring lots. 2. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum Height Section 5.1.4 of the Zoning By -law limits the height of a detached accessory building to a maximum of 4.5 metres above grade. The purpose for regulating the maximum height for detached accessory Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -19 Page 2 of 8 Page 92 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... buildings and structures, above grade, include: a) to ensure that they will remain clearly secondary to the main building on the lot, being a single detached dwelling; b) to prevent their use for human habitation (per Section 5.1.1); and c) to restrict their visual prominence on the property, as viewed from abutting transportation routes and neighbouring properties. 3. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum Floor Area Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning By -law limits the floor area occupied by detached accessory buildings to a maximum of 70 square metres, which consists of the "total area of all floors in a building" (per definition of "Floor Area "). The purpose for regulated the maximum floor area for detached accessory buildings, based on lot size, is to ensure that no one detached accessory building will compromise the main use and /or visual prominence of the single detached dwelling. On conducting a site visit of the subject property, Planning staff observed that: a) few other properties in the vicinity contain detached accessory buildings or structures and, where they do, the accessory buildings are predominantly no more than one storey and are located within the rear yard of the lots; b) the visual prominence of the dwelling on the subject property is significant as viewed from O'Brien Street, and is moderate as viewed from Brook Street; c) the buildings on neighbouring lots along the north side of Brook Street are significantly set back from the road; and d) a vegetative buffer exists between the proposed location of the accessory building and the neighbouring lot to the east, however, no vegetative buffer exists between the location of the proposed detached accessory building and Brook Street. With respect to the variances sought from the maximum floor area and height for a detached accessory building, since they are considered to be related by virtue of the proposed increase in floor area on a second storey requiring an increase in the maximum height permitted, Planning staff is of the view that their consideration in tandem would be appropriate as a result of their dependence on one another, and as a result of their cumulative impact. Specifically, as previously noted, the purposes for regulating the maximum height and floor area of detached accessory buildings and structures include to prevent the visual prominence of the main building (the dwelling) being compromised by an accessory building, to ensure its use is clearly secondary and subordinate to the main building, and to prevent its use for human habitation. In the case of this application, it is noted that, at 62.4 square metres (672 square feet), the footprint of the proposed building will not exceed the 70 square metre (753.5 square foot) maximum of the Zoning By -law, however, because the building is proposed to have a second storey with a ceiling height exceeding 1.8 metres (5.9 feet), the 33.8 square metre (364 square foot) floor area of the second storey is included in the calculation of its total floor area, at approximately 96.8 square metres (1,036 square feet). Additionally, it is noted that the introduction of the second storey appears to directly contribute to the proposed building exceeding the 4.5 metre increase in height permitted for an accessory building. With a proposed height of 5.28 metres, the proposed accessory building would exceed the maximum height otherwise permitted by approximately 17.3 per cent and, with a proposed floor area of 96.8 square metres, the building would exceed the maximum floor area of 70 square metres by approximately 38.3 per cent. Therefore, in consideration of the purpose for regulating the maximum height and floor area for detached accessory buildings, and of the variances proposed from these provisions it is the opinion of the Planning Department that the proposed variances from these provisions, in and of themselves, would not significantly compromise the visual prominence of the dwelling on the property and, by Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -19 Page 3 of 8 Page 93 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... virtue of the design of the proposed building, would generally maintain the character of the surrounding area. With respect to the variance sought from the minimum required exterior side yard setback, as previously noted one of the reasons for requiring an exterior side yard setback that is greater than the minimum required interior side yard setback is to ensure that buildings or structures will not encroach within a required sight line on a corner lot. In the case of this application, Schedule 3 to this report illustrates the location for the proposed detached accessory building, sited such that it would be closer to the rear lot line than the front and, thereby, maximizes its distance from the required line of sight. Therefore, the proposed variance from the minimum required exterior side yard for a detached accessory building would appear to maintain the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and would be considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Are the variances minor? As the proposed variances are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character of the surrounding area, the proposed variances are considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department - Engineering Department — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Surveyor's Real Property Report Schedule 3: Site Plan Drawing Schedule 4: Floor Plan and Exterior Elevation Drawings CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, the proposed variances in Application 2012 -A -19, specifically, to permit the construction of a detached accessory building with an exterior side yard setback of 3.0 metres, a floor area of 96.8 square metres, and a height of 5.28 metres, appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: (,/4l Alan Wiebe Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: Andria Leigh, M IP, RPP Director, Development Services Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -19 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 4 of 8 Page 94 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) 11V 1 H3DN3dS I11111 3133111 wEl• atlOb 1S � (n E.< O II =I cc GVOdl NVMOO 1110omis 13e1IS N3189O MIN S Z 3N11 cc In O 0) co W a_ 0 cc r co U W N CO aor Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -19 SW" Fel %ft Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 8 Page 95 of 141 LOOK STREET I I i 13e1IS N3189O MIN S Z 3N11 cc In O 0) co W a_ 0 cc r co U W N CO aor Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -19 SW" Fel %ft Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 8 Page 95 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... SCHEDULE 2: SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) SURVEYORS REAL PROPERTY REPORT PART 1- PLAN OF SURVEY OF LOT 28 REGISTERED PLAN 702 TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COUNTY OF SIMCOE SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 75 30 60 90 PHUT PE htt J. MANSFIELD, OLS - 2004 PART 2) REPORT 1 The house, addition and well are wholly situated an the lot ( c"I 24 T' I 25 REGISTERED LOT 27 PIN 58556-0031 (LT) PLAN OF EINE TREES 5668' 5653' ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS PLAN SUBMISSION FORM 1515191 THIS PLAN IS NOT VALID UNLESS IT 15 AN EMBOSSED ORIGINAL COPY ISSUED BY THE SURVEYOR In accordance wiYI Raqulalian +026. SecHan 29(3). 702 o� NI N 58"72' 30" E 1 (t'[. /SEl) $ 146.83' 1 (FL/ MIA • 1 5150' 2 STOREY WELL. FRAME 37.5' ADDITION 5183' 1 STORE Y ' FRAME DWELLING (No. 69) ° 14623 (PL N58°22'30 "E r LOT 28 PIN 58556-0032 (LT) —3' 8 BROOK STREE1 180.0 (PLAIS1 sot psi) Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -19 Page 6 of 8 Page 96 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... SCHEDULE 3: SITE PLAN DRAWING 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) 3928 7448m 4.G >`�.�• r -- - „, _ 3.0 metres NH .15 5- etE BU31N/ , -T. / ISING DCSHED v ..2' f • 2745 .._ DUSTING DECK €xisi mn�t l)Fa' - AY a I I ! f+ I I I^ L EX&ik.1; rt?'aewae & Ci4�EliT — X �� � I �_ L= �.t ti EXISTIIJG TILE BED I i EXTERIOR SIDE LOT LINE .0" BROOK STREET xsr ra WAY 17 �� LOT 28 PLAN 702 CON.3 ORO- MEDONTE ` atee' FRONT LOT LINE Mt O' BRIEN STREET Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No 2012 -A -19 Page 7 of 8 Page 97 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... SCHEDULE 4: FLOOR PLAN AND EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWINGS 2012 -A -19 ( Scandrett) :1 -0 floor plan MW ROOK 672 60/FT 629 91/43 LC£I 364 SO /71 333 97/0 TOTAL MS 3047 80.354/43 Main Floor: 672 ft2 (62.43m2 Loft: 363.7 ft2 (33.79m2) loft plan 17 feet, 4 inches (5.28 metres) Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -19 Page 8 of 8 Page 98 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... Page 99 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) Frontage of Property on Brook Street 4 4 - . 7.-;, °. >- - . 'A Y y �� ., F' 0 4, 'mod ;tit '�r � i ':, i • , . -40..„4,,, . . . i • ' '_,..,'..`,,-.-,,,,;,,-,,,, ,OD . ° - - . `-' . , ,,,or . ,.• ,,, . „ � 5 _ . . _._ . .., , ._ _ _ • . ....• . . .. _. _ ,. . . • . . ._. . . K Page 100 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) Location of Proposed Detached Accessory Building r �E Y. ' 4 �. v • s} ` dq,� art: �1 $ fib.,• q " _Vy S'q', i.: ? ` p �7 ttV f P 'it w+ r. M; ` - , P Y g I. 'Y." _ _ �; $, T }� }':: i' 7 ... ':. ,� .wee }�:'4 7 + e �• Kr.� ,. • � ��� �0 � - .+ 1 i :acs • � `� � � -� "�' � l� 1 2 'lam t xWR ! hym �Mr w' b y �I „ , y1P , '� 7 -�� f Page 101 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... 2012 -A -19 (Scandrett) View of Dwelling from Brook Street �. ".',- °: t;,.......„ .. J ' ti MP' :4. '- 4 t Yl .¢ YRiy 1` . k • S.,1 am k y ` � t } "'y ,.s- c y"�� - W .1 ,.,i k�+ 4itii, .,._ .......... ,,,,_ ,,,:,_ ,?.,._ t: '"Ifi: 'lei' \"CIA.H....*. xi ' �_ fh t r +... ^ -' +7« - for -,17� POW ts,:- .; . :L $4.7_ l'ik 4 1 ,loo` 'J C wfiJ v 1 '1t 1 '�, • Cif,. r , • 11111 Page 102 of 141 5d) - 2012 -A -19 (Scott Scandrett) 69 O'Brien Street, Lot 28, ... Page 103 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... Proud Herimge, EA-citing Fnrur< TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -20 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 South Plan 104, Part Lot 9 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 007 -11900 R.M.S. File #: D13 -43148 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.3 a) and Table B2 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the detached accessory building (the "carport ") shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 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 unenclosed "carport": a) Be located no closer than approximately 6.0 metres from the front lot line; and b) Have a floor area not exceeding approximately 66.6 square metres. 3. That the detached accessory building ( "carport ") be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 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 by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property is zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone and presently contains a single detached dwelling. In 2008, by way of application 2008 -A -21, the property owner sought variances to enlarge the existing non - conforming dwelling on the lot, and to construct a "carport" with a floor area of 44.5 square metres (479 square feet), as a detached building accessory to the residential use of the property. The applicant is now seeking to construct two detached accessory buildings on the property, consisting of: a) a "carport" with a floor area of 66.6 square metres (716.7 square feet), located in the front yard at 6.0 metres from the front lot line (by way of a revision to 2008- A -21); and b) a one - and -a -half storey "garage" in the rear yard with a footprint of 83.8 square metres (902.5 square feet), second storey floor area of approximately 47 square metres (508 square feet), and a height of 4.75 metres above grade (as a new set of variances). The applicant has stated that the variances proposed are intended to accommodate their need for increased storage for their personal recreational watercraft, as well as for the storage of other personal items and musical instruments. Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -20 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 9 Page 104 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... Following the issuance of the Notice of Hearing of the variances requested it was determined that, while the "carport" currently proposed would only require a revision to the Committee of Adjustment's decision from 2008, permitting the construction of one detached building accessory to the non- conforming residential use of the lot, the current proposal to also construct a second detached accessory building (the "garage ") would constitute the further expansion of the existing non - conforming use on the Local Commercial (LC) Zone property, thereby requiring an additional variance from Section 5.18 of the Township's Zoning By -law ( "Non- Conforming Uses "). In this regard, it is noted that the Notice of Hearing issued to owners of land in the immediate area did not include the acknowledgement that a further variance from Section 5.18 of the Zoning By -law is required in relation to the proposed "garage ". ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Local Commercial (LC) Zone 1. For "Carport" (revision to 2008 -A -21) a. Section 5.1.3 a) — accessory building in front yard b. Table B2 - Minimum required front yard setback 2. For "Garage" (new application) a. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height b. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum floor area Required Proposed Not permitted Accessory building in front yard 7.5 metres 6.0 metres 4.5 metres 4.75 metres 70 square metres 131 square metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural Settlement Area in the Official Plan. Section C3.2 of the Official Plan states that "[permitted] uses in [this designation] ... are low density residential uses". Therefore, the proposed construction of a detached accessory building which will be incidental to the residential use of the lot would constitute a permitted use in the Official Plan. On this basis, the proposal is considered to confirm to the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone and, pursuant to Table B1 of the Township's Zoning By -law, permitted uses in this zone do not include single detached dwellings. With respect to detached accessory buildings, Section 5.1 of the Zoning By -law contains provisions regulating the location, size, and use of detached accessory buildings and structures. As previously noted, the applicant is requesting specific relief from the Zoning By -law in relation to a) a "Carport" Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 2 of 9 Page 105 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... located in the front yard, at 6.0 metres from the front lot line (as a revision to Variance Application 2008- A -21); and b) a "Garage ", having a floor area of approximately 131 square metres, and a height of 4.75 metres above grade, as evaluated individually below. PROPOSED CARPORT As previously noted, in 2008, the property owner applied for and obtained variances related to the proposed construction of a "carport ". As previously proposed, this "carport" constituted the expansion of a non - conforming use, due to the Local Commercial (LC) Zone applying to the property, where this zone does not permit single detached dwellings. In their previous submission, the "carport" was to be located at more than 7.5 metres from the front lot line (as required in Table B1 of the Zoning By -law), and was to occupy a floor area of 44.5 square metres (479 square feet). In that submission, they also requested a variance to construct an addition to the existing dwelling on the property in a manner that otherwise also expanded a non - conforming use. By way of Notice of Decision dated June 27, 2008, the Committee of Adjustment approved Variance Application 2008 -A -21. Since that time, the applicant has not yet constructed the proposed "carport ", and is now requesting a revision to the previous Committee Decision in that regard, to increase its size from 44.5 square metres to 66.6 square metres and to also reduce its setback from the front lot line, from 7.5 metres to 6.0 metres. 1. Section 5.1.3 A) — Detached Accessory Building in Front Yard Section 5.1.3 a) of the Zoning By -law prohibits detached accessory buildings to be located in the front yard of a property, which is the area of a lot between the main building and the front lot line. The purpose for regulating the location of buildings and structures in relation to the front lot line of a property includes: to maintain a consistent character of the visual prominence of buildings or structures in relation to lot lines fronting on transportation routes, to ensure that buildings or structures on corner lots do not encroach within a minimum line of sight for traffic, and to reduce their visual impact as viewed from neighbouring lots. 2. Table B2 — Minimum Required Front Yard Table B2 of the Zoning By -law contains standards for properties zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone, and requires that the main building on a lot be located no closer than 7.5 metres from the front lot line. The purpose for requiring a minimum front yard setback include to maintain an appropriate degree of separation between buildings on a property and activity taking place on a transportation route, to reduce their visual impact as viewed from nearby land uses and activities and, as it relates to detached accessory buildings, to reduce the extent to which they may compromise the visual prominence of the main building on the lot. In the case of this application it is noted that, by way of a decision from the Committee of Adjustment on Variance Application 2008 -A -21, the applicant has previously received approval to construct a detached accessory building (an unenclosed "carport") in the front yard of the property. During a site visit of the property, Planning staff observed that the area identified by the applicant for the proposed construction of a "carport" is not located in a direct line of sight of the dwelling, and would be located between an existing vegetative buffer along the front lot line of the property, and the interior side yard of the lot. Further, it is noted that based on the applicant's proposed design of the "carport ", its unenclosed nature would lend to the reduction in its visual prominence as viewed from neighbouring lots and Line 2 South. On this basis, the variances requested for the proposed "carport" would be considered to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and would be considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 3 of 9 Page 106 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... PROPOSED DETACHED GARAGE 3. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum Height Section 5.1.4 of the Zoning By -law limits the height of a detached accessory building to a maximum of 4.5 metres above grade. The purpose for regulating the maximum height for detached accessory buildings and structures, above grade, include: a) to ensure that they will remain clearly secondary to the main building on the lot, being a single detached dwelling; b) to prevent their use for human habitation (per Section 5.1.1); and c) to restrict their visual prominence on the property, as viewed from abutting transportation routes and neighbouring properties. 4. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum Floor Area Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning By -law limits the floor area occupied by detached accessory buildings to a maximum of 70 square metres, which consists of the "total area of all floors in a building' (per definition of "Floor Area "). The purpose for regulated the maximum floor area for detached accessory buildings, based on lot size, is to ensure that no one detached accessory building will compromise the main use and /or visual prominence of the single detached dwelling. Regarding the proposed "garage ", as previously noted, the Notice of Hearing circulated to owners of land within the required radius of the subject property did not include reference to the requirement for a further variance from Section 5.18 of the Zoning By -law (for "Non- Conforming Uses "), with respect to the further expansion of the existing non - conforming use of the property, for a residential purpose. Are the variances minor? As the proposed variances related to the "Carport" are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character of the surrounding area, they are considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department - Engineering Department — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Surveyor's Real Property Report Schedule 3: Site Plan Drawing Schedule 4: Floor Plan and Exterior Elevation Drawings Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -20 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 4 of 9 Page 107 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, the proposed variances in Application 2012 -A -20, specifically, to permit the construction of an unenclosed "carport" with a floor area of 66.6 square metres, located in the front yard at 6.0 metres from the front lot line appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. With respect to the proposed "garage ", with a height of 4.75 metres above grade and a floor area of 131 square metres (1,510 square feet) divided across one and a half storeys, it is the opinion of the Planning Department that the Committee's consideration of this portion of Variance Application 2012 - A-20 be deferred to provide an opportunity for proper notice to be given under the Planning Act, of all points of variance required, and to allow additional information to be obtained from the applicant regarding the proposed building. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: I/ U Alan Wiebe Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Director, Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 5 of 9 Page 108 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -20 (Crook) 11 :1: :: ;':11171: ∎11 M: !11:! 1!!: Ill ..111.�rlG�li■!CICII 14 ,dk �J11.1111� Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 6 of 9 Page 109 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN DRAWING 2012 -A -20 (Crook) Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 7 of 9 Page 110 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... SCHEDULE 3: FLOOR PLAN AND EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWINGS (FOR "CARPORT ") 2012 -A -20 (Crook) -r-t-- - w.. 4 .. R ' r I. 11MIaI,. ;1 /l f 1 I I 5TORAGE o <. 1 4 b Y < E l I IiIIq in I 11q;.i1 [ii1 itzezrazfir;ii 1l,,11 I iui'�iiinrli11 I ii! IB • I iz■ nl pp1lt1l1��t�.1�la1i�nul ■■x1'111lIp1l f■nl �1//n16,nxfIl Jon it imaunnlw 1 0111111' 141{141NL111III1I I i111Ni /M11 111iItt1111111 1111'NII 1144111' "Carp Floor area: 66.6 {1716.7 square feet) 4111. 1.1111, 111: 111 1111 1tiu11111aul il.1171IItl11111111111i 01n1111n1111111111 liatl 11 111111111/114111 111111111 1,l41a111111111W1111111111 Ialu4nn,u1n/'4n111m1111 J olusal1 111111 1111'011i 1111.1.111�1mu4u14u'11111111111111 1141 /1111411111 I 11 t/.....tl�nnul n lmlNlunn11 1111111111110 IIIIHIn'n1111 117411 lliul i�(ni Itg11 111' 1�11111111111111111W1104i41I111111111111111111111nt S1i�1 FI 11:11 11 111111 1 11111 111111111111111111111 IErill U- 116 tra11111111111ry1I1111111 t 111.1111 11111. 1 111111.111 1.111 111 �I 1 1111 I1 1 1n/1nlimnmu h 1111111111 111111111111 1111111Iiu1 1111111111 111u1111LM1 /1101u1li111/ IMIN ull.II ilh1 INIIII /11 CARPORT / :m.0,1..r...a r �Nr' F/r1tJ �1.111t1.11111fnnIlln:6111 1h lltll /41111111,11 Il.hi!lnit Y 1 i!a �. 1. 1 III ) a I 1 I I MAKE 10'-0' LONG I I I 1 - • LEFT ELEVATION .d� CARPORT FLOOR PLAN 11 .1u,a..1..1 _$QRE jj i�. /IM111�11 _ rl 1 111 �n� 111► IIIiilli14.i11i Ofic 111 1111111ij1111111iii 1iin1ililljijiiiii. is jl iilli4ji ally ial 11143 11117/1 1 71111 11111 Melillo 11tlMti, x111'111110 410/1/11 11 /Int' kill 1 ,. 4ln�inl!Ui 11 iii iil ,1 I II liiit111liu1I�Iiiii " ..l, 11411111 111111'1 'Iry II lu 1111 hill11111 II IIIlinli'I hI r111hi 111111 111'11 r miiiin�� I1, tr•= in" i ly,�i/ 11111�1 ,irnl hil1uii111ii�h�'1111 ,..uI11I11 _ L. •IS:O - °•- n lu � � luil 11LVil:P lI1n1 • _•..va m 11111111 1! .In i.! I_lu Shin mmuul.4Lgpnuhut hi 1111 �nN 111111 11111111101, T11 IN DO . m AO I t t�1 ice! .. ea1m t_5 FRONT ELEVATION -5 _ _5 RIGHT 3 ±_5 ELEVATION 1 _ Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 8 of 9 Page 111 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... SCHEDULE 4: FLOOR PLAN AND EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWINGS (FOR "GARAGE ") 2012 -A -20 (Crook) :PRY p UNnEA•i O SHE4 Illll ihil UNHEATED GARAGE MAIN FLOOR PLAN -0' DEEP SECOND FLOOR PLAN DECK STORAG 1 • STORAGE Li_ L HEATED ARAGP. STORAGE -H 722[.0aou I 1 Ill► A 1111 11�1 ■1. 41111066.411116. . 411111 lullIl.. Ammo maim mob, 411n _h 1111h, 411111 � ® IlIl1lh. [� nimmnramn�irmmiIa,immu11 niam. �pu �lllll�ll OIIpflliil �1tiii1N1 .iiiil�i 11��1111 ��1� �I�I�I► riinnnmmranumunnnmm�� nrnnnnnnmw � i ni r rn D C1 C1 LLWIIIIJ • [11 11 LLIJJI I I I lrn11 JThLW] LLLU L 1 1 FRONT ELEVATION Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -20 Page 9 of 9 Page 112 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... Page 113 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... Page 114 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... 2012 -A -20 (Crook) Front Yard Setback to Proposed Carport 4` f� [, 1t 4•:' ..a. do M t .. - ,4� ' _ ''� : - , k� '� ,j y - . - - -\....., 'z ' , 'y _�� 1 Ali - ' • 1 N+. Page 115 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... 2012 -A -20 (Crook) Location of Proposed Detached Accessory Building w s I 4_ 'a I•ii ., 0 . mow l - ,; 1 slipli Page 116 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... 2012 -A -20 (Crook) Detached Accessor�yy Building on Neighbouring Lot to South ., t. 4.„.., ...: ,,-,„rov.,,, :41.f.„-...1... - - , tre, , , ,.. . , f .,,,,,iit , , ' * .,,- 'tdr.1104,,_ 14.-,-.. .....LL,:i , , ,. ' --. '�` ,*tom .C- R f °+ Y 9 fL _ T ,; • s r*, - ' ..A7''--.'.. rc .111°PN ■ r a M4'L,-... ., 1. ,e 'i, ; WilitgaftiiI,, bit*. ‘-, _Ili . ,:..,....,_ ....... ,„, .._. Page 117 of 141 5e) - 2012 -A -20 (Lawrence and Kimberly Crook) 1180 Line 2 Sou... O z 2, 0 J 0 -r r z 0 aA 0 U U -o N U co 40 N 0 Ir l'anhil II 11 IIII11inUlilllVi'� " "'" Page 118 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... t tlk we, Proud Hmimgc, /r, inng P mr TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -21 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Roy & Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road Plan 1, East Part Block A (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010- 006 -06400 R.M.S. File #: D13 -43149 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The property presently contains a single detached dwelling, a detached accessory building, and a shed, and the applicant is proposing to construct a new detached accessory building on the property. The proposed detached accessory building is sought to be located in the front yard, would have a footprint of 91.79 square metres (988 square feet) and have a second storey floor area of 74.2 square metres (799 square feet), for a cumulative floor area of approximately 166 square metres (1,787 square feet), and would have a height above grade of 6.16 metres (20.2 feet). ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning Zone: Residential One (R1) Zone 1. Section 5.1.3 c) — Accessory building in front yard 2. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height 3. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum floor area By -law 97 -95: Required Not permitted 4.5 metres 70 square metres Proposed Accessory building in front yard 6.16 metres 166 square metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Official Plan The property is designated Rural Settlement Area by the Township's Official Plan. Zoning By -taw The subject property is located in the Residential One (R1) Zone by Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended. Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -21 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 6 Page 119 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department - Engineering Department — County of Simcoe - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Drawing Schedule 3: Floor Plan Drawings Schedule 4: Elevation Drawing CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, Variance Application 2012 -A -21, specifically, to permit the construction of a detached accessory building in the front yard of a property with a floor area of 166 square metres and a height of 6.16 metres above grade, should be deferred at the applicant's request, to provide them an opportunity to revise the application. Respectfully submitted: Alan Wiebe Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -21 Page 2 of 6 Page 120 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -21 ( Poirier) VA' 411141 Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -21 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Page 121 of 141 5f) - 2012-A-21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN DRAWING 2012-A-21 (Poirier) • • 41, Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012-A-21 Page 4 of 6 Page 122 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... SCHEDULE 3: FLOOR PLAN DRAWINGS 2012 -A -21 (Poirier) i L First Storey F600r area: 74.2 square metres (799 sq are feet) WWI • e.. r I _ _ - _ _. ._ 1 f-I • 5 4. II I a. v.uwrgL N.wmM. row OW I. ;1 Main Floor Plan _ _ 114 =ro C/.WTILEVER OECI(ra ?VE ISIOftiN6 } s4.* I d Floor area: 47 square metres (5O6 square feet) I Kamm s1•C a -a S —labs Framing DetOH Cf 114° =1'-0` TOTAL AREA : 988 suit vo.cn No.3Jcaw 10105/2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEW ammo. No.2 F *e 02/06/2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEW Amara IJo.1 I or 30/04)2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEW tyS ia anawate • 3367 Baldwalt Len RR,Y2 Utopia ON LOU IT Td (700) 721.722 e NT: Roy Poirier LOCATION: 360 Shanty Bay Rd Om Medortte Tow ship, 01 PROJECT: Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -21 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Page 123 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... SCHEDULE 4: ELEVATION DRAWING 2012 -A -21 ( Poirier) E. :7a i�LPLY 1x12 etAR1 RIME BEAM NO AI— ...NI LOAD EEAlJ zr SPw 2 STUD WALL P 1.00m Gdndv6 imtcr c4 •A 724 IQ WPP/ 2 JOISTS. W 0.G V7 CLUE / WALED KR FLOOR PPAEH A8 PER OWNER OEOI 70877E mom f.0'. 8111O0ERES RAW TO 4F00111.EMB78 r. co. WO SRN/ 2 ROC la PLWWOOO A -- SHINGLE START 95 '[R A8PIMLT. FASCIA E VERY ; -GUARD ENCLOSURE STAIR WAIL HOT 8HOW'N 2.2XA TOP PuATIS- P CONCRETE SLAB.... e'CRUSHED STONE • Y r -r U? e P 11- MI 8RAM Al WOOD 110450 LIe ELL PLATER WI V eOLTAAT4?O.G W SIAPe GRADE AWAY 9-eBOW TOP OP PFD Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -21 Page 6 of 6 Page 124 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... Page 125 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... 2012 -A -21 (Poirier) Existing Detached Accessory Building on Property M I >. i /iJlyM ,l+Ti'. ___ IN moo- - `4: - -'1 \ ti" : -� 1. • FFF���jj C••�. �- ` _ v3 ,c� . - A • - .S w., Vin, r Page 126 of 141 5f) - 2012-A-21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... Page 127 of 141 5f) - 2012-A-21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... Page 128 of 141 5f) - 2012 -A -21 (Roy and Freda Poirier) 360 Shanty Bay Road, ... tv0 0 U U -o N U co N 0 N N 0 Q 0 i 0 0 4J co U 0 J !lr s;b , _ L 4 w 'f' M Jr k a ltF.. , '' a r C� x h - Page 129 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... Page 130 of 141 5g) - 2012-A-22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... Page 131 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... 2012 -A -22 (Jansma) Agricultural Lands to East of Subject Property F . ... . . , .. smilastiowiewa . . ,.. .. . ., ara k tw S fA ry' "� y11� �4 3 _ - �� � � ,.- x' 17 '�� 1 1 dal ,� 4: 1 1 ,V ! {) yyi \ x M J Vl 1 ! '� i rah t4 aNV�'��1 ,�' '1,/''t J I 4 1 T tf 0jl g i 1 r ', N „.t �'��y\ � 1 J�w� ty, �,Ai' t-i e v. F r 1 of d Ja ] 4qc 'dip \ A'r . fO'' r 44 ' , � N: : '� 'r ti i f ; e ;1i,f iiW PI v iii i, Iha i f ,(� -$4 I ? i .A', arV '.' v lyf ,- 1 `<7 q ';.,• ' .t+ / a. S 9 1 'q N ' \•;>.4.1**,.., r 'S�i r��� .: :14,..:.-,,,,;: .. rr f •e, r •a r qJl �lJ 11. �' R�5 1 to t # ('. l'17 „1".i.-• a v ' kl 11 2,.1,v 4� }!, �'�i r. -' '�,., '°� ,p�J,' I a ': t r ,�I��'� )k'�."�s* : kut -0 �f, 1� 4 ‘e.,,,. ” `.�y\' 1'}i �!... ~ F. f,„ L.'i4 i- . ,d Tf ., h ' 4';.,,,,: ., 1 SL e F A 1C, i F r a Page 132 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... ,Jedonte Proud Heritage, Esrithg Funny TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2012 -A -22 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Alan Wiebe, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: June 21, 2012 Subject: Variance Application (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North Concession 5, Part Lot 17 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 -010- 002 -25100 R.M.S. File #: D13 -43150 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.4 and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the detached accessory building shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 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 detached accessory building: a) Have a height above grade not exceeding approximately 4.82 metres; and b) Have a floor area not exceeding approximately 93.65 square metres. 3. That the setbacks, floor area, and height for the proposed detached accessory building, be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 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 by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property presently contains a one - storey single detached dwelling with a floor area of approximately 140 square metres (1,507 square feet), and the applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building on the property. The proposed detached accessory building (garage) would have a floor area of approximately 93.65 square metres (1,008 square feet), and would have a height above grade of approximately 4.82 metres (15.8 feet). The applicant has stated that their reasons for intending to construct a detached accessory building of the floor area and height proposed include: for the storage of personal and recreational vehicles, and for carrying out personal hobbies. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone Required Proposed 1. Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height 4.5 metres 4.82 metres 2. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum floor area 70 square metres 93.65 square metres Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -22 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 1 of 7 Page 133 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Agricultural in the Official Plan. Section Cl of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in this designation and, specifically, Section C1.2 of the Official Plan states that "[the] principle use of land in the Agricultural designation ... shall be agriculture ", and continues to state that "[other] permitted uses include single detached dwellings ... ". Since the proposed detached accessory building would be incidental to and directly associated with the existing residential use of the property, the proposal is considered to confirm to the general intent of the Official Plan. Do the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and are the variances appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is located in the Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone and, pursuant to Table Al of the Township's Zoning By -law, permitted uses in this zone include single detached dwellings. 1. Section 5.1A — Maximum Height Section 5.1.4 of the Zoning By -law limits the height of a detached accessory building to a maximum of 4.5 metres above grade. The purpose for regulating the maximum height for detached accessory buildings and structures, above grade, include: a) to ensure that they will remain clearly secondary to the main building on the lot, being a single detached dwelling; b) to prevent their use for human habitation (per Section 5.1.1); and c) to restrict their visual prominence on the property, as viewed from abutting transportation routes and neighbouring properties. 2. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum Floor Area Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning By -law limits the floor area occupied by detached accessory buildings to a maximum of 70 square metres, which consists of the "total area of all floors in a building'' (per definition of "Floor Area "). The purpose for regulated the maximum floor area for detached accessory buildings, based on lot size, is to ensure that no one detached accessory building will compromise the main use and /or visual prominence of the single detached dwelling. On conducting a site visit of the subject property, Planning staff observed that: a) the one - storey dwelling on the property is located in a visually prominent location; b) the location of the proposed detached accessory building would be moderately obstructed from sight, as viewed from Line 4 North, by an existing vegetative buffer parallel to the front lot line and existing vegetation on the property; and c) the property is surrounded by properties which either contain moderate to dense vegetation, and /or are used in association with agricultural purposes, containing large agricultural buildings. Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -22 Page 2 of 7 Page 134 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... Therefore, since the variances proposed would result in the construction of a detached accessory building on the lot with a size, and in a location, that would not be anticipated to result in the visual prominence of the dwelling and the residential use of the property being compromised, and since it would be would be considered consistent with the character of the surrounding area, the proposed variances would be considered to maintain the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and would be considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Are the variances minor? As the proposed variances are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character of the surrounding area, the proposed variances are considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation and Environmental Services — Building Department - Engineering Department — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Drawing Schedule 3: Floor Plan Drawing Schedule 4: Exterior Elevation Drawings CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the Planning Department, the proposed variances in Application 2012 -A -22, specifically, to permit the construction of a detached accessory building with a floor area of 93.65 square metres, and a height of 4.82 metres above grade, appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Alan Wiebe Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: Glenn White, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -22 Page 3 of 7 Page 135 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2012 -A -22 (Jansma) N93N1:1 1 15116:S1DEROAD =W U I- w 0 z RV N ' 3NI=1 NE3NIl Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -22 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 4 of 7 Page 136 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN DRAWING 2012 -A -22 (Jansma) Development Services Application No, 2012 -A -22 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Page 137 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... SCHEDULE 3: FLOOR PLAN DRAWING 2012 -A -22 ( Jansma) „0, cvt - Floor area: 93,65 square metres (1,006 square feet) rl' Development Services Application No. 2012 -A -22 Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Page 138 of 141 5g) - 2012 -A -22 (Alfred and Laurie Jansma) 519 Line 4 North, ... SCHEDULE 4: EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWINGS 2012 -A -22 ( Jansma) ®ELE:YATION 1 El lia° 5 9" R-SCP PF 7.-Er:si.Eec,a- a 1II?+En • 7 C -rF AR -.So- PURI-NE, o 24" 0.0 - 3a. sreE.i. PCCF,=v. • a E . f • 0 2s' c - 7-4 =! L STRAPofia • 24• : c. rrf•AFt :9ga STEW- SFC G - 2.N4a PR RE '11.2EATW 90170M PLATE I sll..�Gc "Ya.r Development Services Meeting Date June 21, 2012 Application No. 2012 -A -22 Page 7 of 7 Page 139 of 141 6a) - Correspondence dated June 14, 2012 from the Ontario Mu... Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Ontario Municipal Board 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: (416) 212 -6349 Toll Free: 1- 866 -448 -2248 Fax: (416) 326 -5370 Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca IN THE MATTER OF subsection Appellant: Applicant: Subject: Property Address /Description: Municipality: Municipal File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: Tribunaux de l'environnement et de I'amenagement du territoire Ontario Commission des affaires municipales de ('Ontario 655 rue Bay, suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: Sans Frais: Telecopieur: Site Web: (416) 212 -6349 1- 866- 448 -2248 (416) 326 -5370 www.elto.gov.on.ca 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, County of Simcoe Coulson Ridge Estate's Ltd Consent Part Lot 3, Concession 7 Township of Oro - Medonte 2010 -B -06 PL101365 PL101365 APPOINTMENT FOR HEARING The Ontario Municipal Board hereby appoints: at: on: 10:30 AM Thursday, September 27, 2012 at: Administration Office Council Chambers 148 Oro - Medonte Line 7 South Oro, ON LOL 2X0 for the commencement of the hearing of this appeal. The Board has set aside two (2) days for this hearing. Ontario c. P.13, as amended ', E C iY E I JUN 1 A 2 8v O O- MVIEDONTE All parties and participants should attend at the start of the hearing at the time and date indicated, irrespective of the number of days scheduled. Hearing dates are firm - adjournments will not be granted except in the most serious circumstances, and only in accordance with the Board's Rules on Adjournments. If you do not attend and are not represented at this hearing, the Board may proceed in your absence and you will not be entitled to any further notice of the proceedings. In the event the decision is reserved, persons taking part in the hearing and wishing a copy of the decision may request a copy from the presiding Board member or, in writing, from the Board. Such decision will be mailed to you when available. Pour recevoir des services en frangais, veuillez communiquer avec la Division des audiences au (416) 212 -6349, au moins 20 fours civics avant la date fixee pour /'audience. Assessment Review Board - Board of Negotiation - Conservation Review Board - Environmental Review Tribunal - Ontario Municipal Board Niagara Escarpment Hearing Office - Office of Consolidated Hearings Page 140 of 141 6a) - Correspondence dated June 14, 2012 from the Ontario Mu... We are committed to providing services as set out in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005. If you have any accessibility needs, please contact our Accessibility Coordinator as soon as possible. DATED at Toronto, this 13`h day of June, 2012. 4.01 JOANNE HAYES SECRETARY Page 141 of 141