Loading...
05 14 2013 Committee of Adjustment AgendaTownship of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future 1. OPENING OF MEETING: THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday, May 16, 2013 TIME: 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, April 18, 2013 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski), 290 Ridge Road West, Concession 7, Part West Half of Lot 24 and Part Lot 25, except Pt 1, 51R-6080, Application for the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation. b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concession 9, Part of Lot 11, Application for a boundary adjustment/lot addition to the adjacent residential parcel of land (Part 2) in order to "square off" the property. c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore Road East, Concession 9, Plan 780, Lot 34, Application for relief from Setback from Average High Water Mark of Lake Simcoe to extend the roof over existing deck. d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, Concession 8, Plan M -174, Lot 23, Applicant for relief from Setback from Slopes to construct a single detached dwelling. e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Concession 7, Plan 755, Pt Lot 34 & 36, Application for relief from Permitted Location and Maximum Height in a Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone to add an unenclosed carport to the existing garage. Page 1 of 152 Page 92 -103 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East Half Lot 26, 51R-9847, Part 1, Concession 5, Application for relief from Maximum Height and Maximum Floor Area in an Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone. 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail, Concession 7, Plan M -368, Lot 75, Application for relief from Maximum Floor Area of accessory building to construct a new detached accessory building. 104 -132 g) 133 -152 6. NEW BUSINESS: a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. 7. NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, June 20, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. at Old Town Hall, 833 15/16 Sideroad. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Page 2 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... -..1111.--61.144'1111111111N 7ou�r % Ye Prorrd Heritage, Exciting Friirc Thursday, April 18, 2013 Present: Staff present: Scott Macpherson, Chair Larry Tupling Roy Hastings Allan Johnson Bruce Chappell THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers TIME: 10:08 a.m. Andria Leigh, Secretary Treasurer /Director of Development Services; Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services; Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Scott Macpherson assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order. 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. CA130418-fr Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the agenda for the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, April 18, 2013 be received and adopted. Carried. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: None declared. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, March 21, 2013. Motion No. CA130418 -2 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, March 21, 2013 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 1 of 11 Page 3 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2013 -B -05 (William & Sharon Pottage), 4398 Line 4 North, Concession 4, Lot 8 (Former Township of Medonte), Application for a technical severance to re- create two agricultural parcels to correct a situation where two lots have merged on title. William & Sharon Pottage, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA130418 -3 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -05, for the re- creation of one (1) new lot for agricultural purposes, subject to the following conditions: 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 minimum total lot area for the severed lot be 42.0 hectares; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; and 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Carried. Page 2 of 11 Page 4 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. b) 2013 -A -01 (Kim Gavine), 1473 Mount St Louis Road West, Concession 2, Lot 55, Application for relief from setbacks from limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone for an addition. Kim Gavine and Simao Lauzeiro, applicants, were present. Garry Kumpula, adjacent property owner, reviewed the concerns noted in his correspondence provided to the Committee. Motion No. CA130418 -4 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -01, specifically, to permit the replacement and expansion of the existing dwelling to a total main floor area of 139.4 square metres (1500 square foot) located within the boundary of the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. That notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5.28 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the setbacks for the proposed dwelling be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the proposed single detached dwelling has a main floor area of approximately 139.4 square metres (1500 square feet) detached accessory building. That the setbacks for the proposed 1 1/2 storey single detached dwelling be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; and 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. Carried. Page 3 of 11 Page 5 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. c) 2013 -B -06 (Terrence Clark & Kimberley Ann MacDonald), 1672 Old Barrie Road West, Concession 3, Part Lot 10 (Former Township of Oro), Application to permit the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation. Terrence Clark, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA130418 -5 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -06, for the severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, subject to the following conditions: 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 minimum total lot area for the severed lot be 2.0 hectares; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 5. That the applicant apply for, and obtain, an amendment to the zoning of the retained lands, prohibiting their use for a residential purpose; 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. Carried. Page 4 of 11 Page 6 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. d) 2013 -A -15 (Randy & Marlene Langstaff), 419 Line 11 South, Concession 12, North Part Lot 23 (Former Township of Oro), Application for relief from Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Randy Langstaff, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA130418 -6 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -15, specifically, to permit a 35.04 square metre (377 square foot) detached garage within 8.0 metres (26.2 feet) from the boundary of an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.28 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed detached garage shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By- Law; 2. That the buildings and structures on the property be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 5 of 11 Page 7 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. e) 2013 -A -16 (Peter Warder), 4829 Line 11 North, Concession 12, Part Lot 11 (Former Township of Medonte), Application for relief from Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Wanda Myles Warder, applicant's spouse, was present on behalf of the applicant. Motion No. CA130418 -7 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -16, specifically, to permit an addition to an existing dwelling consisting of a 73 square metre (240 square foot) screened in sunroom and 26.8 square metre (288 square foot) shed as to be located within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.28 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the proposed sunroom and shed addition shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That the buildings and structures on the property be substantially and proportionally 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 and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 6 of 11 Page 8 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. f) 2013 -A -17 (Randy & Lori Wuensch), 863 Ridge Road West, Lot 26, 51 R -3096, Part 5, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro), Application for relief from Maximum Height and Maximum Floor Area. Randy Wuensch, applicant, was present. Pete Mulder, neighbour, noted his support for the application. Motion No. CA130418 -8 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -17, specifically, to permit a detached garage with a maximum height of 5.12 metres and a maximum floor are of 167.69 square metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the proposed 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 verifying, in writing by way of survey or real property report, that the detached accessory building will not exceed a floor area of approximately 167.69 square metres and a height of 5.12 metres above the established grade. 3. That the buildings and structures on the property be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; and 4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 7 of 11 Page 9 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. g) 2013 -A -18 (Wayne & Christine Lambert), 11 Palm Beach Road, Concession 10, Plan 863, Lot 4, Application for relief from Minimum Required Interior Side Yard. Wayne Lambert, applicant, was present. Vicki Palmer, neighbour, reviewed her concerns noted in her correspondences dated April 10, 2013 and April 2013. Motion No. CA130418 -9 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -18, specifically, to permit a minimum interior side yard setback of 2.0 metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the attached garage /hobby /workshop 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 attached garage /hobby /workshop be located no closer than approximately 2.0 metres from the northerly interior side lot line; 3. That the location and size of the proposed attached garage /hobby /workshop be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 4. That the applicant provide the Township with an engineered lot grading plan; 5. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 6. 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 8 of 11 Page 10 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. h) 2013 -A -19 (Wendy Camirand & Paul Brown) 17 Barrie Terrace, Concession 1, Plan 663, Lots G & H, Application for relief from Minimum Required Interior Side Yard. Paul Brown, applicant, and Ian Malcolm, architect, were present. Motion No. CA130418 -10 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -19, specifically, to permit a minimum interior side yard setback of 2.4 metres, 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 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 be located no closer than approximately 2.4 metres from the northerly interior side lot line; 3. That the location and size of the proposed single detached dwelling be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 4. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 9 of 11 Page 11 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. i) 2013 -A -20 (Steve Graves), 1479 Line 1 South, Lot 1, Concession 1, Application for relief from Maximum Height. Motion No. CA130418 -11 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -20, specifically, to permit a maximum height for a detached garage of 5.4 metres, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed 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 that the detached accessory building shall possess a height of no more than 5.4 metres above finished grade; 3. That the location and size of the proposed detached garage be in substantially conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 4. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. Carried. Page 10 of 11 Page 12 of 152 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — April 18, 2013. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, May 16, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. CA130418 -12 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 1:38 p.m. Carried. Scott Macpherson, Chair Andria Leigh, Secretary Treasurer Page 11 of 11 Page 13 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Ci5ttl/alofite. Proud f{erkurr, E'rairing Future TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -08 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Consent Application Barry Leigh 290 Ridge Road West Concession 7, Part of West Half of Lot 24 and Part of Lot 25 Motion # Roll #: 4346 -010- 009 -00100 _ R.M.S. File #: D10 -44428 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Application 2013 -B -08: 1. That one copy of a Registered Reference Plan of the subject Bands prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Committee Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the applicant apply for, and obtain, an amendment to the zoning of the retained lands, prohibiting their residential use; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 5. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; and 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent Application 2013 -B -08 is to consider the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of a farm consolidation. The total lands have an area of approximately 43.7 hectares (108 acres) and approximately 380.3 metres (1,248 feet) of frontage along Ridge Road West (County Road 20). The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage of 45 metres (147.6 feet), a lot area of approximately 5.4 hectares (13.4 acres) and are intended for residential, agricultural and hobby farm uses. A single detached dwelling, two agricultural buildings and accessory buildings are located on these lands. The lands proposed to be retained would have a lot area of approximately 38.2 hectares (94.5 acres), are vacant of buildings or structures and are proposed for continued agricultural use. Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -08 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Page 14 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... ANALYSIS: The applicants have a binding agreement of purchase and sale to sell the retained farm lands to a bona fide farmer (Piotrowski Farms) as part of a farm consolidation. The application proposes to sever the existing dwelling and related buildings from the balance of the farmland on the basis that the dwelling is surplus to a consolidated farm operation. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan and Zoning BV -law The subject property is designated Agricultural according to Schedule 'A' to the Township of Oro- Medonte Official Plan. Section C1 of the Township's Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Agricultural designation and permits and uses that include agriculture and single detached dwellings. Section C1.3.1 of the Official Plan encourages the expansion, consolidation of new agricultural uses. While the Official Plan does not contain policies specific to the severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, Section D2.2 of the Official Plan contain general consent policies which would allow for the consideration of severances of this nature. The majority of the subject lands are zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone, while a portion corresponding with a watercourse is zoned Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. This application, if approved, would not result in any development that would impact the lands in the EP Zone. Table B4B of the Township's Zoning By -law requires a minimum frontage of 45 metres for a lot in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone and Table B4A requires a minimum of 0.4 hectares for a single detached dwelling and 2.0 hectares for a hobby farm or agricultural uses. The lands proposed to be severed would comply with the minimum required lot frontage and lot area for residential, hobby farm and agricultural uses. Planning Staff notes that size and shape of the proposed severed parcel is largely dictated by the locations of the existing buildings on the lands and their considerable distance from the road. This proposed severance of a residence surplus to a farm consolidation is not anticipated to affect the viability of the farm operation taking place on the retained lands. Having considered the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the application generally conforms to the policies of the Township's Official Plan. County Official Plan The subject lands are designated Rural & Agricultural in the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Section 3.3 of the County's Official Plan contains "General Subdivision and Development Policies' Development Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -08 Page 2 of 6 Page 15 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... and, specifically, Section 3.3.4 states that "[consents] for the purpose ... consolidation of land holdings are permitted but shall not be for the purpose of creating new lots except as otherwise permitted in this Plan", and continues to state that "[all] lots created shall conform to all applicable municipal policies and bylaws." Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan contains policies for lands in the Rural and Agricultural designation, and states that "[prime] agricultural areas will be protected for agriculture and compatible uses ... lots may be created for an agricultural use ... a residence surplus to a farming operation ... [and] [new] lots for agricultural uses should generally not be less than 35 hectares ... ". On this basis, it is the opinion of Planning Staff that proposed severance generally conforms to the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) Section 2.3.4.1 of the PPS contains policies related to "Lot Creation and Lot Adjustments ", and specifically states that "Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for ... a) agricultural uses, provided that the lots are of a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations ... c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance." The process through which the Township would ensure that residential uses are not permitted on the vacant farmland is rezone the lands accordingly. During a site visit of the subject property and the immediate area, no livestock operations were identified which would result in the requirement for the applicant to provide confirmation of compliance with the applicable Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the application is consistent with the PPS, subject to a zoning by -law amendment to prohibit the residential use of the retained lands. Places to Grow The subject Consent Application has been reviewed by Planning Staff with respect to the Places to Grow policies. Section 2.2.9.2 of these policies state that "[development] outside of settlement areas may be permitted in rural areas in accordance with Policy 2.2.2.1(iy', which states that "[population] ... growth will be accommodated by ... directing development to settlement areas, except where necessary for development related to ... rural land uses that cannot be located in settlement areas". The Places to Grow policies, however, do not prohibit severances in agricultural and rural areas where such severances are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no concerns. Transportation Division - Building Division — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — County of Simcoe — Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -08 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 3 of 6 Page 16 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 — Location Map Schedule # 2 — Severance Sketch CONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -08 BE APPROVED, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, for the reasons that the application generally conforms to the Places to Grow policies and the Official Plans for the County and the Township, and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Respectfully submitted: 1L)*) Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -08 Page 4 of 6 Page 17 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -08 (Leigh) Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -08 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 5 of 6 Page 18 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... aqr 01.kl%ra\ 4 SCHEDULE 2: SEVERANCE SKETCH 2013 -B -08 (Leigh) l )-wry I1- N Sre55 — 02q d r1-'faiqe kbi r.0 -Cue 1- f/ J L a&L% &AJ e 7. 4-- d. 37d bromaLl U1 • • Q.qr au l fol l._o,nd ir�rn�rm 1c ind1 �e 6 n'(o Oor Development Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -08 Page 6 of 6 Page 19 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Page 20 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Page 21 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Page 22 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Page 23 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Page 24 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Brissette, Marie From: Witlib, Derek Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:32 PM To: Brissette, Marie Subject: FW: Consent Application 2013 -B -08 Attachments: County Comments - 2013- B- 08.pdf Derek Witlib Manager, Planning Services Township of Oro - Medonte From: Hamelin, Rachelle [ mailto :Rachelle.Hamelin @simcoe.caj Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:21 PM To: Witlib, Derek Cc: Hoppe, Bruce; Murphy, Paul Subject: Consent Application 2013 -B -08 Derek, Please see attached County comments for consent application 2013 -B -08. • The County Transportation department is satisfied the required County Road right -of -way widths have been obtained, as conditions of previous planning applications on the subject property, therefore the County does not require additional widening at this time. If you require additional information, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Rachelle Hamelin Planner III County of Simcoe, Planning Department 1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, ON LOL 1X0 Phone: (705) 726 -9300 ext.1315 Fax: (705) 726 -9832 Email: rachelle.hamelin@simcoe.ca 1 Page 25 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... COUNTY OF SIMCOE County of Simcoe Planning 1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 Main Line (705) 726 -9300 Toll Free 1- 866 - 893 -9300 Fax (705) 727 -4276 simcoe.ca PLANNING Derek Witlib on behalf of Secretary/Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte PO Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, May 14, 2013 RE: Consent Application File No. 2013 -B -08 Concession 7, Pt. West 1/2 Lot 24 and Pt. Lot 25, except Pt. 1 51R -6080 (290 Ridge Road West) Former Township of Oro, now Township of Oro - Medonte Thank you for circulating the County of Simcoe. The subject property is designated Agricultural in the Township Official Plan, and therefore subject to the Agricultural policies of the County Official Plan and Provincial policy documents. This application is seeking approval to permit the creation of a new residential 5.4 hectares (13.4 acres) lot surplus to a farming operation. The proposed retained portion of the subject property would be approximately 38.2 hectares (94.5 acres). Section 2.3.4.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) states lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for a) agricultural uses, b) agricultural related uses, c) a residence surplus to a farming operation, or in limited circumstances, d) infrastructure. Furthermore, PPS policy 2.3.4.3 states "the creation of new residential lots in prime agricultural areas shall not be permitted, except in accordance with policy 2.3.4.1 (c) [surplus residence]." It is understood the PPS permits lot creation for "a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation," provided there is the acquisition of farm parcels for a single farm operation. Both the PPS and the County of Simcoe Official Plan define "residence surplus to a farming operation" as "an existing farm residence that is rendered surplus as a result of farm consolidation ". County planning staff acknowledge the existing residence is set back a distance from the road and the length of driveway is required for access, however the sketch provided to the County with the Notice of Hearing lacks the accuracy of the existing lot layout and under - represents the scale of the proposed severance. County planning staff encourage a literal interpretation of PPS policy 2.3.4.1 c) and County of Simcoe Official Plan definition, and that only the residence, required access, and appropriate sewage and water qualify for severance. To that effect, the County does not object to the proposed consent application provided assurances, as per the PPS and the County of Simcoe Official Plan, demonstrate the lot creation is as a result of farm consolidation, the lot size is reduced to include only the existing dwelling and appropriate sewage and water system, MDS requirements are met, and the applicant is required to clearly prohibit the facilitation of a new residential dwelling on the retained lands to the County's satisfaction. PLD- 003 -001 Page 26 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 705 - 726 -9300 ext. 1315, rachelle.hamelinc simcoe.ca. Sincerely, The Corporation of the County of Simcoe Rachelle Hamelin Planner III cc. Bruce Hoppe, Manager of Development Planning Page 27 of 152 5a) 2013 -B -08 (Barry Leigh - Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski),... —THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE PO Box 100, Oro, ON, LOL 2X0, (705) -487 -2171 THE LAKE SlMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY HAS REVIEWED THIS AP PUCATION AND EETERN , D THAT WE HAVE NO QRJ '' TO ITS A ' VAL �ratu� �1,.�'�•,•_ tea Derek Witlih on behalf of Secretary-Treasurer Page 28 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... fSfi oXifi,doonte, Proud H.,*. Exsh b Future TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -07 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Consent Application 2013 -B -07 (Ken Tran), 1514 Line 9 North Concession 9, Part of Lot 11 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010 - 004 -05700 R.M.S. File #: D10 -44369 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Application 2013 -B -07: 1. That one copy of a Registered Reference Plan for the subject land indicating the severed parcel be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary- Treasurer; 2. That the severed Bands, with an area of approximately 1.7 hectares (4.2 acres), be merged in title with the abutting lands to the east, and that the provisions of Subsection 3 or 5 of Section 50 of The Planning Act apply to any subsequent conveyance or transaction involving the subject land; 3. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 4. That the applicant's solicitor provide an undertaking that the severed lands and the lands to be enhanced will merge in title; 5. That the applicant apply for, and obtain, an amendment to rezone to an Agricultural /RuraV (A/RU) Zone that portion of the merged lands that is presently zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2); and 6. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider Consent application 2013 -B -07 which proposes to permit a lot addition. The applicant's lands possess frontage along Line 9 North, as well as along Old Barrie Road (County Road 11) and are municipally known as 1514 Line 9 North. The lands to be severed are located on the south side of Old Barrie Road, having frontage along Old Barrie Road of approximately 171 metres (561 feet), a lot depth of 74 metres (242.7 feet) and a lot area of 1.7 hectares (4.2 acres). Proposed to be retained is 57 hectares (140.8 acres) of land for continued agricultural use. ANALYSIS: The lands proposed to be severed are vacant of buildings and are proposed to be merged with an adjacent vacant 0.54 hectare (1.33 acre) lot, to result in a combined lot area of 2.64 hectares (6.53 Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -07 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Page 29 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... acres). No new lot is proposed to be created as a result of the proposed boundary adjustment/lot addition. The purpose of the application is to enlarge and "square off" the existing vacant lot for future residential use. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan All of the lands related to this application are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. Residential uses are permitted in the Agricultural designation and Section D2.2.2 of the Official Plan contains provisions which permit a consent for the purpose of modifying a lot boundary. Planning Staff is of the opinion that this application conforms to the Official Plan. Township Zoning By -law The lands proposed to be severed and retained are zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone. The existing lot with which the severed lands are proposed to be merged is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone. Both the A/RU Zone and the RUR2 Zone permit residential uses in the form of a single detached dwellings. In Planning Staff's opinion, the dual zoning of the merged lands is not a desirable situation for the following reasons: 1. The presence of two zones on the lot may limit the flexibility of siting a future dwelling, since the Zoning By -law requires that, where a lot is divided into more than one zone, each portion of the lot shall be used in accordance with the provisions (including setbacks and lot area) for the applicable zone; and 2. With two zones on the lot, the use of the parcel would not be able to satisfy the minimum required lot area of 2 hectares (4.9 acres) within the A/RU Zone for the purpose of a hobby farm and agricultural uses. Based on the above, Planning Staff recommends that, as a condition of consent approval, the merged lands be rezoned to place then entirely within an A/RU Zone. County of Simcoe Official Plan The subject lands are in the area designated Rural and Agricultural according to the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Section 3.3.4 states that "[consents] for the purpose of boundary adjustments and consolidation of land holdings are permitted but shall not be for the purpose of creating new lots except as otherwise permitted in this Plan", and continues to state that "[all] lots created shall conform to all applicable municipal policies and bylaws." Since the proposed boundary adjustment would not result in the creation of a new lot, would conform to the Township's Official Plan and would not Development Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -07 Page 2 of 6 Page 30 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... introduce any, or lead to an increase in an existing, situation of non - compliance with the Zoning By- law, the application is considered to conform to the County's Official Plan. Provincial Policies This application is subject to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS, 2005), Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Places to Grow), and Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP). With respect to the Places to Grow and LSPP policies of the Province of Ontario, Planning staff notes that these documents do not contain provisions for boundary adjustments. However, Section 2.3.4.2 of the PPS contains policies which support for boundary adjustments in agricultural areas. When Planning Staff inspected the site it was observed that there is an existing livestock operation located to the west of the subject lands. Section 2.3.3.3 of the Provincial Policy Statement requires that new land uses, including the creation of lots, and new or expanding livestock facilities shall comply with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae (MDS). Since this application represents the proposed enlargement of an existing lot on which a residential use is already permitted, rather than the creation of a new lot or land use, MDS does not apply to this consent application. However, MDS may apply to and impact the establishment of a dwelling on the lands, in the event that MDS is incorporated into the Township's Zoning By -law in the future. Planning Staff advises that the use of the lands may be subjected to the impacts of normal farm practices in the area, including odour, noise and dust. ICONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division – no concerns Transportation Services Division - Building Division – County of Simcoe – ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 – Location Map Schedule # 2 – Severance Sketch ICONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -07, BE APPROVED, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, for the reasons that the application generally conforms to the Places to Grow policies and the Official Plans for the County and the Township, and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Respectfully submitted: —A* Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -07 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 3 of 6 Page 31 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -07 Page 4 of 6 Page 32 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -07 (Tran) Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -07 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 5 of 6 Page 33 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... SCHEDULE 2: SEVERANCE SKETCH 2013 -B -07 (Tran) Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -07 Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Page 6 of 6 Page 34 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... Page 35 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... Page 36 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... Page 37 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... Page 38 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... a � l std te Iff4:Vvit Zt Page 39 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... Page 40 of 152 5b) 2013 -B -07 (Kenneth Tran), 1514 Line 9 North, Concessi... ��r Q N -- THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE PO Box 100, Oro, ON, LOL 2X0, (705)-487 -2171 NOTICE OF HEARING 2013 -B -07 (Tran) trio IN THE MATTER OF Sections 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P. 13 - and - 3 t IN THE MATTER of applications for consent, Submission No. 2013 -B -07 AN APPLICATION BY Kenneth Tran LOCATION OF PROPERTY Concession 9, Part of Lot 11(Focnter Township of Oro) 1514 Line 9 North PURPOSE OF APPLICATION: The purpose of Consent application 2013 -B -07 is for a boundary adjustment/lot addition to the adjacent residential parcel of land (Part 2) in order to "square off' the property. The lands proposed to be severed would have a lot frontage of 171 metres (561 feet), lot depth of 74 metres (242.7 feet), and a lot area of 1.7 ha (4.2 acres) and are proposed to be added to the existing vacant residential lot to the east. The lands to be retained have an existing lot frontage of 550 metres (1804 feet), a lot depth of 904 metres (2965 feet), and a lot area 57 ha (140.8 acres) and contain an existing dwelling, wood shed, and barn. THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT HEREBY APPOINTS Thursday the 16th day of May, 2013, at the hour of 10:00 a.m. in the Oro - Medonte Township Municipal Building in the Council Chambers, for the hearing of all persons who desire to be heard in support of or in opposition to these applications. You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your views about these applications or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you are aware of any person interested in or affected by these applications who has not received a copy of this notice you are requested to inform that person of this hearing. If you wish to make written comments on these applications they may be forwarded to the Secretary of the Committee at the address shown above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. The applicant(s) must attend this hearing or be represented by an authorized agent NOTICES OF DECISION - Copies of the decisions of the Committee will be sent to the applicants and to each person who appeared in person or by counsel at the hearing and who has filed with the Secretary a written request for notice of the decision. Dated at the Township of Oro - Medonte this 2nd day of May, 2013. gatjV THE 1.A7i, REGION .„;ONSIEFIVATION „ ...4. tOilrh Y $4EVIEVtitiP l6Fd`.. • , .')sR'r' lION{; 91 RECEIVED MAY 1 3 ZU13 ORO— i14EDONTE TOWNSHIP Andria Leigh, Secretary-Treasurer Page 41 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... C9r%�11`eclonte Nand Heritage, Exeiung Pmnre TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -22 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Paulette and Doug Overholt) 321 Lakeshore Road East Concession 9, Plan 780, Lot 34 Motion # _ Roll #: 4346 - 010- 009 -60600 - R.M.S. File #: D13 -44427 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 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 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 be located no closer than 13.7 metres from average high water mark of Lake Simcoe; 3. That the location and size of the proposed single detached dwelling be substantially in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 4. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property contains currently contains a 2- storey dwelling that is 10.6 metres (35 feet) wide and 22.4 metres (73.5 feet) long. There is currently an uncovered raised porch extending off of the rear of the dwelling 2.4 metres (8 feet) past the roofline. The applicant is proposing to extend the existing roofline of the dwelling 5.5 metres (18 feet) towards the lake, resulting in the setback from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe being reduced from the current 15.9 metres (52.2 feet) to 13.7 metres (44.9 feet). Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -22 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page 42 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Section 5.30 — Setback from Average High Water Mark of Lake Simcoe Required 20 metres Proposed 13.7 metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C5 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. In Section C5.1 of the Official Plan the stated objectives of the Shoreline designation are: • To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area. • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. • To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services. Residential uses are permitted in the Shoreline designation and this variance application is to extend the roofline of an existing dwelling over the currently uncovered porch with the intention to help shelter it from the elements and make the existing residential dwelling more comfortable. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance conforms to the Official Plan with respect to maintaining the existing character of the predominantly residential area. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law and the SR Zone permits single detached dwellings. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum setback of 20 metres from the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe serves to maintain an attractive waterfront and potentially reduce the impacts of development on the natural features of the shoreline area. Planning Staff has inspected the lands and notes that the surrounding dwellings in the area have varying setbacks from Lake Simcoe and the requested variance would not appear to be out of character with the surrounding development. A functional and adequate amenity space would remain in the rear yard adjacent to Lake Simcoe. Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -22 Page 2 of 7 Page 43 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to the setback from the high water mark would conform to the general intent of the Zoning By -law and would be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance minor? As the variance is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on surrounding land uses, it is considered to be minor. I CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no concerns. Transportation Division - Building Division — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - County of Simcoe - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Side Elevations Schedule 4: Front & Rear Elevations ICONCLUSION: It is the recommendation of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -22 be approved, specifically to permit the extension of the roofline over the existing uncovered deck, for the reasons that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -22 Page 3 of 7 Page 44 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -22 (Overholt) Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -22 Page 45 of 152 5c) 2013-A-22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... \SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2013-A-22 (Overholt) z a 1.• OMR 0 PART I , 51R-13423 1.4.1 410005 z LAKE MICOE Iiferk: 6-,44/4.5 .rerv- 04.4 .dwerc .Excw vGd! 120.9, G., s,,,e) 1 EZOF LOT TOW.. OF OROAIEDONTE nr.INIMICIPOLITY I maucasetemat I.= WA.11.10I 32/ air 24.4. + -44:VO ,LA g4.4- 64/1 Qf Mem Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-22 Page 5 of 7 Page 46 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... SCHEDULE 3: SIDE ELEVATIONS 2013 -A -22 (Overholt) RIGHT ELEVATION i --- -- -' LEFT ELEVATIOty� Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -22 Page 47 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... SCHEDULE 4: FRONT & REAR ELEVATIONS 2013 -A -22 (Overholt) Yatemet Ith; 11' 11. 111,PAWA DO El �i'j l� i� I I,1! IIIII11!iiI1I I III . FRONT ELEVATION senswann- Fla k'o<'i I 1 l IIIUi i II l h I 1 i I I I I i 1I'', i t'n i irnr IIE�I m��ul �W�IE � it lg111 g .�' Rif ' , REAR ELEVATION l Std. a72t. O ^$" I Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -22 Page 7 of 7 Page 48 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 49 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 50 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 51 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 52 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 53 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 54 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 55 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Page 56 of 152 5c) 2013 -A -22 (Paulette & Doug Overholt), 321 Lakeshore R... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority 2c3r1-2 cti •t • Monday, May 13, 2013 Adrianna Spinosa Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Ms. Spinosa, Re: Application for Minor Variance File 2013 -A -22 (Overholt) 321 Lakeshore Road East Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe A Watershed for LifQ� *By email only* RECEIVED- MAY 1 3 2013 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Thank you for circulating this application for .minor variance to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. Based on our review and given that the property is located on the shoreline of Lake Simcoe, we recommend that any approval of this application be subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a permit from the LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. 2. That a planting plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the LSRCA for the shoreline area adjacent to Lake Simcoe. Through the permit process and planting plan, a vegetation protection zone can be created in order to help maintain and improve the water quality of Lake Simcoe. The extent and composition of the protection zone can be determined in consultation with the land. ner and municipality. Pleas S Ch Seni /cfb Copy: Ise us of your decision. ping V oordinator LSRCA, Bev Booth and Taylor Stevenson 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 Fax: 905.853.5881 E -Mail: Info @LSRCA.on.ca Proud winner of the International Thiess Riverprize Member of Conservation Ontario Page 57 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... T.afigr of C9i ✓ wns donte Praia Herbage, Exelibog Moore TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -23 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Glen & Vicki Douglass) 5305 Line 7 North Lot 23, Plan M -174 (Former Township of Medonte) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 020 - 005 -03823 R.M.S. File #: D13 44429 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.28 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed single detached dwelling shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That the buildings and structures on the property be proportionally and substantially 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 and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The subject property is currently vacant of buildings and structures and the lot includes a portion of a steep slope. The applicant is proposing to construct a dwelling in proximity to the top of the slope. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Residential One (R1) Zone Section 5.32 — Setback from Slopes Required No building within 23 metres of 3:1 slope Proposed Building within 13 metres of 3:1 slope FINANCIAL: Not applicable. Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -23 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 9 Page 58 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Residential in the Official Plan and the permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings. Therefore, the proposed dwelling conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Residential One (R1) Zone and the permitted uses in this zone include single detached dwellings. The Zoning By -law prohibits buildings within 23 metres (75 feet) of a 3:1 slope. The intent of the Zoning By -law is to protect people and structures from hazards and damages associated with unstable slopes. The applicants retained a qualified professional to assess the slope with respect to the proposed development and a copy of that assessment is included as Schedule 4 to this report. The slope assessment concluded that the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the existing slope. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By -law and is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance minor? As the proposed variance is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, it is considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Township will supply metre and water to lot line. Transportation Division - Building Division — County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations Schedule 4: Slope Stability Assessment Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -23 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 2 of 9 Page 59 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... CONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Minor Variance Application 2013 -A -23 be approved, specifically to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling, for the reasons that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -23 Page 3 of 9 Page 60 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -23 (Douglass) Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -23 Page 4 of 9 Page 61 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2013 -A -23 (Douglass) SITE PLAN PREPARED FOR BUILDING PERMIT COUGATION LOT 23 PLAN M -174 (GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF MEDONTE) TOWNSHIP OF ORO— MEDONTE COUNTY OF SIMCOE 1 EDO EFLEHT ',DRONED RANEE SURVEYING LTD. 2013 .r� LOT mA' 1 REGISTERED PLAN BLOCK r TE ory ------r a oe 9A i1 4d _.95 � •-__ -1 1£50 A BLOCK JO o 3' 6 Z d Rr rry • _ ,g __ >MI F x.,l ,,.,.>° WAS arx-miZR 9 'ieC 10% 5012E t. I t sNr- web ,,,,P 5 -� p•E Jxy T N Sp . --- S - TD LOT '1'4,423 Inv -9I1 ;<yip a 1 a� 0,01 PLAID `dn afi ASSC1.1TRN OF OWNED LE SMEARS 1870399 41[sf 4 tr G 6210 N DE AREED. 4' i,, METRIC b 0� M — 174 Fl FVATION NQTF cow, PDC ELECROMS v+ mµ OCO or 020 20 Pum Y-174, .N LEV.T. or moo clues c.c. * I FGEND ■ 402110 110111042111 ▪ DM. MADE SURVFYOR'S NOTE ti en DAY d E ILLUSIOA/EO xulcc. NYC MOLE o an mE Rn£A3E 101E ACC 1020 7013 COMM �a EMT e3 DI'xa c° Be COM AND CAN BE CAUTION LIM. TO'nVE 5W1MO E mist EO ev I. ORE COM IS PLAN C 100.12217 720011 204100E0 2...10 74721220 e17, 201 2 VR74£029VRC.Ens_2012 \1121.1X20 \1221m.Drq 3 112Ll222 a. ..,..rama. .RD.cn .> 132319 EPLETT WOROSEC RAIKES SURVEYING LTD �• \ Onlcrf0 Loci Surveyors • Cm002 lands Surveyors �J . 014%17051 S2R - 2952 329 C ram% O .t Oct% % ON LAP 2, Dcris v (1051 722 - 8212 612 Choy Road 90710. ON VW 9M ci 1 oD -w• -1210 Ees . (200 529 - owe c -unu 1.022,..210.2.01 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -23 Page 5 of 9 Page 62 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... SCHEDULE 3: ELEVATIONS 2013 -A -23 (Douglass) MAMMA - ➢[ malciUs =S F»a'1T DtlATON I1RANMNC LET AT ELEVATIONS A21 BASEMENT & FOUNDATION A2.2 MAIM FLOOR PLAN A3.1 SECTIONS k DETAILS /EMT FIFVATON BOAS Al TWINS BE MAI 1'04 MIA MB SF irgaVNFC vvc via oa>ar m CAW OW. 0.1170 w • Dupuis a Ouellet 1� ArdM lAS Ddarn Sank "ELEVATIONS -, NENFIOIIOME VICKI S4433 Amamet 13.521 A' Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -23 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 6 of 9 Page 63 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... SCHEDULE 4: SLOPE ASSESSMENT 2013 -A -23 (Douglass) GEOSPE'C ENGINEERING LTD. 287 Tiffin Street, Unit 10, Barrie, Ontario L4N 7R8 TEL: (705) 722 -4638 FAX: (705) 722 -4958 April 23, 2013 Vicki Douglass 1 -39 Yonge Street South Elmvale, Ontario LOL 1P0 Attn: Ms. V. Douglass (Email — Vicki.douglass539 @gmail.com) Re: Visual Assessment of Slope for Proposed Residential Development 530S Line 7 North, Moonstone 13 -1768 Dear Vicki, As requested, we are pleased to provide comment with respect to the referenced site, specifically the proposed residence as detailed in the Site Plan Prepared for Building Permit Application and prepared by Eplett Worobec Raikes Surveying Ltd. (EWRS), Project N° 132319, dated April 16, 2013. In this regard, we have completed a site inspection and reviewed the drawing provided. Site Description The property under review included an irregular shaped triangular lot with a dimension along Line 7 North of approximately 118 m a perpendicular depth to Line 7 of approximately 110 m and a down slope hypotenuse dimension of approximately 152 m. A plateau area slopes gently upwards from the northwest corner of the property to the approximate midpoint of the property then slopes moderately downward to the east. Based upon the EWRS Site Plan that included Topographic Survey information the plateau is situated approximately 16 meters above the toe of slope. The slope surface included many mature trees of varying species. Trees especially those with vertical trunk orientation would suggest that the integrity of the slope has not been compromised over the lifetime of the tree. At this site, numerous straight and vertical trees were situated on the slope. However, some inclined and bent trees indicate that some localized surface activity has occurred over that past 50 years. More specifically, the surface activity appears to be related to very localized surface sloughs, Finally, beyond the Natural Drainage Course no evidence of groundwater seeps was apparent on the slope surface. GEOSPEC ENGINEERING LTD. 7768 Slope Comment Visual Rev 5305 Line 7 Norm Moonstone 1 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -23 Page 7 of 9 Page 64 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Slope Geometry We understand that a residence is proposed on the upper plateau and will be situated 8.4 meters from the roadside property line and approximately four meters from the gently inclined, Natural Drainage Course, top of slope and more than 13 meters from the moderately inclined, top of slope. A proposed septic tile bed will be situated further from the top of slope. Based upon a review of the survey prepared by EWRS, the datum elevations of the Top and Bottom of the Slope in the area of the proposed residence as well as slope inclination are detailed below in Table 1. Table 1: Slope Inclination Sectiom Length � 4�) �o of Slope p p ]Elevation (m) Bottom of Slope elevation (m) eight (m) Inclination of Slope ffl[oriz. Vert. Angle Cross Section Drainage Course Steepest Cross Section 54 24 102.1 103.2 87.6 92.4 14.5 10.8 3.7 2.2 1 1 15° 24° Based upon the included topographical data the existing slope appears to be inclined at a degree in the range of 15° to 24° at the topographic sections reviewed. Our geotechnical experience in the area of Moonstone has revealed the primary geological deposit in the area is typically comprised of a compact to very dense glacial till. Furthermore, the Angle of Internal Friction of the till in the general area would be in the order of 40° excluding any seepage planes. The slope at this site was heavily treed by a variety of species some with trunk diameter in excess of 50 cm. More importantly, numerous mature trees had a vertical trunk orientation which suggests the slope has been stable through the life of the tree and no seeps were apparent. GEOSPEC ENGINEERING LTD. 7768 Elope Comment Visual Rev 5305 Line 7 North Moonstone 2 Page 65 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Conclusion & Continents Based upon the current review, it is our considered opinion that the proposed residence may be constructed as situated on the drawing referenced in a manner that will not have a negative impact on the existing slope. It is assumed that the structure will be constructed in accordance with standard building code requirements and founded on soil of appropriate capacity which must be confirmed by a representative of Geospec Finally, any vegetation, beyond the building development footprint, that is damaged during the construction operations must be reinstated and exposed soil protected from surface run -off erosion. We trust this letter meets with your approval. Should you have any questions or require clarification on any aspect of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully, GEOSPEC ENGINEERING LTD. K. Malcolm, Consulting Engineer Email: Mat Smitham - smithamhomes @hotmail.com GEOSPEC ENGINEERING LW. 2768 Slope Comment Visual Rev 5305 ate 7 North Moonstone Page 66 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 67 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 68 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 69 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 70 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 71 of 152 5d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglas), 5305 Line 7 North, ... Page 72 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... U'i' - 4redoza!e Alum! ! Hmin sr, Exciting rW.,n TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -24 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Lily Cadeau) 97 Lakeshore Road West Concession 7, Plan 755, Part Lots 34 & 36 Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 009 -36900 R.M.S. File #: D13 44430 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the garage and 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 garage and attached carport be located no closer than approximately 1.2 metres from the front lot line; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision that the detached accessory building shall possess a height of no more than 4.9 metres above finished grade; 4. That the location and size of the garage and attached carport be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 5. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; and 6. 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. IBACKGROUND: The property presently contains an existing two storey dwelling and a 49.95 square metre (531.7 square feet) detached garage. The applicant is proposing to repair the existing garage and its foundation, as well as add a 27.3 square metre (294 square feet) carport. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Section 5.1.3 (a)— Permitted Location Section 5.1.4 - Maximum Height Required 7.5 metres 4.5 metres Proposed 1.2 metres 4.9 metres Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -24 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Page 73 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C5 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. In Section C5.1 of the Official Plan the stated objectives of the Shoreline designation are: • To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area. • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. • To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services. Residential uses, including accessory buildings such as garages and carports are generally permitted by the Official Plan. Planning Staff notes that the applicant is not proposing to change the location or size of the existing garage. The variances that are triggered by the proposed carport addition would not, in Planning Staff's opinion, negatively impact the character of the existing residential area. Based on the above, the requested variances are considered to conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law and the SR Zone permits single detached dwellings, as well as accessory buildings. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres serves to achieve relatively large landscaped front yards which contribute to the low- density residential character of the area, as well as ensure that there is adequate space in which to provide off - street parking spaces on private property in front of dwellings. The provisions within the Zoning By -law that regulate detached accessory buildings are intended to ensure that accessory buildings remain subordinate to the principal use or main building on the same lot. Based on the applicant's sketches, matters such as off - street parking or landscaped space are generally not expected to be negatively impacted. Planning Staff is of the opinion that variances, if approved, would not detract from the low - density residential character of the area and that the garage will remain subordinate, in both appearance and use, to the existing dwelling on the lands. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the carport addition will not substantially increase in overall size and mass of the building when viewed from the road, nor would the proposed variances aggravate any existing situation. Planning Staff notes that there are other existing structures of similar size and setbacks along Lakeshore Road West. Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -24 Page 2 of 6 Page 74 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Based on the above, the requested variances are considered to conform to the general intent of the Zoning By -law and are appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance 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, they are considered to be minor. ICONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - IATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevation & Floor Plan ICONCLUSION: It is the recommendation of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -24 be approved, specifically to permit the addition of a carport and the repair of an existing garage, for the reasons that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -24 Page 3 of 6 Page 75 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -24 (Cadeau) 111 I I 111 .�- pULEW��°� 111111111aill 1111 SHE -��LL B WOO •ys wiii+ rwta s�..w • SUBJECT PROPERTY (97 Lakeshore Road West) Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -24 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 4 of 6 Page 76 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... L OT 37 SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2013 -A -24 (Cadeau) LAKESHORE ROAD WEST 7Th' 224.940 NAIL & WASHER IN WEST FACE OF HYDRO POLE t Haa hwt EXISTING RESIDENCE 4 ,• _ Ism 0- Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -24 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 5 of 6 Page 77 of 152 5e) 2013-A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... SCHEDULE 3: ELEVATION & FLOOR PLAN 2013-A-24 (Cadeau) PROPOSED CARPORT • ■•=mormom ■■■ME•■■■■••11111 MINIOIRIMITMIMMIM.MEE ■RWRINNITSTRORIM■M■1■11.MMIIMIRIM MIRMENRIRMORIIMMET RRTMERIIRRIRElm■Em•R• IIIRMNIRMI■IRTTIPTT MIRMIRMITRIRMER MR TIMMINIR PERIM M■MaRIM REIIMOMMIRIMIRREY IIRIMINTREIRIMENEMME■MITT/MORRIRMRINIRM=1•11•NRINRIMIMRIVE- MR MN IMMINIM■1=■■■■IRERM EIRMIRNMR.R.RRN=R1111=E.-- •••RRNMMIMIMMERIMNIm■■■■■■••MRII•RREIMI■■•■ MiRliM■l■-■■••=11M R111■••••mMEMMIRENIMRE. •NIIIIMRYINM.M.R■M■•■■■•••11•R■RIMMIT. COW. jaimi • RR I I Ma 11 as .N I I Or. .■ • • - EXISTING GARAGE RITH NEC SPICCO FINISH TO MATCH RESIDENCE 7 - LAKESHORE ELEVATION • T VZ*21. NAV. EC MACROS Et OMMI RE Et EMMY NM ESREEC neE MOM REL. EV .0R MURRE.LICILN TR 1111%,TiEcr w pm sONEFEt NAIR marammief, NJET MEL RUBEN WEL,. icon' Elm, Ca CaRTRECREa RIKER WITITT,RRIREI MYR MAW, WAN MEN AO. WREN ERN RC WEN. NOTES rantifatILTZVArlairl=t111 WWI IRTECTICIG IMRE TWITEITOR TT 11118-MCNE OLT RE VCR Nome.. RUM IVOLUNIMETZT .110.710 WIC 111WLArge MKT/ TAIRMEAL <OEM TO RON NIMO RUM NEW. ECM IR ...EIRE NTT WPM TO ER IF RR P.19.71. OLE la ▪ 1...nicrAnkralMErerr.1.4T AZZ ,El.,,,,TeREELITNLAMINIRIETTMSERATIRY 112.7.4,614,WING. efa.../..1,21110WW, ROOM. A PAMOINEF MOM NM" NE 015,60,40307.0...W.5,14,1,EOWARN .19.1.91,CRLOIV COLE. NOTES & REVISIONS ANDREW 16CIFTERIM DESIGN S. DRAFTING 11 Par—i. RIM, LOLATA PH alsAr-sol a AAA 705-07-1067 B EET rodrayretlEsicriCkoRarscom CARL CADEAU 97 LAKESHORE ROAD WEST MEC, PROPOSED CARPORT AMMON 97 LAKESHORE ROAD WEST ORO-MEDONTE CERWMI ELEVATION MEOW. A towns MEET. TT WALE V40'-0. lAre APRIL 2013 7- 102 1318 PROPOSED CARPORT Area--299.0 PROPOSED PLAN WENN RE Ef. RE YR MEET LP DE DR. IMERSEREMPI TER RE NNW EWE .14.1800,111A-4. RARE NEMTERRTERN aTIEMKNIV NOTES ,r7:41e'r.rart4raz,' ,,,,,,,...RIMIRMITZ=GRO ROis TERCM ELEITEREs E IR ORREMENT NEr CDR. EERY TEETER MERNYM ORM 1111NaorRE RE RUM OCNRE,MIN6 NERVEREIRSER MR.. TIMGERAI iM NIRO MAC LEE IECIANTYFEERLOR VORMLIGNILLETTEr ITERIRTERLF IMRE RIMARTC RERIEMMTEENSONMAYSEPREERMaNtRO, tordstemeermanownzrorwrgE lig.f,1070070.7.7 NOTES & REVISIONS ANDRE, MCINTYRE DESIGN & DRAFTING illopa MVOn. VEMIT 1-0,170 AMR FAX 995-417,907 NEM nEETTRATESEMET,MCROTT MEP CARL CADEAU 07 LAKESHORE ROAD WEST PROPOSED CARPORRODMON 97 LAKESHORE ROAD WEST 090-MEDONTE ouvala ROOR PIAN 010 110 A ISPB7Va >BY. AAA APRIL 2013 11 101 1318 Development Services Application No. 2013-A-24 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 6 of 6 Page 78 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 79 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 80 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 81 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 82 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 83 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 84 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... May 9, 2013 Andria Leigh Secretary Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Re: Notice of Hearing 2013 -A -24 Application by Lily Cadeau 97 Lakeshore Road West Concession 7, Plan 755, Pt. Lot 34 & 36 Greetings, Committee Members: Geoffrey Booth 99 Lakeshore Rd. W. R.R. #1, Oro Station, ON LOL 2E0 RECEIVED MAY 1 0 M13 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP My name is Geoffrey Booth and I am the owner of 99 Lakeshore Road West, being the property immediately to the west of the Cadeau property. Let me begin by stating that, in principle, I have no objection to the proposal being put forward by my neighbours. However, as no attempt has been made to discuss this matter with me, I feel it is best that my thoughts and concerns be expressed in written form, so that the Committee fully understands my point of view in this matter, and the potential impact that approval of such a project may have upon my property. It is my understanding the existing garage is to be raised, thus requiring the height variance. As shown on the Cadeau survey and the copy of my survey (enclosed), the garage is only .67m from my property at the closest point. 1 would like to know whether the use of my property will be required during construction, and am unsure how the proposed activity around the building will impact my property, both short and long term. For example, as indicated on the enclosed sketch, my septic system, including the biofilter tank and the mantel are located along the same boundary as the garage. As you can understand, the integrity and function of this system are of paramount importance to me. Secondly, if I were to grant access, I would need to know that any ensuing damage or disfigurement would be repaired to my satisfaction. I am also unsure about the intended use for the enlarged garage. In recent weeks a transport truck has been parked on the second driveway located on the Cadeau property. This driveway is not shown on the plans that were provided, but has been there for some time and was recently resurfaced with fresh gravel. I would not be in favour of this application if the enlarged garage is to be used to park such a truck or to support a trucking operation. Page 85 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... 2 In closing, I would like to reiterate to Members that I intend no ill will in this matter. Rather, I welcome the opportunity for an open, honest and transparent discussion, and look forward to full compliance and accountability from all parties concerned. As my wife, Julianne Ecclestone, will be assisting me in this matter, I hereby appoint her as my agent to respond to any issues I am not able to address. Further, I would appreciate receiving a written copy of the Committee's decision. Sincerely, Geoffrey Bootti Page 86 of 152 5e) 2013-A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... ORGEMEDONTE Building Inspection Department REPORT OF INSPECTION DATE: i4 At.'t /05 ORO, P.O. BOX 100 ONTARIO LOL 2X0 TEL: ,(705) 487-2171 FAX: (705) 487-0133 NOTE: Inspections can be called in after hours INSPECTION: ° TIME IN -- -TIME OUT.. t-2-5,.? that you are required to comply with the following order(s): i 1 f -t-rp-so L-- 17 •••._ I 1 ......• yr : 2 WA-i-Vait'UT '■0 64 e›Fii LaTw..- ri T 1 i — hf 1 " 1 ,g--- L__ . .1 1 I .._..=Tt i---?,':i 1 1 LI.47.3.n.r.t.40 1 --i2 4s ,,,z- :;1op4e= L.A-.-4 i-----, r I c ---.• ,...,-,‘,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2.,:714„,%.,........,1 11 ; i ,' i 174 --,----,eu_,e34) 1 11 il , 1. rf 1 i..... . _ Cr 'I:" i...{- i"'"', r e It /5----..,c, e is f• ^3 31"A •t-4- - 71-, 1 • ‘. i 1 • x I 41, 0., I .4 P• Page 87 of 152 5e) 2013-A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... PERMIT NO: ORO-MEDONTE Building Inspection Department REPORT OF INSPECTION ORO, P.O. BOX 100 ONTARIO L0L 2X0 TEL: (705) 487-2171 FAX: (705) 487-0133 NOTE: Inspections can be called in after hours • 0'3 DATE: frA,A ,)4') INSPECTION: v,-4- TIME IN 11.-o -- -TIME OUT 11-47 ---TAKENOTIC.thayu are required to comply with the following order(s): A-1-412.41, a.:-.1) &A) e-7-, krk) PeVek NOTE: A request for Reinspection is Required Received By:, Inspector: Page 88 of 152 I, c:.5. Lerfl-to • -iifyiJIA-- I - . 6 ' 1 cik, itrottl i [14 t r# 1.....t.wo. 10 4-1--L -- - .' i 2 4 A,rissil,Lz...v•zo Pm 0 FA k_4.----'11:- It T _,.., 1 L-7.--r-__}.11 . . ws-0,,,,40-t-_, ... n . il .I .0.-- _ , 1 LLI tPi, 4. 1 t -; 41,..s ' `-floNe-- LA-ti- di . 11 I . ow) TT- g...-,s• - f -- 1.- :.. • ...., . . .-5" ' 10 4- v• .rz--''. — ..4- -. 0 -- I. .• - -%. - . „....._ _ 1'. 1 ..., ........."....._„/"....._ _.—",.. --.... — krk) PeVek NOTE: A request for Reinspection is Required Received By:, Inspector: Page 88 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West. Con... Page 89 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 90 of 152 5e) 2013 -A- 24 (Lily Cadeau), 97 Lakeshore Road West, Con... Page 91 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT !hand k < Gxnrong Forum. Application No: 2013 -A -26 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Dennis Barker) 1024 Ridge Road West East Half of Lot 26, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010 - 008 -13401 R.M.S. File #: D13 -44423 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed 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 does not exceed a floor area of 261 square metres; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision that the detached accessory building shall possess a height of no more than 5.8 metres above finished grade; 4. That the development of the lands be in substantially conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee, including that an existing concrete block garage with frame addition be removed forthwith upon construction of the new accessory building; and 5. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property is currently contains a single detached dwelling and accessory buildings. The applicant is proposing to construct a new accessory building and remove an existing accessory building. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone Section 5.1.4— Maximum Height Section 5.1.6 - Maximum Floor Area Required Proposed 4.5 metres 5.8 metres 100 square metres 261 sq. metres Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -26 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page 92 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Agricultural by the Township's Official Plan. The permitted uses of the Agricultural designation include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, and Planning Staff considers the proposed accessory building to conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone and an accessory building is permitted pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Zoning By -law. The intent of the Zoning By -law's restrictions on the floor area and height of accessory buildings is to ensure that such buildings remain secondary and subordinate the main structure and uses on the property. Planning Staff is of the opinion that with respect to this application the proposed accessory building would be secondary and subordinate to the main residential use of the lands, for the following reasons: • The applicant's proposed accessory building is to be located in the rear corner of the property, while the existing dwelling is located towards the front of the property and will continue to have the appearance as the prominent structure on the property; • The property is a relatively large residential lot (0.49 hectares or 1.22 acres) and the proposed accessory building will not dominate the lot; • The lot is relatively isolated from other residential lots and the proposed accessory will not appear out of character in comparison to surrounding land uses and development. The variance, if approved, would not have any direct impact on the immediately adjacent properties which consist of large agricultural parcels and there are no existing dwellings or other buildings on the adjacent parcels in the vicinity of the proposed accessory building. For the reasons outlined above, the proposed variance 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. Is the variance minor? As the variance related to the proposed accessory building is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on surrounding land uses, it is considered to be minor. Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 2 of 7 Page 93 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... CONSULTATIONS: Transportation Division — Environmental Services Division — no concerns. Building Department — County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations Schedule 4: Floor Plan I CONCLUSION: It is the recommendation of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -26 be approved, specifically to permit an accessory building, for the reasons that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: 'Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 3 of 7 Page 94 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -26 (Barker) SUBJECT PROPERTY (1024 Ridge Road West) Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 95 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... e Lios ex. ea N.W. CORNER CONCF590N 5 \SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2013 -A -26 (Barker) SR PI.UJ OF 51164E7 . BY Lµ 000030E 045, DAM 400.7254520 3 7908 501'39'30" 00 r. 'y1J N ri'AI /1'/ PGftCC ED CPsl ul tt.( 42)'34 PART 6 �• gi 3541. P � n I CCS $s �vmar NINO 43E621 1750 Na. 721731 91.47 _Z1 00,48 _ / iAw Ag m 6 RUDY MAK SURVEYING LTD. 1.` s 1995. ( PART 1 1 PLAN OF PART OF 111E EAST HALF OF LOT 26 CONCESSION 5 FORMERLY 111 THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO NOW 10 1HE I TOWNSHIP OF ORO— MEDONTE IN THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE SCALE 1 500 5 0 15 50 a r, 5 1 0l( 9 0 4 N81401001E >.T5am 1:47 � (RIM PUBLIC TRAVELLED ROAD ' KNOWN A5 R 1 D G, E (04 a P R 2 9a W t • e Iro.ae00.90N� 1NC4704 0//09011 Ne0roe't5'E 0237 50'. N 0. 72522 MIK R O A D 104179 E A S T H A L F C O N C E S S I O N SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT (PAR7 2) REPORT SUMMARY 05102 0 111E EAST HOP 00 LOT 27, OONO£590N 5 00 ORO, W IN THE FORMERLY IN THE 700 10 NO 700451, OF ORU- 1459400017, COUNTY OF SIM:NE • 01E 1_00.41100 Cr FENCING •.1er441 wee... and /or RI.111 -ol -WO . ON 091.15514 Not 0314000 07 t6Is Report 00.0* WEST 1O40ARY ON PLAN 5!.97.7 WAS NOT SHOW coRRECTLy. L O T 26 SURVE'YOR'S CERTIFICATE I CER0FY 11407, 111E OELf1. ARV.' REPRESENTED ON THIS PLAN 145 GOMPLE190 ON 111E 1104 GAY OP JANUARY 1995. D ATED: JANUARY 19 TSB 16107 MAK 014TARio LANG 500011000 11419 PLAN IS 1107 Vµ10 004217 ENBOSSEO 4111H A 5044 BEARING NOTE 501021010 4147502 WOOL 0OAD 059110X5 00 PUNNE O 15 -9047 1110 8E110 14117519 LEGEND CENOIES FOUND SURVEY 00NU4.1ENT 00207ES PL0N1E0 SURVEY MONUMENT 0030104 STANDARD IRON 945 DENOTES IRON MAR 1161 00157E WINE. 090 1e-yc_ 0{140115 POKING (9004) 0@40105 911. GA10RM0N O.LS. (995). MERCIES 1_11 Nemec 0.LS. P /(595) CENO1ES 0070200 507»00 9Y 411. 025040E 00,5. DAlEO SEPTE4BEP ]. 1950, MOM_ DISTANCES 900W1 E OH THIS PLAN 011 IAN NS FP. 0 5411 RUDY MAK SURVEYING LTD. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS 64 CEDAR POINTE DRIVE. 4511 1447 BARRIE. ONTARIO IAN 50' Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 5 of 7 Page 96 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... SCHEDULE 3: ELEVATIONS 2013 -A -26 (Barker) 4':l q' A 11Z 1200E- Vt-TcH tIt P- Fp T I A -L..L. 5 Dcog /LJi Ja Js mores wPd L R 43} Sb �t4t. L Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 6 of 7 Page 97 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... SCHEDULE 4: FLOOR PLAN 2013 -A -26 (Barker) -PP vte R1 -.= i °l♦ Lij. Q u co (2,11 `lE • Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -26 Page 7 of 7 Page 98 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... Page 99 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... Page 100 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... Page 101 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... Page 102 of 152 5f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East... Page 103 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Tnwn,leip � e fite Proud tievime, Exciting Puune TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -25 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: May 16, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Jason Gullett) 17 Cherry Trail Lot 75, Plan M -368 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 -010- 003 -27434 R.M.S. File #: D13 -44424 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: BACKGROUND: The property is currently contains a single detached dwelling and a shed. The applicant is proposing to construct a new accessory building. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Residential One (R1) Zone Required Proposed 1. Section 5.1.6 — Maximum Floor Area of 70 square metres 117 square metres accessory building (753.5 square feet) (1259.4 square feet) FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Residential by the Township's Official Plan. Low density residential uses and accessory buildings are generally permitted by the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Residential One (R1) Zone and an accessory building is permitted pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Zoning By -law. The intent of the Zoning By -law in restricting the floor Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 1 of 12 Page 104 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... area of accessory buildings to a maximum 70 square metres (753 square feet) is to ensure that such buildings remain secondary and subordinate the main structure and uses on the property. The Zoning By -law also limits the lot coverage of all accessory buildings to a combined total of 5% of the lot area. Planning Staff notes that the proposed accessory building would achieve a coverage of 5 %, but during Planning Staff's site inspection a shed was observed on the property which was not included on the applicant's site plan and which was not included in the applicant's lot coverage calculation. The existing shed and the proposed accessory building, when combined, would appear to exceed the 5% maximum. In this respect, the applicant would need to either amend his application to either: include the existing shed (this would trigger the need to defer the application in order to allow it to be re- circulated), remove the existing shed (this could be addressed under the current application if the Committee chooses to impose a condition that the shed be removed) or reduce the size of the proposed accessory building (the Committee has the authority to grant a lesser variance). Planning Staff recognizes that the location of the proposed accessory building in the rear yard, combined with the presence of landscaping (spruce trees) partially screening the building from adjacent properties are factors that may help mitigate any the visual impacts of the proposed building and keep it secondary and subordinate to the property's main residential use. However, Planning Staff also recognizes that the subject lands are located within an established and stable residential neighbourhood, the character of which includes a very low- density "estate" style of development. The existing buildings are generously spaced and their arrangement and massing demonstrates a consistent adherence to zoning standards. Notwithstanding some of the mitigating factors described in the paragraph above, the applicant's proposed accessory building has the potential to alter the appearance of the neighbourhood in a way that would detract from Its current character. In a different context, such as on a rural non -farm lot in an agricultural setting where parcel sizes and building forms are more varied, Planning Staff could potentially support a variance of this nature. However, in the context of the existing residential subdivision where the built form is very consistent and contributes to the character of the neighbourhood, Planning Staff is unable to support this application. For the reasons outlined above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the application does not meet the general intent of the Zoning By -law and is not appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance minor? Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variance is not minor and, if approved, would negatively impact the character and appearance of the neighbourhood. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation Division — Environmental Services Division — property serviced by municipal water. Building Department — County of Simcoe — Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 2 of 12 Page 105 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Planning Justification Letter CONCLUSION: It is the recommendation of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -25 be refused, for the reason that the application does not meet all four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: AL‹)//1. Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -4-25 Page 3 of 12 Page 106 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -25 (Gullett) w z J rear Att..ty RIDGE -ROAD W SUBJECT PROPERTY (1024 Ridge Road West) Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -25 Page 4 of 12 Page 107 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... \SCHEDULE 2: PLANNING JUSTIFICATION LETTER 2013 -A -25 (GULLETT) Page 11 MORGAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT INC. April 25, 2013 Township of Oro - Medonte Planning Department Attention: Andrea Leigh, Planning Director Re: Township of Oro - Medonte Lot 75, Registered Plan No. 51M -368 Known municipally as 17 Cherry Trail Application for Minor Variance Planning Justification Letter 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Planning Justification Letter MORGAN Planning & Development Inc. has been retained by Jason and Wraygan Gullett to prepare and submit a minor variance application for the construction of an accessory building at 17 Cherry Trail. The application relates to the proposed size of the building which, at 117 square metres, exceeds the standard established in the zoning by -law of 70 square metres. The purpose of the Planning Justification Letter is to provide an understanding of the proposed variance, and to demonstrate the ability of the subject lands to sustain the proposal. 1.2 Location and Description of Land The Gullett home lies on the east side of Cherry Trail, in the Sugar Bush residential community. This area is typical of a "rural residential subdivision ", characterized by generally large homes on large residential lots. The property has 30 metres of frontage on Cherry Trail and a lot depth of approximately 78 metres, yielding a lot area of 0.23 hectares (0.58 acres). See attached Figure 1 — Location Map. The existing home is substantially setback from the road and side lot lines and is buffered from the Tots to the north and south by a tree line along the side lot lines. A large area of bush lies to the rear of the property. There are currently no detached accessory buildings on the property. P.O. Box 834, Orillia, Ontario L3V 61(8 Tel: (705) 327 -1873 / Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -25 Page 5 of 12 Page 108 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 12 1.3 Surrounding Uses The Sugar bush development can generally be described as a rural residential enclave surrounded by forested areas. North: detached residential dwelling East: vacant bush West: detached residential dwelling South: detached residential dwelling 2.0 OVIERVBlEW OF P' °'OP ®SAL The enclosed application seeks the approval of a minor variance to allow the construction of a detached accessory building which exceeds the maximum size permitted under the general provisions for accessory buildings. The applicant intends to build a 7.6m x 15.2 m (25' x 50') storage building, containing a home office for his business as well as storage for lawn -care and recreational equipment The business serves a client base that extends across much of the province with most of the activity taking place away from this property. The nature of the business requires a home office. At 117 square metres, the size of the building exceeds the standard provided in the zoning by -law of 70 square metres. In all other respects; height, lot coverage, sideyard, etc., the proposed building is within the standards established in the Zoning By -law. See attached Figure 2 — Site Sketch. Provision ,-'•y -lava Standard Proposed Total floor area 70 m2 117m2 Lot coverage — accessory buildings 5% 4.9% Height 4.5 m 4.0m Side yard 2.0 m 3.0m Rear Yard 2.0 m Approx. 25 m Separation from Main Building 1.0 m Approx. 8 m As referenced above, part of the building is intended to be used for a home office in support of a home occupation. Section 5.12 of the zoning by -law provides direction on the rules governing home occupations. 5.12 HOME OCCUPATIONS Where a home occupation is permitted in a Zone, the home occupation: a) shall clearly be a secondary use of the lot; b) shall be conducted entirely within a detached accessory building and /or the main building on the lot; c) shall be conducted by at least one of the residents of a dwelling unit located on the P.O. Box 834, Orillia, Ontario L3V 6K8 Tel: (705) 327 -1873 / Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 6 of 12 Page 109 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 13 same lot; d) shall not occupy more than 35 percent of the gross floor area of the dwelling unit, if the home occupation is contained in a dwelling unit in the main building on the lot; e) shall not occupy more than 50 percent of the gross floor area of a detached accessory building in the Residential One (R1), Residential Two (R2), Rural Residential One (RUR1), Rural Residential (RUR2), Shoreline Residential (SR) and the Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zones and 100% of a detached accessory building in the Agricultural /Rural (A /RU)Zone, if the home occupation is contained within a detached accessory building; f) shall not create noise, vibration, fumes, odour, dust, glare or radiation which is evident outside the dwelling unit; g) shall not employ more than one employee who is not a resident of the dwelling unit; h) shall not involve the outdoor storage or outdoor display of materials or finished products; i) shall not involve the repair or maintenance of motor vehicles; j) shall not consist of an occupation that involves the sale of a commodity not produced on the premises, except that telephone or mail order sales of goods is permitted; and, k) shall not require receipt or delivery of merchandise, goods or equipment by other than a passenger motor vehicle or by parcel or letter carrier mail service using motor vehicles typically employed in residential deliveries. These provisions allow for a home occupation to be conducted in a detached accessory building, provided this use does not occupy more than 50% of the floor- space of a detached accessory building in an R1 zone. The office use relates to the owner's contracting business which is the sale and construction of pre - engineered commercial and industrial buildings. The proposed office space for his business is in accordance with the applicable requirements in Section 5.12. 3.0 P POLICY PRA fl EWORK 3.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and Growth Plan for the Greater G©Iders Horseshoe The Provincial Policy Statement provides direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decisions affecting planning matters "shall be consistent with" policy statements issued under the Act. As the subject application relates to the creation of an ancillary building which is accessory to a dwelling which is permitted under the existing zoning and Official Plan policies and there is no potential for a negative impact on an environmental feature or function, there are no issues of compliance with Provincial planning policies. P.O. Box 834, Orillia, Ontario 13V 6K8 Tel: (705) 327 -1873 / Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 7 of 12 Page 110 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 14 3.2 County of Simcoe Official Plan The property is designated 'Rural and Agricultural' in the County of Simcoe Official Plan. The proposed building is accessory to an existing permitted residential use. Therefore there is no conflict with the County of Simcoe Official Plan. 3.3 Township of Oro- Medonte Official Plan The property is designated `Residential' in the Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan. A detached accessory building to a residential use is a permitted use in the designation. See attached Figure 3 — Township Official Plan Schedule `A'. 3.4 Township of Oro- He¢lonte Zoning y-law The property is located within the Residential One (R1) Zone. A detached dwelling and associated accessory buildings and home occupations are permitted uses in the R1 Zone. See Figure 4— Zoning By -law Schedule 4.0 CONCLUSION This application proposes to allow for the creation of a 117 square metre detached accessory building on the Guilett property. The building is intended to accommodate a home office for the owner's business and provide additional storage for the household. When considering this application, the Committee must consider the four tests as outlined in Section 45(1) of The Planning Act, which states that a variance from the Zoning By -law should: a) Be minor; It has become a generally accepted principle that the determination of what is minor is not a simple mathematical calculation. The context, including site specific circumstances and the potential impact on neighbours must be considered. In this case, the construction of a building of this size is relative to the size of the lot is in accordance with the zoning by -law's direction as expressed in the maximum amount of coverage permitted for accessory buildings. b) Be desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure; The application would appear to be appropriate and desirable as the proposed building will be buffered by the location in the rear yard, the relatively large lots in the area and the existing tree - lines. Therefore, it appears that the building will not have an undue visual impact an the adjacent neighbours. P.O. Box 834, Orillia, Ontario L3V 6K8 Tel: (705) 327 -1873 / Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -25 Page 8 of 12 Page 111 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 15 c) Maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By -law; The proposed variance request does appear to maintain the general intent and purpose, as a the intent of the By -law is to ensure that accessory buildings do not "overwhelm° the property and its neighbours. In this case, the proposed budding is clearly accessory to the main use of the property (Le. the existing home) and is less than the maximum footprint that would be allowed under the applicable coverage limits. d) Maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan: As the proposed use is clearly accessory to the permitted residential use of the property and is often found as an ancillary use in this type of residential area, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan is being maintained. It is the professional opinion of the undersigned that the proposed minor variance represents good land use planning for the following reasons: u The proposed variance satisfies the four tests which are to be applied to its consideration under The Planning Act. • Approval of the application is consistent with the applicable policy environment. • The size and use of the proposed accessory building is similar to accessory buildings found in similar settings elsewhere in the Township a The proposed building meets all of the other applicable zoning by -law requirements. • The proposal does not impair the efficient use of land and will facilitate the operation of the owner's business. Respectfully submitted, MORGAN Planning & Development Inc. Andrew R. Fyfe, M.A. Planner P.O. Box 834, Orillia, Ontario L3V 6K8 Tel: (705) 327 -1873 / Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -25 Page 9 of 12 Page 112 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... County of Simcoe Figure 1 — Location Map. - - Ydnlcpei Border —«a Cpnbv -2 Voter - - au Hla my 2 or Road Lowi Roads urodeem ad and Satwns12220e Yhdrr Interd05n1 j lfral R.aons Lend Water Line, Permanew . cnloba 5er5 an NlnPFn 11101 Laedeae `WOWrNes Parmenen. 22e2020 .2i, Petewanl War4enaree arras.. urban nee mn my PPbaan 11112 ,112p, either In whole or In part, may not be reproduced without the w,iitten authority from 0 The s1mcoo. This map is Intended for personal use, has been produced using dam from a variety of sources anti may no Produced in part) under license from; Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources: 0 Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Remarras: St Ternnet Enterprises 102 and msuppliers: 0 Members of the Ontario GeospaOPl Date Exchange. All rights reserved. THIS 15 NOI-A PLAN OF SURVEY 1:18,056 Corporation of the county of thecurrom or accurate. 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 km ,91465E r t Avow Apra 05, 2013 Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 10 of 12 Page 113 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Cherry Trail 30m (-Figure 2— Site Sketch Gullett Minor Variance Application - 17 Cherry Trail 0) 9 17 Cherry Trail 7.6m co ii cC1 0 3 3.0m+ 4 a Lot 75 30.079m 7.6m 3 Lot 76 Scale 1:400 Development Services Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -25 Page 11 of 12 Page 114 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Figure 3 — Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan Schedule `A' Residential designation Figure 4 — Zoning By -law Schedule A -16 Residential One (R1) Zone Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -25 Meeting Date May 16, 2013 Page 12 of 12 Page 115 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 116 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 117 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 118 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 119 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 120 of 152 5g) 2013-A-25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 121 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 122 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Page 123 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Brissette, Marie To: Subject: Witlib, Derek RE: 17 Cherry Trail From: Andrew Fyfe [ mailto:afyfe@morganplanning.ca] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:13 PM To: Witlib, Derek Cc: 'Joshua Morgan' Subject: 17 Cherry Trail 2_0 (3- A 25 c A.Q. tb A • Derik —spoke to our client and he has agreed to a reduction in his request so as to facilate approval. His biggest constraint is the length of his boat on the trailer which requires a building 44' long and he has reluctantly agreed to reducing the building to this length and he has also agreed to a reduction in width to 24'. The shed would remain. As a result the proposal goes from a 25' x 50' = 1250 ft2 (116.1m2) building to a 24' x 44' = 1056 ft2 (98.1m2). We would modify request a variance from the by -law standard 70 m2 to 99 m2. This will allow him to accommodate his boat & trailer, ATV, a small home office. As stated over the phone, his business relates to the sale of pre- engineered through -out the province and there is no need or intent to operate a contractor's yard from this location. MORGAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT INC. Andrew Fyfe, Planner Tel: (705) 327 -1873 Fax: (705) 327 -2850 Email: afyfe @morganplanninq.ca Website: www.morganplanning.ca Mailing Address: PO Box 834, Orillia, ON L3V 6K8 Physical Address: 6 Frederick Street, Orillia, ON L3V 5W4 1 Page 124 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... LLegh, Agl i6a From: Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 7:56 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: Zoning Variance at 17 Cherry Trail Contact: Andria Leigh We are the residence at 13 Cherry Trail in Sugarbush. We are 2 doors away from the location at which the zoning variance is being requested. We object strenusously to any variance being granted that would result in a large back yard building for the purpose of storage of construction material and vehicles. If the variance should be granted it is inevitable that the result would be a relately large increase in street traffic, off hours noise, and pollution by exhaust fumes, etc. This situation would be totally intolerable and we ask that no suck variance from purely residental zoning be allowed. This type of commercial /industrial activity should be persuded elsewhere in the township. Respectfully Jeffrey C. Wilson Beverly Vivian 13 Cherry Trail Sugarbush Name: Jeff Wilson & Bev Wilson E -mail Address: 1 Phone Number: 1 Page 125 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Lefi h, And ea From: Sena: 4m: S ubjlect: Contact: Andria Leigh Tuesday, May 14, 2013 8:29 AM Leigh, Andria 17 Cherry Trail, amendment I find it hard to accept turning 17 Cherry Trail into an industrial zone legally when the norm at this address is having a mini excavator parked on a tri -axel trailer for weeks at a time on the street & having a 40 yard garbage container at the roads edge for a month filed with old building material. By letting the Gullett's build a garage this size & for construction purposes it should be in an industrial area only, like all the other businesses in Oro - Medonte. I think Sugar Bush should remain the same decent residential community it's always been. Craig Page Operations Manager cpage @aluminous.com www.aluminous.com Aluminous Lighting Products 114 Healey Rd. Bolton, Ontario L7E 5R2 t. 905- 857 -8100 EXT 406 f. 905- 857 -8131 t. 1.877.625.7240 f. 1.888.700.8656 Name: Craig Page E -mail Address: Phone Number: 1 Page 126 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... From: Sent To: Subject: Attachments: Good Morning :) Larmer, Patty Tuesday, May 14, 2013 8:16 AM Leigh, Andria Zoning - 17 Cherry Trail Letter to the Township.doc Please accept this letter as a representation of myself as I'm unable to attend the zoning meeting due to work obligations. Please confirm receipt of my letter. Thanks and have a great day, Patty Larmer 1 Page 127 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... 11 represent the family at 16 Cherry Trail, the residence directly across from 17 Cherry TrailL The to work obllngations,11 am unable to attend the hearing on May 16 but feel At necessary to connnnemt on the proposed construction of the said detached building. We as a family were drawn to Sugar I:'ush 9 yews ago. As a mother of 2 young boys searching for a peaceful "family-oriented" community, Sugar II,ush was spoken highly as "a modest residential" subdivision that offers so much to young ffandlies...boy were they right! A few yews ago, the Township built our community a beautiful park cleverly named Sweet Water lark w 'du residents have access to directly off Cherry Trail. A day doesn't pass without seeing families walking them dogs, children bilking or talking their toboggans to the park to enjoy fresh air and good dean fun! Although Cherry Trail is a sidewalk-free street, residents ffeell comfortable walking up to park taking advantage of the access otT Cherry Trail and not using the access off Line 6, a much busier road. So 1i ask you...do you see a construction business a health fit into this community? Construction vehicles have been a nuisance on numerous occasions in the past to may family — vehicles and equipment parked on both sides off the street making it difficult to comae and go out of my driveway a few times even having to wait until a vehicle moves out of the way soli can get into rimy driveway. Many times vehicles are parked facing the wrong direction and left idling which tells me people are in a hurry "junst ramming in for a second" — how would these people ever think to look for our youngsters in their path? Regularly in front of 19 Cherry Trail, it becomes a one-lane street with many residents carefully manoeuvring between work vehicles. It's already a huge nuisance and building this structure to run a construction business in a residential community win only increase the dangers on our street. I[ like to make clear this is a zoning issue not a personal one. As there is already a business being rain from 19 Cherry Trail, adding another will drastically Impact the property value off our homes. 1 ask the Township to please keep our anei. la bourhood the way it was intended by not allowing this construction business to be a continual nuisance. Thank you, ]fatty Lamer Page 128 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... To the Committee of Adjustments May 13, 2013 RE: Hearing Z 1. -A -25, the Minor variance (Application being Drawls by.ieson and Wraygan MAW of 17 Cherry Trait, Concession 7, PIawMtii-3 w ::, lot First I would like it known that by not appearing in person, his mimes not lessen the degree of opposition I have to granting this application. Unfortunately my work schedule will not allow me to attend. To keep in tone with the existing buildings and "character" of the neighborhood, I am not be opposed to small sheds for which permits do not have to be obtained. But, for the below reasons i am opposed) to the construction of a garage/shop/out building etc. of any size for which a r r_rnraitt must be issued. Having had a recent conversation with Mr. Gullet about his intension to apply for, and obtain a Minor Variance so he could erect a 7.6m x 15.2 m work shop in his yard. He stated he needed somewhere to store his construction equipment and materials, and that he wanted to put up a large shop. During this conversation, he also stated the mature Spruce trees along the side of the yard closest to me would be staying up so 0 wouldn't really see this building anyways. My reasons for wanting this application denied are as follows: Over the past couple of years Mr. Gullet's construction business appears to be growing well. There has been a regular supply of construction equipment, contractors and large trucks in and out of his yard and drive way hauling his heavy equipment, Le. An etteevator , a (fob at and other related construction equipment and materials at all hours of the day and night, seven days a week. This is done with seeming disregard for neighbors, the time of day and the disruption of a quiet neighborhood that it causes. It has become a nuisance to say the least. The trees along the side of the yard closest to me will only partially block the view of this building for a short period of time, but sadly, they may have to be cut down one day. Not to mention the risk of killing them OLItright in the process of the constructing this building, as the foundation will be very close to, if not encroaching into the root areas of these trees. When these trees die, or are cut down because they interfere with this building, this will leave me looking at a 1g.im11 long building where construction equipment, materials and a variety of motorized vehicles are being stored and cleaned. This will have a direct negative uunpact on the valtoe of my property if I should ever choose to sell my home. Not to mention the decrease in having a pleasant view from my yard. These trees will de absolutely nothing to reduce the noise and traffic that is associated with this kind of business and activity taking place next to my home. Mr. Gullet has slowly tuned his back yard into a "contractor' yard ", as defined in the Oro- Medonte bylaw definitions of a CONTRACTORS'[ ?ARK) "Means eua area afflicted where epuaiipmmeot and urueterials eisea➢ by a Trading a?nd /ar excavating contractor are stoned 2nrd /mr w➢nere eormaraetor performs shop or assetimbliy " By regularly storing construction materials, equipment and debris in his yard Mr, Gullet's business activities and actions fall into this definition. Along with being an eyesore this activity has the potential to create a home for unwanted wild animals and vermin. E0 /EO 30'd ic:oi EteZ /ET /SO Page 129 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Equipment is being cleaned with gas engine pressure washers on his driveway and concrete pad in his yard. This creates a great deal of noise, and mess that ultimately ends up on the street /and or in my driveway because of the grade of the street, again, with seeming disregard for personal property, and a general lack of respect for the neighborhood. It has gotten to the point of being a nuisance. By allowing a larger storage area and shop, I fear the traffic, noise and mess Mr. Gullets business creates Mid only coritinuae, and become worse over time as Mr. Gullets business grows. All this will have a negative impact to the value of my home_ neighborhood is classed as residential area ota), and a business such as Mr. Gullets would be better suited to an industrial zoned area where zoning already allows fur this type of activity. This would have much less impact on the neighborhood as a whole. The current zoning bylaws for this neighborhood do not support this type of activity or business, therefore a building of this size /type is not required and a building permit should ld be denied. There are least two businesses that are being run out of Mr. Gullet's residence at this time. It appears that the dominant use of Mr. Gullet's residence is becoming more and more business oriented Adding an additional building of any size, would defiantly tip the scale from the prime function of this property being for human habitation, to one of being a business oriented property. By allowing Mr. Gullet to add a shop in his yard of any size, the amount, and type of traffic will only increase. We have large trucks corning and going to haul Mr. Gullet's construction equipment as it is. By allowing a building of any type will only make it more convenient for Mr. Gullet to add and store more equipment and materials for his (businesses. This will increase the amount of traffic on the street even more. Along with the )bylaw enforcement issues, noise, and the disruption this causes, this type of activity also causes somewhat of an increased safety risk for the young children in the neighborhood by having an abnormal amount of large vehicles on our neighborhood streets. Just to put the scale of this project into perspective, the size of this proposed building is 1259.4 sq. Ft. This is otrunedu (bigger than the original size of Mr. Gullet's home which was approximately 9 00 sq. ft. This is also much bigger than the sq. Footage of my home which is 1109 sq. ft. When you add in the sq. Ft of his new &leeway, this will be more than double the sq footage of mny horns, and earnest triple that of Mr. Gullets original home. I personally feel that by allowing Mr. Gullet to erect any size building will effectively allow him to run a business that violates the zoning for this neighborhood. Therefore, this and any future applications should be denied. Stercereamours Rick Graziano E0 /Z0 3E$$d LS :0Z £TaZ /£ /S0 Page 130 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Leigh, Andria From: Lois Andrews _ _ . _ Sent: Monday, May 6, 2013 12:34 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: cherry trail Cherry Trail is a sidewalk free street which leads to the community park , Sweetwater. This is a meeting place of as many as 300 people on family day. On a daily basis , there are people of all ages walking, bicycling or running along Cherry Trail. I wish to emphasize that this is the original purpose of this street. Cherry Trail is located in the modest residential subdvision of Sugarbush. It is a peaceful. quiet community so I am appealing to you to keep it that way. As a resident co -owner of number 14, one of the greatest visual pleasures of the trail is to watch young children and young families care - freely walk to the park with their skating gear or their toboggans or beach balls. There are baby strollers and toddlers who are a regular vista. The greatest audio pleasure is the sound of the birds Other attractions are the fresh air. Imagine how a construction business could impact this scenario. Traffic (and especially large construction vehicles) endanger the very people we promised , as a community. quiet and safe haven to in the single family neighbourhood. The parking is a nuisance in the neighbourhood. There are often illegally parked vehicles which suggests people in a hurry who haven't lime to park properly. The location of the construction business is the same site as the already existing dog- grooming business at number 17. This already increased vehicular traffic in the area. I see the impact quite clearly. Additional parked vehicles on the street will force the residents further out into the road placing them in harm's way. They no longer breathe fresh air as diesel fumes and other emissions drastically increase. Workers, in a hurry dropping equipment off or picking it up may not be as careful, may not even expect or see a youngster in their path. The traffic will increase the nuisance factor previously mentioned. Prestige construction needs to operate from a commercial industrial zoned space or a very large rural acreage. Sugarbush does not and should not have this zoning designation which is in conflict with family life. It is for family living and was zoned this way over 30years ago. I believe that the dominant use should be human habitation not business. Even when the owners are away on vacation, enjoying the pleasures community life elsewhere that Cherry Trail used to enjoy, float trucks arrive to load and off -load construction equipment. Residents are impacted in the owner's absence. Page 131 of 152 5g) 2013 -A -25 (Jason & Wraygan Gullett), 17 Cherry Trail,... Across the street from number fourteen are some lovely neighbours at numbers 15 and 19 who demonstrate respectfulness of the rights of the community population. Their homes will be more grossly impacted by this change. They will unfairly bear even more noise, traffic and other nuisances. The change will negatively affect the property value of the their house. This is not personal issue this is a zoning issue. I do wish the family all the best . I would like them to enjoy this lovely neighbourhood they way it was intended. It is the business that needs to relocate. Please do not set this precedent of allowing such a large scale business to locate here as you will destroy a neighbourhood. The township needs to keep its residents in mind when making their decision. Yours Truly, Lois Andrews 14 Cherry Trail 2 Page 132 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. Ontario Association of Comet Adjustment 8t Consent Aut INSIDE THIS ISSUE: President's Desk Conference Report 2013 Seminar TAC Corner Site Selection Report Legislation Report Resolutions Report Nominations Report Board of Directors? Finance Report Secretary Treasurer's Report Primer on Planning Graduates Accreditation Report Education Monitoring Publicity & Website 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Municipality of the 11 Month - Zorra OMB Corner TAC Corner 12 -18 18 OACA Puzzle Page 19 2012 Seminar Highlights 20 INSERTS: • Constitution • By -laws • Proxy Form • Nomination Form • Auditor's Report • AGM Minutes OACA Newsletter APRIL 2 0 1 3 From the President's Desk am sitting here looking out of my window as snow falls. It seems as if the season has been put on hold. I know spring is coming but I am sure everyone will agree not fast enough. Unlike the season, our Conference in Richmond Hill is approaching quickly and what an event it is shaping up to be. Besides being able to meet old friends again, there is an outstanding opportunity for learning. Linda Gavey, as Conference Chair, has assembled a varied selection of topics that are sure to excite everyone. Always popular Sidney Troister will be there. Nancy Bozzato will be presenting Committee Guidelines and there will be a TAC (Technical Advisory Committee) workshop to answer those unusual and tough questions. Jane Pepino will also be hosting a work shop. Ken Petersen and Darryl Lyons from the Ministry will be out to talk about the PPS and looking for your input. There will also be some new faces, Murray Evans, Evans Planning, Gus Galanis, Town of Richmond Hill, Patrick Harrington, Aird & Berlis LLP, Irvin Shachter, MMAH, and Pat Woolly, O.L.S., Krcmar Surveyors Ltd. Monday evening, there will be a Fifty's Show. Come out in your best 50's outfit, enjoy a malt, and bring your dancing shoes. Robert Waind and Robert Clancy will be your bar tenders in the "R & R Hospitality Suite" — that's "Robert & Robert" not "Rest & Relaxation ". Check it out after a day of learning and networking, it's sure to be a riot Tuesday night also promises to be amazing with George St. Kitts and his band. I am looking forward to seeing everyone there. In other news, your Board, lead by Christine Vigneault, has come up with a new OACA logo, which I think looks great. Christine Vigneault has also taken on maintaining the website in house so we can react faster to keeping things fresh and new. If you have not looked at the "New" OACA website www.oaca.info, please do, Christine has done a superb job. Carol Capes has done a great job ensuring that the Newsletter and conference /seminar packages have been printed and delivered. The Resolutions Committee headed by Robert Waind, Susan Benson and me is recommending some changes to the by -laws to provide clarification in regards to election procedures. I would like to thank Ron Ducharme from the Town of Essex for reviewing the election procedures. Louise Taschner was the contact for Christine Lang hosting the 2012 seminar in Peterborough and Deb McCabe continues to work very hard on our Fall Seminar, to be held at Horseshoe Valley Resort near Barrie, which is also looking very interesting. Deb McCabe, as chair of Nominations, has assembled a full slate of candidates. Anyone wishing to run for the Board of Directors is encouraged to contact Deb. I hope everyone has a happy and healthy spring, and again, I hope to see you all at the conference in Richmond Hill. Respectfully submitted, 4 vtd e-a5 -f etevbP.ri, OI4CA 1 Yei derit Page 133 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 2 2013 Conference Report The/1-(W4'Are'A1A'e' Tan/o H MAY 26 - MAY 29, 2013 WOW! It is almost here and will be over before we know it. OACA and the Town of Richmond Hill are looking forward to welcoming the delegates and guests attending conference. With a great selection of workshops to choose from and entertainment to keep everyone rejuvenated, it will be both educational and fun. If you can, please bring some door prizes from your municipality to make it more fun! For the delegates, there will be networking, learning, top -notch entertainment (forget the shopping and snoozing), and laughter in abundance. We have a host of interesting and timely workshops planned for both Committee Members and Secretary- Treasurers. All components of the conference will be held at the Sheraton Parkway Toronto North Hotel & Suites. The Companion Program offers a two -day package highlighting various points of interest within the Town of Richmond Hill. The companions will enjoy the comfort of our "VIVA" transportation. Monday's program begins with a tour of Richmond Hill and the Richmond Hill Centre for the Performing Arts with entertainment in the courtyard by "The Musical Hatter ", Cam Woolvett, with "A Trip Down Memory Lane ". Next will be a short historical walk down Yonge Street to visit the Heritage Centre and enjoy a tour and lunch in their quaint cafe. After lunch, a horse and wagon will take you for an unforgettable ride through the streets of Richmond Hill to enjoy the many sites Richmond Hill has to offer. Returning to the Richmond Hill Centre for the Performing Arts you will visit the T'amo Ice Cream Shop before boarding the bus and heading back to the Sheraton. Tuesday will be a visit to Varley Art Gallery and Unionville. Returning to the Sheraton you will join your companion to enjoy fabulous, flamboyant, energetic entertainment by Sharron Matthews, a redheaded Canadian goddess of cabaret. Monday evening enjoy a "50's" dinner at the "OACA & RH Diner" and be entertained by CZEntertainment with the "That's Fifty Show" starring Roy LeBlanc and his 5 -piece band. Roy LeBlanc is an Elvis, Johnny Cash and Roy Orbison impersonator. Feel a little daring — here's a "Double Dare " — dress for the "50's" and "Rock and Roll" the night away. Don't be in a rush to leave! Tuesday's banquet and dance features entertainment by George St. Kitts and his band throughout dinner and the evening. George St. Kitts has shared his gift of song since the age of three, performing vocals that led to a dazzling career on stage and producing musical revues. YOU WON'T WANT TO MISS THIS YEAR'S EDUCATIONAL AND ENTERTAINING CONFERENCE "BE ENRICHED IN RICHMOND HILL" J Page 134 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. 2013 Seminar - Horseshoe Valley Resort HORSESHOE VALLEY RESORT WELCOMES OACA! PAGE 3 Make sure you keep September 19th and 20t, 2013 available to attend the 2013 Fall Seminar being held at the beautiful Horseshoe Resort, just 20 minutes north of Barrie, Ontario. Come and experience two days in an area that will overwhelm you with fall colours. Experience everything Horseshoe Resort has to offer and perhaps extend your two days at seminar into a weekend adventure. With golf, zip lining and tree top trekking, there is so much to fill up your time while staying in one of the most picturesque areas of the Province. Horseshoe Adventure Park and all the attractions offered will surely make you want to stay and enjoy a fall weekend at the resort!!! Remember it all starts at 7:00 p.m. on September 19`h with the Meet and Greet to be held in the Fireside Lounge of the Inn. As all guest rooms will be within the Inn, you won't have to go far to enjoy an evening of mingling and musical entertainment. Workshop presenters are being confirmed and topics being worked on, so we can bring you the education portion of the seminar that OACA takes pride in. Our lunchtime keynote speaker has been booked and I'm sure you will enjoy the antics of Orillia's own Jim Foster, humourist and local columnist. Can't wait to see everyone at Horseshoe Resort this fall, and hope you are as excited as I am to experience a piece of Simcoe County! Deb McCabe Seminar Chair TAC COIINEII 41111° QUESTION: What constitutes an amendment to an application that Committee has considered? If a decision is made and before the appeal date has lapsed, can an amendment be submitted? We have a amendment fee in our Tariff of Fees By -law, one with re- circulation, the other without re- circulation, but we are not clear as to what constitutes an amendment. TAC ANSWER: In response to your question regarding an amendment to a Committee of Adjustment application, the OACA "Technical Advisory Committee" provides the following for your consideration; Minor Variances cannot be changed once the Decision is made. The applicant would have to re -apply for the new proposal. Section 53(23) of the Planning Act permits a "change in conditions" for "Provisional Consents" but not to the proposal. An application can only be amended if the Committee has deferred their decision to a future meeting. Your tariff of fees by -law is probably referring to a deferred application. The fee requiring no recirculation is when Committee may need further information prior to a decision but the application does not change. The fee requiring recirculation is when the applicant needs to make changes to the application and have it re- circulated to the commenting agencies and the public. This response is based on the information provided by the members of the OACA "TAC' Committee and is not a legal opinion. If you have a question for TAC email oaca @primus.ca! Page 135 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 4 Site Selection Report Your Site Selection Committee is diligently working on upcoming conference and seminar locations to ensure that we select province wide destinations that inspire top notch events. To date, we have confirmed: Conference 2013 Fall Seminar 2013 Conference 2014 Sheraton Parkway, Richmond Hill Horseshoe Resort, Barrie Blue Mountain Resort, The Blue Mountains As a Board, it is our goal to rotate sites throughout the Province so that we showcase a variety of Ontario municipalities and provide each Member the opportunity to attend an event that, from time to time, is closer to them. We base our criteria on a number of factors, including accessibility by air, train or car, appropriate meeting space and accommodation as well as area attractions. Although we are now narrowing our search you still have time to nominate your municipality for our 2014 Seminar. Kingston, North Bay and Muskoka are currently under consideration. There is no financial responsibility on the part of the host municipality. We only ask for staff time to assist in preparations. Our Board of Directors will be there every step of the way to guide and offer support where needed. If you think your municipality would be interested in hosting an OACA conference or seminar we would like to talk to you. Please feel free to contact Bob Clancey, Susan Benson or Deb McCabe. Respectfully submitted, Site Selection Committee Deb McCabe Bob Clancey Susan Benson dmccabe@ramara.ca mimibob(a�xplornet.ca sbenson(@.crandella.com Legislation Report The Province continues to hold meetings in regard to the PPS. The Ministry will conduct a workshop at this year's Conference where questions will be answered. Respectfully submitted, Legislation Committee Andreas Petersen Robert Waind Susan Benson Page 136 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 5 Resolutions Report The Resolution Committee has reviewed the By -Laws and having regard for section 3:06(2) recommends the following changes: Original Version; 4:00 ELECTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4:04 Nominations from the floor shall be accepted by the Chairman of the Nominations Committee and recorded by the Secretary- Treasurer, up to a time to be announced by the Chairman or in the Chairman's absence another member of the Nominations Committee at the Annual Meeting. 4:05 Any member unable to attend the Annual Meeting who is eligible to hold office, may be nominated by two members in good standing, providing the nominee's letter of acceptance is received by the Secretary- Treasurer prior to closing of nominations. 4:13 The election of officers as set out herein shall be reported to the Annual Meeting by the Returning Officer, who will also report the number of ballots distributed, the number of ballots cast, and the number of spoiled ballots, which shall be recorded by the Secretary- Treasurer, and the results of the count shall be made available to any candidate on demand. Recommended Amended Version; 4:00 ELECTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4:04 Nominations from the floor shall be accepted by the Chairperson of the Nominating Committee and recorded by the Secretary- Treasurer. One member in good standing is needed to nominate a member in good standing, which shall be seconded by another member in good standing. The recording of these individuals by the Secretary- Treasurer must be in the order of nominating and follow the slate of candidates that was presented by the Nominating Committee. Acceptance of nominations for each position from the floor must be called three (3) times before closure of nominations for that position by a motion. The nominees will be asked if they will let their name stand. 4:05 Any member unable to attend the Annual Meeting who is eligible to hold office, may be nominated by one member in good standing and seconded by one member in good standing, providing the nominee's letter of acceptance is received by the Secretary- Treasurer prior to closing of nominations. Letters must state the office, be dated and signed by the applicant. 4:13 The election of officers as set out herein shall be reported to the membership at the Annual Meeting by the returning officer. Prior to the close of the conference, Wednesday morning, the returning officer shall report to the membership the number of ballots distributed, the number of ballots cast and the number of spoiled ballots, which will be recorded by the Secretary- Treasurer. The results of the count shall be made available to any candidate on demand. Respectfully submitted, Resolutions Committee Andreas Petersen Robert Waind Susan Benson ampetersen @ymail.com robertbwaind @simcoemail.com sbenson(&crandella_com Page 137 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 6 =ir Nominations Report The following active members of OACA are being presented as candidates for election to the 2013 -2014 Board of Directors: PRESIDENT (1 to be elected) Andreas Petersen, Committee Member, City of Thunder Bay VICE PRESIDENT (1 to be elected) Robert B. Waind, Committee Member, Town of The Blue Mountains SECRETARY TREASURER (1 to be elected) Linda Gavey, Secretary Treasurer, Town of Richmond Hill Committee Member, Haldimand County DIRECTORS (5 to be elected) Susan Benson, Committee Member, Township of Muskoka Lakes Bob Clancey, Committee Member, Township of Stone Mills Paul Morand, Committee Member, Town of Tecumseh Christine Vigneault, Assistant Secretary Treasurer, Town of Richmond Hill Susan Votour, Secretary Treasurer, City of Orillia PAST PRESIDENT (1 nonelected position) Deb McCabe, Secretary Treasurer, Township of Ramara Further nominations for any of the above noted positions may be made from the floor during the Nominations and Resolutions portion of the annual conference agenda, in the Town of Richmond Hill. Please consider running for a position on the Board of Directors and give back to your Association. Respectfully submitted, Deb McCabe Chair Nominations Committee 2012 -2013 OACA Board of Directors Back (Left- Right): Robert Waind, Christine Vigneault Carol Capes, Bob Clancy, Andreas Petersen Front (Left- Right): Susan Benson, Louise Taschner, Deb McCabe, Linda Gavey J Page 138 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. The OACA Board of Directors PAGE 7 What you need to know about being a member of the OACA Board of Directors... The Board of Directors has 7 meetings per year, June (immediately after conference), July, September (prior to seminar), November, January (teleconference), March, and June (Sunday afternoon prior to start of conference). The June meetings are held at the conference location and the September meeting at the seminar location. All other meetings are usually held in a location convenient to the Board of Directors. Meetings are usually held on a Friday, most Board of Director members arriving Thursday evening. Accommodations, meals and travel expenses are covered for these meetings. The meetings are sometimes a teleconference not requiring any travel. Expenses for the first meeting (June - immediately after conference closing) are not covered as members are already at the conference. The September meeting is combined with seminar and expenses are covered, including seminar registration. For the June meeting prior to conference, conference registration and expenses (one night's accommodation, if required, meals and travel) are covered. Most importantly, being involved keeps you active, informed, and in touch with others in your field. This is a BONUS. Please note that you must be a member in good standing to put your name forward for election at conference. Finance Report The finances of The Association are very strong. The year end financials will be presented at the annual Conference in Richmond Hill. Any questions from the membership are welcomed and will be addressed. Respectfully submitted, Finance Committee Andreas Petersen Bob Clancey Page 139 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 8 Secretary Treasurer's Report Details of the Association's finances can be found in the enclosed Auditor's Review Engagement for 2012. The Association continues to maintain a stable financial position to provide its members with informative newsletters and educational opportunities. Another great educational and fun experience has been prepared for the delegates and their guests attending the annual conference in Richmond Hill. "The Hills Are Alive" — with learning, music, and laughter for you and your companion. Deb McCabe, Past President, along with your Board of Directors, is finalizing details for the 2013 annual seminar to be held this fall at Horseshoe Resort in Barrie. Robert Waind, Director, is heading up the 2014 conference in The Town of the Blue Mountains and Robert Clancey, Director, is seeking out Kingston for 2015. Deb, Robert Clancey and Susan Benson, Director, continue to seek out locations for the OACA conferences and seminars. This year, your Board of Directors chose a new logo for the Association and established a new OACA website. The Board had over 200 designs to choose from. Christine Vigneault used her expertise and dedication to obtain various logos from Designers around the world responding to the posting and then did a marvellous job creating the "New" OACA website using the new logo. Check it out at www.oaca.info. Andreas Petersen, President, kept the finances under review, Christine Vigneault, Director, designed a new look for the newsletter, Carol Capes, Vice President, continued to ensure the OACA newsletter was printed and distributed, and Louise Taschner, Director, and I delivered the "Committee Guidelines" training session to various municipalities. am looking forward to another successful event at the Annual General Meeting. See you there! As Always: LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD: This is YOUR Association and YOU are the one that helps make it work with YOUR participation and support. YOU have a voice and a vote. Please use them for the benefit of YOUR Association. Respectfully Submitted, Linda Gavey ACST Secretary- Treasurer Page 140 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 9 2012 Primer on Planning Graduates Congratulations! WINTER 2012 FALL 2012 Kevin Austin Angella Allen Kathy Bradley- Comeau Susan Arnold Laurie Collins Kimberly Bester - Melanson Christine Fraser - McDonald Brendan Boyle Natalie Garnett Rebecca Breedon Colin Goodeve Diane Chaffe Peter Gross Patrick D'almada Emilie Gruyters Amanda D'angelo Jonathan Hall Elizabeth Davis -Dagg David Hannam Trish Girard Lisa Harrington Allison Holtzhauer Andrea Ireland Brandon Kopp Stephanie Jarvis Natalie Kopp Heather Lysynski Barbara Major Karen Mclsaac Steve Mongeon Valerie Mckeever Corrine Nauta Tatyana Moro Sherry Renick Kevin Robertson Lianne Sauter Geoff Romanowski Peg Schiek Dianna Saunderson David Scott Amber Tabor Laurie Spence- Bannerman Tanya Thompson Michelle Starnes George Turnbull Emily Thaler Julia Van Der Laan De Vries Donna -Lynn Tremblay Lynn Vandenbroek Stephanie Troyer Boyd Crystal Warner Adrian Vaneck Amanda Werner - Mackeler Nt Page 141 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE I0 Accreditation Report I am very pleased to congratulate the following individuals who have received or renewed their accreditation for the ACST, ACST(A), ACM or ACM(A) designations since June 2012. ACST Maryann Sidon — ACST Heather J. McCrae — ACST Allison Moore — ACST ACST (Renewal) Christine Lang — ACST (Renewal) Kym Pelham — ACST Renewal ACST(A) Jennifer Foster — ACST (A) Jennifer Sandham — ACST (A) Valerie McKeever — ACST (A) Annette Helmig — ACST (A) Please remember that the designations expire after 5 years and you need to reapply to continue your designation. The expiry date is shown on your certificate. If you wish to continue to use your designation or wish to seek accreditation for the first time, please submit your application as soon as possible. Respectfully submitted, Linda Gavey Accreditation Chair Phone: 905 -771 -2414 Email: linda.gavey a(�.richmondhill.ca oko Education Monitoring 1 o1/4 ;A) leP4,-- I am, once again, very pleased to advise that throughout the past year, several students have successfully completed the Primer on Planning course, a number of new and renewed Accreditations have been approved, questions have been answered by the Technical Advisory Committee, and the revised "Committee Guidelines" training session presented to various municipalities. Respectfully submitted, Linda Gavey Education Monitoring Publicity & Website Report This term, the Publicity & Website Committee, embarked on refreshing OACA's look with a new logo and website. The task of designing a new logo was given to a web based company called 99Designs.ca. Designers from around the world responded to our posting and provided us with over 200 logo designs to choose from. After much debate and consideration, the Board chose our new logo, and it looks great! As a next step, we created a new, user friendly website that highlights OACA's business and provides enhanced service to our members. Any comments or feedback? You can "Contact Us" through the website or send us an email at oaca @primus.ca! Respectfully submitted, Christine Vigneault & Carol Capes Publicity & Website Committee Page 142 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. MUNICIPALITY OF THE MONTH April 2013 The Township of Zorra PAGE I I Where is it? Zorra Township is a rural municipality located at the north -west corner of Oxford County, in the heart of South - Western Ontario. The Township spans over 530 kilometres and is comprised of several rural clusters and two serviced villages, Embro and Thamesford. It is a predominately rural landscape and home to many farming communities, with small town charm. The population of Zorra Township is 8,125. The Township of Zorra maintains 85 kilometers of paved roads, 424 kilometers of gravel roads and has 74 bridges within the Township's boundaries. Craig St. Marys Thorndale Woodstock IInngersoll ©2O12 Google i r•., tia ; 1 Map VD 12 Google What are the biggest attractions? Harrington's historic grist mill was restored by a local community group and opened to the public in 2010 for viewings. This mill represents how rural communities operated and shows the kind of industry that was prevalent throughout the area many years ago. The mill was in continuous operation from 1846 -1966. It was built with hand -hewn native pie timbers and topped with a split shingle roof. It was first powered by an overshot waterwheel which was later replaced by a more efficient water - driven turbine in the 1880's. Ayr Bsrfart The Beachville District Museum was built in 1851 and currently houses many interesting artifacts, from a history of the limestone quarries to a baseball display describing the first ever recorded baseball game in North America which occurred in Beachville. What makes the municipality unique? The Township of Zorra hosts numerous events and festivals throughout the year which are always well attended and a lot of fun! A few of the great events include the Highland Games, Calithumpian, Wienerfest (Yes — a festival just for wiener dogs!), Lakeside Triathlon and the Embro Fall Fair! The Township is also home to numerous local farmers markets. What are the most common issues faced by the Committee of Adjustment? One of the common issues faced by Zorra's Committee of Adjustment is Variances to Minimum Distance Separation (MDS). These applications create a balancing act which the Township must perform between agriculture and the expanding livestock production and existing rural residential development. Urban Design Guidelines The Township of Zorra is in the process of reviewing design guidelines for the community. The purpose of the design guidelines is to guide new development within the Township, with a focus on the two services Villages; Embro and Thamesford. In general, good rural design will create a safe, functional and attractive built environment. Design guidelines can be used to review development proposals. Design guidelines are not used to determine land uses. Instead they provide direction on things like site design, building orientation and massing, architectural design, landscaping and public spaces. The County of Oxford is working on an Official Plan update, as part of the Township's study we will recommend new design policies that may be incorporated into the updated Official Plan. Sheep at a local Zorra farm. OACA would like to thank Karen Graham, Clerk of the Township of Zorra, for submitting this information to "Municipality of the Month ". More information can be found on the Township's website at www.zorra.on.ca Would you like your municipality to be featured on an upcoming "Municipality of the Month "? Go to the OACA Website at www.oaca.info for more information and to download the submission form. If your municipality is selected to be featured, you will receive a free one -year OACA Membership! Page 143 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 12 ISSUE DATE: February 05, 2013 OMB Corner Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de ['Ontario IN THE MATTER OF subsection 45(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended Appellant: Applicant: Subject: Variance from By -law No.: Property Address /Description: Municipality: Municipal File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: APPEARANCES: Parties Land Eng Associates Ltd Donnie McLean Minor Variance 71 -74 42 Ontario Street Town of Grimsby A-21/12 PL121212 PL121212 Land Eng Associates Ltd. Donnie McLean Canadian Western Trust Company Counsel Manfred Rudolph Ken Hood MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY R. ROSSI ON JANUARY 25, 2013 AND ORDER OF THE BOARD PL121212 [1] Donnie McLean ( "Applicant ") applied to the Town of Grimsby ( "Town ") in 2012 to permit the establishment of a group home at 42 Ontario Street. The Committee of Adjustment ( "Committee ") approved the variance to permit the location of the home within 343 square metres of another established group home despite the fact that the Zoning By -law requires a minimum distance of 455 metres. Mr. McLean represented himself and his wife Dr. Maxine McLean at these proceedings. [2] Land Eng Associates Ltd. ( "Appellant ") has appealed the Committee's decision to the Board. Manfred Rudolph represented the Appellant. Page 144 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 13 -2- PL121212 [3] Prior to the commencement of the hearing, Ken Hood sought party status for the Canadian Western Trust Company ( "CWTC "), the mortgagee of the subject property, which Mr. Rudolph supported. However, the Applicant opposed the request on two grounds: first, that CWTC did not attend the Committee meeting to express its objection to the Applicant's requested minor variance and second, that Optimum Mortgage is the first mortgagee of the subject property and not CWTC. Mr. Hood responded firstly that CWTC had not received notice of the Committee meeting yet it had inexplicably received notice of today's Board hearing once sent out by the Board in December 2012. Mr. Hood submitted that had CWTC known of the Applicant's attempt to change the use of the property and seek a variance to the Zoning By -law at the Committee meeting, his client would have participated and objected vigorously to the minor variance application at that time by virtue of CWTC's lawful status as the mortgagor of the subject property. In response to Mr. McLean's second argument regarding which company is the established mortgagor of the property, Mr. Hood presented to the Board a series of title documents that established persuasively and to the satisfaction of the Board that CWTC is in fact the legal mortgagee of the subject property. These documents are contained in Exhibit 2 and are identified as follows: 1. The Ontario Land Registry Office Parcel Register (Property Identification Number) of the mortgage showing CWTC as a "party" to a $284,000 mortgage on the subject property (a second mortgage in the amount of $35,000 is held by Oakwood Concepts Inc. and is not in dispute); 2. The Parcel Registry and registered mortgage naming CWTC as "chargee" of the subject property; 3. Signed affirmation by the Applicant Donnie McLean on 25 October 2011 declaring the subject property is to be used as a single family residence in accordance with all zoning by -laws with CWTC listed as a party to the mortgage; 4. The CWTC Standard Charge Terms - Fixed Rate document referencing the filing number as shown on the registered mortgage for the subject property; and a 5. Signed acknowledgement of the CWTC Standard Charge Terms by the Applicant Donnie McLean on 25 October 2011. Page 145 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 14 -3- PL121212 [4] When confronted with the aforementioned documents, the Applicant did not challenge and did not dispute their veracity. In response, the Applicant submitted to the Board a photocopied fax page (Exhibit 3) with the letterhead "Optimum Mortgage" and underneath "A Division of Canadian Western Bank" that provided particulars of the subject mortgage. The Applicant submitted that his only dealings have been with the Optimum Mortgage broker. However, the Board finds that the registered title documents substantiate the legal status and interest of the rightful mortgagee in these proceedings. The Applicant was also unable to persuade the Board that CWTC was deficient in not attending the 2012 Committee meeting or that CWTC's failure to attend the Committee meeting should preclude CWTC from being considered as a party to this hearing. [5] The Board determines that CWTC has an interest in this property through the terms of the mortgage to the Applicant. Mr. Hood has provided the Board with highly persuasive uncontradicted and unchallenged evidence in the form oflegal documentation that CWTC is the lawful mortgagee of the subject property, that it has established its bona fide interest in this matter; and that it made all reasonable efforts to attend once notification from the Board was received. Given all ofthese findings, CWTC should be granted party status to these proceedings. [6] Once granted party status, CWTC's Counsel Mr. Hood argued that the Applicant had nei- ther the right nor the authority to ask the Committee for a variance from the use of the mortgaged property. Mr. Hood submitted that the provisions of the aforementioned CWTC Standard Charge Terms document bind the Applicant. Specifically, the Standard Charge terms provide: "The Chargor [mortgagor] shall not without the express written consent of the Chargee [mortgagee] first had and obtained: (a) change the present use of the Lands..." Further, Section 8.2 obligates the mortgagee to "promptly observe, perform, execute and comply with all present and future laws, rules, requirements, orders, directions, ordinances and regulations of every governmental, municipal and civil authority or agency concerning the Lands..." Further, the Applicant's signed declaration binds him to two relevant provisions of the mortgage: "That all property taxes due on the property have been paid to date and there are no outstanding taxes and/or penalties levied in accordance with all zoning by- laws" and "That the property is used as Single Family Residence in accordance with all zoning by- laws ". Page 146 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 15 - PL121212 [7] It is evident that the Standard Charge Terms bind the mortgagor and provide certain requirements and obligations as set out in the document. In this case, the subject document does not permit the mortgagor to unilaterally seek changes to the status or use of the mortgaged subject property from the Town without the expressed written permission of the mortgagee, which is the lender. [8] Next, with specific reference to the aforementioned latter two provisions in paragraph 6, Mr. Hood's documentary package also contained evidence of the Applicant's non - payment of municipal taxes to the Town for the year 2012 as well as two additional items: a "Notice ofSale under Mortgage" wherein CWTC demands payment from the Applicant of the mortgage, interest, a penalty, administration fees, realty taxes and costs plus the principal balance by January 7, 2013 and a Statement of Claim filed by CWTC against the Applicant in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice for the Applicant's non - payment of the mortgage since October 1, 2012. Mr. Hood advised the Board that the document shows the Board that his client as a lawful owner ofthe subject property is currently taking legal action to wrest the property from the mortgagor and to sell it by virtue of the Applicant's default on past mortgage payments. It is established law that a mortgagee is entitled to the payment of the money secured to it by the mortgage; it has legal estate in the land mortgaged; and it may recover the land. Conversely, the Applicant as mortgagor is liable to certain duties and he can do nothing that defeats the rights of the mortgagee. The Board determines that CWTC's documents set clear terms to which the Applicant is bound that render null his application for a minor variance to the Committee. The facts are clear; the Applicant did not have the approval of CWTC to make this application for variance and the Applicant agreed to this limitation through the Standard Charge terms. [9] Additionally, while submitting that the Applicant had no right to seek the minor variance in the first place, Mr. Hood also advised the Board that the Applicant had appeared before the Committee at a time when he had still not paid his 2012 municipal taxes on the subject property and he was also in default on his mortgage payments to CWTC. In this regard, both Mr. Hood and Mr. Rudolph for the Appellant argued persuasively that this appeal cannot proceed further as the Applicant's initial application to the Committee is null and void ab initio by virtue of the Standard Charge Terms requirements of the mortgage to which the Applicant is bound and which do not permit Page 147 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 16 -5- PL121212 the Applicant/mortgagor to change the use in the manner he sought and certainly not without the expressed written permission of CWTC, the mortgagee. [10] Relevant to the Board's determination in all minor variance applications is s. 45(1) of the Planning Act ( "Act'). Referencing the powers of Committee, the Committee may authorize such minor variance from the provisions of the by -law in accordance with four tests as enunciated therein. However, such application must be made by the owner of the land, building or structure affected by the by -law or any person authorized in writing by the owner. In the case at hand, the Board finds that CWTC must be considered and treated as an "owner ". The Applicant was not authorized to apply for the minor variance for this property by virtue of the Standard Charges Terms, which bind the Applicant through the mortgage. By extension, given the current status of the property, the application to the committee is moot and arguably premature. Mr. Rudolph also expressed his client's position that the minor variance application was a moot matter and should not have been heard by the Committee. [11] The Board considered carefully the evidence and arguments before it and as stated, determines that without the written permission of the lawful mortgagee, CWTC, the Applicant/ mortgagor had no authority to seek from the Committee its approval to change the use of the subject property from Single Family Residence to Group Home or by extension to seek a concomitant reduced separation distance variance to facilitate that use. As an administrative tribunal with recognized expertise in the domain of planning law and issues, the Board notes the highly unusual set of circumstances that played out at this hearing related to legal ownership of the subject property and professes its initial reluctance in these reasons to stray from consideration of matters beyond the planning merits of this case. However, the Board was presented with overwhelmingly persuasive evidence that established CWTC's legitimate interest in this matter and the Applicant's actions that violate the mortgagee's Standard Charge Terms document to which the Applicant is bound. The Board finds that the term "owner" in s. 45 of the Act includes CWTC. [12] Notwithstanding these circumstances and as a hearing de nova, the Board sought to ensure that the Applicant was at a minimum afforded an opportunity to proffer any directly relevant planning evidence he possessed that might contribute to the Board's determination of the minor variance matter should the Board have proceeded Page 148 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE 17 -6- PL121212 beyond the aforementioned procedural issue of property ownership, The Applicant's wife responded and told the Board that the Applicant and she did not know what they had to do to prepare for the hearing and they had no planning evidence to submit and they had not retained any expert witness to offer a planning opinion. The Board noted, however, that the Applicant's wife had been in communication with the Board's planner assigned to this. The Applicants presented neither sufficient nor persuasive explanation to the Board for their lack of preparedness. It is incumbent upon persons filing appeals with the Board to come prepared for the hearing and to offer planning evidence in support of their positions. The Applicant and his wife were obligated to inform themselves about the nature and responsibilities associated with party status at planning appeals before the Board. The Board also took steps to explain to the Applicant and his wife the appeal process as well as the tests for a minor variance to be met under s. 45(1) of the Act. The Applicant failed to meet his responsibility in coming prepared to the hearing. [13] The Board determines that CWGT has a lawful and established interest in this matter and finds persuasive Mr. Hood's submissions as well as his client's documentary evidence that the Applicant is in violation of the Standard Charge Terms of the mortgage and that the Applicant had no legal basis on which to seek a variance from the Committee that stemmed from a proposed change of use for the subject property - an action that requires the expressed written permission of the mortgagee. The Applicant's actions constitute a violation of the mortgage terms in evidence before the Board. In this regard, the Board determines that the Applicant's initial application to the Committee is not authorized by virtue of the Standard Charge Terms requirements of the mortgage to which the Applicant is bound and which do not permit him to change the use in the manner he sought and certainly not without the expressed written permission of CWTC, which the Board determines to be an owner of the property through its provision of the mortgage for the purposes of s. 45.1 of the Act. Even if the Board was incorrect in making its finding on the subject of ownership, the Board still determines through the oral evidence of the Applicant that he failed to provide any planning evidence in support of the minor variance. Page 149 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PAGE I8 -7- PL121212 ORDER [14] The Board orders that the appeal is allowed and the minor variance is not authorized. "R. Rossi" R. ROSSI MEMBER TAC COIINE1I It° QUESTION: Based on this Board Order, does the Secretary Treasurer have to notify the Mortgagee? The Province took this requirement off the application form. TAC ANSWER: In this highly unusual case, the Board reviewed the validity of the variance based on the validity of the application. The variance was not authorized because it was not made by the rightful owner of the land as determined by the Standard Charge of Terms Agreement. Further, the applicant was not prepared and did not provide any evidence in support of their variance and whether it met the four tests. The Planning Act does not include (in either 197/96 or 200/96) any reference to providing Notice to the Mortgagee. The role of the Secretary Treasurer and the requirements of the application were not brought into question in this case. In our opinion, the onus is on the applicant (owner) to ensure that they are not in violation of the their mortgage agreement (which may be restrictive when it comes to matters such as this) or any other legal agreement for that matter. Even if it was established best practice to ask for mortgage information (above and beyond Planning Act requirements) - it would be difficult for Secretary Treasurer's to determine "owner" under these circumstances without requesting a copy of the mortgage agreement and understanding the provisions - which would be outside of their jurisdiction. This response is based on the information provided by the members of the OACA "TAC' Committee and is not a legal opinion. If you have a question for TAC email oaca@primus.ca! Page 150 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. PUZZLE PAGE PAGE I9 Want to win a prize at the 2013 OACA Conference in Richmond Hill? When you arrive at Conference, be the First OACA member to provide both completed (and correct) puzzles to Linda Gavey, OACA Secretary Treasurer ! WORD LIST ACST ASSOCIATION AUTHORITY BY -LAW COMMITTEE CONFERENCE DELEGATES DIRECTOR EDUCATION OFFICIAL OMB ONTARIO PRIMER SECRETARY SEMINAR TAC CLUES CF X D H R E F Y L P X E U O Y R A T E R C E S Y R T DS I L B MO A L N T T Z I B U U K N Y Y C O N E I R F M C C U T P O S L V Y R G Q H E V A WK R T I U A O E N AR R MT T D L O X T H W F OE T B 0 1 W J AO T T A T NI 0 T E K O U Z I H U C P I 0 Y 1 R DS N N M CA A B E I C O M M I T T EE I K K X R R S OK L T J A Z D F Q O A A MI I S HI D W I P E N T K D C L DP S W H B M M O N S E M I N A R Z A P N O K O S E V Z V K O X Z OR F 00 ACROSS 2. Municipality of the Month 5. Designation 8. Legally Enforceable 10. Policy Document 13. Nominated Past President 14. Municipal Staff Person DOWN 1. Fall Seminar 3. Secretary Treasurer 4. Conference Location 6. Musical Hatter 7. Correspondence Course 9. Number of OACA Board Members I I. Provincial Policy 12. Committee Member 3 15 B 10 9 11 12 13 III NAME: MUNICIPALITY: Page 151 of 152 6a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. Seminar 2012 - County of Peterborough ONTARIO ASSOCIATION • COMMITTEES OF ADJUSTME AND CONSENT AUTHORITIES Page 152 of 152