Loading...
06 20 2013 Committee of Adjustment AgendaTownship of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future 1. OPENING OF MEETING: THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA Old Town Hall, 833 15/16 Sideroad Thursday, June 20, 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, May 16, 2013 b) Minutes of the Special Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Monday, June 10, 2013. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North, Concession 8, Part of Lot 20, Part 1, Plan 51R- 33801, (Former Township of Oro), Application for the creation of a new lot by way of severance. b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 North, Concession 7, West Part of Lot 5, (Formerly Township of Medonte), Application for the creation of a new lot by way of severance. c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and Robert Rix), 1922 Warminster Sideroad, Concession 14, Part of the East Half of Lot 6 , (Former Township of Medonte), Application for the creation of a 3 new lots by way of severance, for future single detached residential uses. d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Concession 10, Plan 902, Lot 3, Application for relief from front yard setback, interior side yard setback, maximum height of accessory building, maximum lot coverage and maximum floor area. Page 1 of 251 Page 106 -123 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, Lot 2, Concession 1, Plan 51R-20640, Part 1 (former Township of Orillia), Application for relief from maximum floor area to construct a proposed accessory building (hobby shop). 11:00 a.m.: 124 -139 f) 140 -162 g) 163 -183 h) 184 -207 i) 208 -251 j) 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose), 1129 Line 4 North, Concession 5, Part of Lot 14, (former Township of Oro), Application for relief from permitted locations and maximum floor area for a proposed accessory building. 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East, Plan 952, Lot 49 (former Township of Oro), Application for relief from minimum interior side yard setback and maximum height for a proposed boathouse. 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road East, Plan 589, Lots 11 & 20 (former Township of Oro), Application for relief from the minimum interior side yard for single detached dwelling, minimum interior side yard for boathouse and maximum width of boathouse. 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road West, Concession 3, Part of the West Half Lot 27 (Former Township of Oro), Application for relief from permitted uses, permitted locations, maximum height, maximum lot coverage and maximum floor area. 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland Drive, Plan 993, Lots 76 & 77 (Formerly Township of Orillia), Application for a boundary adjustment/lot addition to an adjacent vacant parcel of land, for future single detached residential use. To be heard in conjunction with 2013 -A -31 and 2013 -A -32, being applications for relief from minimum lot frontage and minimum lot area for the proposed lot. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, July 18, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. Page 2 of 251 Page 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Page 3 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... 7 ou'uthip of Val e•( to iW rrf H4Tirape, i:xrrrivJ., i=irruri- Thursday, May 16, 2013 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: 10:03 a.m. Staff present: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services; Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator; Adrianna Spinosa, Planner 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Scott Macpherson assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order` 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: 1 a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. CA130516 -1 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the agenda for the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, May 16, 2013 be received and adopted. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: Carried. Scott Macpherson declared a pecuniary interest on Item 5g) 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, as he is a neighbour. Scott Macpherson left at 11:58 a.m. and was not present during the discussion or vote on this matter. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES: a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, April 18, 2013. Motion No. CA130516 -2 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, April 18, 2013 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 1 of 9 Page 4 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 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. Edmund & Kaari Piotrowski, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA130516 -3 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -08, 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 applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for the lot created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 4. That the applicant apply for, and obtain, an amendment to the zoning of the retained lands, prohibiting their use for a residential purpose; 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 9 Page 5 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. 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. Kenneth Tran, applicant, was present. John Crawford, on behalf of Gord Woodrow, noted concern over future buildings being built so close to the farming operations. Motion No. CA130516 -4 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -07, for a boundary adjustment /lot addition, subject to the following conditions: 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 lands, 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 /Rural (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. Carried. Page 3 of 9 Page 6 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. 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. Paulette & Doug Overholt, applicants, were present. Motion No. CA130516 -5 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -22, specifically, to permit a minimum setback of 13.7 metres from the Average High Water Mark of Lake Simcoe, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.31 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 (219.15 m.a.s.I.) of Lake Simcoe; 3. That the buildings and structures on the subject lands 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. Carried. Page 4 of 9 Page 7 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. d) 2013 -A -23 (Glen & Vicki Douglass), 5305 Line 7 North, Concession 8, Plan M -174, Lot 23, Applicant for relief from Setback from Slopes to construct a single detached dwelling. Glen & Vicki Douglass, applicants, were present. Anna Charman, neighbour, noted concern over the trees aging and falling or requiring to be removed, that weather is over saturating the ground and high winds are taking down trees, and she noted concern over a nearby lot being flooded with sand as a result ditching that occurred on Line 7, all of which is creating hazard on the integrity of the slope. Barb Nikkanen, neighbour, noted that the variance is not minor as it is 30 feet and that the reduction in setback will affect her privacy. Motion No. CA130516 -6 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -23, specifically, to permit a minimum setback of 13 metres from a 3:1 slope, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.32 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. Carried. Page 5 of 9 Page 8 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. 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. Carl Cadeau, applicant and Andrew McIntyre, agent, were present. Julianne Ecclestone, neighbour, reviewed the concerns outlined by the correspondence submitted by her husband Geoffrey Booth. Motion No. CA130516 -7 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -24, specifically to permit a detached garage and carport possessing a minimum front yard setback of 1.2 metres and a maximum height of 3.55 metres, subject to the following conditions: 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 3.55 metres above finished grade; 4. That the location and size of the garage and attached carport be substantially and proportionally 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. Carried. Page 6 of 9 Page 9 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. f) 2013 -A -26 (Dennis Barker), 1024 Ridge Road West, East Half Lot 26, 51 R -9847, Part 1, Concession 5, Application for relief from Maximum Height and Maximum Floor Area in an Agricultural /Rural (A /RU) Zone. Dennis Barker, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA130516 -8 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approves Variance Application 2013 -A -26, specifically to permit an accessory building possessing a maximum height of 5.8 metres and a maximum floor area of 261 square metres: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.4 and 5.1.6 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 verifying, in writing by way of survey or real property report, that the detached accessory building will not exceed a height of 5.8 metres and a floor area of 261 square metres; 3. That the buildings and structures on the property, including the removal of a garage as shown, 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 9 Page 10 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. g) 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. Scott Macpherson declared a pecuniary interest on Item 5g) 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, as he is a neighbour. Scott Macpherson left at 11:58 a.m. and was not present during the discussion or vote on this matter. Jason Gullett, applicant, and Andrew Fyfe, Planner, were present. Rick Graziano, neighbour, read his correspondence Errol Doddridge, neighbour, noted the current commercial uses on the property, continuous equipment being used and stored on the property, and that an already operational dog grooming business on the property was causing vehicular congestion on a residential street. Ken Gellately, neighbour, reiterated Mr. Graziano's and Mr. Doddridge's comments. Alan Baker, resident, questioned why the driveway to the proposed building had already been installed, and noted that the applicant has moved debris onto the abutting property where a subdivision is being proposed. Motion No. CA130516 -9 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment defers Variance Application 2013 -A- 25, at the request of the applicant. Carried. Page 8 of 9 Page 11 of 251 4a) Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held ... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — May 16, 2013. 6. NEW BUSINESS: a) April 2013 OACA Newsletter. Motion No. CA130516 -10 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that the April 2013 OACA Newsletter be received. 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. Motion No. CA130516 -11 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Hasting It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 12:50 p.m. Scott Macpherson, Chair Carried. Carried. Derek Witlib for the Secretary Treasurer Page 9 of 9 Page 12 of 251 4b) Minutes of the Special Committee of Adjustment meeti... Thu..nship of Proud Heritage, Exciting Fromm Monday, June 10, 2013 Present: Regrets: THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers Scott Macpherson, Chair Allan Johnson Bruce Chappell Roy Hastings Larry Tupling TIME: 9:40 a.m. Staff present: Andria Leigh, Director of Development Services /Secretary Treasurer Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Scott Macpherson assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order. 2. ADOPTION 0 a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. SCA130610 -1 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the agenda for the Special Committee of Adjustment meeting of Monday, June 10, 2013 be received and adopted. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: None declared. Carried. Page 1 of 3 Page 13 of 251 4b) Minutes of the Special Committee of Adjustment meeti... Special Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — June 10, 2013. 4. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2013 -B -10 (Robert Cheslock), 9733 Highway 12 West, Concession 14, Part Lot 5, 51R-37351, Part 1 (Medonte), Application to permit an easement for Bell Canada and Rogers Cable from the Isabella estates subdivision to Highway 12. Greg Barker, Planner, was present on behalf of the applicant. Bruce Teskey, neighbour, provided clarification regarding the easement. Motion No. SCA130610 -2 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -10, for permission to grant two easements for Bell Canada and Rogers Cable, subject to the following conditions: 1. That three copies of a Registered Reference Plan indicating the lands subject to the easement be prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor be submitted to the Secretary - Treasurer; 2. That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. 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 3 Page 14 of 251 4b) Minutes of the Special Committee of Adjustment meeti... Special Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — June 10, 2013. 5. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, June 20, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. at Old Town Hall, 833 15/16 Sideroad. 6. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. SCA130610 -3 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 9:51 a.m. Carried. Scott Macpherson, Chair Andria Leigh, Secretary Treasurer Page 3 of 3 Page 15 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: (9� ✓D dome Prowl If,1,1g . Pxnrt g 1-mu, 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -09 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Consent Application Mike Mills 57 Line 7 North Concession 8, Part of Lot 20, Part 1, Plan 51 R -33801 Motion # Roll #: 4346 -010- 003 -32700 _ R.M.S. File #: D10 -45773 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Application 2013 -B -09: 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 applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicable Development Charges Fee for the County of Simcoe and the Simcoe County District School Board, and the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; 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 -09 is to consider the creation of a new industrial lot by way of severance. The subject lands have approximately 189.9 metres (623 feet) of frontage along Line 7 North, a depth of approximately 259.08 metres (850 feet), and occupy an area of approximately 3.88 hectares (9.6 acres). The lands proposed to be severed do not contain any buildings, would have frontage of approximately 100 metres (328 feet), a depth of approximately 203 metres (666 feet), occupy an area of approximately 2.02 hectares (5 acres), and are intended for future industrial use. The lands proposed to be retained would have frontage of approximately 89.9 metres (295 feet), a depth of approximately 259.08 metres (850 feet), occupy an area of approximately 1.86 hectares (4.6 acres) and are intended for continued residential use. Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -09 Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page 16 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... ANALYSIS: The property is located in the north east corner of the Oro Centre Secondary Plan Area and was re- designated through Official Plan Amendment No. 32 to be wholly contained within the Oro Centre Office - Industrial designation. The consent application proposes to sever the lands to be used for industrial purposes from the existing residential dwelling on the property. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan and Zoning By -law The subject property is designated Oro Centre Official Plan in accordance with Official Plan Amendment No. 32. Section C17 of the Township's Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Oro Centre designation and specifically Section C17.2.3 applies to the Office - Industrial designation and permits a wide variety of office and industrial uses that are intended to generate employment for the Township. Section C17.2.3 of the Official Plan does not contain policies specific to the severance of an industrial lot, however Section D2.2 of the Official Plan does contain the general consent policies which would allow for the consideration of severances of this nature and are discussed below: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed severed and retained lands would have frontage on Line 7 North, which is a public roadway maintained year -round by the Township of Oro - Medonte. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; The properties will not have access to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; This application proposes to create an industrial lot within the Oro Centre Commercial - Industrial area which was intended to be developed for these form of use. In addition, Line 7 North is a designated haul route designate to accommodate significant traffic volumes. The site lines and large frontages confirm that sufficient opportunity is available for the construction of a new entrance for the industrial lot subject to approval of an entrance permit by the Township's Transportation Department. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; The application proposes to create an industrial lot for the operation of a shop. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage of approximately 100 metres on Line 7 North and a lot area of Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -09 Page 2 of 7 Page 17 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... approximately 2 hectares. The lands to be retained would have frontage along Line 7 North of approximately 89 metres, and a lot area of approximately 2 hectares. The severed parcel currently contains a single detached dwelling and complies with the zone requirements, the severed lot would comply with the zone requirements of the Economic Development zone. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. The Township Zoning By -law has established a minimum lot area of 0.4 hectares for an industrial lot and therefore the proposed lot is 4 times the size allowing for sufficient area to accommodate the required servicing. f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Any future development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, where the construction of any industrial buildings may be subject to the completion of a lot grading and drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. g) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; The retained lands, will meet with the minimum required lot frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By -law. No development applications are active adjacent to the subject lands, and as such no negative impacts with respect to access are anticipated as a result of this consent. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; The lands are not located within the regulated area of the Conservation Authority and therefore no permits would be required under the Conservation Authority's Act. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; Any future development would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. The subject lands are zoned Economic Development (ED) Zone in conformity with the Oro Centre Official Plan designation. Table B3 of the Township's Zoning By -law contains the provisions for the ED zone and requires a minimum frontage of 40 metres and a lot area of 0.4 hectares for an industrial use. The lands proposed to be severed would comply with the minimum required lot frontage and lot area for an industrial use. 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" and, specifically, Section 3.3.4 states that "[consents] for the purpose ... consolidation of land Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -09 Page 3 of 7 Page 18 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... 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 by laws." Section 3.6.7 of the Plan, states that in rural areas, uses permitted are those listed in 3.6.6 plus highway commercial, institutional, residential lots created by consent, country recreational facilities, country residential subdivisions to a maximum of 40 lots, and rural business parks which would be consistent with the office - industrial designation and proposed use of the property. Section 3.6.8 further states that subdivision by consent is permitted for agricultural, agricultural related, highway commercial, and institutional uses. Lots should be restricted in size in order to conserve other lands in larger blocks for agricultural or environmental purposes. The lands comply with the requirements and provide sufficient lands on the retained block for future industrial purposes. 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) The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Policy 1.1.4.1(c) contains the policies that in rural areas that development that is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels should be promoted. The surrounding land uses consist of rural and residential uses immediately to the north, and commercial and office uses to the south. Therefore the proposed industrial building would be in keeping rural landscape of the area. In Policy 1.6, "Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities ", addresses issues such as the use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities should be optimized, wherever feasible, before consideration is given to developing new infrastructure and public service facilities. The lot would be serviced by an individual well and private septic system at the time that any buildings were proposed to be constructed. The proposed Consent application which provides for the severance to create an industrial lot with a lot area of 2.0 hectares is considered to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. 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(07', 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 where such severances are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. The proposed industrial severance is located within an area designated for such use by the Township's Official Plan and has been intended for such use since, the adoption of the Official Plan. Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -09 Page 4 of 7 Page 19 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... ICONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no concerns. Transportation Division - Building Division — no concens Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 — Location Map Schedule # 2 — Severance Sketch CONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -09 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: Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP Director, Development Services Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -09 Page 5 of 7 Page 20 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 1N 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -09 (Mills) r.. W ........ : ................... p+ * r..'; ;....... te .. :...+........... ._• ..................... 410.01.0500,11.111:441504,551101111131101 ........................................................ ......l+' nt..$.. . .�'ts 0. :22222:4;t2:::2101011 • :} •. i : µ ; r i* 1 w .'R C irR6 0011.}}00�wua.i1 ......................... ......................................... AA 1,01.0 +R. ...... ... i.i./R N rS ......................................... A• ..... .f HIGHWAY 31 SUBJECT PROPERTY (57 Line 7 North) HIGHWAY 11S Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -09 Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Page 6 of 7 Page 21 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: Proposed Lot(s) 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... SCHEDULE 2: SEVERANCE SKETCH 2013 -B -09 (Mills) , o J s E 1 cn N 0 +2J ("?55c 0i;,,7 rL. 2 Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -09 Page 7 of 7 Page 22 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 23 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: Proposed Lot(s) i 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... fi 4 3 Page 24 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 25 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 26 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 27 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013-B-09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 28 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 29 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013-B-09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 30 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 31 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 32 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), 57 Line 7 North... Page 33 of 251 5a) 10:00 a.m.: Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Derek Witlib Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, Re: Application for Consent B9/2013 (Mills) 57 Line 7 North Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe 2013 -B -09 (Mike Mills), eR_ A Watershed yr *By email only* Thank you for circulating this application for consent to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. Based on our review, we recommend that any approval of this application be deferred until the following has been fulfilled: ✓ A Natural Heritage Evaluation (NHE), under Designated Policy (DP) 6.25 of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, has been prepared to the satisfaction of the LSRCA and Township. As you may know, a wetland evaluated by the Ministry of Natural Resources is located to the north of the subject property. The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, based on Designated Policy 6.21 and 6.22, defines wetlands as key natural heritage and hydrologic features. 6.25 -DP further states that a Natural Heritage Evaluation is required for any development or site alteration proposed within 120 metres of these features. It should be noted that the NHE shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of 6.26 -DP of the Protection Plan. Please vise us of any decision on this matter. Ch rl.s F. B rg- •s, MCIP, RPP Senio Plan ing oordinator /cfb Copy: County of Simcoe, Rachelle Hamelin 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 Fax: 905.853.5881 Proud winner of the International Thiess Riveror,ze Web: www.LSRCA,on.ca E -Mail : Info ©LSRCA.on.ca Member of Conservation Ontario Page 34 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... TU,«ti,p —maw Prowl , wore TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -11 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Consent Application Robert & Janice Morton 4015 Line 6 North Concession 7, West Part of Lot 5 Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 020 - 003 -01301 R.M.S. File #: D10-45834 IREQUIRED CONDITIONS: IBACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent Application 2013 -B -11 is to consider the creation of a new agricultural lot by way of severance. The subject lands have approximately 156.7 metres (514 feet) of frontage along Line 6 North, a depth of approximately 730 metres (2394.68 feet), and occupy an area of approximately 11.5 hectares (28.413 acres). The lands proposed to be severed contain a single detached dwelling, would have frontage of 115 metres (377 feet), a depth of approximately 200 metres (656 feet) and occupy an area of approximately 2.2 hectares (5.4 acres). The lands proposed to be retained would have frontage of approximately 55 metres (180 feet), a depth of approximately 730 metres (2394.68 feet), occupy an area of approximately 9.4 hectares (23.23 acres), and are intended for a future single detached dwelling. IANALYSIS: The application proposes the creation of a new agricultural lot by way of severance for a proposed hobby farm. The lands proposed to be severed have a depth of 200 metres, frontage along Line 6 North of 115 metres, and a lot area of 2.2 hectares and contain the existing single detached dwelling. The land to be retained is proposed to have a lot area of approximately 9 hectares and are currently vacant. FINANCIAL: Not applicable. Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -11 Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Page 1 of 8 Page 35 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... IPOLICIES /LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan The subject property is designated Rural and Environmental Protection Two by the Township's Official Plan. Section C2.2 of the Official Plan outlines the permitted uses within the Rural designation, which include agricultural and single detached dwellings. In accordance with Schedule B of the Township's Official Plan there is a water course at the front of the property although not designated or zoned; in addition the subject lands are identified as a significant woodland. In addition there is a watercourse located on the adjacent property beyond the rear lot line, and therefore a section at the back of the subject lands are located in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone on Schedule A20 of the Zoning By -law 97 -95. Section C2.2 of the Official Plan does not have direct policies that relate to the creation of a lot for agricultural purposes, and thus the policies found in Section D2.2.1 (New lots by Consent) would apply and are assessed further below: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed severed and retained lands would have frontage on Line 6 North, which is a public roadway maintained year -round by the Township of Oro - Medonte. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; The properties will not have access to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; This application proposes to create a hobby farm. Significant traffic volume will not be generated by any agricultural or residential use if located on the proposed severed lands. The applicant will be required to apply for and obtain an entrance permit from the Township Transportation Department. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; The application proposes to create an agricultural lot for the operation of a hobby farm. The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage of approximately 115 metres on Line 6 North and a lot area of approximately 2.2 hectares. The lands to be retained would have frontage along Line 6 North of approximately 55 metres, and a lot area of approximately 9.4 hectares. The severed parcel currently contains a single detached dwelling and complies with the minimum required lot area of 2.0 hectares and 45 metres of lot frontage as required in the A /RU Zone for a hobby farm. It has been noted that the proposed severed and retained lands would meet the lot area and frontage of the A/RU Zone. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; The applicant will be required at the time of submission of building permit to meet all requirements for septic system installation and private water supply. The Township Zoning By -law has established a minimum lot area of 2.0 hectares for a hobby farm use in the A/RU Zone to reflect development on private services. Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -11 Page 2 of 8 Page 36 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Any future development will be reviewed by the Township Building Department, where the construction of any agricultural buildings and single detached dwelling may be subject to the completion of a lot grading and drainage plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. g) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; The retained lands, will meet with the minimum required lot frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By -law. No development applications are active adjacent to the subject lands, and as such no negative impacts with respect to access are anticipated as a result of this consent. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; Portions of the severed and retained lands at the front and the back of the property are within the regulation area of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and therefore would require further consultation in order to determine if a permit is required under the Conservation Authority's Act. To date the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority have not provided comments regarding this application other than to note the watercourse on the front of the property, their policy is to discourage the fragmentation of the watercourse through lot creation, and their requirement for further review of the natural heritage and hazard features on the site. As discussed above, portions of the property are located within the Environmental Protection Two overlay designation related to the significant woodlands on the site. Section B3.3 states that permitted uses in the EP2 designation are those permitted by the underlying designation (Rural in this case), which permits the hobby farm. The policies further state that development of any use that requires a zoning or official plan amendment is subject to an EIS; however this would not apply to this application. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; Any future development would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. As such, the proposed creation of a new agricultural lot by way of severance for a hobby farm is generally in keeping with the intent of the rural policies stated in the Official Plan. For the purpose of this application, it is noted that the creation of new lots by way of severance is permitted within the Rural designation, where the tests of severance listed in Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan are met. The proposed severed and retained lots would front on a municipal road, and would comply with relevant Zoning provisions. Based on these factors, the application to create a new agricultural lot through severance maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. On this basis, the policies of Section D2.2.1 have been satisfied. The severed and retained lands are partially regulated by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, who have stated verbally that an EIS is required to demonstrate there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or ecological functions of the area. Planning Staff are of the opinion that favorable comments from the NVCA are required before the application can proceed further. Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -11 Page 3 of 8 Page 37 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Township Zoning By -law 97 -95 The subject lands are zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. This application, if approved, would not result in any development that would impact the lands in the EP Zone which is located at the rear of the property. In addition there is a watercourse that traverses the front of the property and in accordance with the zone provisions any future buildings would be required to be a minimum of 30 metres from the top of bank of watercourse, sufficient area would be available to comply with this provision. 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 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 both residential and hobby farm and agricultural uses. Therefore, the application would comply with the provisions as prescribed by the Zoning By -law. County Official Plan The subject lands are designated Greenlands in the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Specifically, Section 3.7 contains the Greenland policies which require an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) to be completed prior to development occurring on the lot. The proposed severance for the creation of an agricultural lot for a hobby farm would not be consistent with the Greenland policies without the submission of an EIS, which is to be reviewed and approved by the County of Simcoe and NVCA. It is our opinion that the proposed development does not generally conform to the policies of the County Official Plan without this study being completion prior to a decision on the proposed severance. Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) Policy 2.1.4 contains the policies in Natural Heritage Areas in municipalities which does not permit development in significant woodlands, unless there has been a demonstration that there is no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. The requirement of an EIS would be required in order for the proposed severance to be permitted and to be considered to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Policy 1.1.4.1(c) contains the policies that in rural areas that development that is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels should be promoted. The surrounding land uses consist of large agriculturally related and rural residential land uses. Therefore the proposed hobby farm would be in keeping rural landscape of the area. The proposed Consent application which provides for the severance to create an agricultural lot with a lot area of 2.2 hectares for a hobby farm is considered to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement as it relates to the use; however would require the completion of the EIS to confirm that there is not negative impact on the watercourse and woodland features resulting through the lot creation. Places to Grow The application has been reviewed with reference to the Place to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. In Policy 2.2.9 - Rural Areas there are provisions that allow for development to occur outside of settlement areas in site specific locations with approved designations. As stated Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -11 Page 4 of 8 Page 38 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... above, the Township's Official Plan does not have policies within the Rural Designation, for the creation of agricultural Tots, however the proposed use of a hobby farm as the main use on the proposed severed lot would be in accordance with the Rural policies within the Official Plan. Based on the above the proposed agricultural severance in the Rural designation would be in conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan. 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. The application has been reviewed with reference to the Place to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. In Policy 2.2.9 - Rural Areas there are provisions that allow for residential development to occur outside of settlement areas in site specific locations with approved designations. The subject lands are designated Rural and Environmental Protection Two Overlay within the Township Official Plan, which requires the submission an EIS to ensure that the development of the lands will not have a negative effect on the environmental features. Once the EIS has been reviewed by the Township, County of Simcoe and the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, it can then be determined if the proposed recreation of a lot would conform with the Place to Grow legislation. With the absence of an EIS the proposed application does not conform to the Places to Grow legislation. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — No Concerns Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — The property appears to be within the County Greenlands Designation; an EIS is required in support of the application for the proposed severance. There also appears to be a drainage feature crossing the front of the property. The NVCA discourages new lots which bisect environmental features such as watercourses. We would also discourage a new driveway across the watercourse and through potential natural hazard areas. County of Simcoe — 1 ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 — Location Map Schedule # 2 — Severance Sketch Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -11 Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Page 5 of 8 Page 39 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... ICONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -11 BE DEFERRED, pending submission of a scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS) to the satisfaction of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, the County of Simcoe, and the Township of Oro - Medonte. Respectfully submitted: _______4,1_ -__e Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP Director, Development Services Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -11 Page 6 of 8 Page 40 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -11 (Morton) Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -11 Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Page 7 of 8 Page 41 of 251 5b) 2013-B-11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... SCHEDULE 2: SEVERANCE SKETCH 2013-B-11 (Morton) E. 1/2 OF LOT 5, CONCESSION 7 E. 1/2 OF LOT (1255) 1 CONCESSION I 17 02,9 1.4 p purii PIN 58528-0031 (Lia N 25°18' 15 W rENOLD_cra. 515 01715t0"611 0 2 0 • 1 tWELLING (No.4015) 199.4' to well S. 1/2 OF S. 1/2 OF W. 1/2 OF LOT 5, CONCESSION 7 8 pp„poso Tt Dar located siddle el fEcnn gate 599 (059) 514 I (PROP) 51420' (15(011 N 311056. 40. W (0ff1211NCE BEARING) ORIGINAL ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN CONCESSIONS 6 AND 7 PIN 58528-0001 (LT) • W 1 /9 (W JflT A . CONCESSION 7 SW A, gr7 0255) Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-B-11 Page 8 of 8 Page 42 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 43 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... z � �O to O ,O Aflal HaSf ZFo65N� e �rr s n srm W Up 1" I tl L NUISSHJNUJ V ,LO I MU 6/ L M O 0 O G =MEXICO offf[ ` e,aa sN U.'D zzmstsas w. tezgxcs ¢Lava 851196 H szzzWaN rL . JZ'66G 9�a9 s[,b5N nnal n141. L NOISS $JNOJ'910130 Zit 'M30Z/I'SJ0Z /I'S ' gm >,..xs 3a z /ts an■ L/IN NFBM*ee EttErl 89%EL 9.0 ■FLON T d-t I SilIDV SIP -Veld I�� (1.1) SZelli LSN Nua m L NOISSaJNOD ` .1.01 d0 Zit d0 ZITS d0 Z/i 'N 1 ay,., _ e cos • {{��t W1 En. s. VI aNv tJlN SLY 4M�vR 65 a fi (ED ezao-szsas Nua zeze -aL5 ' Z Diva NOISS.SJNOJ '510730 Z/I 'M Page 44 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 45 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 46 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 47 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 48 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 49 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 50 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 51 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 52 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 53 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Page 54 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... Kathy Marsden Rosemarie Lafrance 3987 Line 6 North Coldwater, ON LOK 1E0 June 17, 2013 The Secretary of the Committee The Corporation of the Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 ZOIS ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Dear Committee: Re: Hearing 2013 -B -11 application for severance Dear Committee: This letter is to inform you and express our opposition to the application for lot severance at 4015 Line 6 North, Concession 7, West Part of Lot 5. The reasons we oppose this application are: 1. The severance of this lot goes against the County of Simcoe's plan for intensification of more populated areas. 2. The severance of this lot will set a precedent for future severance applications for the development of ecologically sensitive land. 3. Severance and development of this lot will deter the variety of wildlife that currently resides there and in the surrounding area. 4. As owners of the adjoining lot, we have recently implemented a forest management plan for the purpose of encouraging, supporting and protecting wildlife. Severance and development of this lot will interfere with the support, encouragement and protection of wildlife in the area. We appreciate notice of the application and the opportunity to express our views. We request to be informed of the decision by the Committee once the decision has been made. Sincerely, Kathy Marsden Rosemarie Lafrance 0 Page 55 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... co 4.7 Member Municipalities Watershed Counties Member of Conservation ONTARIO June 18, 2013 Andria Leigh, Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2X0 Dear Ms. Leigh; fib) Zoc t l "56\,(-6z3 co- 4' Re: Application for Consent 2013 -B -11 (Morton) Part Lot 5, Concession 7, 4015 Line 6 North Township of Oro - Medonte (Formerly Township of Medonte) The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for consent in accordance with Natural Heritage and Natural Hazard policies established under the Provincial Policy Statement. Based on our review of the proposal NVCA staff are concerned that retained parcel would require a new crossing of a watercourse to access a building envelope. In addition, the proponent has not provided documentation addressing the impacts on natural heritage features for this area. The following comments provide further details on the above noted key matters. Natural Hazards The front part of the property is bisected by a tributary of the Coldwater River and due to a significant upstream drainage area, this area may be within a Regional Storm floodplain. Furthermore, there is the potential for erosion hazards along the creek channel. The Provincial Policy Statement which provides guidance on planning matters states that development shall generally be directed to areas outside of hazardous lands adjacent to river and stream systems which are impacted by flooding hazards and /or erosion hazards. Furthermore, development (including the creation of a new lot) and site alteration shall not be permitted within a floodway regardless of whether the area of inundation contains high points of land not subject to flooding. There does not appear to be a development envelope on the property which would not involve the development within the floodplain or erosion hazards of the watercourse. The proposed lot does not meet the intent of Natural hazard policies established under the Provincial Policy Statement. In addition, NVCA's Planning and Regulation Guidelines identified that no new lots should be created that would require a new crossing of a wetland or hazardous land limit to access a building envelope. Celebrating 50 Years in Conservation 1960 -2010 NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation Page 1 of 2 John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On LOM 1TO Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.nvca_on.ca Email: admin@nvca.on.ca Page 56 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... June 18, 2013 Re: Application for Consent 2013 -B -11 (Morton) Part Lot 5, Concession 7, 4015 Line 6 North Township of Oro - Medonte (Formerly Township of Medonte) Natural Heritage The property is traversed by a tributary of Coldwater River and is part of a significant woodland with wildlife habitat. The property is within the Greenlands designation of the Simcoe County Official Plan and it has been identified as significant woodland within the Official Plan of Oro - Medonte. Notwithstanding the Natural Hazards associated with the site, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required to support lot creation within the County Greenlands. Please be advised that lands in association to the Coldwater River tributary are under the regulatory jurisdiction of the NVCA whereby permits are required under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to any development. In summary, due to the identified concerns NVCA staff are not in a position to support the proposed consent application. Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward a copy of any decision. Sincerely, Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Copy: County of Simcoe, Ms. Rachelle Hamelin Page 2 of 2 Page 57 of 251 5b) 2013 -B -11 (Robert and Janice Morton), 4015 Line 6 Nor... ,■„, County of Simcoe Main Line (705) 726 -9300 COUNTY OF Planning Toll Free 1- 866- 893 -9300 S1MCOLA 1110 Highway 26, Fax (705) 727 -4276 Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 simcoe.ca 06-)zot -(3- •• PLANNING 4 W; Derek Witlib on behalf Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Mr. Witlib, RE: Consent Application 2013 -B -11 West Part of Lot 5, Concession 7, (4015 Line 6 North) Formerly Township of Medonte, now Township of Oro - Medonte June 19, 2013 Thank you for circulating the above -noted consent application to the County of Simcoe. The subject property is designated Rural in the Township's Official Plan and designated Greenlands in the County Official Plan, therefore is subject to the General, Rural and Greenlands policies of the County of Simcoe Official Plan. The applicant is requesting consent to create a 2.2 hectare (5.4 acre) residential lot. The proposed retained portion of the subject property would be approximately 9.4 hectares (23.2 acres). The subject lands are within an area identified as the Oro Moraine (0M2) Copeland Forest unit of the County Greenlands designation. The Copeland Forest is a large swamp forest that has been classified as a provincially significant wetland. The area immediately to the south of the forest forms part of the Oro Moraine proper, which is typified by undulating topography and very sandy soils. Ground water recharge occurs throughout the moraine, a portion of which subsequently makes its way to the deep regional aquifer, while some discharges into wetland (bottomland) forests situated at the base of the moraine, which in turn provide baseflow to the Coldwater and Sturgeon Rivers. One of the significant habitat functions performed by the Copeland Forest is as a winter deer concentration area. An `Unevaluated Wetland' has also been recognized by the Ministry of Natural Resources on the site. Section 3.7.6 of the County Official Plan states that residential lots created by consent may be permitted in the Greenland designation, conditional on acceptable results from an Environmental Impact Statement (E.I.S.). In addition, County of Simcoe Official Plan policy 3.6.11 states that residential lots in the Rural designation should be restricted in size in order to conserve other lands in larger blocks for agricultural or environmental purposes. Consent lots should be developed to an approximate maximum size of one hectare, except where larger sizes may be suitable because of environmental constraints or design considerations. The County of Simcoe does not object to the proposed lot creation, provided an EIS demonstrates that the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the natural features and associated ecological functions of area and the residential lot size is reduced in order to maintain conformity with the County of Simcoe Official Plan. Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require additional information, do not hesitate to call, 726 -9300, ext.1315. Sincerely, The Corporation of the County of Simcoe Rachelle Hamelin Planner III cc. Bruce Hoppe, Manager of Development Planning Chris Hibberd, NVCA PLD- 003 -001 Page 58 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 59 of 251 TOWnIMP OoFOoRO- NEDONI7TE (9r :"1 edo te, REPORT Application Noe 2013 -B -12 to 2013 -B -14 To: Committee off Adjustment Prepared By: Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 SuNect: Consent Applications [harry, [roan, and G` ®bert Rix 1922 Warminster Sd1er© Concession 14, Cast Part Lot 6 (Former Township of Died ®rate) Motion # Roll #: 4346 -020 =004 -19200 G` RCS. Fie #: D10-45 35 REOUl1 IED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision on Consent Applications 2013 -B -12 to 2013 -B -14, respectively: 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 applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; 3. That the applicant pay $ 2,000.00 for each of the three (3) lots created as cash -in -lieu of a parkland contribution; 4. That the applicant pay $9,302.74 for each of the three (3) Tots created as a pro -rated fee for upgrades to the municipal water system in the Warminster settlement area; 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 the Consent Applications is to consider the creation of a 3 new lots by way of severance, for future single detached residential uses. The subject lands have approximately 268 metres (879.2 feet) of frontage along Warminster Sideroad, a depth of approximately 620 metres (2034 feet), and occupy an area of approximately 19.4 hectares (47.9 acres). The 3 new Tots proposed to be severed would possess frontages of 33.3 metres (109.25 feet), depths of 60 metres (196.8 feet and lot areas of approximately 2000.29 square metres (0.494 acres). The lands proposed to be retained would have a frontage of approximately 168 metres (551 feet) and an area of approximately 18.8 hectares (46.4 acres) and are intended for continued agricultural use. AEI ALY5lS: The three lots to be severed are located immediately east of the three residential lots created by Consent in December 2012. in the future the intent is a total of three more residential Tots would be proposed to the wets of the existing three residential lots approved in 2012 for a total of nine residential lots. The lands proposed to be severed are currently vacant; and the retained lands contain the existing residence and accessory buildings. Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application hio. 2013 =5 =12 through 2013 -B -14 Page 1 of 7 Page 59 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 60 of 251 FINANCIAL: Not applicable. POLOC ES /LEOOSLATOON: u ®w O •o OffoclaO POaon The subject lands are designated Rural Settlement Area in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C3 policies relate to the use and development of land in this designation. Specifically, Section C3.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses include low density residential uses" as proposed by this application. Beyond this provision, Section C3 of the Official Plan is silent with respect to the severance of land in the Rural Settlement Area. It is rioted, however, that Section A5 of the Official Plan contains provisions related to the Township's "Servicing Strategy" and states that "[servicing] in Warminster ... is by municipal water system and private septic systems ..." as proposed for these applications. On this basis, Planning staff must review the general "Subdivision of Land" policies contained in Section 02.2.1 of the Township's Official Plan, to evaluate the proposed applications for consent. SecU "n 02.201 e Subdlivusion of Lard poOicies Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains the tests for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that 6s maintained year round basis: The proposed retained lot and each of the three proposed severed lots would have frontage on a public road (Warminster Side Road) maintained by the Township on a year -round basis. Lb) Does not have direct access to .a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the afunty saapporfs the request; Neither the lands to be retained nor any of the lands to be severed have direct access to a Provincial Highway or a County Road. c) Will not cause : traffic hazard; The subject applications were circulated to transportation staff for the Township, who have not expressed any objection to these applications. Entrance permits would be required for the new driveways at the time of site development/construction. d) Has adequ.:]txe size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning 0y -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; The subject lands are zoned Residential One (R1) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97 -95. Table B1 of the Township's Zoning By -law requires a Minimum Lot Frontage of 30 metres, and a minimum lot area of 0.2 hectares. Consent Applications 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13, and 2013 -B -14 DeveDopmerat services Riieetirog Date Jima 20, 20113 Aproncstion No. 2013-B-12 through 1 2013 -B -14 Page 2 of 7 Page 60 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... propose the creation of three new Tots with frontages of 33.3 metres and areas of 0.2 hectares in compliance with the provisions of the Ri zone. Therefore, based on the above characteristics for the proposed severed and retained lands, the proposal is considered to result in the creation of three new residential lots with one retained lot, all of which will have adequate size and frontage in accordance with the Township's Zoning By-law. Similarly, since the proposed severed lands are located within the Warminster settlement area and will be surrounded by existing residential uses, with lots of similar sizes and frontages, the proposed development would be considered compatible with the uses taking place on adjacent lands. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of selvage dis.oeal; The applicants provided a hydrogeological assessment report of the subject lands concluding that individual sewage disposal systems are appropriate to accommodate development on the subject lands. With respect to water supply, as noted above, the Township's Official Plan states that "[servicing] in Warminster ... is by municipal water system ... ". In that regard, comments received from the Environmental Services Department note that "each lot is required to pay ... $9,302.74 for water system upgrades" and that "they will require, in addition, a water meter and a trench inspection ... ". Therefore, subject to the further consideration of these applications, it would be recommended that conditions of provisional consent on each application include the requirement for the payment of $9,302.74 per lot, for upgrades to the municipal water system in Warminster. The requirement for the water meter and trench inspection would not be imposed as conditions of provisional consent but rather would be addressed at the time of building permit submission. 7) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patters in the area; Any future residential development will be reviewed by the Township Building Division, where the construction of buildings and /or structures may be subject to the completion of a lot grading plan to ensure water runoff has no negative impact on neighbouring properties. 01) Will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this plan; As proposed, the lands to be retained and severed comply with the minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage provisions of the Zoning Bylaw for their respective zones. ®eveiopment Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 papiication loo. 2013 -3 -12 through 2013 -3 =14 Page 3 off 7 Page 61 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... h) Win not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; Neither the lands to be retained or severed have area regulated by the conservation authorities. i) Will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for dither uses in the area; it is noted that any future residential development on the proposed severed Tots would require connection to the municipal water system in Warminster. County off Simcoe Offfficia0 Pan Pursuant to Schedule 5.1 of the County's Official Plan, Warminster is identified as a "Settlement' in the Township, the boundaries of which Section 3.5.4 of the County's Official Plan states "are shown in local municipal official plans and are considered to be the approved settlement area boundaries of this Plan." In that regard, Section 3.5.12 states that "[in] Settlement Designations, subdivision may occur ... by consent." Additionally, Section 3.3 of the County's Official Plan contains "General Subdivision and Development Policies ", and Section 3.3.3 requires that "[lots] may be created only where they have access to and frontage on a public highway ... ". Further, it is noted that these applications have been circulated to the County of Simcoe who, as of the writing of this report have not stated any objection to the proposed development. Therefore, it is the opinion of the Planning Department that Consent Applications 2013-B-12 to 2013- B -14 are considered to conform to the general intent of the County's Official Plan. P cvnca0 PoOicy Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient and use and development patterns. Section 1.1 of the PPS contains policies related to "Managing and Directing Land Use to Achieve Efficient Development and Land Use Patterns ", and states that "Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by ... d) avoiding development and land use patterns that would prevent the efficient expansion of settlements areas ... e) promoting cost - effective development standards to minimum land consumption and servicing costs ..." (Section 1.1.1). Further, Section 1.1.3 contains policies for "Settlement Areas ", and states that: O "Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted' (Section 1.1.3.1); o "Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on ... a) densities and a mix of land uses which ... 1. efficiently use land and resources; 2. are appropriate for ... the infrastructure ..." (Section 1.1.3.2); and • "New development taking place in designated growth areas should occur adjacent to the existing built -up area and shall have a compact form, mix of uses and densities that allow for the efficient use of land ..." (Section 1.1.3.7). Therefore, since the proposed development would result in the creation of three new lots within a settlement area, and would be located within an existing built -up area, the proposed Consent is considered to be generally consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. DeveiopmmePnt Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 i ppiicatiooro Flo. 2013 -B-12 taorough 2013 -B -14 Page 4 of 7 Page 62 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 63 of 251 Growth Man boo• the Greater GoNen Horseshoe, 2012 The subject Consent Applications have been reviewed by Planning staff with respect to the Places to Grow policies. Section 2.2.2 of the Growth Plan contains policies for "Managing Growth ", and states that "Population and employment growth will be accommodated by — a) directing a significant portion of new growth to the built -up areas of the community through intensification ... [and] i) directing development to settlement areas ... ". Therefore, since the proposed development would result in the creation of three (3) new residential lots within a settlement area, where it would be directly accessed by an existing road and located in an area where it would be compatible with adjacent land uses, the proposed developments are considered to maintain the general intent of the Province's Growth Plan. CONSULTATIONS: Transportation & Environmental Services Department — payment of $9,302.74 per lot required for water system upgrades Building Department — ATTACHMENTS: ACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Context Map CONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Consent Applications 2013 -B -12 to 2013-B-14 BE APPROVED, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, for the reasons that the application generally conforms to the Places to Grow policies, the Official Plans for the County and the Township, and to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Respectfully submitted: Andria Leigh, MCIP ' PP Director of Development Services ©evs0opmeov4 SeMces 111fieefflng Fats June 20, 2013 pp0ucstoon No. 2013 -3-12 'ER-trough 20134-14 Page 6 of 7 Page 63 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP (2013-1312 through 2313-B-14 GFIx) I 1 • • -SUB JC CT PG4OPER Y- 11922- /AR INS1TER SIDEROAD) Devepopmmeovt Seovuoes I feet g Date Ja.00ve 20, 2013 Appppa±atuonn Flo. 2013-B-12 through 2013 -B-14 Page 6 of 7 Page 64 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... SCHEDULE ULE 2: CO TEXT MAP (2013 =19=12 through 20113 =C3 =14 Mx) Development Services Wleeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 =13-12 through 2013-8-14 Page 7 off 7 Page 65 of 251 ,:C1 -1.131 Halt.lt. i ill 1 II 4 li UR NAI2:; 'F I l 1 itt SC4LRC7 FA -ZIJCLS ;I 14 fATA:: o ;.ttyOR, .'U. R:;S R. rims =n z:: _ 1 I �� Proposed 7h[ee (3) Severed r' j?;,,. is =a��• •Ivr. . F. •w -aaaN s �\ �� .. r �. r... .1 �� I ,".1 I 1 v. 1 I II ` IT i I I USE: ye xvll I I - R li _v1 I L � 1 t I I .421 4t, _C .. C: ~ jI 4 faATION, \ 4Q i�j{ —YI 5_f y it .t Fr .l . . l om. ` nm.v .wc Nua.c ara r.¢.I •. <4:t1. Ct II-1- '.NuVvavlte tiY +;.v: I I I I 1 I t , 1 I j 1 1 ITT 1.- j 1 1117, .t, 1 1 I______ I 1____L___ L— I 1 — I Ti !JflD•tE MI-- MORGAN SEVERANCE DRAWING ~E MR a /f ui i- E-t OF Uff 0 WAX:E41PV 14 W TMIINSHIP YF 1 1 I 1 I_ I:Ny6 F SINCODONTE COUNTY OF SIA/CCE Development Services Wleeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 =13-12 through 2013-8-14 Page 7 off 7 Page 65 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 66 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 67 of 251 DTI 1 ._,, I- 1 cr) „, r__ FT-, _ , _ a u it —;-- _ —__ Z- — I v� ' F I ,w I 4 I L- - —i - . _yf1C� i�l�tl`✓] / / � Q ° = / w ir ,/ g 9 ; Ix o ran. I� - - - -c__� y ly ,a— v LP .mac �� � I ,-. I �I: - - - - -- -7 -- ---- Page 67 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 68 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 69 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 70 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 71 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 72 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 73 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 74 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 75 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 76 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 77 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... Page 78 of 251 5c) 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13 and 2013 -B -14 (Barry, Brian and... ,;..bow 0S June 19, 2013 Secretary of the Committee Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Re: Notice of Hearing 2013 -B -12, 2013 -B -13, 2013 -B -14 Barry, Brian and Robert Rix Committee Members: Please accept this letter as an expression of our views regarding the application to create 3 new Tots by way of severance at 1922 Warminster Side Road, Concession 14. We own the abutting residence (2004 Warminster Side Road) to the 3 new proposed lots, and are requesting consideration of the following: • The minimum interior yard set -back be changed from 2.5 metres to 4.5 metres as per the existing exterior side yard set -backs (or greater if possible) • Preserve tree & rock buffer between properties • Because of the historical significance of the stone fence, we would also like it to be stated that the stone fence cannot be moved Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to a written copy of the decision. Written decision can be mailed to 2004 Warminster Side Road, RR #2, Orillia, Ont. L3V 6H2. Sincerely, Tina & Peter Strik Page 79 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 80 of 251 TOWNSHII P OF ORO -MC Do ON7[ Qi '" ✓/ktioFtte, RE POT Pn d U&nigr, L-rhing Funr. Application No: 2013-A-13 To: Committee o4 Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Wptlib, Manager, PDanri nm Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Jason Kho) 973 Lakeshore Goad Cast Concession 10, Plan fah-219, foot 3 Motion # Roil #: 4346-010-010-03102 H.M.S. Fills #: 00113 -44225 [HEMMED CONDm®NIs: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.6 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, including landscaping, submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying by way of survey /real property report, prior to pouring of the foundation, that the detached accessory building does not exceed a floor area of approximately 134.7 square metres; 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 for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. 0ACDSGROMND: This application was previously deferred by the Committee of Adjustment on March 21, 2013 at the request of the applicant. The property presently contains an existing one storey dwelling and a one - storey detached garage with carport. The applicant is proposing to demolish and replace the garage and carport, as follows: Existing Garage and Carport: - Height: 1- storey - Garage floor area: 45.4 square metres (490 square feet) - Carport floor area: 24.6 square metres (265 square feet) -Total floor area: 70 square metres (754 square feet) Development services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2 0 1 3 - - 1 3 Page 1 of 7 Page 80 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 81 of 251 Proposed Garage and Carport: - Height: 1.5 storeys - Garage floor area: 97.5 square metres (1050 square feet) - Carport floor area: 37.2 square metres (400 square feet) -Total floor area: 134.7 square metres (1450 square feet) ANALYSIS: The applicant has the following revisions to the application: Original Application (March 2013): The applicant, for the purposes of the detached garage with carport, originally requested the following relief from Zoning By-law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline (Res derotfa] SR i Zone Rem aolredl Pr®r K�e� Section 5.1.3 (a) — Front Yard Setback 7.5 metres 1.2 metres Section 5.1.3 (d) — interior Side Yard Setback 2.0 metres 1.67 metres Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height of accessory 4.5 metres 5.88 metres building (garage) & 5.64 metre(carport) Section 5.1.5 Maximum lot coverage 5% 5.25% Section 5.1.6 Maximum floor area 70 square metres 139.4 square metre (garage and carport) Revised Application (June 2013): The applicant has revised the application as follows: Zone: Shoreline Residerotual iSR) Zone G gill oredl Gar ®pdl Section 5.1.3 (a) — Front Yard Setback 7.5 metres 2.6 metres Section 5.1.6 Maximum floor area 70 square metres 134.7 square metres (garage and carport) FNANClAL Not applicable. POUCIES /LLEGISLATfl N: 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. Residential uses, including accessory buildings, are generally permitted by the Official Plan. Section Development Services fleeting Date June 20, 2013 ApppOicetion No. 2013 -A -13 Page 2 of 7 Page 81 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... C5.1 of the Official Plan states that one of the objectives of the Shoreline designation is, "To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area." Planning Staff recognizes that the existing garage has stood since 2004. As such, the building may be a feature that the residents of the area have become accustomed to as part of the neighbourhood with no adverse impacts. In revising his plans, the applicant has made an effort to preserve the neighbourhood's character by: • Slightly reducing the floor area and height of the proposed garage, slightly re- positioning the garage and no longer requesting variances for interior side yard setback, building height and lot coverage; • Situating the proposed garage at the same front yard setback as the existing garage; and • Proposing landscaping (shrubs) between the garage and Lakeshore Road East; While the proposed garage would still be larger than the existing garage, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the changes made by the applicant to reduce or eliminate some of the originally requested variances, combined with the proposed Landscaping, would result in a development that would lessen the garage's visual impact on the neighbourhood. Based on the above, the requested variances are considered to generally conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning Bylaw, 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. Since the applicant is now proposing to position the garage slightly farther from the road than originally proposed, the proposed garage would be at the same setback from Lakeshore Road as the existing garage, plus it will now allow sufficient space in which to plant shrubs to soften the appearance of the structure. At the same time, the parking situation would be improved because the orientation of the proposed garage would no longer force cars to park in the deficient space between the garage and the road. Instead, the applicant is proposing to relocate the driveway in a manner that would enable parking to occur beside the garage and entirely on private property, rather than overhang onto the road allowance. The applicant's proposed reductions to the height and the floor area of the garage from the original application would to help to reduce the visual impact (massing) of the garage when viewed from the road and the garage would remain smaller than the existing dwelling on the lands. Therefore, Planning Staff is satisfied that the proposed revisions to the application would result in a building that would remain accessory, both in its appearance and use, to the main dwelling. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances would conform to the general intent of the Zoning By -law and are appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Development Services Nieettlng Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 -A -13 Page 3 off 7 Page 82 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Is the variance minor? Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variances, as revised, are minor since the applicant's changes to his plans would reduce cumulative negative impacts of the originally requested variances. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — Applicant to verify at time of building permit application that the sewage system meets the required setbacks of Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - 1 ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plans (Original and Revised) Schedule 3: North & East Elevations (Original and Revised) ICONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -13 should be approved, for the reasons that it meets the general intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law, it is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot and it is minor. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -13 Page 4 of 7 Page 83 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... SCHEDULE e WWCAMON MAP 2013-A-13 Mho) Development Services Meeting Date Jame 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-13 Page 5 of 7 Page 84 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... SCHEDULE 2: 2013-A-13 (Kho) O ROGNAL S r[E FLAB (MARCH 2013) L M:SHOP, ROAD i , -:, • mama ure� = fi' F y I � cxe N.. ou wa I g \,s ryW,\ icnan In ..v..... I11111' anlMCOk1. 1' II 0 j I I I 1 n .! 1 1 1 III i l f ■ $(<E AN ........... k�- mesa, erms.• ��_.._ �� mn N.n II i l9EV SF D SITE PLAN (JULIE 2013) rrkeahon Roxd aA `NOPV1,172uGRMP. alLIVEVPAY RECEIVED NAY 7 1 IDIS ORO -MY oMITE TOW r SHIP Devepoprment Servpces f leetprog Date June 20, 2013 Appppoetton Flo. 2013 =A -13 Page 6 of 7 Page 85 of 251 MAIM AMES 5d) 2013-A-13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... ORFMNAL NORTH SCHEDULE 3: 2013-A-13 (Kho) EAST ELEVATIONS (MARCH 2013) til iu 1" !Ng REVMED N RTH EAST ELEVATIONS (JUNE 2013) .41d „„MW' lIlhk EASU:1110 t oiman sin.0.Ta RECEIVED MAY 31 11 ORO-MED UTE TOWN 10 GM TOM Development Services Application No. 2013-A-13 Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Page 7 of 7 Page 86 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 87 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 88 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 89 of 251 i �A�ds x-28 � i i IT x i. a° ?o ?h is" 1 i 9 0 P B _RR 3 -, _ 3 l I i ra gyp?' &� �'N Pogo °g$o 9p$_ ° IIIIII m .0 1 �[ e q ,'0. 2 0 g IL 2-6-9) a R o •4 A C $ O O b i 1 b `_ 1t .3 b 4 z 1 d 1 lY= .020:0' 9' T N botl a 1 4 l E' =11111 -1 111 =11111 ° M1111 =111 1111111111111111 III -11111 0 =11111 111 °11111 =11111 =11111 =1111N 0 111 =111_111 - 11111- 111- - 11111= °II 111111— 111111 - 111111 III111E111 111E-111111---1111 = 111111 11E = 111111°111111= 111 =111111°111111 =111111 =111111 = 111111 = 111111 -1111 ® ui Li a 0-'1-- ; �g w z o o III o CC 1 i 111= 111111= 111111= 111111E11INf 111111=111II=IIII 111 11111= 111111 =111111 �I _._ _{ = 111111 =111111 = 111111 -111 III= 111111 = 111111 =111N� 111111 = 111111 = 111111 -1111 III = 111111= 111111= 111111 = 111111= 111111 =111111 =1 III- 1111 = "— Page 89 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 90 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... m a m 0 N West & South Elevations t �P a.9 %S�^9 1 �u s" 8a;ijxs I s y O adg; z 2 7gg-,� Q 1I {1 s� $ Lo JH� I i q & : O �� ■Q6S 10 c�—) e -t'. .2 u o^.O .. < g g z° s SS a Page 91 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... �� °a Rb�� I llji'Ii i lla 1 b g Ise €- _4 la 1 ;1 as ei?Y�o m 6,ol�1m �' o x E .s-I %3- Po 4 4 ) cl 5 b 4 i w mosto .1 rte. vus g a 3,771117 WOITI ALI NMI NO • b 011133 17011 AO lun RIO wriaa Poem a Page 92 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... 0 ri Jo. I 1„ „Ii•; yp e !!h o s 1 c . %�n8'rs °$ � Sig 9 Sk �i b"�'�$U_ F. I w g" 172 N J 11 J W U a zTo w�€ s" z 5.0 s9 0_ 1 , w0 e Cross - Section ff 411 ^�I11- 3 mwisrawwraw w Im. II =111111 ,;.II =1q 111111= 1I= 11 = 111111 =1 11=11 11IITI11 1111 =111111 °11111 111111= 111111- 1� =11 E-11111 = 111111 =111111 -III 11= 11=111111= \ \'�n 111111 =11111= 11111— III= 111 =11111 =11111 =111111= 111111=11111 -1 III 1 YN =111111 = 111111 "- 11111 =1 .� IIIII 11111 =1 ...,::; =IIIII ''- ��iiilli 11111 =1 111111= 11111161111 1 =III IIJI — • Page 93 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 94 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 95 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 96 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 97 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 98 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... Page 99 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... June 8, 2013 RECEIVE I 0.00 JUN 7 4 201j ORO MEDONTE To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee ofAdjustm• • TOWNSI-11P Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 — Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter in full support of Jason Kho's application for a minor variance. My property is directly east of Jason's and we share the interior side lot line. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. The privacy and enjoyment of my property has not been affected. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Marie Metsa (power of attorney for) Marg Laansoo 977 Lakeshore Road East Hawkestone, ON LOL 1TO Page 100 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... 500 zo(-fi —iiktsLrys2_616,0 June 8, 2013 To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee of Adjustment Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 — Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter to show my support for Jason Kho's minor variance application. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. My home is diagonally across the street. Jason's current garage is not in our existing line of sight nor will be the proposed one. I feel that the proposed garage plan will not diminish the characteristics of the neighbourhood. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, David and Olga Coulter 968 Lakeshore Road E Hawkecrrno "N LOL 1T0 RECEIVED JUN 1 1 315 ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Page 101 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... 500 Z0(3 19-'3 June 8, 2013 To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee of Adjustment Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 - Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter to show my support for Jason Kho's minor variance application. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. My home is located a few houses down the street from Jason's. I feel that the garage is consistent with the character of the neighbourhood and will not detract from it any way shape or form. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael and Anna Pape 980 Lakeshore Road E Hawkestone, ON LOL 1TO RECEIVED JUN 1 1 201.1 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP 0 Page 102 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... c)0-10(3--/c)-(3 of June 8, 2013 To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee of Adjustment Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 — Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter to show my full support for Jason Kho's application for minor variance 2013 -A -13. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. In order to exit the neighbourhood from my home, I drive to the junction of Poplar Crescent and Lakeshore Road East. I am quite familiar with Jason's existing garage. I feel that the proposed plans to replace his existing garage will not negatively impact the surrounding charm of the neighbourhood. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Darren ?au 21 Poplar Crescent Hawkestone, ON LOL 1TO RECEIVED JUN 1 1 X016 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Page 103 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... c:0 7;f3(— June 8, 2013 To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee of Adjustment Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 — Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to show my support for Jason Kho's application for minor variance 2013 -A -13. My home is located directly behind Jason's and we share the rear lot line. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. The privacy and enjoyment of my property has not been affected. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Robert and Renee Brennan 763 Line 9 S Hawkestone, ON LOL 1TO RECEIVED JUN 1 1 21113 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Page 104 of 251 5d) 2013 -A -13 (Jason Kho), 973 Lakeshore Road East, Con... June 8, 2013 To: Oro Medonte Planning Department and Committee of Adjustment Re: Application for minor variance 2013 -A -13 - Jason Kho To Whom It May Concern: Sc3,)lc1- P-(3 A(0 O I am writing this letter to show my support for Jason Kho's minor variance application. I have no objection to the size or location of his proposed garage. My property is directly adjacent to the west and we share an interior side lot line. Currently, I cannot see his existing garage due to the trees and bushes between our properties. Jason's proposed plans will not change this and my privacy and enjoyment of my property will not be affected. As well, I feel that the proposed garage plans will not diminish the charm of the neighbourhood. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steve and Maureen White 967 Lakeshore Road E Hawkestone, ON LOL 1TO RECEIVED JUN 1 1 2013 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Page 105 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 106 of 251 =.r� � TO l l 'NSW') OF O O -MEDOVTE REPORT 4.'Z Pra,d H.,ft, ; L'zriruig Rnnrc Application Flo: 2013 -A =21 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared) By: Kory CIhishoim, Manner Meeting Date: Dunne 20, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Matthias Meyer) Lot 2, Cori 1 (Oruiiva) Part 1, 51H-20540 (Former Township of Oruliia) Motion # G` iii #: 4346-030-010-01305 H.M.S. Guile #: DI 3 -44390 HIEGUlRsD co omTiOCIS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the 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 111.5 square metres. 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. BACKGROUND: This application was originally circulated for comment in May of 2013, but was not considered by the Committee as it was deferred at the request of the applicant in order that he could make changes to the proposal. The applicant is in the process of preparing the lands for the construction of a single detached dwelling on the property (floor area of approximately 233.5 square meters (2513 square feet)). The minor variance is required as the applicant is also proposing to construct a one- storey detached garage (floor area of 111.5 square metres (1200 square feet)). ANA(I YSiS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 9795: Zone: Agricultural/Rural (A/G UI Zone G` ec•luuired Proposed Section 5.1.6 - Maximum Floor Area 70 square metres 111.5 sq. metres Development Services Meeting Date Jame 20, 2013 pplication Flo. 2013 -A -21 Page 1 of 6 Page 106 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 107 of 251 MMANCDALI-: Not applicable. POLOCES /LEMS(i ATIOfie Does the variance conforms to the general intent o0 the Official PO n? The property is designated Rural Settlement Area (Price's Corners) in the Official Plan. Low density residential uses are a permitted use within this designation. The applicant's proposed detached accessory garage which will be complimentary to the single detached dwelling that is being constructed is representative of typical low density development and therefore conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning /ly -law9 and is thce variance appropr0ate for the desirab0e development of the loft' The subject properly is zoned Residential One (R1). According to the Township's Zoning By -law, accessory buildings are a permitted use. The proposed development of the lands would comply with all minimum required setbacks, but requires relief from the maximum floor area provisions of the Zoning By -law. The Zoning By -law restricts the height and floor area of accessory buildings in order to ensure that the scale of such structures remain secondary and subordinate to the main residential use of the property, as well as to prevent over- development that would detract from the rural /natural character of the area. During a site visit of the property, Planning Staff observed that the proposed garage would remain secondary and subordinate for the following reasons: o The scale of the proposed one - storey garage (floor area of 111.5 m2) is proportionately smaller than that of the two - storey single - detached dwelling (floor area of 233.5 m2). 0 The location of the garage would be to the rear of the dwelling when viewed from Bass Line. 0 The property has a unique shape with a long driveway to the wider building area which is tucked well back behind the adjacent dwellings with lots of vegetated buffers. o The size and location of the proposed garage would be very appropriate for the size of the lot, and rural character of the surrounding area. Planning Staff also notes that the subject property is well vegetated both behind and beside the proposed garage, negating any visual impact it may have on neighbouring properties. Based on the above, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance, if approved, would not have any negative impact on surrounding land uses or the character of the surrounding area, and that the proposed accessory building would clearly remain secondary to the main residential use of the property. Development Services Meeting Date Jun 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-21 Page 2 of 5 Page 107 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... 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 proposed variance related to the 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 the character of the surrounding area, it is considered to be minor. ICONSULTATIONS: Transportation Division — Environmental Services Division — Building Division — No concerns. County of Simcoe - 1 ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations ICONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -17, specifically, to permit the construction of an accessory building appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: ice, e¢pa. Kory Chisholm Planner Reviewed by: 044) Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -21 Page 3 of 6 Page 108 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATOON MAP 2013-A-21 (Meyer) SUBJECT CT PROPERTY (Lot 2, Con 1 (©rMa), Pt. 1, 61R- 20640) Development SeMV6ces pplucatuom Igo. 2013 -A -21 IMIeetlng Date June 20, 2013 Page 4 of 6 Page 109 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... 0 SCHEDULE 2: SrE PLAN 2013 =A-21 Meyer) 4, acre.* For (Timor V2tr fans I re. rpi;n3 5:2 €. of ovib✓•id, n� p 1. '19QCre5 \ 4, t L el 0 4 1s +r ?At L s• i J $9 QZ. IT '1 RECEIVED NIAI 1 i 71113 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP 4, v — t;k' L:ne f 79e N 'c1 s� SP1 2_ O c3 —k Pb ko. -W+kC ate 1-in2 , L3Y r-tz CM Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-21 Pave 5 of 6 Page 110 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... SCHEDULE 3: CLC VAT O IS 2013 -A -21 Meyer) lac+ Iaft se- Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-21 Page 6 of 6 Page 111 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... 2013-A-21 M East Side of Bass Line UL AVENUE /® S \ \� � w 4 tttttttttttttttttttttttt AISAIUSIqUISA tt � ¥ 0! $ - tk§1� /ql 7 SUBJECT PROPERTY . 3 0 2, C On 1 (O HI |a� Pt 1, 51R-20640) - - Page 112 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... It r & �-' ,70' 015 And C... x3 y 36,.1 nrd s.ic.mj - - - -i - - — j- -a - vim - - --3- T 1 (.bb' Obi 6 N� Fr�otl! b°1' CAL° 4 )�o cr cr Page 113 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... }} u L cn •0 co au W 6 {3 11 14- - 0I 5.01 0 14- wS t Hd 1 Page 114 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 115 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 116 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 117 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 118 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 119 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 120 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 121 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Page 122 of 251 5e) 2013 -A -21 (Matthias Meyer), East side of Bass Line, L... Zia tom- Witlib, Derek From: Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 8:34 PM To: Witlib, Derek Subject: Hearing 2013 -A -21 Contact: Derek Witlib Dear Derek Witlib, We are writing to you in reference to Hearing 2013 -A -21 in the matter of Section 45 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c P.13 and In the Matter of an application for a minor variance on Base Line. We are currently building a house at 143 Base Line. We are concerned as to the intentions of Mr. Matthias Meyer and his "hobby shop" that he is apply for to build. As per the letter we were sent stating Mr. Meyer would like to build a shop that is 111.5 sq meters. We are concerned as per the use of this shop and for noise as this is a residential area and our home. We also feel a shop of this size is not suited for this residential neighborhood. We are unable to attend the hearing on Thursday, June 20th at loam due to of being able to get the time off work but would like to be notified of the outcome of this hearing and what Mr. Meyer plans on using this shop for. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks, Matthew and Jennifer Strongman Name: Matthew and Jennifer Strongman E -mail Address: Phone Number: 1 Page 123 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: Page 124 of 251 LU I i -H -L t (iNOrm L1iarke ana Lynne Larose)... TOWNSHOP OF OROo -MIEDo Oo NTC /(fir �,iP�r",ytJ�°' REPORT POo Q4 Rnrrl li.•nngr, F..ri+i, F,fl r Application No: 2013 -A -2 To Committee ou Adjustment G�repare�l yo Dere4� �9itl °ul�, [tanag gl Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Dorm Clarke Lynne Larose) 1128 Line 4 North Concession 5, Part of Lot 14 (Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 002 -26001 RMS. Bile #: ®13- 444:55 REEOBREID CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed accessory building 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 an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 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 approximately 92 square metres; 4. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Nottawasaga Valley 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 for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. BACKGROUND: The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) and presently contains an existing single detached dwelling. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to construct a detached accessory building (garage) and has requested the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Rural Residential Two (RUR21 Zone Required f 'rorposdl Section 5.1.3 — Permitted Locations Not permitted in Front Accessory Building in Yard Front Yard Section 5.1.6 - Maximum Floor Area 70 sq. metres 92 sq. metres Development Seo-vices Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 -A -27 Page 1 of 6 Page 124 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: Page 125 of 251 LU I i -H -L t (iNOrm L1iarke ana Lynne Larose)... Not applicable. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings and accessory uses. Therefore, the proposed garage conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Dots the variance meet the general Intent of the Zoning Bylaw, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) in the Township's Zoning By -law and the RUR2 Zone permits single detached dwellings and accessory buildings. The Zoning By -law's requirement for prohibiting accessory buildings in the front yard is to maintain an attractive residential character in the Township's rural residential areas. The Zoning By -law limits the size of accessory buildings in order to ensure that such buildings remain secondary to the main building on the lands. Planning Staff has inspected the subject lands and observed that the lot has no immediate neighbouring dwellings and is situated among larger agricultural parcels with which would not be affected by the location or size of the proposed garage. Staff also observed that the existing dwelling on the lands is positioned substantially back from the road and that the applicant appears to be taking advantage of an existing flat area on the lands and avoiding the need to extend the length of the existing driveway for the purposes of the garage. The location of the proposed garage is in Planning Staff's opinion, logical based on the features of the property. Planning Staff also notes that the garage would still maintain a substantial setback (21 metres or 69 feet) from Line 4 North and would in no way negatively impact the appearance of the streetscape or the area's rural character. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances would conform to the general intent of the Zoning By -law and are appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. is the varlanvcce minor? As the variances related to the proposed garage are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on surrounding land uses, they are considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -27 Pave 2 oil 6 Page 125 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Building Division — No concerns. County of Simcoe — Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — NVCA permit has been issued for the proposed garage. IATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations Schedule 4: Floor Plan ICONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -27 should be approved, for the reasons that it meets the general intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law, it is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot and it is minor. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -27 Page 3 of 6 Page 126 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... SCHEDULE 1: LOCCATD®N DAP 2013-A-27 Park Larose) W z SUBJECT PRO 1129 Line 4 North) Development Servpces lilleeCng l0ete June 20, 2013 Appppcaoov No. 2013 -A -27 Page 4 e 6 Page 127 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013-A-27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... 9 JO 9 eBed C &CZ ern' am] IBLtaeopfg L L. OWANE 3' 2 4ZPVot., SE TWEE NT E FE:3R-7 4c TE W BEARING) tE° .oN Loogeoopth:ily Se00iLEGS zueu.odopeAea C 11 / E: ONS • N37.47.04- W NVld JS 53.4 (ascurn 11.08a) Lz-v-claz :Z 21111C13H3S 0 Page 128 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: • 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... SCHEDULE 3: 2013-A-27 (Clark u Larose) rose) ELEVATIONS S en r. s U 2 00001 0000 �DDOO, =0000' -00001 =0000 =0000: 0000° 1 REAR ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION Development Seovces Rfieeting Date June 20, 2013 AppUocation Flo. 2013 -A -27 Page 6 of 6 Page 129 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 130 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: tn O S_ cu J W q S_ C/7 CO 1 <riZ N c 1 0_ m O N 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Z6'IZI 1,11,74.1.0U a3aun, 0,0111MI 3WtIHJ e 3aois m 3 „00 ,00 .19N n ! N 1.1 Zal4- r' �cr igaaJ ,,_ S 1C'D 0l M 101 "3114. 03 N - _ ty rci� T z m mW ° 2 e mF --3 m + o a0 m aE Ai F- 06.101 EI 7'101 3 „00 00 .IO Ni 41 N, 3H 1I1411 L I I 07 2 0 7rhi ! 5 3 4 c) r ni r, R1 Fri C) �) rt7 r� 1,) Co Page 131 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 132 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: LU I 0-H -L / (Norm uiance ano Lynne Larose)... A�1 Future PDans ` 3�.�" Y i - P � g> 'fix �m tl § may 4 5 g� € m`$5 £"'o o r : 6 °aN xa gs§ s €o €6g_� mg4aRamy P € $�d8 6 �o E9 m iwoF '" � d' 5 �� �4 5 �adR_€ sk �;� �� MO s, 3 i I � ; �. : g� ; 1 weer CLARK DRAMS PLAN $ a Li Sad° gym& €soak CSSS fib& g O to ¢ w a � I ke&I 2 2z8 11111 W I FRAM C13 U N N m t 0 -.0 o ce 0 d 'o om , a o (74%4 = 0 -.0i 0 -.m s -s s -.row o -.oe N Page 133 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 134 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 135 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 136 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 137 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 138 of 251 5f) 11:00 a.m.: 2013 -A -27 (Norm Clarke and Lynne Larose)... Page 139 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... I q TOo WNNSHO OFORO MEDONTG T hre or -� c�/o REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -23 To Committee of Adjustment Prepared) E y: Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (ernd Schaeffers) 2233 Lakeshore Road Cast Plan 952, Lot 49 Motion # Roll #e 4346-010- 012 -09300 RMS. Bile #e 013 -45, 33 REQUIRED CONlom®V'dS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed boathouse 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 an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing prior to pouring of the foundation and 2) verifying the constructed boathouse does not exceed a height of approximately 4.6 metres above the average high water mark of Lake Simcoe (219.15 m.a.s.l.); 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 for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) and presently contains an existing dwelling and detached garage. The applicant is proposing to construct a boathouse on the lands. ANALYSIS: - The applicant is proposing to construct a boathouse and is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline Residential iSR i Zone Required Pro?.osed Section 5.6 (a) — Minimum Interior Side Yard 2.0 metres 1 metre Setback Section 5.6 (e) - Maximum Height 4.5 metres above 4.6 metres above average high water average high water mark mark Development Services IMeetiang Date .Dame 20, 2013 Applicatioro No. 2013 -A -28 Page 1 of 7 Page 140 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 141 of 251 Not applicable. POLICOES /LEGISLATVO Does the variance conform to the general intent oa the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings and accessory uses, including boathouse. Therefore, the proposed boathouse 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 Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law and the SR Zone permits single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, including boathouses. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum interior side yard setback is intended to achieve adequate space for access and maintenance around buildings, as well as provide a separation that prevents the crowding of adjacent properties. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a maximum building height is intended to ensure that a boathouses remains secondary in its appearance to the main building on the property, as well to protect the shoreline from the appearance of over- development. Planning Staff has inspected the lands and observed that the proposed boathouse, including the proposed deck on the boathouse roof, would be located in approximately the same location and elevation as an existing stone and concrete patio. As such it is Planning Staffs opinion that there would be no significant difference in the impact of the development on the subject lands, the shoreline or the adjacent property. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances would conform to the general intent of the Zoning By -law and are appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. is the YE dance minor? As the variances related to the proposed boathouse are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on surrounding land uses, they are considered to be minor. CONSULT ATONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — no concerns. Development services Meeting Date Jame 20, 2013 Apppication No. 2013 -A -28 Page 2 of 7 Page 141 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - IATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations Schedule 4: Floor Plan ICONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -28 should be approved, for the reasons that it meets the general intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law, it is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot and it is minor. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -28 Page 3 of 7 Page 142 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... SCHEDULE 1z LOCATKON MAP 21113-A-2 ; (Seas &Beers) SUBJECT PROPERTY (2233 Lakeshore Road East) DeveOopment Services fleeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Igo. 2013 -A -28 Page 4 of 7 Page 143 of 251 5g) 2013-A-28 (Bernd Schae em) 2233 Lakeshore Road East... LIP eBBd Etz.-y-Ep.ez 'wuopR *dv c 2' a ty Kea &so ew S8OVUSS we1110011 p \ 6,]eO"1-21ort9-5Jfl • LI * Q� oMg pY- N¥2d 21 S (a 9406 v s &az :z22nasHGS Page 144 of 251 5g) 2013-A-28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... SCHEDULE 2013-A-28 (Schaeffer) Development Sian( lces Meetlng Date June 20, 203 pollination No. 2013-A-28 Page 6 of 7 Page 145 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... SCHEDULE 4: 2013-A-2 (Schaefers) FLOOR PLAN J 3 t • 4 .o -z 1 0z1 1 0 24 4; Oil Ito i• I' a a Development Services 11Neetirog Date .Dune 20, 2013 Appiicatiooi 2013 -A =28 Page 7 of 7 Page 146 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... 2013-A-28 S 2233 Lakeshore Road East v 11;;ip Ii...E: 6it..........f.!!!! pirillsasigit 0.11041•011a, loan Stajitottojoit A Iwo noo no no no woo oonosoo.o . r . . K22e « ■A 7 SUBJECT PROPERTY (2233 Lakeshore Road East) \ - A r, Page 147 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... 3 L, C L '^ "-Fr v-v WOOD RETAINING dfS EVOS 313dOmoo AO SNIV ad EOZZZ - PROPQSED STRUCTURE SITE ADDRESS Page 148 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... N CO ti) 00 M�� N m %--1 0 N Scale 1 r.ch =2G feet (1.240) j_ QvO1 3770r19171'd, Itl 3 A61 ag N 4 ki 30JWIc 371V1 Schaeters Residence - Plot Plan A t 8 sw 0 N kr Ii I Qp e er 4 0 Z 2 Page 149 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 150 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 151 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 152 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 153 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 154 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 155 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 156 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 157 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 158 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 159 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 160 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Page 161 of 251 5g) 2013 -A -28 (Bernd Schaefers), 2233 Lakeshore Road East... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority -4ta. rn�� Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Derek Witlib Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, Re: Applications for Minor Variance Township of Oro- Medonte, County of Simcoe *By email only* • • Thank you for circulating these applications for minor variance to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. The LSRCA has reviewed the following applications in the context of provincial policy and Regulations passed under the Conservation Authorities Act: • A28/2013 • A29/2013 • A31/2013 • A32/2013 Based on our review, we recommend that any approval of these applications be subject to the following condition: ✓ That the owner shall obtain a permit from the LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. f-\\ dvise us of your decisions. S rel Chars F. Bu Senio Planni! /cfb •a g 1 s, MCIP, RPP oordinator Copy: LSRCA, Taylor Stevenson 120 Bayvlew Parkway, Box 282 I Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 I Fax: 905.853.5881 Prouc! of th Irternation -1 Tl�i�ss ltiv< rLri Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca E -Mail: info @LSRCA,on.ca l ern_ er of Conservation Ontario Page 162 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 163 of 251 TOWNSHIIP OF ORO MEDONT/E �L \. REPORT //�� ;"4 .0, ie£/t r,oud t[ni, , F.uiNug lmur. Application No: 2013 -A =29 Too Commrlittee of AdlDaostrroerot Prepared Dye Derek Wtnt HP, Manager, Mannhog ServOces Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Varlance Application (Gen ,: LLonda Stewart) 111 Lakeshore Road) Cast Man 5 9, Lots 11 ; 20 Motion # G olO #: 4346 =010- 012 =09300 RAZ. Goole #: 013 -45 32 HEMMED CONDTTmONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 and Section 5.6 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed single detached dwelling and boathouse 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 an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by pinning the footings prior to pouring of the foundation; 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 for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. PAC GROWND: The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) and presently contains an existing 1- storey dwelling and a boathouse. The applicant is proposing to construct a new 2- storey dwelling and a new boathouse on the lands. ANAILYSOS: The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling and a boathouse and is requesting the following relief from Zoning By-law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline Resident SR i Zone G edaoured Proposed Table B1- Minimum Interior Side Yard for Single Detached Dwelling 3.0 metres 1.5 metres Section 5.6 (a) — Minimum Interior Side Yard for 2.0 metres 1.5 metres Boathouse Development SeMces Meetiing Date June 20, 2013 Appncatport No. 2013 -A -29 Page 1 of 6 Page 163 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 164 of 251 Section 5.6 (c) — Maximum Width of Boathouse 30 percent of width of 50 percent of width of lot at average high lot at average high water mark water mark ERNIANC ALLo Not applicable. POLIOC S /LLGISLATIOM Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings and accessory uses, including boathouses. Therefore, the proposed development 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 log? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law and the SR Zone permits single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, including boathouses. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum interior side yard setback is intended to achieve adequate space for access and maintenance around buildings, as well as provide a separation that prevents the crowding of adjacent properties. Planning Staff has inspected the lands and observed that the proposed dwelling and the proposed boathouse would be located in generally the same locations as the existing dwelling and boathouse. The applicant has advised that the existing dwelling has an interior side yard setback of 2 metres and it is Planning Staff's opinion that the proposed 1.5 metre interior side yard setbacks will not significantly detract from the purpose and intent of the Zoning By -law in this instance. Reasonable space for access and maintenance around the building would remain and the adjacent properties would not be unduly crowded by the proposed 2- storey dwelling. The existing adjacent dwellings consist of a 2 -story dwelling to the west and a 1- storey dwelling to the east. The 2- storey dwelling to the west would be the closest existing building to the applicant's proposed dwelling and Planning Staff notes that this existing adjacent dwelling contains only basement windows, but no main floor or second - storey windows along its side wall. On the other hand, the existing 1- storey dwelling the east does contain main floor and basement windows along its side wall, but it is positioned farther from the proposed dwelling. It is Planning Staff's opinion that the applicant's proposed 2- storey dwelling will not create any significant new impacts on the adjacent properties in terms of massing, crowding or shading. The proposed new boat house has been positioned to maintain the same interior side yard setback (1.5 metres) as the existing boathouse and it is Planning Staffs opinion that this will not have any negative impact on the adjacent property or on access and maintenance around the boathouse. However the new boathouse is proposed to be wider than the existing one. in considering whether the proposed increase in the width of the boathouse (50% of the width of the lot) would negatively Development Services rVleeting Date ,hrne 20, 2013 Application fro. 2013 -A -29 Page 2 of 6 Page 164 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... affect the character of the shoreline, Planning Staff noted that the proposed boathouse would largely replace an area of the shore line that is already considerably altered in the form of existing concrete retaining walls and stairs. Considering the existing appearance of the shoreline in this location, it is Planning Staff's opinion that the new, wider boathouse would not negatively impact the character of the shoreline and that the new boathouse would remain accessory and secondary to the main dwelling in its appearance and use. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances would 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 variances related to the proposed dwelling and boathouse are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, are considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, and are not anticipated to have an adverse effect on surrounding land uses, they are considered to be minor. ICONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - 1 ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations I CONCLUSION: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -28 should be approved, for the reasons that it meets the general intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law, it is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot and it is minor. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -29 Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Page 3 of 6 Page 165 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... SUBJECT PROPERTY (111 Lakeshore Road East) Devepopmerot Services Meeting Date June 2092013 Apppucatpoaa Flo. 2013 -A -29 Page 4 o4 6 Page 166 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... SCHEDULE 2: 2C1 3 A 2 (Stewart) ST CPLAN LAKESHORE REI E EXISTING GARAGE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING ABUTTING SEPTIC EXISTING ABUTTING DWELLING EXISTING ABUTTING WELL X EXISTING DWELLING wv 4 PROPOSED NEW BUILDING AREA • st NEW YuFLL EXISTING - - - -- -- -- FAG!" tt�� ATTACH PT ELLL"- ��L��u r-e• EXISTING BOATHOUSE PROPOSED NEW BOATHOUSE WATERS EDGE FXISTI50 ABUTTING SEPTIC 12.1% WATER LOT (DEED) (SEE ATTACHED SURVEY) EXISTING ABUTTING DWELLING EXISTING ABUTTING WELL 111 Lakeshore Rd SITE PLAN REFERENCE 28 May, 2013 ALL DIMENSIONS TO SITE VERIFIED BY SURVEYOR ATERS EDGE Devepopmer l Services Meeting Dale June 2092013 Application floe 2013 =A -29 Pave 5 of 6 Page 167 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... SCHEDULE 3: 2013-A-29 (Stewart) ®W LUUNG ELEVAT O S 111 Lakeshore Rd E - Proposed Elevations Roadside Elevation —hbx rkl Nal a'111 Wirt =Logo trtajc; 111 Ill €�II 11 Luc t Lakeside Elevation -ScouTI,4 rw11111 . SIP m Side Elevation - Right / Road Side- 4,00 �pyt Side Elevation - Left / Road Side - Developmer Services Fleeting Date J.rne 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-29 Page 6 off 6 Page 168 of 251 VinpeniSOVaillTeiniSnaittalinliaaNKUSOSVigagSrititSfittlilainaluttl 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... 1 AVM NH Vd w u, 0 a 0 SUBJECT PROPERTY (111 Lakeshore Road East) QV0 oilo Page 169 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... C0 4a a--1 LL, Crn J 0 N I ° � 0 N Side Elevation - Right 1 Road Side - .r n. trtrzttanntzurl WEI I I .; cam) c-z Side Elevation - Left 1 Road Side -- CjEs-t` Lakeside Elevation - Page 170 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 171 of 251 ■9 Page 171 of 251 5h) 2013-A-29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 172 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 173 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 174 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 175 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 176 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... -744't7'17.Ant'ta- ITAWMINAM110111 f' 110110110.. 4111111101': Vitt II K‘.11 1:11111111 %1 { ' 11,i�1 IF Page 177 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 178 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 179 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 180 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 181 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Page 182 of 251 5h) 2013 -A -29 (Ken and Linda Stewart), 111 Lakeshore Road... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority rnK2g-fl. Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Derek Witlib Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, Re: Applications for Minor Variance Township of Oro- Medonte, County of Simcoe *By email only* • • Thank you for circulating these applications for minor variance to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. The LSRCA has reviewed the following applications in the context of provincial policy and Regulations passed under the Conservation Authorities Act: ® A28/2013 • A29/2013 ® A31/2013 • A32/2013 Based on our review, we recommend that any approval of these applications be subject to the following condition: ✓ That the owner shall obtain a permit from the LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. Please dvise us of your decisions. Cha les F. Bu Senio Planni /cfb g • s, MCIP, RPP oordinator Copy: LSRCA, Taylor Stevenson 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 I Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 I Fax: 905.853.5881 Prouc! of th Irternation -1 Tl�i�ss ltiv< rLri Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca E -Mail: info @LSRCA,on.ca l ern_ er of Conservation Ontario Page 183 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... TOWNSHIP OF OJ O M EDONTLS 7iw. +rrhlp nl �, ._.. EF EE T C9i ✓l dome, Frond fi.Tlmgr. ExnrinQ Fruure AppDucatoon floe 2013 -A -30 To: Committee oil Adjustment Prepared 1 :y: Arudrua Le0gh, Director, Devefopment Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Variance ApOpHeatuoro (Tim Donna Rainey) 2022 Ridge Road) weft Concession 3, West Part of Lot 27 OMotion # RoOO #e 4346 -010 °007- 2,J900 RAILS. Hie #: D1345831 REQUORED CCo_ONDOTO NS: BACKGROUND: The property is currently contains an existing dwelling and accessory buildings and the applicant is proposing to construct a new accessory building on the lands which are zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone. ANALYSOS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning 03y -law 97 -95: Zone: Loca0 Commercuaf 1 LC) Zone Reouired Proar ®sea:O Table A2 — Permitted Uses Not Permitted Extension /enlargement of non - conforming use Section 5.1.3 — Permitted Locations 2.0 metres As existing: 0 metres, 1.2 metres & 1.4 metres Section 5.1.4 — Maximum Height 4.5 metres 4.877 metres Section 5.1.5 — Maximum Lot coverage 5 percent 9.67 percent Section 5.1.6 - Maximum Floor Area 70 square metres 139.29 sq. metres FINANCIAL: Not applicable. DevepopnrRent Services fleeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Igo. 2013 -A -30 Page 1 of 6 Page 184 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... POLOCES /L OOSLA11ON: Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Rural Settlement Area in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C3 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. In Section C3.1 of the Official Plan the stated objectives of the Rural Settlement Area designation are: • To maintain and create attractive communities with suitable amenities. • To ensure that settlement areas are developed in a logical and cost effective manner. Permitted uses include low density residential uses, small scale commercial uses, including accessory buildings. The proposed accessory building is associated with a residential use on a commercial property, which would not maintain the character of the existing residential area, due its large size (floor area and height) and the coverage for all the accessory buildings on the property. Based on the above, the requested variances do not conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zonings By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Local Commercial (LC) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -law which permits small scale commercial uses that serve the needs of the community; and therefore the existing 2 storey brick home (residential use) is a non- conforming use on the property. The accessory buildings (sheds and garages) are accessory to the non - conforming use and therefore the proposed building construction would be considered an expansion of a non- conforming use. The Zoning By -law requirements are intended to achieve relatively large landscaped yards which contribute to the low- density character of the area, as well as ensure that there is adequate space in which to provide off - street parking and amenities areas on private property. The provisions within the Zoning By -law that regulate detached accessory buildings are intended to ensure that accessory building 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. However, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variances, if approved, would detract from the low- density character of the area and that the proposed accessory building would not have the appearance of being subordinate to the existing dwelling on the lands. Planning Staff has come to this conclusion based on the combination of the following factors: o The increased height of 4.877 metres (whereas a maximum of 4.5 metres is permitted) is higher than the existing accessory building; • The increased floor area of 139.29 square metres (whereas a maximum of 70 square metres is permitted) and is in addition to the four existing accessory buildings which are proposed to be maintained; and • The increased lot coverage of 9.67 % (whereas a maximum of 5% is permitted) for all the accessory buildings with the proposed building having a lot coverage of 6.8 %. In Planning Staff's opinion, the cumulative effect of all of the above -noted factors would make the proposed accessory building the most dominant structure on the subject lands, rather than a subordinate building to the existing dwelling. Deveiopmsnt Services Meeting i Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 -A -30 Page 2 of 6 Page 185 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 186 of 251 Planning staff recognizes that the location of the proposed accessory building is in the rear yard however the property does has an exterior side yard abutting Line 2 South. It is evident that there is an existing wood fence and vegetative buffer along the property lines which would partially screen the building from adjacent properties to assist in mitigating the visual impacts of the proposed building; however the lands are located within an established settlement of Shanty Bay with a character of low density development, with open landscaped yards which generally adhere to the zoning standards. Notwithstanding the mitigating factors, the applicant's proposed building has the potential to alter the character of the neighbourhood, and planning staff is unable to support the application as proposed. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances would not conform to the general intent of the Zoning Bylaw and are not appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Is the variance minor? The requested variances, if approved, would result in an accessory building that would be substantially larger and out of proportion with the surrounding area, and that would become the dominant rather than subordinate building on the lot. For these reasons the variances, when considered together, are not minor. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division— no concerns. Building Division— no concerns. County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Schedule 3: Elevations & Floor Plan CON1CLUS0 ®Nlo It is the opinion of the Planning Department that Variance Application 2013 -A -30 should BE REFUSED, for the reasons that it does not meet the general intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By -law, it is not appropriate for the desirable development of the lot and it is not minor. Respectfully submitted: Andria Leigh, MCIP, P Director, Development Services Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-30 Page 3 of 6 Page 186 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... SCHEDULE 1: L CATON MAP 2013 -A -3G (ahtey) Development Services Application Flo. 2013-A-30 Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Page 4 o4 6 Page 187 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... k 2 Om 1 \•o a = SCHEDULE 2: SUE LFLA (PROPOSED) 2013 -A -30 (Ra i y) 9.o tnCt Z 1.73 okrNGv.lL'1� (I,SM Subject' prbpert�` Sep AIiYSG� Ian, a� carve \,,e4114'4-9.2,-, {Ne3 K. 9.29 ' d 9 M AA acc.�,1- Proms S$ c o.1}ro,ch cci plco, ®¢ survey C, • W 4�1e.11 tQnar ' 0.29 2 44. R. c c�G Road. I ;.239 wide. (;-o {+,) fep STTF. .LA r 2o22 OIi-rAg.ko ,v\a/ 2a�Rc,13 to 0 aM, -i,� 10 20 3a 74, lade Development Services Meeting Date June 20, 2013 Application Flo. 2013-A-30 Page 5 of 6 Page 188 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... SCHEDULE 3: ELI VAMO S AND FLOOR PLAN (PROPOSED) 2013 -A -30 (R &owey) a_15,76 x !al!, surd C tip M.�_ 1�. 34_x9,94 m2 (cyoos.t) ' {2tzdogN 12.ou -rH 5Le VAT 9C1L curs C4c r Ot4. :o 3-+ -o4ie 1. 4 i -_ u(S iYvSS�s st Z__StrOXeket - _ .. _ _..... _ _... Vkte L_�.1d.1'ELr�I'.p_..__. snag . a� I s _ 12 . Development Services Meeting n Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-30 Page 3 ott 6 Page 189 of 251 ■ -- 6.94.46.. Q., 9x4 h� -0 vere� Dmr 3.657...LAO . (176'4FO`.o9I w I N �o•2i13x2 -.r3 -42-H' 47 A' -9 M fl a_15,76 x !al!, surd C tip M.�_ 1�. 34_x9,94 m2 (cyoos.t) ' {2tzdogN 12.ou -rH 5Le VAT 9C1L curs C4c r Ot4. :o 3-+ -o4ie 1. 4 i -_ u(S iYvSS�s st Z__StrOXeket - _ .. _ _..... _ _... Vkte L_�.1d.1'ELr�I'.p_..__. snag . a� I s _ 12 . Development Services Meeting n Date June 20, 2013 Application No. 2013-A-30 Page 3 ott 6 Page 189 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 190 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... T U N £ e. N N `!!. Ilk � �y p. V 6 s av E 4-t, i w " 0 4 0 4- f Mo MIN 1111 AIM," vy --.02.11409 79VMMO,11 O✓ 1 n iiwawwwies I i 1 1 0 Page 191 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... W CO • W LL O V) m® 1 Z 1 O N SUBJECT PROPERTY 35 O•l1tl z aeon 6P91 fi �3 0.31N139 00;:r2 d F°e'cx y QA .015,0 599 rtnc __ M: 4 I rOLCV 99.416 rts.4 -112 \--"°;c61-11 4 $ (w x ®N4 .., WE6N RANGE 2 AND C P LLON ANGE BE ^to,l Page 192 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 193 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 194 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 195 of 251 5i) 2013-A-30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 196 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 197 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 198 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 199 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 200 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 201 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 202 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Page 203 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... The Corporation of The Township of Oro - Medonte PO Box 100 Mrs H. A Fish Oro 2016 Ridge Road West Ontario Shanty Bay, LOL 2L0 LOL 2X0 Ontario. Date: 18th June 2013 5)2_0 t3 A -moo �.� rvvQ_4'EZ Dear Sir /Madam I am writing in response to the letter I received from your office, dated the 6th June 2013, regarding the below: Notice of Hearing 2013 -A -30 In The Matter of Section 45 of the Planning Act, R.S.0 1990 c. P1 -and - In the Matter of an application for a minor variance Location of Property: 2022 Ridge Road West Concession 3, Part of the West half Lot 27 (Former Township of Oro) • • RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2013 ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP As the adjacent neighbour abutting the property along the North line, I object to the applicant's proposal for the following reasons; 1. The proposed building is disingenuously identified as a shed but is in fact the size of a four car garage with a footprint of 139.29 m2 plus loft, which is larger than that of any neighbouring homes. The subject's home being 154 m2. When you take into consideration the existing four accessory buildings and house on the property, collectively, it will double the allowed lot coverage restrictions. Two of the large buildings ( #3 and #4) which appear on the drawing, were just recently constructed by the owners, in non - compliance of the by- law: permitted locations, being in breech of the 2 meter set back from the lot line. Of note, shed #2 on the drawing is actually a single car garage. It appears a small community is being constructed in the back garden. 2. It should be noted there already exists non - conforming side yard setbacks of both the main house and the existing shed #1, and garage #2. In addition, the proposed structure will tower over the Westerly neighbour. 3. The proposed new driveway runs ? ft, along the length of the lot line, parallel and abutting line 2 and is only several meters away from the four way stop at Ridge Road. This could potentially cause a problem with ingress and egress from the property. It would also create noise and disruption in the back garden area of neighbouring homes, and would impact the privacy, peace and enjoyment of residents being in their gardens. Which was one of the reasons we purchased our home. Shanty Bay is a quiet historical rural village with a certain quaint flavour, which deserves to be preserved. At this strategic corner, overbuilding to this high density will set a dangerous Page 204 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... precedent both from a planning perspective by creating overbuilding. The applicant presents inaccurate images to illustrate the proposed location of the garage, taken from angles, which deliberately omit the neighbouring homes and their proximity to the site. The outdated aerial view does not show the current location of the unlicensed vehicles and the temporary tent garage, which currently litter the property. It is my fear that the actual use of such a massive building will be for some type of truck or heavy equipment shop or other industrial use given the size of floor area, and of the overhead door and the applicants' disregard for the bylaws thus far. If allowed, this building and its possible uses will surely detrimentally affect the property values of the surrounding homes. The applicants must remember that they live in the midst of a residential lakeside village of modest homes, not an industrial park. Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns. I would ask that you notify me once a decision has been made with respect to the above -noted application. Thank you Regards1 Haidee Fish Page 205 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... The Corporation of The Township of Oro Medonte Attention: Andria Leigh Director of Development Services, Notice of Hearing 2013 -A -30 In The Matter Of Section 45 of the Planning Act, R.S.O 1990 c. P13 Objection to Application for a minor variance by Tim and Donna Rainey June 19th 2013 Dear Andria Leigh, We, Rachel Stirling and Frank Genovese are writing to you with intent to object to the application for a minor variance by Tim and Donna Rainey of 2022 Ridge Road West Concession 3, Part of the West half Lot 27 Former Township of Oro. We kindly ask that you share our concerns with the hearing committee at Hearing 2013 -A -30 on Thursday 20th day of June, 2013 at 11am. We kindly ask that the Review Committee refuse this planning application for a minor variance. We are the land owners of and reside at 00001 Melissa Cres Shanty Bay Ontario Plan M71 Lot #4 adjacent to the proposed development site. Our property is directly located and connected to the Rainey's North East property line of 40 metres. We share 33metres of this 40 metre property line. Herein are our comments and objections relating to this planning application: Visual Impact - This development would be an imposing structure consuming all but 2 metres of our 33 metre shared property line. Our shared property line is not fully treed. The view from the kitchen, dining room, patios and play areas will be of this proposed storage building. The building would overshadow our main area for family backyard activities and would greatly diminish our enjoyment of the property. It would directly change the appeal of a quiet and peaceful green space to that of a city or industrial view. Size of structure - This proposed building is out of scale for the neighbouring lot sizes. It is the equivalent of placing a house between the two properties! It is overbearing especially since it would be so close to the property line. This development is more suited to a farming or industrial setting where you would expect tall and oversized storage facilities. Effect of the development of character of the neighbourhood - Shanty Bay is a charming, rural community that boasts a peaceful and tranquil atmosphere for its residents. Shanty Bay attracts homeowners who want a quaint, upscale, Muskoka -like atmosphere near the lake who are willing to build nice homes paying higher taxes. Adding a large storage building will detract from the character of the neighbourhood and will set a precedent for others to do the same reducing the appeal to prospective homeowners. This storage facility would be visible to traffic along Shanty Bay Road, Second Line and Melissa Court. Page 1of2 Page 206 of 251 5i) 2013 -A -30 (Tim and Donna Rainey), 2022 Ridge Road Wes... Attention: Andria Leigh Director of Development Services, Privacy - This storage facility will infringe on our privacy since it is located next to the property line and the view from the upper and lower floors would be directly into our family use areas. Loss of Garden Land - A very large portion of the garden land of the property would be used to build this storage facility. The footprint and height of the building combined with the driveway uses a significant portion of the property and takes away the open aspect of the neighbourhood. Noise - We have concerns about the potential noise levels of using the building for storage of personal and professional property maintenance equipment especially during the summer when the property owners would likely move their equipment and vehicles in /out on a regular basis. Adverse effect on residential amenity of neighbours - The proposed building and driveway will be a constant distraction and infringement on privacy. Based on the size of the building and the overhead door, one can expect to have large equipment and vehicles entering and exiting. This building will be located 2 metres from our children's play area and family gathering spot. Unacceptable high density /overdevelopment of the site - This property already has more than sufficient storage space for a residential neighbourhood. There are currently 4 sheds on the property with one the size of a single car garage. To add another storage building that is the equivalent of a large house or 4 car garage is overkill for personal storage. In closing, I'd like to reaffirm that the reason we moved to Shanty Bay was to bring our family up in a peaceful, village environment. For the past 11 years we have loved the friendly, courteous and supportive nature of Shanty Bay's residents. We wish that we felt able to approve this application in a friendly, courteous and supportive manner to our neighbours the Raineys, however the size and location of this storage building is far to imposing on our property and family. This kind of storage facility is better suited outside of the village boundaries. We would consider a smaller storage shed located along the south west edge of the Rainey's property. It is our hope that we can take part in working together to keep all parties involved happy in having everyone's needs met. Thank you for considering our objections. We can be reached at 705 - 726 -5330 for further discussion. Regards, Frank Genovese, Rachel Stirling Page 2 of 2 Page 207 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 208 of 251 Ei®NTC 0111111V TOWNSW OF © O M %%1174Qh- t" nte, REPORT Prvu! Itnir {cr, E thou Fnrurc Application Nos: 2013 -9-15 2013 =A =31 2013=A =32 To Committee of Adlustmerut Prepared Eye Derek Witlib Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Subject: Consent Application and Minor Variance Applications (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.) 8911 Woodland Drive Plan 993, Lots 76 .. 77 (former Township of Orillia) Motion # Boll #0 4346 °030 °012 °34300 4348- 030E012 -34400 G.M.S. File #o 01045;41 01345842 RC QUIE EIDD C ®NI ®ITm OBIS: Not applicable at this time. EACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent Application 2013 -B -15 is for a boundary adjustment/lot addition to an adjacent vacant parcel of land, for future single detached residential use. The subject lands, containing an existing single detached dwelling which is proposed to be demolished, have approximately 27.4 metres (90 feet) of frontage along Woodland Drive, a depth of approximately 72 metres (236 feet), and occupy an area of approximately 0.19 hectares (0.47 acres). The purpose of Minor Variance Applications 2013 -A -31 and 2013 -A -32 is to permit lot frontages of approximately 18 metres (59 feet) and lot areas of approximately 0.13 hectares (0.32 acres), resulting from the proposed boundary adjustment. NALYS S: The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage of approximately 8.93 metres (29.29 feet), a depth of approximately 68.2 metres (224 feet), an area of approximately 0.06 hectares (0.15 acres) and are intended to be merged with abutting vacant parcel to the north. The merged lands would result in a vacant parcel possessing a frontage of approximately 18 metres (59 feet), a lot depth of approximately 68.2 metres (224 feet) and a lot area of approximately 0.13 hectares (0.32 acres), intended for future single detached residential use. The lands proposed to be retained would have frontage of approximately 18 metres (59 feet), a lot depth of approximately 68.2 metres (224 feet) and a lot area of approximately 0.13 hectares (0.32 acres), intended for future single detached residential use. Deve0opxment Services Meeting Date, June 20, 2013 r pplication Nos. 2013- [B -15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 -A -32 Page 1 off 9 Page 208 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 209 of 251 IFPNANCML Not applicable. TOviNSHOP OFFMOAL PLAN The subject property is located in the Shoreline designation in the Township's Official Plan and the policies of this designation permit uses that include lots for single detached residential purposes. Section C5,1 lists the objectives of the Shoreline designation, as follows: a To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area; o To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline; and 0 To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services. Also pertinent are the Official plan's general "Subdivision of Land" policies (Section D2) which permit boundary adjustments /lot additions. Section D2.2.2 states that "the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected as intended by this Plan ". Based on the above, relevant development considerations with respect to the applicant's proposal would include: o Compatibility with adjacent uses; o The ability of the lands to be serviced by an appropriate water supply (well) and private on -site sewage disposal (septic) system; o Grading and drainage of the lands; Planning Staff notes the lot frontages and lot areas proposed are consistent with much of the existing lot pattern along Woodland Drive and that the development being proposed (single detached dwellings) is consistent with the existing development of the area. Therefore, from a general land use standpoint, the applications appear to be compatible with the surrounding area. However, in Planning Staff's opinion there are functional servicing matters that require more in -depth analysis before decisions are made with respect to these applications. With respect to the ability of the lands to be adequately serviced, the applications have been circulated to the Township's Building Division which, as of the preparation of this report, has verbally advised that additional detailed private on -site servicing plans will be required before these applications can be adequately assessed to determine if private on -site services can potentially be accommodated. Additional written comments from the Building Division are expected to be forthcoming. With respect to grading and drainage, Planning Staff visited the site and noted that there is presently a culvert on Woodland Drive that outlets into a ditch which travels the entire length of Lot 77 and discharges into Lake Simcoe. The location of the ditch would currently impede the development of one of the lots. Therefore it will be necessary for the applicant to identify how this issue is proposed to be addressed. As of the preparation of this report, Transportation and Environmental Services Staff have verbally advised that comprehensive lot grading and drainage plans for both Tots should be Development Serwuoes Meet Dates Jane 20, 2013 Appppoattoro Nos. 2013- [3 -15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 -A -32 Page 2 of 9 Page 209 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... prepared by a qualified professional and submitted for the Township's review, in order for these applications to be properly assessed. It was also noted by Transportation and Environmental Services Staff that any relocation of the drainage ditch may require easements in favour of the Township. Additional written comments from the Transportation and Environmental Services Department are expected to be forthcoming. Based on the above, Planning Staff is of the opinion that additional technical information will be required from the applicant in order for Township Staff to thoroughly assess Consent Application 2013 -B -15 and Minor Variance Applications 2013 -A -31 and 2013 -A -32. These information requirements will first need to be clearly identified by Township Staff and commenting agencies and then conveyed to the applicant. it is Planning Staff's opinion that these issues are sufficiently substantive to require that they be examined prior to any decisions being made with respect to the applications. COUNTY OFFICIAL PLAN The County Official Plan contains boundary adjustment policies (Section 3.3.4.) similar to those of the Township's Official Plan, as well as other general development policies that would support the need to address the development matters that have been identified above. Written comments from County Planning staff are expected to be forthcoming regarding these applications. PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT (PPS) AND GE 6 INTH PLAID Low - density residential development within the Shoreline designation represents the kind of limited residential development that is permitted in rural areas by Section 1.1.4 of the PPS. In Planning Staff's opinion, these applications have the potential to be consistent with the PPS, subject to the applicant demonstrating that the site conditions are suitable for individual on -site sewage and water services, as set out in Section 1.6.4.3 of the PPS. These applications generally appear to conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, including the Simcoe Sub -area. LAKE SI 1COE PROTECTION CCTION PLAN Policy 4.15 DP of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan generally prohibits new on -site sewage systems within 100 metres of Lake Simcoe, except where the development proposal is for only one dwelling on an existing lot. Since the proposal consists of a boundary adjustment between two existing Tots of record and will not result in the creation of any new lots, there may be flexibility within the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan to consider the proposed development. The subject and are located within an area that is regulated by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) and written comments from the LSRCA are expected to be forthcoming in this regard. CONSMLTATIOft IS: Transportation and Environmental Services - Building Department — County of Simcoe — Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — Developr raent Services Application Nos. 20113 -D -15, 2013 -A -311 & 2013 -A -32 ffleeting Date: June 20, 20113 Page 3 of 9 Page 210 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedules 2A & 2B: Aerial Photos Schedule 3A & 3B: Sketches of Proposed Severance CONCLUSION: In the opinion of Planning Staff, Consent Application 2013 -B -15 and Minor Variance Applications 2013 -A -31 and 2013 -A -32 should be deferred until all relevant circulation comments are received and any development issues are assessed or resolved. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP,RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application Nos. 2013 -B -15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 -A -32 Page 4 of 9 Page 211 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... SCHEDULE LE 1: =MOON MAGI 2®13_x_1 (MGM Farms and FIng ©rs Ltd.) ®eve opmer d Services AppD6os4600v Nos. 2013-B-1592013-A-31 84 2013-A-32 Bleating Date: June 2092013 Page 5o49 Page 212 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... SCHEDULE 2A: AC RlALL PHOTO 21113 -A -1 (MGM F,: rolls and Fingers Ltd.) Figure 3 Local Context Lolls 76&77 Pc■bprea Pivf B3, 4020er>anclavrcreA .2.1 01011111117 T nA orolo-weomp ownb olamaP: LEGEND Subject Ste Proposed Lot Line Exating Lot Lire DATE: May28. 2013 SCALE 1:500 1a1R11Mo IEWPez111 iife1PetaAN> wi3000 IAAA mre: IDIS FISSAMSNA PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE MHBC ARCHITECTURE 114 CO11.111 STRfIT IAIIII. CM. L4M INS Rio A>s ININEZ Imo 1 M1'M SIANmN & Development Services Meeting Date: Jurne 20, 2 013 Application Nos. 2013- L3 -t5, 2013-A-31 CL 2013 =A-32 Page 6 of 9 Page 213 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... SCHEDULE 2 AI E AL PHOTO 2013 -B-1I (MGM Farms and Rag= Ltd.) Figure 2 Location Aeries Lets 7B &77 11.1s1ME mm a, poeagq, fl nsnoroouno.nr1 ouWM n e o/o C eq * n ount,ofaMcoe LEGEND Subject Site w.�F. ... Lot Line DATE: May28, 2013 SCALE 1.600 a 113lN10111.asM M epoe2.2BIl1 oVm t]!qg InPLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE MHBC ARCHITECTURE ' aMOLM i' 'MEET 4 M, �a1L tMf leessan11 1 0111, 1.14 Development Services Meeting Date: June 20, 2013 Application Nos, 2013- 3-15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 =A =32 Page 7 of 9 Page 214 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... SCHEDULE 3A: SURVEY SKETCH OFF PROPOSED SEVERANCE C 2013-B-15 (MGM 1 V anna and Foragers Ltd.) 1 EXISTING AREA: ±0.06ha LOT 77 EXISTING AREA: ±0.13ha LOT 76 EXISTING SURVEY j 1 s PROPOSED AREA: ±O.13ha 1 0. �,,,,� 7 ° ° -I RESIDENTIAL l'} =ItI �itf� hint Mi iii li�I —ill MiMi�i�i� 3 PROPOSED AREA: ± 0.13ha LOT 77 1 SITE PLAN Sketch Plan Lots 76 8 77 HM{ANW Pan 9a3, (reA.yta�Towrahlv of South dar} Tcwrcha a Oro-MK.. C0.aa, >SW. LEGEND Subject See Lot Line RESIDENTIAL RECEIVED MAY 3 1 BM ORO- MEDONTE TOWNSHIP DATE' May 28, 2013 SCALE 1 500 N1135a81IXmrp.0 aapmy. ✓A 21Ma13My 0 C T tdranpr an blawryq Idd, apa 4. 2011 Development Services Meeting Date: Jana 20, 2013 AppDlcetlon Nos. 2013 -8-15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 =A -32 Page 8 o4 9 Page 215 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... SCHEDULE 3 : SURVEY SKETCH OF PROPOSED SEVERANCE 20134.-15 (MGM Farrows and HngaT3 CL1ci) E ST NC SURVEY O. PROD MOMFOO OF OPINE MIES mean INR Figure 4 Site POaru & Survey Man Lots 76 & 77 lepetxWG Plan ate. IGROpr!tk Taynsntp or SouEll OnPim _,v pof OraMREnnte County of Smcae „COOL LEGEND 1 Subject Site DATE: May 28, 2013 SCALE 1 : 500 x111 ysiiscravega,4Mpured SONev1013 dwp Eas - -C; �n __ _L..._._._._. ep Prlan Sunuytnp LEtl., gpri A, ]O�J Lot 76: o Exisang Area: Proposed Area: Let 77: • EtistIng Area: O Proposed Area: t0.06he t0.13he t0.19ha t0.13ha inPLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE MHBC ARCHITECTURE COEt IFN 51ftEEi B�RRIE. e >YSS Tie W.i i -. TJE *A.'tli[ wwWNIYti^RU�.�cYn Development Services Meetings Date: June 20, 2013 Application Nos. 2013- I3 -15, 2013 -A -31 & 2013 -A -32 Page 9 of 9 Page 216 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 217 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 218 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... N m • Q � m, CIS N 1 CR5 09 E O co co N Q LL HO:Y{3S 1 cepa me., 5 0 >- W co f ' $ ` z LtT. y( RAIT a? Vi (IOLA W _j 20 D3115 I}1'1 11 { a� Z N.. _.. —..�r� p ^ Page 219 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 220 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 221 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 222 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 223 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 224 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 225 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 226 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 227 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 228 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 229 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 230 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 231 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Page 232 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority '4ta. rnK2gfi. Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Derek Witlib Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, Re: Applications for Minor Variance Township of Oro- Medonte, County of Simcoe *By email only* • Thank you for circulating these applications for minor variance to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. The LSRCA has reviewed the following applications in the context of provincial policy and Regulations passed under the Conservation Authorities Act: ® A28/2013 • A29/2013 ® A31/2013 • A32/2013 Based on our review, we recommend that any approval of these applications be subject to the following condition: ✓ That the owner shall obtain a permit from the LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. dvise us of your decisions. Please Siricerdl Cha les F. Bu . -ss, MCIF, RPP Senior Planni g 'coordinator /cfb Copy: LSRCA, Taylor Stevenson 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 I Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 I Fax: 905.853.5881 Prouc! of th Irternation -1 Tl�i�ss ltiv< r rig Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca E -Mail: info @LSRCA,on.ca l ern_ er of Conservation Ontario Page 233 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Z03- Er /5 'r)c THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE lr PO Box 100, Oro, ON, LOL 2X0, (705) -467 -2171 NOTICE OF HEARING 2013 -B -15 IN THE MATTER OF Section 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P. I3 - and - IN THE MATTER of an application for consent, Application No. 2013 -B -15 AN APPLICATION BY: LOCATION OF PROPERTY PURPOSE OF APPLICATION: MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd. 891 Woodland Drive Plan 993, Lots 76 & 77 (Formerly Township of Orillia) The purpose of Consent Application 2013 -B -15 is for a boundary adjustment/lot addition to an adjacent vacant parcel of land, for future single detached residential use. The subject lands, containing an existing single detached dwelling which is proposed to be demolished, have approximately 27.4 metres (90 feet) of frontage along Woodland Drive, a depth of approximately 72 metres (236 feet), and occupy an area of approximately 0.19 hectares (0.47 acres). The lands proposed to be severed would have a frontage of approximately 8.93 metres (29.29 feet), a depth of approximately 68.2 metres (224 feet), an area of approximately 0.06 hectares (0.15 acres) and are intended to be merged with abutting vacant parcel to the north for future single detached residential use. The lands proposed to be retained would have frontage of approximately 18.5 metres (60.7 feet), a depth of approximately 68.2 metres (224 feet) and an area of approximately 0.13 hectares (0.32 acres), and are intended for a future single detached residential use. This Consent Application is being heard in conjunction with Minor Variance Applications 2013 -A- 31 and 2013 -A -32. THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT HEREBY APPOINTS Thursday the 20h day of June, 2013, at the hour of 11:00 a.m. in the Old Town Hall, 833 15/16 Sideroad for the hearing of all persons who di to the application. You are entitle you may be re affected by thi that person of forwarded to tl FAILURE T( THE LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY HAS REVIEWED THIS APPUCATION AND DETERMINED THAT WE HAVE absence and, e NO OBJ I TO FTS AP notice in the t , authorized age BIGNATURE�;>f_ DATE i$ i ress your views about this application or are aware of any person interested in or this notice you are requested to inform nments on this application they may be town above. :nd the hearing it may proceed in your ct, you will not be entitled to any further this hearing or be represented by an /\ Derek Witlib on behalf of I4 Secretary- Treasurer 4 Page 234 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Secretary of the Committee of Adjustments Township of Oro Medonte 148 Line 7s Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 June 15, 2013 l& 3 -'5 -Vbi .G1 t 11 "E:(7 FTC- e JUN i A ais oRamEoavrE _ iQWNTS I This letter is in response to the proposed application for a variance to Plan 993, Lots 76 & 77. We live at 1037 Woodland Dr. And feel this would be detrimental to our neighbourhood. We live beside one of the 30 foot parcels of land, and know first hand that these (easements) which is what we were told when we purchased our property, provide a natural watershed to Woodland Dr, as the property on the other side of the road is considerably higher than our homes. Everytime it rains these 30 foot properties have a river running down through them. I feel that to let the owners of lots 76 & 77 subdivide these properties for financial gain would be detrimental to the surrounding properties. We do request to be notified in the future regarding any changes to existing properties on Woodland Dr. Thank you ina-add Joy Mather 1037 Woodland Dr RR# 1 Orillia, Ont L3V 6H1 Page 235 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... To: Secretary of the Committee RE: Notice of Hearing 2013 -B -1 Notice of Hearing 2013 -A -31 & 2013 -A -32 I ORO- IVIEDON TE TOWNSHIP June 13,201, 1= R RECEIVED1 JUN 11 213 We are unable to attend the hearing regarding the above applications on Thursday June 21,2013. We are submitting our comments regarding the applications. We own the property located at 881 Woodland Drive (since 1998) which is two houses to the north of 891 Woodland Drive. After reviewing the applications, we are absolutely opposed to changing the Zoning By- law to the proposed 18 metres and .13 hectares. A reduction in "Shoreline Residential" is counterintuitive to an established lakeside community. This proposal increases residential density and adds one more septic bed and one more well to the shore of environmentally sensitive Lake Simcoe. The By -law that is currently in place, serves as a protection against random high density development. Zoning By -Law 97 -95 requires a minimum 30 metre lot frontage and .2 hectares lot area which sets a standard in a rural setting. Lakeside living should not become urbanized because a newly purchased property (2012) in which the owners have a corporate name (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.) decide to profit from building two houses. To rule in favour of this application, would be precedent setting for all future property purchases and all existing properties. Granting an exception to existing Zoning By -laws would be catering to the whims of those more interested in profit rather than retaining the integrity of established shoreline communities in Oro - Medonte. Simply stated, we are opposed to the application. An increase in residential density is not compatible with lakeside living and will lower existing property values. Sincerely, Kjell Johansson, P.Eng Debby Johansson Page 236 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... June 17, 2013 Secretary of the Committee of Adjustment- Township of Oro - Medonte: 148 Line 7s, Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Re. 891 Woodland Drive hearing June 20, 2013 To Whom It May Concern: We are the owners of 913 Woodland Drive. We purchased this property in May 2012 so that we may enjoy our Lakefront home along with our adult children for many years to come. At this point in our lives we are still commuting from the city. We chose this location because it offers a quiet, country atmosphere with properties on generous lot sizes. It is truly a getaway for our family to come to our cottage. An application has been made with respect to the property above that would entail the combination of this property with a small adjacent lot and the severing of these lots for the purpose of creating two new lots. These new lots would not meet the current Zoning bylaw 97 -95. In fact, the proposed lot frontage in this application would be 40% less than the required minimum lot frontage. As well, the proposed lot area in this application would be 35% less than the mandated minimum. As homeowners and neighbours, we are adamantly opposed to this application. If this deviation were allowed, it would significantly change the character of the neighbourhood and could serve as a precedent for other such developments. We purchased our property with complete knowledge of the regulations with respect to the Official Plan of the Township. We support the integrity of this document and do not wish to see it impaired in any way. This application is not in the best interest of our community. We are asking that you please do not approve this application. We are not available to attend the June 20, 2013 meeting in person. However, we are available by telephone to give a testimony if required. Thank you. Brian & Susan Goldstein 913 Woodland Drive of Page 237 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Leigh, Andria To: Subject: L3- �4Ji.bt�1 -ems` 0. Witlib, Derek FW: Committee of Adjustment meeting Re: Plan 993 & Lots11,23,33,41,51,59,77 From: Leo & Linda Mallais [mailto:r Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:38 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: Committee of Adjustment meeting Re: Plan 993 & Lots11,23,33,41,51,59,77 Dear Ms. Leigh it's my understanding that a hearing is scheduled (11:00 am June 20th) to review an application by the owners of lot 891 (and others) in order to have existing user in common lots developed as building lots. As a home owner on Woodland Drive,to say that I'm somewhat concerned would be putting it mildly. In an effort to be brief I'll just list some of these concerns in point form. I do however expect that they will be tabled during the Plan 993 Committee of Adjustment Meeting. Your assistance in this matter would be appreciated. • Precedent for 30 ft lots on and around Lake Simcoe • Ecological impact on Lake Simcoe • Ecological impact on local Wells • Financial impact to current residents due to property devaluation. • Loss of use of user in common lots • Seven new driveway access points on Woodland Drive • Drainage problems as three of the user in common lots are used to direct runoff water away from our homes and away from Woodland Drive. • Increase in local traffic Thank You in advance for your consideration of our concerns Leo & Linda Mallais 1145 Woodland Drive Orillia, Ontario L3V 6H1 1 Page 238 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Leigh, Andria From: JOHN GOLDSAND < Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 11:54 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: Hearing June 20, 2013 - Hearings 2013 -B -15, 2013 -A -31, 2013,A -32 As long time residents of Woodland Drive, we are writing to you to express our opposition to the proposals put forward by MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd. Unfortunately, we are unable to attend the hearing in person but these are our reasons for objecting to the proposed changes: It is not clear to us that the parcel of land with frontage of 8.93 metres (Lot 77 in pictures provided) is able to be developed. There are 6 other similar parcels that were designated as "rights of way" to the lake many years ago. If it is truly common access to the lake, then no one should be permitted to develop these privately. In addition, permitting the development of Lot 77 as described could set off development of the other "rights of way ".of and along Woodland drive. The proposed new lots do not meet the minimum requirements for frontage or area size as outlined in Bylaw 97 -95. Allowing further development along the shores of Lake Simcoe will put further stress on an already stressed ecosystem. It is not clear whether the proposed changes will affect water drainage into the late through Lot 77. There is note of a ditch going into the lake through the middle of the property. Also there appears to be a a culvert just west of the property. I assume water flows into the lake via the culvert and ditch. Development of the land (Lot 77) will interfer with the natural water flow and potentially affect local wild life as well. It is not clear to us from the drawings submitted that the proposed septic systems and wells are adquate distance from the neighboring wells and septic systems. For the reasons listed above, we would like to express our opposition to the proposal coming forward June 20th and ask that it NOT be approved. Respectfully, Andrea & John Goldsand Page 239 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Witlib, Derek From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr. Hoggarth, Irwin, Doug Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:40 PM Ron Hoggarth . Council; Leigh, Andria; Witlib, Derek RE: Notice of hearing I have forwarded your comments to our Planning staff. Z:) - 6- I� 0 The applications you referenced will be dealt with through the Committee of Adjustment, who Council have delegated their authority to. Regards, Doug Irwin Director Corporate Services /Clerk Township of Oro - Medonte From: Ron Hoggarth [mailto:r Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:12 PM To: Irwin, Doug Cc: Hough, Ralph Subject: Notice of hearing Doug Regarding Notice of hearing 2013 -A -31 and 2013 -A -32 Please forward this to members of Council . I am sending this email to continue to express my concerns for building on the 30 foot lots on Woodland Drive .1 believe you have on record our concerns from my Deposition to council . We felt all along that the developer was going to build on these lots . We are concerned about the drainage that is not mentioned in this application We are not sure how there can be a change when your plan is to build on 100 foot lots today. We will be at this meeting to express our concerns Regards Ron Hoggarth Ron Hoggarth Sales Represenative Ed Lowe Realestate 1 Page 240 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... Township of Ore - Medonte Secretary of Committee of Adjustment 148 Line 75 ORO, ON. LOL 2X0 June 18, 2013 RE: 891 Woodland Drive hearing June 20, 2013 To whom it may concern, 20(3 B - IS - 0*Qd at sL r-` ` -�. 4 We write this letter in support of all the residents on Woodland Drive, Ore - Medonte, ON, that are opposing the re- zoning and development of the 30 foot lots along Woodland Drive. It would appear that changes (zoning Classification) were made to the existing lots some time ago without the knowledge or notification to the current residents. My wife and I purchased 1149 Woodland Drive last January/2012 which is located adjacent to one of the 30 foot lots in question. We were of the understanding that these lots were zoned as common areas and didn't meet the requirements for development. We will be following up with are lawyer to see if this information was provided to him at the time of gathering information during our purchase. The property located beside us is used to supply drainage /run -off for the surrounding area. An 18 inch steel culvert is installed under the roadway to allow additional run -off from across the road from the ditch way. Your public works department clears this ditch every spring to allow water to flow freely during spring melting; an obvious concem would be the likelihood of flooding to the existing properties during this time. This area also provides drainage during seasonal rain periods and poses an even higher risk of damage to properties infrastructure. Nancy Jo & Barclay Rutherford 1149 Woodland Drive Ore - Medonte, ON L3V 61-11 PH Email: r Page 241 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... June 17, 2013 thit r �d , Committee of Adjustment lib Township of Oro - Medonte JUN 17 201J Re: Hearings No. 2013 -B -15, 2013 -A -31, 2013 -A -32 °R0-o,,,, Plan 993, Lots 76 and 77 Tw °OA I7 I live at lot 75 on Woodland Drive, (number 897). That is next to lot 76 and south of it. The Orillia Packet, February 2013, in an article about trouble on Moon Point, said that for projects on land, the municipality and the LSRCA are in control. In the water, it is the Ontario and Federal governments. Harry Hughes is quoted as saying at that meeting "When you're on the shoreline, you're kind of overlapping both ". The article was about someone who was eventually taken to court, fined $10 000 (the maximum) by LSRCA. There was the suggestion that people are proceeding with projects without permits because the maximum fine is worth it. In other words, for the welfare of the Lake, the Federal, and Provincial, Governments, are depending on Committees such as this to save this environment. The mandate of this Committee is much Larger that just lots 76 and 77. The Lake Simcoe Protection Act seems to be appreciated but it has spawned interest groups such as Campaign Lake Simcoe and Ladies of the Lake that point out that there needs to be much action taken right now. Many thousands of volunteer hours are being spent by good people; we must all listen to them. These groups are calling for the advice of The Science Advisory Committee to be heeded. A spokesperson for that body estimated there were already 12 000 buildings on the Lakeshore and called for every available bit of shoreline left to have 100 meters depth of naturally vegetated buffer. I call on this committee to urge the council to move towards that happening so that many of these types of session do not have to occur. I also urge this Committee work towards legislation concerning what can and cannot be done along the Lakeshore. There is on end of direction in this regard from environment groups. I truly believe that most people would be appalled if any of the 30 foot strips are used so I are going to proceed on the assumption that you agree. The width of lot 76 is 90 feet. Two lots would be only 45 feet width. Each will probably be required to have ugly septic tanks about six feet above the present ground level as the inspector insisted I have at lot 75 four years ago. Runoff from those hills will be coming onto adjacent properties. My water well required several thousand dollars work done on it about one year ago. It will still go dry if a tap is left on for about fifteen minutes. That did happen about three weeks ago; there is still noticeable silt in the water. The aquifer seems to be an extremely fine silt. When a well was drilled on lot 74 a few years ago the house at lot 73 had so much silt in it that the owner said that she could not use the water. Several years ago, in the spring, residents at lot 70 were concerned that the drainage ditch on the inland side of Woodland Drive, was blocked by snow and a small lake was growing across from their home. They feared a flood into their property. They called for Page 242 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... attention. I assume that the workers that arrived were from the Township. Their equipment broke the dam but all that water flowed in a large torrent across the road down the driveways of lots 75 and 76. The importance of the drainage through lot 75 was made very clear to me that day. When the land on the inside of the road is eventually developed, there will be a much increased drainage flow from there. _ I have always trusted that lots 76 and 77 would remain as they were. It flies in the face of common sense that all land- owners be expected to know the details of all papers at the Township office. It is logical that the people of Woodland Drive would not contemplate houses could be allowed on 30 foot lots. It is logical that we would expect that other lots must be a minimum of 30 meters. If there was some technical glitch on some paper in the, past or if some aspect changed because of time, it is the responsibility of the Council to fix it. It should not come to the wallets of the residents. If any part of lot 77 can by destroyed with a building or part of a building, the developer will be encouraged to think that the other six strips can be used too. Realize that if anything except vegetation is allowed on them, there will be a much different neighbourhood. It will not be pretty. Everyone on the street, not just the 13 people adjacent to the 30 foot strips, will lose huge dollars of house -value. Of course, assessments are related to the value of homes. Again, it appears that the Provincial and Federal governments seem to be acting only in the water and are depending on the land jurisdictions to legislate so that perhaps the Lake may still be saved. The responsibility of this Committee is huge. What you do re lots 76 and 77 will have vast influence not only on the citizens of Woodland Drive but on the County and thousand of concerned volunteer groups. I want to believe that no one thinks that one additional building, let alone seven, additional buildings on about 1.2 kilometers of Woodland Drive's shoreline is good. Please restore my faith that good can happen here right now. Lot 77 must stay as is at 30 feet with natural vegetation encouraged. Lot 76 must get only one house. Ken Taylor 897 Woodland Drive, Orillia, Ontario, L3V6H1 (lot 75) Page 243 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... June 17, 2013 Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte 148 Line 7s Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 4vet) JUN 7.7 2013 Q�Qw>vsNlw1 Re. Notice of Hearing 2013 B -15, A -31 and A32 891 Woodland Dr. Lots 76 and 77 Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the matter of the possible development of the 30 -foot right of way next door to us (by way of adding it to an existing site and severing into two building lots). I have two major issues that I would like to address with the Committee. The first deals with the appropriateness of allowing residential development on 30 -foot lots, and specifically the grandfathering of these properties to allow residential development. The second issue deals with a number of concerns that I have with the specific application to develop the property at 891 Woodland Dr- Lots 76 and 77. Development on 30 -foot Lots It is a matter of public record that I spoke to Council on May 22nd, 2013 against residential development on the seven 30 -foot lots on Woodland Drive. I understand that these have been presented as "grandfathered" lots and the non- conforming use is allowed for this reason. I understand and appreciate the legitimacy of non- confirming uses with respect to planning regulations. In a situation where a land use is established, such as a residence on a 30 -foot lot, and the municipality then decides that this type of development is no longer appropriate, it would be unreasonable to tell the homeowner they have to demolish their home to be in conformity with the new rules. Grandfathered or non - conforming uses, while legitimate, must be carefully scrutinized. By definition these uses represent "bad planning ". They would not be allowed today because they are inconsistent with current planning policies and best practices. The Municipality, by virtue of its existing planning policies, has clearly indicated that residential development on a 30 -foot lot is unacceptable and should not be allowed. Consequently, the wisdom of allowing these non- conforming uses must be carefully considered. To do less, challenges the legitimacy of our current planning policies. I Page 244 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... believe that there are extenuating circumstances that indicate grandfathering in these cases is not defensible. I have two concerns: 1. There is no existing development. These are long standing vacant lots. No one is being asked to demolish an existing home to align the property with current planning policies. There is no unreasonable constraint or cost being imposed on the landowner to conform to current planning policies. To permit development on these 30 -foot lots is simply bad planning and the fact that they existed before the current planning policies were adopted is simply a technicality that does not justify residential development that the Oro - Medonte Council has clearly indicated is not acceptable. 2. There is no documentation to demonstrate that these properties should be eligible for grandfathering. It appears that these lots may have been designated as public access points in previous plans and certainly the date and the conditions under which they were designated as private properties with development rights is not clear based on any information that has been provided to the residents. In fact a group of Woodland Drive residents has generated legal advice that these lots continue to be public access. Consequently, I would respectfully request that the current application be denied or, at the very least, delayed until Municipal planning staff provide a report that addresses the issues that I have raised with respect to the legitimacy of grandfathering these properties. There needs to be a study that addresses the legality of your claim that these 30 -foot strips are, in fact, zoned SR2. Concerns with Respect to the Proposed Development I have a number of concerns about the proposal to develop these properties. I am the adjacent property owner and have owned my home since 2004. I believe there are a number of critical issues associated with the proposed development and its impact on my property and that of my neighbours that have not been adequately addressed in the development application. These include: 1. Drainage: This is a major concern. The drainage culvert on the subject property is extremely important. Despite the current drainage afforded by the culvert, my neighbours and I have frequently had flooded basements. The previous property owner indicated this was an ongoing issue. The development application provides virtually no details on the potential impacts on local drainage. However, it is reasonable to assume that development on the lot that currently provides drainage can only aggravate an already challenging situation. The culvert under Woodland Dr. acts as one of many secondary drainage facilitation to move storm water, spring runoff etc. from the Woodland Dr. ditch. In the past eight years we have seen a very significant flow down the drainage ditch to the lake in the spring. In 2 Page 245 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... that period we also have had our basement flooded. The applicant recently had the basement flooded on the subject property so I am sure they are well aware of the water and drainage risks in our area. I spoke to Peter Hayes who built my house in 1982 and continued to be the owner until the sale to us in 2004. He said that on more than one occasions the ditch overflowed it's banks. And this is a large ditch, much bigger than the culvert that feeds it. When there is a large snow load in the spring, warm temperatures and a heavy rain, the combination results in a very heavy runoff and that is what happened when the ditch could not accommodate the water coming from across the road. When I look at the application, it is silent about drainage. The aerial photo is poor quality and does not show the ditch. The Existing Survey shows the drainage ditch. The Site Plan for the 2 new houses does not. Please explain to me what this means. Do they propose to cap the culvert? Or as it appears, do they plan to bury a culvert in the ditch upon which one of their septic fields, new house and garage will sit? These are certainly unacceptable options - the first would send more water down Woodland to possibly flood other homes. The second would not have the necessary capacity. Again, I said the ditch has overflowed its banks in the past and the weather is stranger now than it was then. What assurances will we get that their changes will not affect existing drainage in any negative way, failing which we will have recourse? I assume Oro - Medonte would not want to incur this liability. 2. Septic: The developer plans to have the septic fields on the road side. Our wellhead is on the road side and our septic is on the lake side — the possibility for contamination is therefore a concern. 3. Well: The developer's proposal has new wells in the middle of the "building envelope" shown on their site plan. It is not clear how these wells will be serviced. Several neighbours currently have wells with very limited flow rates and high levels of silt accumulation. The addition of a well for the proposed extra lot could exacerbate an already difficult situation. 4. Site Plan/Building Plan: We have been provided with a Site Plan but no indication of the proposed building plan. My assessment of the possible implications and impacts of the proposed development on the use and enjoyment of my property is of course dependent on the proposed development. There is no information on the size and scale of development, impacts on privacy and view planes, landscaping, compatibility with the quality of housing and architectural standards, parking, etc. Whether these houses would be for the applicant's family or built on spec is also important and telling information. These are important considerations with significant impacts on adjoining landowners. 5. Trees/Landscaping: Looking at their Site Plan, although very small and hard to read, it is evident the applicant will remove almost all their existing trees. The current 30 -foot lot is very well treed and acts as an effective buffer between our houses. The subject property (90 -foot lot) is also well treed with cedar hedges and 3 Page 246 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... a fine stand of birch trees on the water -side. It is not clear how the development will affect existing vegetation and the natural buffers between the properties. A landscape plan indicating vegetation that will be retained and new planting to preserve or enhance visual, light and noise screening post development is required to properly assess the impacts of the proposed development. In summary, we have many unanswered questions about the proposed development. While I believe that the Committee has ample reason to deny these applications, a lesser alternative is for the above referenced concerns to be addressed before a decision is rendered on the application and we would appreciate the Committee's guarantee that no final decision will be forthcoming until these issues are addressed. Furthermore, I would appreciate knowing what guarantees will be put in place to ensure that any mitigating measures are effectively enforced. I understand that in some municipalities formal development agreements are required as a condition of approval that indicate the specific steps that will be taken by the developer to deal with issues such as drainage, landscaping and the others that I have noted here. Is this the case in Oro - Medonte? If not, what procedures will be adopted to ensure the developer complies with all requirements and adjoining property owners are protected in the event of non- compliance? We appreciate the opportunity to raise these concerns with the Committee. We look forward to your response. Thank you. Jim and Sue Sarjeant 885 Woodland Drive. 4 Page 247 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... 06/18/2013 14:44 FAX . $0 zo13 - c�o��s • RE: MGM Development plan 993 ATTENTION: Secretary of the Committee of Adjustments; Township of Oro Medonte From: Angela Troiano 999 Woodland Drive, OroMedonte Sent: Junc-19, 2013 To: Secretary of the Committee of Adjustments . I am writing to you in regards to the application put forth by MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd. to sever adjacent vacant parcel of land with approximately 8.93 metres (29.29) feet, a depth of 68.2 metres (224 feet) that is intended for future development for residential use. 891 Woodland Drive, Plan 993, Lots 76 & 77 It is my understanding that these very small parcel of lands along Woodland Drive and along most waterfront property are used for common access. There is a right of way piece of land next to my home at 999 Woodland Drive which has been used for water drainage. Because of the way the waterfront properties are landscaped along the lake, this piece of land has served well to manage water drainage and it is important to keep it under control. I am NOT in favour of using these 30 feet sites for residential development because it will diminish the beautiful character that exists today. The large frontage is what attracted me in purchasing the property as I tern sure that the majority of residence along Woodland feel the same, I would prefer that the lots maintain there value and richness to the residence of Woodland Drive as we do not want to see our residential environment decline in attractiveness due to the lot sizes decreasing. Thank you, Angola Troiano 999 Woodland Drive Oro Medonte • Aa • Page 248 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... June 19, 2013 Mr. Ron Hogarth Mr. Aubrey Golden Cedarmont Beach Ratepayers Association Re: MGM Farms — Woodland Drive Properties, Township of Oro - Medonte — OMB Appeal Our File A6320001 Dear Sirs: b VIA EMAIL ONLY Marshall Green 705.737.1811 ext 124 mgreen @hgrgp.ca Assistant: Susan 705.737.1811 ext 125 susano @hgrpg.ca This is in reply to your request for our legal opinion with respect to the above - mentioned matter which is to be heard by the Committee of Adjustment of the Township of Oro - Medonte this week. You can feel free to share this letter with the Committee of Adjustment. Lot 77, which is the subject of both the severance application and the minor variance application, is one of several small 30 foot frontage parcels on Plan 993. According to records of the Land Titles Office, the particular lot is owned by one Annette Steinberg. Ms. Steinberg also owns the adjoining Lot 76. From corporate records we have checked, Ms. Steinberg has the same last name as one of the directors of MGM Farms and Fingers Limited who are the owners of several other of the lots on Plan 993 and a large piece of land to the north of the plan. From the notices that have been issued it appears that Ms. Steinberg (or MGM) plan on merging Lot 77, one of the 30 foot lots (referred to hereinafter as "the slivers ") with the adjoining lot 76, demolishing a home that now sits on that lot and dividing the lot into two new building lots. Despite the legal issues which I will describe later in this letter of opinion, the result will create three issues that should be considered as part of this application: 1. The two Tots will be smaller than what the Township has now established as the Barrie 1Midland IOrillia 1 Penetanguishene 1 Wasaga Beach 190 Cundles Road East, Suite 107, Barrie, Ontario L4M 4S5 Phone: 705.737.1811 Fax: 705.737.5390 Web: www.hgrgp.ca Page 249 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... appropriate size of lots in the current zone. Thus the requirement of an application for minor variance. Since these are "rural" lots and since they are Lakefront, concerns have to be raised about the ability of the size of that lot to provide adequate environmental protection particularly for lake quality. 2. Picking up from that same concern, there might be provisions in the Lake Simcoe Protection Act and Regulations. I have not reviewed these with respect to this application and perhaps you might want to have a land use planner do so. However, it appears, at least on its face that the Act and Regulations do apply to this application. Most important with respect to this application, though, is the potential problem with notice. Plan 993 of which both 76 and 77 are a part contain a provision that Lots 1, 1123, 33, 41, 51, 59 and 77 (what I have referred to as the sliver) are each considered to be an "area of user, common to each property owner in the subdivision." In other words, each of the persons who own Tots on Plan 993 have a right to use those blocks for appropriate purposes which could include such things as bathing, boating launching etc. This is somewhat similar to an easement given to each property owner in the subdivision. Though this may seem somewhat of an antiquated right (the Plan itself dates back to 1950) it has been more recently dealt with. In 1968, the then owner of Lot 1, which is the largest of these "slivers" on the plan sought and obtained a Court Order to release the "Area in Common" restriction from that lot. Although it does not appear from the face of the Court Order, I take it this was done on notice to and with the consent of the other owners in the subdivision. That same Court Order, though, says that the area of user in common was confirmed for all of the remaining slivers. What we found in our research, though, is that the user in common does not appear on the most recent land titles documents. What should be understood is that all of the Registry Office documents, dating back decades, are being converted and computerized into "Land Titles." As the conversion takes place, many easements, right -of -ways etc. are not being "carried forward" into the new system. This does not mean that they are no longer valid. Our title searcher went behind the Land Titles Plan to find that the area of user in common is in fact still in place and still impacts all of the lots except for Lot 1. This includes Lot 77, the subject of this week's Committee of Adjustment hearing. Accordingly, it is our opinion that this Committee of Adjustment consent hearing should not go ahead until all of the owners on 993 are advised. These owners will, as a result of any severance that is granted, lose their rights to user in common of Lot 77. I also suggest that the Township's provisions with respect to neighbourhood compatibility, the County's provisions with respect to lot creation and the Lake Simcoe Protection Act and its Regulations also be considered as part of this request. 2 Page 250 of 251 5j) 2013 -B -15 (MGM Farms and Fingers Ltd.), 891 Woodland ... I hope that the above is of some help to you please give us a call if you require any further information. Yo fs v: truly EMG /pc all Green 3 Page 251 of 251