Loading...
12 19 2013 Committee of Adjustment AgendaPage Township of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future 1. OPENING OF MEETING: THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thursday, December 19, 2013 9:30 a.m. 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES: 3 - 8 a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, November 21, 2013. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: 9 - 31 a) 9:30 a.m. 2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge), An application for the creation of new lot through the severance of dwelling described as surplus to a farm operation. 32 - 52 b) 9:45 a.m. 2013 -B -23 (James Partridge), 665 Line 8 North, An application for consent for the creation of new lot through the severance of dwelling described as surplus to a farm operation. 53 - 68 c) 10:00 a.m. 2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch), 863 Ridge Road West, Application for relief from Maximum Height (Accessory Building) to permit the construction of a two storey detached garage. 69 - 83 d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker), 667 Mount St. Louis Road West, An application for reduction of interior side yard (northwest corner only) setbacks to permit the construction of a 24' x 36' pole barn /storage building. 10:30 -10:40 a.m.: break. Page 1 of 132 84 - 96 e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert), 41 Cahiague Road, Application for relief from setbacks from limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and minimum first storey floor area for the to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling. 97 - 111 f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour), 187 Lakeshore Road West, Application for relief from minimum Front Yard Setback, minimum Exterior Side Yard Setback and minimum Interior Side Yard Setback to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling. 112 - 131 g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson), 5 Goss Road, Application for relief from setback from Bass Lake to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling. 6. NEW BUSINESS: 132 a) Correspondence dated November 21, 2013 from the Ontario Municipal Board, re: Withdrawal of OMB Appeal, 2013 -A -41 (Braestone Development Corporation), 3009 Line 8 North. 7 NOTICE OF MOTION: None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, January 23, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Page 2 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... 000-/-'.5"Is!tiP61-1j-ii&rknise Prom! Heritage, Eta firing Furore Thursday, November 21, 2013 Present: THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers Scott Macpherson, Chair Bruce Chappell Roy Hastings Allan Johnson Larry Tupling TIME: 9:35 a.m. Staff present: Derek Witlib, Manager of Planning; Marie Brissette, Committee Coordinator 1. OPENING OF MEETING: Scott Macpherson assumed the Chair and called the meeting to order. 2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. CA131121 -1 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Tupling It is recommended that the agenda for the Committee of Adjustment meeting of Thursday, November 21, 2013 be received and adopted. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST: None declared. 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES: a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, October 17, 2013. Motion No. CA131121 -2 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Hastings Carried. It is recommended that the draft minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thursday, October 17, 2013 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 1 of 6 Page 3 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — November 21, 2013. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS: a) 2013 -B -21 (Steve Graves), 1479 Line 1 South, Application for a boundary adjustment /lot addition to the adjacent residential parcel of land (west side) in order to allow for a more accessible driveway entrance. Rob Suddaby, agent, was present. Motion No. CA131121 -3 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Johnson It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment grants provisional consent to Application 2013 -B -21, for a boundary adjustment, 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 0.06 hectares (0.15 acres), be merged in title with the abutting lands to the west (1489 Line 1 South), 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 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 6 Page 4 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — November 21, 2013. b) 2013 -A -46 (2041063 Ontario Ltd. - Janice Brennan), 5071 Highway 11 North, Request for relief from Non - conforming Uses. Janice and Ken Brennan, applicants, was present. Motion No. CA131121 -4 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approve Variance Application 2013 - A-46, specifically to permit expansion of a non - conforming use, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.18 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, all buildings and structures on, and the use of the subject property, shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; 3. That the owner of the property at 5071 Highway 11 North apply for, and enter into a Site Plan Agreement with Council for the Township for the existence of, and expansion to, the non - conforming use and the non - complying building, on the subject property, pursuant to Section 2.3 of By -Law 2009 -062 (Site Plan Control By -law). 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, and the owner has entered into a Site Plan Agreement. Carried. Page 3 of 6 Page 5 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — November 21, 2013. c) 2013 -A -47 (Kenneth & Michelle Tudhope), 8936 Highway 12, Request for relief from Home Occupation not to occupy more than 50% of accessory building; No more than one (1) employee who is not a resident of the dwelling; No outdoor storage /display; and No sale of a commodity not produced on the premises. Michelle Tudhope, applicant, was present. Motion No. CA131121 -5 Moved by Tupling, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment approve Variance Application 2013 - A-47, specifically to permit the continued use of an accessory building for the purposes of a retail store subject to the following conditions: 1. That the buildings and structures on the property be generally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 2. That the owner of the property at 8936 Highway 12 apply for, and enter into a Site Plan Agreement with Council for the Township for the existence and operation of a retail store and a home occupation on the subject property, pursuant to Section 2.3 of By -Law 2009 -062 (Site Plan Control By -law). 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, and the owner has entered into a Site Plan Agreement. Carried. Page 4 of 6 Page 6 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — November 21, 2013. 6. NEW BUSINESS: a) Appointment of Chair for the 2014 Term. Motion No. CA131121 -6 Moved by Johnson, Seconded by Chappell It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that Roy Hastings be appointed as Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for the 2014 Term. b) Appointment of Vice Chair for the 2014 Ter Motion No. CA131121 -7 Moved by Hastings, Seconded by Johnson Carried. It is recommended by the Committee of Adjustment that Bruce Chappell be appointed as Vice Chair for the Committee of Adjustment for the 2014 Term. 7. NOTICE OF MOTION :. None. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: Thursday, December 19, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. Carried. Page 5of6 Page 7 of 132 4.a) Minutes of Committee of Adjustment meeting held on Thur... Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes — November 21, 2013. 9. ADJOURNMENT: a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. CA131121 -8 Moved by Chappell, Seconded by Hastings It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 10:22 a.m. Carried. Scott Macpherson, Chair Derek Witlib, Deputy Secretary Treasurer Page 6 of 6 Page 8 of 132 nmuhi � ", T : Pmu4 Hcrir xc, Exciting Fiume 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -22 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager Planning Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Subject: Consent Application J. & N. Partridge Concession 5, Part of Lots 14 & 15 1064 Line 5 North (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 010 - 002 -32000 R.M.S. File #: D10 -47017 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 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 the following amendments to the Zoning Bylaw: a) Prohibiting residential use of the retained lands; b) Reduced lot area (1.52 hectares) for a hobby farm and reduced agricultural building setbacks on the severed lands; 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 -22 is to permit the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation. The applicants are bona fide farmers who own and farm other lands in the Township. The applicants purchased the subject lands in 2012 to add to their cash crop operation. The applicants do not wish to retain the existing dwelling and farm buildings, for reasons detailed in a letter that is included as Schedule 4 to this report. ANALYSIS: The subject lands have approximately 1,100 metres (3,609 feet) of frontage along Line 5 North, approximately 354 metres (1,161 feet) of frontage along 15/16 Side Road, variable depth of up to approximately 710 metres (2,329 feet) and occupy an area of approximately 52.2 hectares (129 acres). Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -22 Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 12 Page 9 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... The lands proposed to be severed presently contain a dwelling, a detached accessory builhng, two agricultural buildings and a manure storage. The lands would have a lot frontage of approximately 124.9 metres (410 feet) along Line 5 North; a lot depth of approximately 121.9 metres (400 feet); a lot area of approximately 1.52 hectares (3.76 acres); and are proposed for residential use. The lands proposed to be retained are vacant of buildings or structures, would have a lot frontage of approximately 1005.4 metres (3298.46 feet) along Line 5 North; a lot frontage of approximately 354 metres (1,161 feet) along 15/16 Side Road, an irregular lot depth; a lot area of approximately 54.33 hectares (134.24 acres); and are proposed for continued agricultural use. A portion of the retained lands is wooded. IDNA1 CDAL: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. POLDCDC S /LIMSLATOON: Townshurp OfficoaD plan The subject property is located in the Agricultural designation in the Township's Official Plan. Section C1 of the Township's Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Agricultural designation. Specifically, Section C1.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses on lands in [this] designation ... are agriculture [and] single detached dwellings ... ". Section 02.3 of the Official Plan, "Development Policies ", contains policies related to the "creation of new lots for agricultural purposes" (Section 01.3.1), and states that "[it] is the intent of this Plan that land which is suitable for agricultural use be protected from development and land uses that are unrelated to agriculture" and further states that "[it] is also the intent of this Plan to encourage the expansion, consolidation and development of new agricultural uses ... ". On the basis that Section 01 of the Official Plan is silent with respect to the creation of new lots in the Agricultural designation for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, Planning staff defers to Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan, containing policies related to the Subdivision of Land. Secfion DD2.2.1 e Suh vusuon of Mandl poHces: Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains test for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed parcels front onto Line 5 North and 15/16 Side Road, which are maintained year -round by the Township. Devrepopment Services fleeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -22 Page 2 of 12 Page 10 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; The proposed parcels do not have access or frontage to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard, The subject application was circulated to Transportation Division Staff and the Committee should have regard to any comments that may be received. Planning Staff notes that no new driveway entrances have been proposed. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; All of the proposed severed parcel and the majority of the proposed retained parcel is zoned Agricultural (A/RU) Zone. A portion of the wooded area on the retained parcel is zoned Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Most of the retained parcel is cleared for agricultural use. Table B4B of the Township's Zoning By -law requires a minimum frontage of 45 metres for a lot in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone, and Table B4A requires a minimum of 0.4 hectares for a single detached dwelling, 2.0 hectares for a hobby farm, and 4.0 hectares for an intensive or specialized agricultural use. On this case, the proposed severed and retained lands would have the following frontages and occupy the following areas: Lands Frontage Area Proposed to be Severed 124.9 metres 1.52 hectares Proposed to be Retained 354 metres 54.33 hectares Therefore, as the lands proposed to be severed would possess a frontage and area sufficient for residential use, but not for hobby farm or agricultural use. The lands proposed to be retained would possess a frontage and area sufficient to be used for agricultural purposes, in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning By-law for the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone. Since the lands to be severed contain buildings suitable for the housing of livestock, but the parcel is too small for most viable farming activities, Planning Staff anticipates that this parcel has the high potential to attract hobby farm -type uses. For reasons discussed later in this report, Planning Staff is of the opinion that a hobby livestock farm can be operated on the severed parcel without creating a conflict with surrounding land uses. However, since the area (1.52 hectares) of the proposed severed parcel does not satisfy the Zoning By -law's minimum lot area requirement (2.0 hectares) for a hobby farm, it will be necessary for the applicant to address the deficient lot area by applying for and obtaining a Zoning By -law Amendment. e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; 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; DeveDopment Servoces Meeting g Date: December 19, 2013 Apppucat on Flo. 2013-B-22 Page 3 of 12 Page 11 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... With respect to the policies of Sections D2.2.1 "e" through "g" of the Official Plan, as noted in the Provincial Policy Statement section of this report, Provincial policy will require as a condition of provisional consent that "the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance ". Therefore, the prohibition of establishing a residential use on the lands proposed to be retained, as well as their continued use for agricultural purposes would not be anticipated to result in a net change in their need for appropriate water supply or sewage disposal, nor in the drainage patterns of the area. The Building Division has advised that it has objection to this application, indicating that there are no concerns from an on -site servicing (septic system) standpoint. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; As previously noted, the subject lands have portions of land in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone and in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Further, it is noted that the property has a portion its area regulated by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA), who have indicated that they have no objection to the approval of 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 on the subject lands would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure that it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. SSecftoon II e Agalcudta,fireA Operattuons polocueso In conducting a site visit of the subject property, the subject lands presently contain a number of agricultural buildings which are possibly capable of housing livestock. On this basis, planning staff refers to Section D6 of the Township's Official Plan, "Agricultural Operations ", which contains provisions related to "agricultural operations and non - agricultural operations near such uses in the Township ". Specifically, Section D6 a) of the Official Plan states that "[in] order to provide farmers with the ability to carry out normal farm practices, all new development ... shall be set back from agricultural operations in accordance with Minimum Distance Separation One formula." Further, pursuant to Part F of the Official Plan, the definition of "Development" includes "the creation of a new lof'. Planning staff notes, however, that Section 2.3.4.1 "c" of the Provincial Policy Statement states that "Lot creation in prime agricultural areas may only be permitted for ... c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance." It is noted that, as a condition of provisional consent on this application, the zoning of the "vacant remnant parcel of farmland' will be required to be amended to prohibit new residential dwellings within them. Therefore, since the intent of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae includes to reduce or eliminate adverse effects that residential dwellings and agricultural operations can experience, by being in close proximity, prohibiting any new dwellings to be established through this application will achieve the same mitigation measure as the implementation of the MDS Formulae. On the basis of the analysis of the subject application in relation to the Township's Official Plan, as outlined above, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the application generally conforms to the policies of the Township's Official Plan. Further, it is noted that since the proposed lot creation is the result of Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application Flo. 2013 -13-22 Page 4 off 12 Page 12 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... the severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, the proposal is not anticipated to affect the viability of the farm operation taking place on the retained lands. Counter OOfficW Ryan 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 holdings are permitted but shall not be for the purpose of creating new lots except as otherwise permitted in this Plan ", and continues to state that "[all] lots created shall conform to all applicable municipal policies and bylaws." Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan contains policies for lands in the Rural and Agricultural designation, and states that "[prime] agricultural areas will be protected for agriculture and compatible uses ... lots may be created for an agricultural use ... a residence surplus to a farming operation ... [and] [new] lots for agricultural uses should generally not be less than 35 hectares ... ". On this basis, it is the opinion of Planning Staff that proposed severance generally conforms to the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. P ©vhcW PoDocy Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Section 2.3.4.1 of the PPS contains policies related to "Lot Creation and Lot Adjustments ", and specifically states that "Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for ... a) agricultural uses, provided that the lots are of a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations ... c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance." Section 1.1.4 of the PPS contains policies related to "Rural Areas in Municipalities" and, specifically, Section 1.1.4.1 c) of the PPS states that "new land uses, including the creation of new lots ... shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae ". As required pursuant to Section 2.3.4.1 c) of the PPS, it is noted that a condition of provisional consent would be that the zoning of the "vacant remnant parcel of farmland' be amended to prohibit new residential dwellings within them. Therefore, since the intent of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae is to reduce or eliminate adverse effects that residential dwellings and agricultural operations can experience, by being in close proximity, prohibiting any new dwellings to be established on the retained lands will achieve the same mitigation measure as the implementation of the MDS Formulae. Therefore, the application of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae is considered to not be required for this application for consent. On the basis of the above policies, and based on the additional points below, the proposed Consent Application is considered to generally be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, subject to the amendment to the zoning of the retained Bands, prohibiting their use for a residential purpose. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -22 Page 5 of 12 Page 13 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Maces 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(1)', 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 contain policies directly related to the creation of a new lot as a result of a farm consolidation. As previously stated, the purpose of the subject Consent Application is to sever a lot containing a residence surplus to a farm operation as a result of farm consolidation. Vn this regard, it is noted that, while the proposed severance would result in the creation of a new lot, the Provincial Policy Statement requires that measures are taken by the Township to "[ensure] that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance ". Therefore, the proposed severance would result in no net increase in the number of residential dwellings, due to the requirement to amend the zoning of the retained lands to prohibit their use for a residential purpose. Therefore, on this basis, the proposed severance 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, is considered to conform to the Places to Grow policies of the Province. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division - Building Division — no objection Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — no objection County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 Schedule # 2 Schedule # 3 Schedule # 4 — Location Map — Applicant's Consent Sketch — Applicant's Sketch of Parcel to be Severed — Applicant's Letter CONCLUSION: Planning Division Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -22 BE APPROVED, subject to the conditions included in this report, for the reasons that the application conforms to the Official Plans for the County and the Township, the Places to Grow policies and to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Devepopment SeMces Apppooatuooi No. 2013 -[B -22 fleeting Date: December 19, 2013 Page 6 of 12 Page 14 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -8 -22 Page 7 of 12 Page 15 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -22 (Partridge) LOCATION 1064 LINE 5 N )RTH SUBJECT PROPERTY Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -22 Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Page 8 of 12 Page 16 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... SCHEDULE 2: APPLICANT'S CONSENT SKETCH 2013 -B -22 (Partridge) i - / b 41 ., %001 1,5 58545 Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -8 -22 Page 17 of 132 Page 9 of 12 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... SCHEDULE 3: APPLICANT'S SKETCH OF PARCEL TO BE SEVERED 2013 -B -22 (Partridge) Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -22 Page 10 of 12 Page 18 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... SCHEDULE 4: APPLICANT'S LETTER 2013 -B -22 (Partridge) SHIG LEY 'A:r TR DOI REGISTRY SERVICES INC. 168 L,AKESi1ORE ROAD WEST R . # 1, ORS) STATaO[ 1, LOL 2E© November 28th, 2013 The Corporation of The Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 S, Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Attention: Committee of Adjustment Dear Members: Re: James and Nancy Partridge AppiEicatorn for Severance for Farm Consoiidatioro Part of Lots 14 and 15, Concession 5Township of Oro- lMledonte Part of PIN 58541- 0016(LT) James and Nancy Partridge purchased the hereinbefore described lands on the 12th day of April, 2012. They have a total of eight (8) and holdings in the Township of Oro - Medonte. A schedule of the Parcel Identifier Numbers (PINS) and the applicable legal descriptions are attached hereto. The extent of the combined holdings evidences the commitment of Mr. and Mrs. Partridge to maintaining the integrity of farm land in the Township of Oro - Medonte. They desire to consolidate their holdings for the intended purpose of farming the acreage. Mr. and Mrs. Partridge have been most interested in the acquisition of these properties over the years to add "inventory" to their large cash crop operation. That was the case with the lands that form part of Lots 14 and 15, Concession 5 in the former Township of Oro, now Oro - Medonte. The additional farm buildings and dwelling were not a necessity, nor were they a part of the consideration for the purchase of these lands. There are sufficient barns and outbuildings on other lands that the Partridges own to suit their currrent purposes. The residence presents a concern for maintenance and safety issues. Mr. and Mrs. Partridge are no longer interested in being landlords with the task of monitoring tenants and maintaining the residence to an acceptable standard of care. Their focus is to prepare the lands for planting, fertilizing, weed control, and harvesting. This is their area of expertise, and not as landlords with all that entails, and they would like to retain as much workable land as is possible to achieve the purpose of land consolidation for crop production. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -22 Page 11 of 12 Page 19 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... It is the position of James and Nancy Partridge that the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (2.3.4.1), the County of Simcoe Official Plan (3.3.4; 3.6.6 and 4.8.2.5) and the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan (D2.2.1) have been or will be complied with. The Province and the County each speak to the possibility of a lot creation by severing off a "residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation ". While the Township's Official Plan does not speak to this directly, it is noted that there have been occasions when the Township has permitted such severances to fall in line with the position of the Province and the County in this respect. James and Nancy Partridge respectively request the Committee to consider this request for a severance of a "residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation ". trul�J , fi S irley Pa ids, P resid,�ennt Shirley Partridge Registry Services Inc. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -22 Page 12 of 12 Page 20 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 21 of 132 N N m m 0 N 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 22 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 23 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 24 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 25 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 26 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 27 of 132 N N m m 0 N 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 28 of 132 N N m m 0 N 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 29 of 132 N N m m 0 N 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... Page 30 of 132 5.a) 9:30 a.m.2013 -B -22 (James and Nancy Partridge),An appli... December 10, 2013 Derek Witlib, Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Member Township of Oro - Medonte Municipalities P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario Adjala - Tosorontio LOL 2X0 Amaranth Barrie Dear Mr. Witlib; The Blue Mountains Bradford -West Gwillimbury Re: Application for Consent 2013 -B -22 Part Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5, 1064 Line 5 North Clearview Township of Oro - Medonte (formerly Oro) Col I i ngwood Essa The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this Grey Highlands application for consent and based upon our mandate and policies under the Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to its approval. Innisfil Melancthon Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward Mono a copy of any decision. Mulmur Sincerely, New Tecumseth Oro - Medonte !� S' Shelburne Springwater Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Wasaga Beach Watershed Counties Dufferin Grey Simcoe Member of Conservation ONTARIO Natural Champions Celebrating 50 Years in Conservation 1960 -2010 NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation 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 -. E aiail. 0l p in.SLvca.on.ca PAW Heritage, Es: trixg Furore 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -B -23 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager Planning Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Subject: Consent Application (J. Partridge) Concession 9, West Part of Lot 17 665 Line 8 North (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 004 -01000 R.M.S. File #: D10 -47016 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 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 the following amendments to the Zoning Bylaw: a) Prohibiting residential use of the retained lands; b) Reduced lot area (0.74 hectares) for a hobby farm and reduced agricultural building setbacks on the severed lands; 5. That the applicant provide verification, to the satisfaction of the Township, that the existing septic system conforms to Ontario Building Code for minimum clearance to property lines. 6. That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro - Medonte; and 7. That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. BACKGROUND: The purpose of Consent application 2013 -B -23 is to permit the creation of a new lot by way of severance, for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation. The applicants are bona fide farmers who own and farm other lands in the Township. The applicants purchased the subject lands on October 1, 2013 to add to their cash crop operation. The applicants do not wish to retain the existing dwelling and farm buildings, for reasons detailed in a letter that is included as Schedule 4 to this report. Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -23 Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 12 Page 32 of 132 ANALYSIS: 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... The subject lands have approximately 379 metres (1,243 feet) of frontage along Line 8 North, a depth of up to approximately 796 metres (2,611 feet) and occupy an area of approximately 38 hectares (95 acres). The lands proposed to be severed presently contain a dwelling, a detached accessory building and two agricultural buildings. The severed lands would have a frontage of approximately 95 metres (310 feet) along Line 8 North; a lot depth of approximately 91 metres (300 feet); a lot area of approximately 0.74 hectares (1.82 acres); and are proposed for residential use. An existing silo located at the north end of the severed parcel is proposed to be removed. The lands proposed to be retained have a lot frontage of approximately 298 metres (978 feet) along Line 8 North; a lot depth of approximately 797 metres (2614 feet); a lot area of approximately 37.6 hectares (93 acres); and are proposed for continued agricultural use. FINANCIAL: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. POLICIES /LEGISLATION: Township Official Plan The subject property is located in the Agricultural designation in the Township's Official Plan. Section C1 of the Township's Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of land in the Agricultural designation. Specifically, Section C1.2 of the Official Plan states that "Permitted uses on lands in [this] designation ... are agriculture [and] single detached dwellings ... ". Section C2.3 of the Official Plan, "Development Policies ", contains policies related to the "creation of new lots for agricultural purposes" (Section C1.3.1), and states that "[it] is the intent of this Plan that land which is suitable for agricultural use be protected from development and land uses that are unrelated to agriculture" and further states that "[it] is also the intent of this Plan to encourage the expansion, consolidation and development of new agricultural uses ... ". On the basis that Section C1 of the Official Plan is silent with respect to the creation of new lots in the Agricultural designation for a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, Planning staff defers to Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan, containing policies related to the Subdivision of Land. Section D2.2.1 — Subdivision of Land policies: Section D2.2.1 of the Official Plan contains test for the creation of a new lot by way of Consent. In particular, this section states "... the Committee of Adjustment shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 2 of 12 Page 33 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... a) Fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained year round basis: The proposed parcels front onto Line 5 North and 15/16 Side Road, which are maintained year -round by the Township. b) Does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; The proposed parcels do not have access or frontage to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) Will not cause a traffic hazard; The subject application was circulated to Transportation Division Staff and the Committee should have regard to any comments that may be received. Planning Staff notes that no new driveway entrances have been proposed. d) Has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By -law and is compatible with adjacent uses; All of the proposed severed parcel and the majority of the proposed retained parcel is zoned Agricultural (A/RU) Zone. A portion of the retained parcel is zoned Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Most of the retained parcel is cleared for agricultural use. Table B4B of the Township's Zoning By -law requires a minimum frontage of 45 metres for a lot in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone, and Table B4A requires a minimum of 0.4 hectares for a single detached dwelling, 2.0 hectares for a hobby farm, and 4.0 hectares for an intensive or specialized agricultural use. In this case, the proposed severed and retained lands would have the following frontages and occupy the following areas: Lands Frontage Area Proposed to be Severed 91 metres 0.74 hectares Proposed to be Retained 298 metres 37.6 hectares Therefore, as the lands proposed to be severed would possess a frontage and area sufficient for residential use, but not for hobby farm or agricultural use. The lands proposed to be retained would possess a frontage and area sufficient to be used for agricultural purposes, in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning By -law for the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone. Since the lands to be severed contain buildings suitable for the housing of livestock, but the parcel is too small for most viable farming activities, Planning Staff anticipates that this parcel has the high potential to attract hobby farm -type uses. For reasons discussed later in this report, Planning Staff is of the opinion that a hobby livestock farm can be operated on the severed parcel without creating a conflict with surrounding land uses. However, since the area (0.74 hectares) of the proposed severed parcel does not satisfy the Zoning By -law's minimum lot area requirement (2.0 hectares) for a hobby farm, it will be necessary for the applicant to address the deficient lot area by applying for and obtaining a Zoning By -law Amendment. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 3 of 12 Page 34 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... e) Can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; f) Will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; 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; With respect to the policies of Sections D2.2.1 "e" through "g" of the Official Plan, as noted in the Provincial Policy Statement section of this report, Provincial policy will require as a condition of provisional consent that "the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance ". Therefore, the prohibition of establishing a residential use on the lands proposed to be retained, as well as their continued use for agricultural purposes would not be anticipated to result in a net change in their need for appropriate water supply or sewage disposal, nor in the drainage patterns of the area. The Building Division has advised that it has objection to this application, indicating that there are no concerns from an on -site servicing (septic system) standpoint. h) Will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; As previously noted, the subject lands have portions of land in the Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone and in the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Further, it is noted that the property has a portion its area regulated by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA), who have indicated that they have no objection to the approval of 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 on the subject lands would require appropriate approvals for a well, which would ensure that it would not negatively impact the quality and quantity of groundwater. Section D6 — Agricultural Operations policies: In conducting a site visit of the subject property, the subject lands presently contain a number of agricultural buildings which are possibly capable of housing livestock. On this basis, planning staff refers to Section D6 of the Township's Official Plan, "Agricultural Operations ", which contains provisions related to "agricultural operations and non - agricultural operations near such uses in the Township ". Specifically, Section D6 a) of the Official Plan states that "[in] order to provide farmers with the ability to carry out normal farm practices, all new development ... shall be set back from agricultural operations in accordance with Minimum Distance Separation One formula." Further, pursuant to Part F of the Official Plan, the definition of "Development" includes "the creation of a new lof'. Planning staff notes, however, that Section 2.3.4.1 "c" of the Provincial Policy Statement states that "Lot creation in prime agricultural areas may only be permitted for ... c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance." It is noted that, as a condition of provisional consent on this application, the zoning of the "vacant remnant parcel of farmland' will be required to be amended to prohibit new residential dwellings within them. Therefore, since the intent of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae includes to reduce or eliminate adverse effects that residential dwellings and agricultural operations can Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 4 of 12 Page 35 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... experience, by being in close proximity, prohibiting any new dwellings to be established through this application will achieve the same mitigation measure as the implementation of the MDS Formulae. On the basis of the analysis of the subject application in relation to the Township's Official Plan, as outlined above, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the application generally conforms to the policies of the Township's Official Plan. Further, it is noted that since the proposed lot creation is the result of the severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, the proposal is not anticipated to affect the viability of the farm operation taking place on the retained lands. 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 holdings are permitted but shall not be for the purpose of creating new lots except as otherwise permitted in this Plan ", and continues to state that "[all] lots created shall conform to all applicable municipal policies and bylaws." Section 3.6 of the County's Official Plan contains policies for lands in the Rural and Agricultural designation, and states that "[prime] agricultural areas will be protected for agriculture and compatible uses ... lots may be created for an agricultural use ... a residence surplus to a farming operation ... [and] [new] lots for agricultural uses should generally not be less than 35 hectares ... ". On this basis, it is the opinion of Planning Staff that proposed severance generally conforms to the County of Simcoe's Official Plan. Provincial Policy Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Section 2.3.4.1 of the PPS contains policies related to "Lot Creation and Lot Adjustments ", and specifically states that "Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for ... a) agricultural uses, provided that the lots are of a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations ... c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance." Section 1.1.4 of the PPS contains policies related to "Rural Areas in Municipalities" and, specifically, Section 1.1.4.1 c) of the PPS states that "new land uses, including the creation of new lots ... shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae ". As required pursuant to Section 2.3.4.1 c) of the PPS, it is noted that a condition of provisional consent would be that the zoning of the "vacant remnant parcel of farmland' be amended to prohibit new residential dwellings within them. Therefore, since the intent of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae is to reduce or eliminate adverse effects that residential dwellings and agricultural operations can experience, by being in close proximity, prohibiting any new dwellings to be established on the retained lands will achieve the same mitigation measure as the implementation of the MDS Formulae. Therefore, the application of the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae is considered to not be required for this application for consent. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 5 of 12 Page 36 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... On the basis of the above policies, and based on the additional points below, the proposed Consent Application is considered to generally be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, subject to the amendment to the zoning of the retained lands, prohibiting their use for a residential purpose. 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(i) ", 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 contain policies directly related to the creation of a new lot as a result of a farm consolidation. As previously stated, the purpose of the subject Consent Application is to sever a lot containing a residence surplus to a farm operation as a result of farm consolidation. In this regard, it is noted that, while the proposed severance would result in the creation of a new lot, the Provincial Policy Statement requires that measures are taken by the Township to "[ensure] that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance ". Therefore, the proposed severance would result in no net increase in the number of residential dwellings, due to the requirement to amend the zoning of the retained lands to prohibit their use for a residential purpose. Therefore, on this basis, the proposed severance 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, is considered to conform to the Places to Grow policies of the Province. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no concerns Transportation Division - Building Division — Township has no septic records for this property. Applicant to verify that existing septic system conforms to Ontario Building Code for minimum clearance to property lines. Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule # 1 Schedule # 2 Schedule # 3 — Schedule # 4 — — Location Map — Applicant's Consent Sketch Applicant's Sketch of Parcel to be Severed Applicant's Letter Development Services Application No. 2013 -B -23 Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Page 6 of 12 Page 37 of 132 ICONCLUSION: 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Planning Division Staff recommends that Consent Application 2013 -B -23 BE APPROVED, subject to the conditions included in this report, for the reasons that the application conforms to the Official Plans for the County and the Township, the Places to Grow policies and to the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 7 of 12 Page 38 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -B -23 (Partridge) LOCATION MAP 665 LINE 8 NORTH ono 4***414;voipi•441P, off*W41114,41k0 :t00 410 401to ,•.�43 � ��v Iry Hof .sue sr 40.01.11.0.4, AVAA Art* oltetA44iis-k Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 8 of 12 Page 39 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... SCHEDULE 2: APPLICANT'S CONSENT SKETCH 2013 -B -23 (Partridge) < olao °�o y�E s. -�� 51R26991 0034 Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 9 of 12 Page 40 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... SCHEDULE 3: APPLICANT'S SKETCH OF PARCEL TO BE SEVERED 2013 -B -23 (Partridge) Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 10 of 12 Page 41 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... SCHEDULE 4: APPLICANT'S LETTER 2013 -B -23 (Partridge) SHIRLEY PARTRIDGE REGISTRY SERVICES NC. 168 LAKESHOREE [GOAD WEST R.R. # 1, ORO S f ATiON, O 1 LOL 2E0 November 28th, 2013 The Corporation of The Township of Oro - Medonte 148 Line 7 S, Box 100 Oro, ON LOL 2X0 Attention: Committee of Adjustment Dear Members: Re: James Howard Partridge Appiicatiov for Severance for Farm Consolidation Part of West Hedf Lott17, Concession 9 Township of Oro -F 1edonte Part of PIN 58547- 01131ILT) James Howard Partridge purchased the hereinbefore described lands on the 1st day of October, 2013. Mr. Partridge personally, and together with his spouse, Nancy Partridge have a total of eight (8) land holdings in the Township of Oro - Medonte. A schedule of the Parcel identifier Numbers (PINS) and the applicable legal descriptions are attached hereto. The extent of the combined holdings evidences the commitment of Mr. and Mrs. Partridge to maintaining the integrity of farm and in the Township of Oro - Medonte. They desire to consolidate their holdings for the intended purpose of farming the acreage. Mr. and Mrs. Partridge have been most interested in the acquisition of these properties over the years to add "inventory" to their large cash crop operation. That was the case with the lands that form part of Lot 17, Concession 9 in the former Township of Oro, now Oro - Medonte. The additional farm buildings and dwelling were not a necessity, nor were they a part of the consideration for the purchase of these lands. There are sufficient barns and outbuildings on other lands that the Partridges own to suit their currrent purposes. The residence presents a concern for maintenance and safety issues. Mr. and Mrs. Partridge are no longer interested in being landlords with the task of monitoring tenants and maintaining the residence to an acceptable standard of care. Their focus is to prepare the lands for planting, fertilizing, weed control, and harvesting. This is their area of expertise, and not as landlords with all that entails, and they would like to retain as much workable land as is possible to achieve the purpose of land consolidation for crop production. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -B -23 Page 11 of 12 Page 42 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... It is the position of James and Nancy Partridge that the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (2.3.4.1), the County of Simcoe Official Plan (3.3.4; 3.6.6 and 4.8.2.5) and the Township of Oro - Medonte Official Plan (D2.2.1) have been or will be complied with. The Province and the County each speak to the possibility of a lot creation by severing off a "residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation ". While the Township's Official Plan does not speak to this directly, it is noted that there have been occasions when the Township has permitted such severances to fall in line with the position of the Province and the County in this respect. James and Nancy Partridge respectively request the Committee to consider this request for a severance of a "residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation ". very truf //Shirley Partridge, Presiden Shirley Partridge Registry Services Inc. Development Services Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -13-23 Page 12 of 12 Page 43 of 132 2013 -B -23 Partridge 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 44 of 132 2013 -6 -23 (Partridge 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 45 of 132 L) bD L L co m N m m 1 0 N 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 46 of 132 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 47 of 132 2013 -6 -23 (Partridge 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 48 of 132 L) bD L L co m N m m 1 0 N 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 49 of 132 m N m m 1 0 N 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 50 of 132 L) bD L L co m N m m 1 0 N 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Partridge),665 Line 8 North,A... Page 51 of 132 inimmorm i COUNTY OF BSIMCO 5.b) 9:45 a.m.2013 -B -23 (James Pa County of Simcoe Planning 1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, Ontario LOL IX0 Main Line (705) 726 -9300 Toll Free 1- 866 -893 -9300 Fax (705) 727 -4276 slmcoe.ca I L' -LA-Q=D PLANNI G North.A... December 18, 2013 Ms. Andria Leigh Secretary- Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment Administration Building 147 Line 7 South, Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Ms. Leigh, RE: Consent Application File No. 2013 -B -23 Part of Lot 17, Concession 9 (665 Line 8 North) Township of Oro - Medonte (via email) Thank you for circulating the County of Simcoe. The subject property is designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan, and therefore subject to the Agricultural policies of the County Official Plan and Provincial policy documents. This application proposes to sever a surplus dwelling with an approximate area of 0.74 hectares (1.82 acres) due to a farm consolidation. The proposed retained portion of the subject property would be approximately 37.6 hectares (93 acres). The County Official Plan and Local Official Plan outline specific criteria for lot creation within the Agricultural designation. These policies pre -date and are not entirely consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Section 2.3.4.1 c) of the PPS states that lot creation in prime agricultural areas may be permitted for a residence rendered surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any vacant remnant parcel of farmland retained by the severance. County planning staff do not object to the proposed consent application provided the lot creation is a result of farm consolidation, the residential lot is of a minimum size to accommodate the residence and appropriate sewage and water system, and the retained lands be zoned to prohibit a residential dwelling. Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 705- 726 -9300 ext. 1937, tomasz.wierzba�asimcoe.ca. Sincerely, The Corporation of the County of Simcoe ( Tomasz Wierzba Planning Technician cc. Bruce Hoppe, Manager of Development Planning PLD-003 -001 Page 52 of 132 lhaweship n( C4-14.2 ante Prowl Heritage, Exciting Future 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -17 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Josh Mueller, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (R. & L. Wuensch) 863 Ridge Road West Part of Lot 5, Concession 5 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # Roll #: 4346 - 010 - 008 -13900 _ R.M.S. File #: D13 -44331 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 and 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 167.69 square metres and a height of 5.76 metres above the established grade. 3. That the buildings and structures on the property be substantially 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. IBACKGROUND: The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling with attached garage, pool and deck and the applicant is proposing to construct a two storey detached garage (main floor area of 93.8 square metres and second floor area of 73.9 square metres). The applicant previously applied for, and was granted a variance for the gross floor area of the proposed garage. Under the bylaw, the applicant was limited to 100 square metres and was granted a variance for 167.69 square metres by the Committee at its April 18, 2013 Meeting. The applicant has since determined that he requires a variance for the height of the garage. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone Section 5.1.4— Maximum Height Required 4.5 metres Proposed 5.76 metres Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -17 Meeting Date, December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page 53 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... IMMAI COAL Not applicable. POLDCDES /ILC GOSILAT ONo Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural in the Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings and accessory uses on existing lots. Therefore, the proposed detached accessory building conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning 8y=4aw, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the Gott? The subject property is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RD) Zone. According to the Township's Zoning By- law, accessory buildings are permitted pursuant to Section 5.1. The proposed development of the lands would comply with all minimum required setbacks, but requires relief from the maximum height and 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 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 a 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 location of the garage would be to the rear of the dwelling when viewed from Ridge Road; and o The property slopes down away from the road and the garage would be at a significantly lower elevation the existing dwelling. Planning Staff also notes that the property has no neighbours in the rear yard (rail trail), and that a wide tree buffer exists on the property which would serve to screen the proposed garage when viewed from the public trail to the south of the property. Based on the above, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variances, if approved, would not have any negative impact on surrounding and 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. 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 Development Services fleeting Date, December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -17 Page 2 of 7 Page 54 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... 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 Department — Building permit required. County of Simcoe - ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Subject Area 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 -17, specifically, to permit the construction of an accessory building appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Resp tfully submitt Josh Mueller, Intermediate Planner Reviewed By: Derek Witlib MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date, December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -17 Page 3 of 7 Page 55 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -17 (Wuensch) LOCATION MA P 863 RIDGE ROAD WEST RIDGE ROAD W SUBJECT PROPERTY Development Services Meeting Date, December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -17 Page 4 of 7 Page 56 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN 2013 -A -17 (Wuensch) tr+cx.cs >e .49 a B , S Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -17 Meeting Date, December 19, 2013 Page 5 of 7 Page 57 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... SCHEDULE 3: FRONT C L VAT OFD 2013-A-117 17 (VJaae sch) L _t PF2C,NT a av____TIQN ELEVATIONS Prays. No L41S7 LUCAS 2046 6q. FR.. ..,,v... • Ima Ica. rr. NSW SAS : W LoTT FCR LORI >£ FiANO-r WUENSGH leaeieThe ova e4 L:AVM! 7.®-0409 Development Services Meeting Date, December 19, 2013 Application Flo. 2013-A-17 Page 6 o4 7 Page 58 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... SCHEDULE 4e FLOOR PLAN 2013 -A -17 (Wuernsch) e POST SrHFnI ll F ®_ Ides. 'x1/4' with der x PS, x p1113 welded +ea CA. bottom Plata O tH999 V3'x V4' - with GT VW welded 10' x 4e• cost. wed eawlube ce 56'x 96'x 15' <ono. firm. °ate 2�+ Norm � -++ F'I,.00R PLAN - 1024 — 19-1•7 LUCAS 2045 9O. Fi. Lwow.- 1024 5Q. Ff. NEW eAFne8 W/ LOFT-FOR LORI $ RANDY WUENaCH RIMEMble @a4 014 Cie.. w�xis720 -04 Devepcpmeo•ot SeMces Meethg Date, December 19, 2013 Appppcetp®n No. 2013 -A-17 Page 59 of 132 Page 7 of 7 n� rte. ','.....--.-.'...'',4..,',..'"'....,,"'N 1 MIN 1 4 f si v.a 1i • IIM 61 s 5. to 0 h . fro 1 � �.yy�� -4,-- ' 6-i 114 Bt aisle W® ie' ec. over asieao.d li ac. ode dP . da✓„wed r' nxlo Overhead war ce il 1 1 �_�� ry is x tOverhead Door a� n n e POST SrHFnI ll F ®_ Ides. 'x1/4' with der x PS, x p1113 welded +ea CA. bottom Plata O tH999 V3'x V4' - with GT VW welded 10' x 4e• cost. wed eawlube ce 56'x 96'x 15' <ono. firm. °ate 2�+ Norm � -++ F'I,.00R PLAN - 1024 — 19-1•7 LUCAS 2045 9O. Fi. Lwow.- 1024 5Q. Ff. NEW eAFne8 W/ LOFT-FOR LORI $ RANDY WUENaCH RIMEMble @a4 014 Cie.. w�xis720 -04 Devepcpmeo•ot SeMces Meethg Date, December 19, 2013 Appppcetp®n No. 2013 -A-17 Page 59 of 132 Page 7 of 7 2013 -A -17 (Wuensch 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... Page 60 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... Page 61 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... rl Q i 1 m 0 N Page 62 of 132 2013 -A -17 (Wuensch) 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... Page 63 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... Page 64 of 132 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori . nd Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... 30-.9' 2 -7 124- 3'7 124" 2' -2 32A• - / / ! "� / /! /! / A� g �. yA� N 1 W 11 /� 0 5 13-4 I�I I�I I%I ICI ICI Oil 15.4 a II� ICI.,, I I' Ijl IrI I I II I1011,4 I�I I%I L r ri #111 /I 0° ,n rl q e ese top foundation , �� + 1 H553 V7x V4' topQ •x7, V4 eon I r •C2 and p o� 1.1 fIx48�nc r Flues on r I c 36' x I ccora f auj. x s i l I�I II % IrI I ° / ,1i M recess tep of giindaiion vizN •,— m.. :, 30-.9' 2 -7 124- 3'7 124" 2' -2 32A• 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... 4- Exp. Wood Bean By Other 3T-CT E. Wood Bean By 0*4rs 7 -7 174' 3'4 13.4 2'-7 4 324 MAIN FI1]OR 20 T 40H DI I E O= P2 = H444 31/7 xV4' wNh 6' x6' X11.4. welded top and bottom plate H553 1/7 x V4' with 6' x 6' x V4' welded top and bottom plots on YJ x 48'can4 Mad sonotab on 86' x18' cans ling. oeta 20194-07 eu No A2 ° EN* wma FLOOR PLAN -1024 Naas 3,10'a T4 1.54 en a LUCAS rAna 2044 40. FT. Lan cawr 1024 SO. Fr. NEW GARAGE W/ LOFT FOR LORI 4t. RANGY WIDEN 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... 1s1 18'4 2 -7 IDN II 20 R 117 Woad are- engineersd wood roof Irueses over LOFT 16'4 324 ao79-n-0m en.w M.n. LOFT PLAN -1024 3t8 • T4 ids 13767 J. LUCAS 2048 SO. FT, Lot-Caw 102454. FT. NEW GARAGE W/ LOFT FOR LORI it RANDY WUENe 1 91 MM./ ae. �L41-1G 709-7360409 5.c) 10:00 a.m.2013 -A -17 (Lori and Randall Wuensch),863 Ridg... FRONT ELeEVATION -naa 3/16' -1'-CJ A4 ""` ' 13467 ELEVATIONS J. LUCAS ricer 204.8 5g. FT. varc.�... 10215Q. FT. NEW GARAGE W/ LOFT FOR 2a6elble 91 McNgw C.s LORI $ RANDY WUEN e 6' 1r&T0o= 2 7bunrsi+ip :%1:1-�� (9iv./6�.dot it e Proud Hrnrdir, Exrinng Pomn+ 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... TOWN SHIIP OF Oo ROo - RIEDOo NT REPOWT Applucatfion No: 2013-A-4. To: CommKtee off Adjustment prepared lye Derek WOt b, Manager pOan i vuces f feet i j Date: December fber 19, 2013 Subject: Variance AppOOcatk n (R. Co f;(er) 667 Mount St. Louis road cCorucessOon 5, North Bart off Lot 10 (Former TownshOp of Medonte) _S MotOon # I oDfl #o 4346 - 020 -002 -06 01 RAILS. Re #: D13 -46951 GEC QUOf; C D C OO NDOTOONS: The following conditions are required to be unposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B4 -C of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed agricultural storage building shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the agricultural storage building be located no closer than 0.3 metres from the westerly interior side lot line; 3. That the buildings and structures on the property be substantially 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: The property currently contains a single detached dwelling. The applicant is now proposing to construct an 80.3 square metre (864 square feet) pole barn /storage building. ANJALYSOS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: ?orae: A�rocuOturaO/ f aoraO (NRU SectOon 5.te3(d) e OnterOor rude Yard Setback For Accessory BuO0dOncg [ ssg,ured 2.0 metres pror�o�ed„ 0.3 metres I;=ONAN COAL: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. Development Services Application Igo. 2013 -A -48 Meeting Date DecembeT 19, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page 69 of 132 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... FOLD© S /LL GDSLAMONo Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Punt The property is designated Agricultural according to the Township's Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings, accessory buildings and agricultural buildings. Therefore, the proposed building conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Doe 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 lands are zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) according to Zoning By -law 97 -95. Permitted uses in this zone include single detached dwellings, accessory buildings and agricultural buildings. With respect to a residential accessory building, the Zoning By -law requires a minimum setback of 2.0 metres (6.6 feet) from an interior side lot line. With respect to an agricultural building the the Zoning By -law requires a minimum setback of 15 metres (49.2 feet) from an interior side lot line. The purpose and intent of the zoning By -law setback requirement is to provide spatial separation between buildings and adjacent properties and that adequate is available space for maintenance and access around a building. According to the applicant, the location of the proposed building was chosen due to lack of available space elsewhere on the property. Planning Staff attended the site and observed that the existing dwelling is situated between two ravines on its east and west sides and that there is no other location on the lands in which to site the building within convenient proximity the dwelling. While the proposed 0.3 metre (1 foot) setback is very minimal, Planning Staff notes the presence of a large wooded ravine on the adjacent property, immediately beside the proposed building. In Planning staff's opinion there is little likelihood that of any development or uses on the adjacent property that would be negatively impacted by the applicant's proposed building. Access and maintenance activities around the proposed building would, in practicality, likely necessitate stepping onto the adjacent property on occasion. However, in the absence of any comments or objections from the adjacent property owner to the west as of the preparation of this report, Planning Staff supports this variance due to the physical constraints of the applicant's site. The committee should have regard to any comments that may be received from the adjacent property to the west. The applicant has described the proposed building as a pole -barn structure, measuring 7.3 by 11 metres (24 by 36 feet), thus possessing a floor area of 80.3 square metres (864 square feet). This floor area would exceed the Zoning By -law's maximum permitted floor area of 70 square metres (753 square feet) if the proposed building is to be treated as a residential accessory building. Furthermore, a pole barn is not permitted as a residential accessory building according to the Ontario Building Code. Devepopmeovt servuces Meethig Date Decembeo.19, 2013 ApppO catpon Flo. 2013 -A -48 Page 2 of 7 Page 70 of 132 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... However, a pole barn may be used as an agricultural storage building and the Zoning By-law does not limit the floor area of an agricultural storage building. Considering that the property is zoned AgriculturaVIRural (A/IRD) and possesses a lot area of 3.5 hectares (8.67 acres), thus exceeding the Zoning By -law's minimum Dot area of 2.0 hectares (5 acres) for a Hobby Farm, Planning Staff is prepared to treat the appDicant's proposed building as an agricultural storage building. In order to do so, it is necessary to modify the requested variance to grant the following relief: Zouleo A ca t ural/ R uril M� Table 1B34 -C e Irhteruor awls Yard Setback For Agrlcadtural BoAldirug G�e�aoure�l, 15 metres Gar ®� ®sedl 0.3 metres Planning Staff supports this modification as it does not materially change the development being proposed and it is Staff's opinion that the application meets the general purpose and intent of the Zoning By -Iaw. Planning Staff also finds the development to be desirable for the development of the lot as it would likely enhance the appearance of the property by providing indoor storage space for equipment that the applicant is presently storing outdoors. Planning Staff has had regard for the County of Simcoe's request for a D -4 contamination study due to the presence of a nearby closed County landfill. However, in 2003 the Township considered this matter when it approved a Zoning By -Iaw Amendment which allowed for the construction of the dwelling that is currently situated on the subject lands. Since the variance, if approved, would not introduce a new residential use to the property, nothing of land use planning significance would be achieved by requiring a D -4 study at this time for the purposes of an agricultural storage building. is the variance minor? As the proposed variance related to the agricultural storage 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 or the immediately adjacent property, it is considered to be minor. CONSULT/ IONS: Environmental Services Division — Transportation Division — Building Division — Applicant to be aware of Ontario Building Code separation requirements Fire & Emergency Services Department — County of Simcoe — The subject lands are located within 500 metres of a closed, County -owned waste disposal site. A D -4 Study should be completed and implemented to the Satisfaction of the County. Development seMces Appfl catuoo1 No. 2013 -A -48 f�lli eetung Date DeoembeT 19, 2013 Page 3of7 Page 71 of 132 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Applicant's Sketch Schedule 3: County of Simcoe comments CONCLUSION: Planning staff recommends that Variance Application 2013 -A -48 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of an agricultural storage building, since the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -48 Page 4 of 7 Page 72 of 132 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATdON MAP 2013 -A -48 ger) LOCATION MAP 667 MOUNT St. ILOUIIS G° OA WIES SUBJECT PROPERTY MOUNT SAINT LOUIS ROAD W DeveOopment Services Apppucstfion Flo. 2013 -A =43 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 5of7 Page 73 of 132 0 0 4 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... SCHEDULE 2: APPL A T'S SKETCH 2013-A-4 (Kw) MOUN 1 58524 c o ��' e, BETWEEN N58'41'30"E ' 86.53' (P1) 731.4g cP�1 458 °09 624 30 "E S (P;3 Meas.) 63.47' N58 °41'30 "E (P3 & Meas.) N58 °41'30 "E N58'41 ' 30 "E • LOTS 0002— (5 BEARING W R° CO D 65.0 1G o` W cT Z TA Im � 3o a dd 'Jst 1., 4° 411 1 �\c`od Stone PnIin i!■J\ DeveDopmen4 SeMces MeetuorIg Date December 19, 2013 Apppppca on Flo. 2013-A-48 Page 74 of 132 Page 6 of 7 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... SCHEDULE 3o COUNTY OF SMCOE COMMENTS 2013 -A -4, (KO County of SEencoe Main Line (705) 726 -9300 COUNTY OF _ a Pionning Toll Free 1-866 -893 -9300 S1" " 'MCOF Q. �+ Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 im ( . 727 -4276 PLANNING December 11, 2013 Mr, Derek Witlib Deputy Secretary- Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment Administration Building 147 Lone 7 South, Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 RE: Application 20113 -x,-45 (Krer) Put Lot 10, Concession 5, Township off Or Mnenlcinlly I sown as Mount 51. Lords goad West =Mred©r te, County of Simcoe (via email) Thank you for circulating the County of Simcoe. County planning staff understands that the applicant is requesting a minor variance from Zoning By -Law 97 -95 to permit the construction of a 24' x 36' pole barn /storage building. The subject property is located within 500 metres of a closed County owned waste disposal site as identified on Schedule 5.6 of the County of Simcoe Official Plan Consolidated August 7fh, 2007. Section 4.9 of the County of Simcoe Official Plan requires that a study be completed based on the Ministry of Environment's Guideline D-4 — Land Use On or Near Landfills and Dumps. The guideline, which can be found here (http : //►r . smcoe. ca /dpt/pin/applicationslindex.htm), outlines the potential impacts that need to be reviewed prior to considering development in proximity to landfills. The study should be completed and implemented to the satisfaction of the County of Simcoe prior to any future development occurring on the subject lands. Please forward a copy of the decision. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to con .;ct the undersigned at 705 - 726 -9300 Ext. 1937, or Kimberley Pickett at Ext. 1195. Sincerely, Comoi etion off the County of Si; s coe Tomasz Wierzba Planning Technician cc. Bruce Hoppe, Manager of Development Planning Kimberley Pickett, Technical Compliance Supervisor PLD- 003 -001 Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application Igo. 2013 -A =46 Page 7 of 7 Page 75 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 76 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... VONItot • 4• d tro ff Page 77 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 78 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 79 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 80 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 81 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013 -A -48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... zoou IEEE tiNte y ✓:-+fit . . Page 82 of 132 2013 -A -48 (Ker) 5.d) 10:15 a.m. 2013-A-48 (Robert and Constance Ker),667 Mou... Page 83 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Proud Heritage, Esettjn Future Application No: 2013 -A -49 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Adrianna Spinosa Planner Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 _ Subject: Variance Application (Mary Lynn & Imo Weinert) 41 Cahiague Road CON 14 N PT LOT 10 RP 51R23816 PT 1 (Former Township of Medonte) Motion # Roll #: 4346- 020 - 004 -18100 R.M.S. File #: D13 -47012 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Section 4.0 Table B4 and Section 5.28 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, the proposed single detached dwelling shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the proposed single detached dwelling has a main floor area of approximately 26.75 sq.m. (287.9 sq.ft.) or greater; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; and 4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, as provided by the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13. BACKGROUND: The property currently contains a single detached dwelling — to be demolished. The applicant is now proposing to construct a new single detached dwelling. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) Zone Section 5.28 — Setbacks from Limits of Environmental Protection (EP) Zone Table B4.b) — Minimum first storey floor area Required Proposed 30.0 metres 0.0 metres 90 sq.m. 26.75 sq.m. Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -49 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Page 84 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... IFPNAN SAL: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. POLDCDCES /LEODSLLATlON D cv es the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The property is designated Rural in the Official Plan. Permitted uses in this designation include single detached dwellings. Therefore, the proposed single detached dwelling conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. Does the variance meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The majority of the subject lands, including the location of the existing dwelling and the proposed dwelling, is zoned Agricultural /Rural (A/RU) — see Schedule 3. The remainder of the property is zoned Environmental Protection (EP). The Zoning By -law prohibits development within an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone or within 30 metres of an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The intent of the Zoning By -law is protect people and property from natural hazards or to protect natural heritage features from development. The applicant is requesting a 0.0 metre setback from the boundary line. According to the applicant, the location of the building was chosen on the property to avoid construction within the lands regulated by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (see Schedule 4). Furthermore, the location is ideal for construction as it is clear of natural features and it allows for tree preservation. Although there is space on the property to meet the 30 metre setback, it would require trees and bush to be cleared, and permit submission to NVCA. The Zoning By -law requires a minimum first storey floor area of 90 sq.m. for single detached dwellings within the A/RU Zone. First storey is defined in the By -law as "the storey with its floor closest to established grade and having its ceiling more than 1.8 metres above grade." The intent of the By -law is to ensure a consistent Vow- density character will be maintained for dwellings within the Township. Due to the present grade of the property, the applicant has chosen a model (see Schedule 2) which does not comply with the required 90 sq.m., by definition. The chosen model appears as a 2- storey structure from the street view, and as a 1- storey from the rear (south) side. Although the applicant is proposing 26.75 sq.m. (287.9 sq.ft.) first floor area, the floor area above the garage will exceed the required 90 sq. m. alone. Therefore, it is in the opinion of Planning staff that the variance requested for relief from the required Environmental Protection setback and, for relief from the minimum first story floor area, would not have any negative impact on surrounding land uses or the character of the surrounding area. 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. Since the lands are subject to regulation by the NVCA, the Committee should have regard to any comments that may be received from the NVCA. Development SeMces holleetlng Date December 19, 2013 Appl"ooetlon No. 2013-A-49 Page 2 of 6 Page 85 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... Is the variance minor? As the proposed variance related to the single detached dwelling 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. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no comments Transportation Division — Building Division — Demolition, Building and Septic permits required. Fire & Emergency Services Department — no comments County of Simcoe — Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — a permit (or clearance) will be required under Ontario Regulation 172/06. Through the permit process, methods for environmental protection (e.g. sediment and erosion control) will be required. Site grading and tree removal within the Environmental Protection zone should be avoided. ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Conceptual Front Elevation Schedule 3: Zoning Schedule Schedule 4: Conservation Authority Regulated Lands Schedule 5: Proposed Site Plan CONCLUSION: Planning staff recommends that Variance Application 2013 -A -49 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling, since the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Adrianna S•inosa Planner Reviewed by: Derek Witlib, MCIP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -49 Page 3 of 6 Page 86 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP CCAHIAGUE ROAD 0 UBJEC1T LANDS (41 Cahiague Road) SCHEDULE 2: CONCEPTUAL FRONT ELEVATION Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -49 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 4 of 6 Page 87 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... SCHEDULE 3: ZONING SCHEDULE SCHEDULE 4: CONSERVATION AUTHORITY REGULATED LANDS Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -49 Page 5 of 6 Page 88 of 132 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... SCHEDULE 5: PROPOSED SITE PLAN 0 fr ; "2 o w io,of rrr ?I5.B ill vtt CI— Q. _ � r P re tire• q�3 /21/ s Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -49 Page 6 of 6 Page 89 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013-A-49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... Page 90 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... Page 91 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... Page 92 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... IP it �r Page 93 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... ■3i Page 94 of 132 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... Page 95 of 132 Member Municipalities Adjala - Tosorontio Amaranth Barrie The Blue Mountains Bradford -West Gwillimbury Clearview Collingwood Essa Grey Highlands Innisfil Melancthon Mono Mulmur New Tecumseth Oro - Medonte Shelburne Springwater Wasaga Beach 5.e) 10:40 a.m. 2013 -A -49 (Mary Lynn and Imo Weinert),41 Cah... December 12, 2013 Derek Witlib, Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib; Re: Application for Minor Variance 2013 -A -49 41 Cahiague Road, Part Lot 10, Concession 14 Township of Oro - Medonte The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for minor variance and based upon our mandate and policies under the Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to its approval. It is our understanding that this application will help to facilitate the construction of a single family dwelling and septic system adjacent an Environmental Protection (EP) zone. The EP zone relates to a valley feature and a small headwater tributary. We confirm the area of development is not subject to flood or erosion hazards. It appears the development may encroach into an area development regulated by the NVCA under the Conservation Authorities Act. As such, a permit (or clearance) will be required from the NVCA under Ontario Regulation 172/06. Through the permit process, methods for environmental protection (e.g. sediment and erosion control) will be required. Site grading and tree removal within the Environmental Protection zone should be avoided. Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward a copy of any decision. Watershed Counties Sincerely, Dufferin _ ✓- Q Grey Simcoe Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Member of Celebrating 50 Years in Conservation 1960 -2010 NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On LOM 1TO ONTARIO Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.nvca.on.c d Wage Em � a � o�'�'52' ca.on.ca Tuwuhipuf •� (7 Proud Heritage, Exriring Fuarre 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -50 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Adrianna Spinosa Planner Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Subject: Variance Application Brian Goymour & Tami Field 187 Lakeshore Road West Con 7 Plan 967 Pt Lot 70 Lot 71 (Former Township of Oro) Motion # — Roll #: 4346- 010 - 009 -33500 R.M.S. File #: D13 -47015 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 of Zoning By -law 97 -95, as amended, the single detached dwelling shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -law; 2. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the footing and 2) verifying in writing prior to pouring of the foundation by way of survey /real property report that the single detached dwelling /attached garage be located no closer than approximately 6.0 metres from the front lot line; and 3.0 metres from the exterior side lot line. 3. That the location and size of the proposed single detached dwelling be in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 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. IBACKGROUND: The subject property presently sits vacant. The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling with an attached garage and a boathouse; the variances requested are with respect to the dwelling only. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone Required Proposed 1. Table B1 – Minimum Required Front Yard 7.5 metres 6.0 metres 2. Table B1 – Minimum Required Exterior Side Yard 7.5 metres 3.0 metres 3. Table B1 – Minimum Required Interior Side Yard 3.0 metres 2.0 metres Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -50 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 5 Page 97 of 132 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... FORDANCIAL: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Committee of Adjustment be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and Council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. EOLDCDIES /LEGOSSLATDOft\ : Dies 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. Single detached residential uses are permitted in the Shoreline designation and one of the Official Plan's stated objectives of the Shoreline designation is, "To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area." Does the variance meett the general intent of the Zoning By -law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the 1.1? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By -Iaw and the SR Zone permits single detached dwellings. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum interior side yard setback of 3.0 metres is intended to provide spatial separation between neighbouring dwellings, as well as provide ease of access and maintenance on a lot. Although the applicant has requested a variance for a 2.0 metre interior side yard setback, they do not display the need for this variance in their site plan. Planning Staff has visited the subject lands and notes shoreline lots along Lakeshore Road West, between Line 6 and Blvyn Crescent, are relatively large sized lots, with the existing dwellings generally meeting or exceeding the interior side yard setbacks. The proposed layout of the lot appears to meet easterly lot line setback and it is in the opinion of Planning Staff that the applicant has not justified the request for the interior side yard setback. The Zoning By -law's requirement for a minimum exterior side yard and minimum front yard setbacks of 7.5 metres is intended to maintain an attractive residential character in the area by prohibiting structures too close to the street while providing space for landscaped yards and off - street parking in driveways. Planning Staff have inspected the subject lands and observed that the proposed location is approximately the same distance from the street as a variance granted at 187 Lakeshore Road West. Staff also notes that the perimeter of the lot is buffered by a dense hedge. Since the exterior lot line of the subject property is abutting a road allowance (Line 6 boat launch); is not a through road for travel; and is accessed only seasonally by the public, the requested exterior side yard setback of 3.0 metres does not compromise the streetscape. The proposed side entrance garage will allow for a relatively large driveway, thus providing more than adequate off - street parking. Planning Staff is of the opinion that in this case there will be no significant impact on adjacent properties or on the neighbourhood as a whole. The variance requested for the front yard and exterior side yard setbacks, would still allow for adequate access around the building and Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variance maintains the general intent of the Zoning By-law and is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. The variance requested for the interior side yard setback does not fit in with the character of the neighbourhood and is not appropriate for the proposed site layout. Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -50 Page 2 of 5 Page 98 of 132 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Is the variance minor? As the proposed variance related to the single detached dwelling is considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, is considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, it is considered to be minor. CONSULTATIONS: Environmental Services Division — no comments Transportation Division — Building Division — Building and Septic permits required. Applicant to satisfy that both septic and dwelling will both fit on the property Fire & Emergency Services Department — no comments Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority — County of Simcoe — ATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Front Elevation Schedule 3: Proposed Site Plan CONCLUSION: Planning staff recommends that Variance Application 2013 -A -50 be approved, only insofar as to permit a 6.0 metre front yard and a 3.0 metre exterior side yard, to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling and attached garage, since the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: Adrianna Spi Planner Reviewed by: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -50 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 3 of 5 Page 99 of 132 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... SCHEDULE 1: LOCATION MAP 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field) w z UBJECT LANDS (187 Lakeshore Rd. W.) SCHEDULE 2: FRONT ELEVATION 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field) Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -50 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 4 of 5 Page 100 of 132 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... SCHEDULE 3: PROPOSED SITE PLAN 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field) l9 /0'// ' .1`4 \(6,),(ty-N5( ,4 can , \ n / v ' c. vGc i A 493 x x' x �o PIN 58558 -0107 (LT LOT 70 6, 1900) ",64,0 , 9. IB (no • /e' V Ll/k' if Hnr2 ko !-J Lc-r- 71 A-7 LIT 76 tiICfaA16i'i&a t" / - "cz:) ep< Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -50 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 5 of 5 Page 101 of 132 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... .•finip Application No. 2013 -A -50 TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE (under Section 45 of the Planning Act) CON. 7 PLAN 967 PT LOT 70 LOT 71 ADDRESS 1S7 Lakeshore Road West HEARING DATE _December 19. 2013 n Gninns,. -v? rortha Serrrmn- Treunrrrcr Ewnnrinee n/ lainbrieor • Tnrvnxhip U,-.r- .tlr-dnnls Page 102 of 132 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 103 of 132 2013-A-50 (Goymour & Fie 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 104 of 132 2013-A-50 (Goymour & Fie 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 105 of 132 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 106 of 132 2013-A-50 (Goymour & Fie 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 107 of 132 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 108 of 132 2013 -A -50 (Goymour & Field 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Field and Brian Goymour),187... Page 109 of 132 --77 Q _ 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013 -A -50 (Tami Fi �"ci i our ;1 Lake Simcoe Region Oji conservation authority Wednesday, December 18, 2013 Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro - Medonte Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib, Re: Application for Minor Variance File 2013 -A -50 187 Lakeshore Road West Township of Oro - Medonte, County of Simcoe A Watersh for Life *By email only* Thank you for circulating this application for minor variance to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) for our review. Given that the property is located along the shoreline of Lake Simcoe, we recommend that any approval of this application be subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a permit from the LSRCA under Ontario Regulation 179/06 prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit. 2. That a planting plan be prepared to the satisfaction of the LSRCA in accordance with 6.11 -DP of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. 3. That the owner shall pay the minor variance review fee of $200 to the LSRCA. The purpose of the planting plan is to help create and maintain a vegetation protection zone along Lake Simcoe in order to improve water quality and fish habitat. Please ;L vise us of your decision. S Cha -s F. Burge- CIP, RPP Senio Plan 'ng C.. rdinator Copy: LSR A, Taylor Stevenson 120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282 Tel: 905.895.1281 1.800.465.0437 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 Fax: 905.853.5881 Web: www.LSRCA.on.ca E -Mail: Info ©LSRCA.on.ca Proud winner of the International Thiess Riverprize Member of Conservation Ontario Page 110 of 132 5.f) 10:55 a.m. 2013-A-50 (Tami Field aQQ,187.. Lb04-eC3 -47.cL_ e.„• e of- 7reat ged. 4). , 72 eZeo-v‘■ 09542.4-dza /17 / 9 2i a-~e/ / 9 . j 6-e fr • 4, a--c$L/ z5-7t- 1 ,g2-eZe ,224eef, z P - .oLee44e /22 e7z- DEC 1 2013 ORO-MEDONTE TOWNSHIP Page 1 1 1 of 132 Tarurtahip of Proud Heritage, Exciting F.iure 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... TOWNSHIP OF ORO- MEDONTE REPORT Application No: 2013 -A -51 To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared By: Josh Mueller, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: December 19, 2013 Subject: Variance Application (Claire Judson) 5 Goss Road Registered Plan No. 791 Lot 3 Motion # Roll #: 4346- 030 - 010 -13400 R.M.S. File #: D13 -47021 REQUIRED CONDITIONS: The following conditions are required to be imposed on the Committee's decision: 1. That, notwithstanding Table B1 (Minimum Front Yard and Setback from Bass Lake) of Zoning By- law 97 -95, the proposed dwelling shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; 2. That the buildings and structures on the property be generally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; 3. That the applicant obtain any permits and /or approvals required, from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; and 4. That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding, and that the applicant enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the Township of Oro - Medonte in order to remove the Holding (H) designation on the property as provided for within the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13. IBACKGROUND: The subject property currently supports a single detached dwelling (cottage) and small accessory building (outhouse), which the applicant proposes to remove. The property is zoned Residential Limited Service 2 H (RLS2). The lot is 0.21 Acres (0.08 Hectares) with 18.2 metres (59.71 feet) street frontage, and a depth of 48.1 metres (157.8 feet). The lot also backs onto Bass Lake with an irregularly shaped shoreline. The abutting properties are used for residential, and water access. IANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting the following relief from Zoning By -law 97 -95: Zone: Residential Limited Service (RLS) Required Table B1 — Minimum Front Yard Table B1(1) Setback from Bass Lake 7.5 metres Proposed 3.9 metres 15 metres from 3.1 metres from average high water regional storm mark flood elevation Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -51 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 1 of 6 Page 112 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... FINAIMCVALo Not applicable. POLlCOES /LIE SLATOONa Does the variance c nfommm to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C5 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. In Section C5.1 of the Official Plan the stated objectives of the Shoreline designation are: • To maintain the existing character of the predominantly residential area. • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. • To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewer services. Residential uses, including accessory buildings such as single detached dwellings are generally permitted by the Official Plan. Planning Staff notes that the proposed dwelling is to be located entirely on the applicant's property and is intended to replace an existing cottage which currently is dilapidated and generally in disrepair. Planning Staff considers this to be an improvement over the existing situation and, in Planning Staff's opinion, the requested variances would not negatively impact the character of the existing residential area or the natural features of the shoreline. The proposed development has no impacts on servicing. Based on the above, the requested variances are considered to conform to the Official Plan. Doe the variancc, meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the Goff The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service (RLS) (H) according to the Township's Zoning By -law 97 -95. A single detached dwelling is a permitted use in this zone. However there is a Holding (H) provision on the zoning of the land. The purpose of the H is to regulate development on Tots that are on private roads. The application will need to apply for Site Plan approval to remove the H prior to the issuance of a building permit. Although the lot is deficient in acreage, in this case section 5.17.1 of the Township's Zoning By -law 97- 95 would apply. It states: "A lot in existence prior to the effective date of this By -law that does not meet the lot area and /or lot frontage requirements of the applicable Zone, may be used and buildings thereon may be erected, enlarged, repaired, or renovated provided the use conforms with the By -law and the buildings or structures comply with all the other provisions of this By- law." The requested variance to allow for a setback of 3.1 metres from the Regional Storm Flood Elevation would enable the applicant to achieve the ideal location for the proposed dwelling. Due to the irregular shape of the shore line, this distance would not generally adversely affect the character of the land. Devepopment Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Appiiostion No. 2013 =A -51 Page 2 of 6 Page 113 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... The requested variance to permit a 3.9 metre front yard setback, whereas a minimum of 7.5 metres is currently required, would considerably increase the area of development potential on the lot. The lot slopes toward the lake, and if the setback remained at 7.5 metres it would greatly reduce the size of dwelling that could be constructed. Planning staff notes that the proposed attached garage would still remain adequately set back from Goss Road to allow for off — street parking in the driveway. Is the variance minor? As the proposed variances are considered to conform to the general intent of the Official Plan, to meet the general intent of the Zoning By -Law, to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, the variances are considered to be minor. ICONSULTATIONS: • Environmental Services Division — • Transportation Division - • Building Division — Building and Septic Permits Required. Applicant must demonstrate that both septic and dwelling will fit on the property. • Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority — No Concerns IATTACHMENTS: Schedule 1: Subject Area Map Schedule 2: Site Plan (Existing) Schedule 3: Site Plan (Proposed) ICONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends that Minor Variance Application 2013 -A -51 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of a dwelling, for the reason that the variances appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respec ully submitte Josh Mueller Intermediate Planner Reviewed by: #4,,,,L//46 Derek Witlib, MCIP RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -51 Page 3 of 6 Page 114 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... SCHEDULE 1: SUBJECT AREA MAP 2013 -A -51 (Judson) Development Services Application No. 2013 -A -51 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 4 of 6 Page 115 of 132 LOT 39 LOT 4 NEIGHBORING DWELLING 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... XX SCHEDULE 2: SITE PLAN EXISTING 2013 -A -51 (Judson) LOT 40 - LOT 2 X - SHORE LINE 2 Application for Minor Variance 5 Goss Road Current r Scale: 1 :250 Development Services Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Application No. 2013 -A -51 Page 5 of 6 Page 116 of 132 LOT 39 LOT 4 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013-A-51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... SCHEDULE 3: SITE PLAN (PROPOSED) 2013-A-51 (Jusdon) i -PP LOT 40 ?.......--- c---O i C-1 1 Y.\\-\ p-,I, , ..-- ,0 . ,' „,..,,, LEIGHBORING DWELLING X zra.t. PROPOSED ATTACHED GARAGE X29a. PROPOSED DWELLING ±1200sqft LOT 2 Application for Minor Variance 5 Goss Road Proposed New Scale: 1:250 Development Services Application No. 2013-A-51 Meeting Date December 19, 2013 Page 6 of 6 Page 117 of 132 C 0 L) D %--1 Ll) a I m 1 0 N 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... Page 118 of 132 C 0 L) D %--1 a I m 1 0 (NI 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... Page 119 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... rii "If .mratr■-_ :f � ' � • .$ ? '' •A� yr 4, Y,, iH A.a� N .Zr w' ..4 `. rs, 534 Page 120 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... ►-ti _ -._� � • „""`-- -- ...fie► - Page 121 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... Page 122 of 132 C 0 D %--1 Ll) a I m 1 0 N 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... Page 123 of 132 C 0 L) D %--1 Ll) a I m 1 0 N 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... Page 124 of 132 Member Municipalities Adjala - Tosorontio Amaranth Barrie The Blue Mountains Bradford -West Gwillimbury Clearview Col I i ngwood Essa Grey Highlands Innisfil Melancthon Mono Mulmur New Tecumseth Oro - Medonte Shelburne Springwater Wasaga Beach Watershed Counties Dufferin Grey Simcoe Member of Conservation ONTARIO Natural Champions 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... December 10, 2013 Derek Witlib, Deputy Secretary- Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro- Medonte P.O. Box 100 Oro, Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mr. Witlib; Re: Application for Minor Variance 2013 -A -51 5 Goss Road Township of Oro - Medonte The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for minor variance and based upon our mandate and policies under the Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to its approval. It is our understanding that this application will help to facilitate the construction of a single family dwelling adjacent to Bass Lake and its associated Regional Storm floodplain. We advise the proposed dwelling is located outside of the flood hazard. The property is within the regulatory jurisdiction of the NVCA and a permit is required under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to construction. Among other things, a minimum floodproofing elevation will be specified through the permit process. Furthermore, opportunities for environmental enhancement to offset a reduction in the environmental setback will be considered. Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward a copy of any decision. Sincerely, 7:7,j S Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Celebrating 50 Years in Conservation 1960 -2010 NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation 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 ageErn�a4l15ilri.lA /ca.on.ca Brissette, Marie 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (CI nf5" To: Subject: Witlib, Derek RE: 5 Goss Road Committee of Adjustment Application 2013 -A -51 From: Shoniker, Mark [ Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 11:17 AM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: 5 Goss Road Committee of Adjustment Application 2013 -A -51 Dear Secretary- Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, My name is Mark Shoniker and I am one of the co- owners of 4 Goss Road in the Township of Oro - Medonte, along with my brother Tom Shoniker. Our property is situated directly across the lane from 3 Goss Road. The 3 Goss Road property is owned and is used as the private beach by the residents located on the side of the lane on which my property is situated. We wish to express our strong opposition to the subject application for the following reasons: 1) While several pictures were attached to the application, they failed to show the close proximity of 5 Goss Road to the bend which effectively begins the lane -way. The lot is one of the very first that confronts vehicular and pedestrian traffic as they proceed down the lane. Allowing the building to be situated within 3.9 metres of the lane -way would significantly change the sight -line of the street. The original by -law was put in place for a reason, that being to maintain a more spacious road -side appearance and to make it more aesthetically pleasing for all residents. The lots on Goss Road are NOT large in size; building a structure so close to the lane -way would contribute to a "corridor" effect, i.e. an overall feeling of congestion. 2) The use of the term "Road" to describe Goss Road is more of a euphemism than a fact. While no pictures of the road appear to have been submitted with the application, Goss Road is simply an unpaved single -car private lane -way that allows only one car ingress and /or egress at a time. It is approximately 10 feet in width, compared to the standard road width of 24 to 28 feet. When vehicles of opposing directions confront one another, one is forced to either pull into an existing driveway or to drive up on one of the shoulders of the road to allow passage. This is a dead -end street, so traffic is not heavy. Over the years our Association has pursued the Township in the hope of having it assume the road — we did so again last year. We understand that this continues to be a topic of discussion, however have been told that one of the issues that will be reviewed is the current width of the lane -way. There is no commentary provided in either the application or the Report by the Planner as to how any possible future road assumptions would be affected by allowing a building structure so close to what is already a narrow lane -way. I suspect that possible widening of the lane - way as well as drainage etc. would need to be considered. 3) With respect to the foregoing point, this is a very narrow road that obviously possesses no formal sidewalks or walkways for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. We generally walk on the shoulders of the road. None of us wish to infringe on the privacy of other property owners. I suspect that allowing a building as close to the lane -way as this application requests will have the unintended consequence of moving pedestrians directly on to the lane -way at its busiest point — that being by the corner where vehicles first turn to access the lane -way. 4) Again, with respect to point 2, there is no mention as to the potential impact on snow removal. 5) With respect to the beach front/ set back from Bass Lake, I have now had conversations with three residents of our street. None of us are clear as to what is being requested or how the "regional storm flood elevation" is determined. Is the application seeking to build closer to the waterfront than what is currently permitted under existing by -laws? Is the application seeking to have a new rule applied to this particular situation? Those of us situated across the street are avid users of the beach front. We attend to it via gardening/ planting of flowers, etc. Unfortunately the pictures submitted do not convey where the lot is situated with respect to the lake. Numbers 3 and 5 Goss Road are situated on the eastern edge of the lake. When facing the water, the 1 Page 126 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Judson),5 Goss Road, Appli... view of the lake is to your right — effectively looking across the front of the 5 Goss Road property. There is no question that the closer you allow a building to be constructed to the waterfront, the more of the view from the private beach you will impede. 6) Finally, on page 2 of the Planner's Report, there is commentary in the third paragraph from the bottom that appears to infer that, but for various grandfathering provisions, construction of any new dwelling would not be permitted on this site due to insufficient acreage. That being the case, does this application now request that even more exceptions be made to the existing by -laws governing construction on the property? It would appear that there is sufficient room on the property to allow for the construction of a dwelling — conformance with the existing by -laws would only preclude the construction of a particular style of dwelling that the applicant has chosen. It is my intention to appear in person at Council Chambers for the meeting currently scheduled for 11:10 a.m. on December 19th, 2013. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this submission. Yours truly, Mark Shoniker and Tom Shoniker 4 Goss Road 2 Page 127 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Ju bs' f' Iri'I Brissette, Marie To: Subject: Witlib, Derek RE: Application 2013 -A -51 Township of Oro - Medonte From: Mel PETERSIEL [ Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 2:26 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: RE: Application 2013 -A -51 Committee of Adjustment Oro - Medonte Re Application for variance by Claire Judson 5 Goss Road Oro Medonte Dear Sirs As the owner of the adjacent property,7 and 9 Goss Road I wish to bring to the Committee my concerns regarding this request. We are outside the country and unable to be present in person for the Dec.19 meeting,and may see the need to obtain representation. We have owned the property since 1982,and have made extensive changes and additions to bring this home to its present state. We have three major concerns as we see this suggested plan for the property at 5 Goss Road. 1: Is the proposed septic system at the approved distance from our drilled well,so as to allow us continued a continued potable water source? It is unclear from the site plan that that is the case. 2: With the structure that is proposed it appears that our mature trees and hedges are in danger of disruption,changing the present rural treed character of the property. 3: It appears that proposed drilled well is adjacent to our Aquarobic effluent line,and could interfere with the associated lines as well as our basement foundation in that area. Drilling itself would essentially involve our property from this plan. Accordingly I must regretfully oppose the suggested variance from the zoning bylaws. Mel E Petersiel 1 Page 128 of 132 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Ju Brissette, Marie L.401- StIt__. To: Subject: Witlib, Derek RE: Application for variance 5 Goss Rd Oro Medonte From: Anna Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 4:38 PM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: Application for variance 5 Goss Rd Oro Medonte For the record,re application for set -back variance 5 Goss Road.We Ward and Anna Tomlin 37 Goss Road,have no objection to the application.Goss Road as you know is an unimproved /unassumed road maintained by the Goss Beach Cottagers Association on behalf of the owners sharing a deeded right of way over Goss Road.There are,it should be noted,a total of seven or more properties not in conformance with the present 7.5 meter set back which in our opinion does not effect the road or its esthetical appearance or function.Any precedent has,again in our opinion,already been set and any new applications for variances will be dealt with based on their merit, by the Township at the time of application. Andria Leigh Director Development Services Township of Oro - Medonte i Page 129 of 132 Brissette, Marie 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Jud dt-5(5l • <I To: Subject: Witlib, Derek RE: application for set -back for 5 Goss Road From: Scott Wayne [ Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 9:09 AM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: application for set -back for 5 Goss Road Hello wsia Although not directly affected by this application for a set -back variance for 5 Goss Road, we would like to support this application. The reasons for supporting this variance of construction 3.9 metres from the road are: • Goss Road is a Private Road not assumed by the Township of Oro Medonte therefore the by -law should not apply • Any addition to this property will be advantageous to the community and will definitely be an improvement to what is presently on the site • There are many permanent homes along Goss Road. Many of these have been in their present location for several years. Many homes are already constructed as close as 3.9 metres from the road and some even closer without any difficulty to traffic or pedestrian usage. It for these reasons, we do not oppose this variance and will support the new construction. Wayne and Elaine Scott 43 Goss Road L3V 6H2 Derek Witlib Manager, Planning Services Township of Oro - Medonte 1 Page 130 of 132 Brissette, Marie To: Subject: 5.g) 11:10 a.m. 2013 -A -51 (Claire Juds Witlib, Derek RE: 5 Goss Rd. variance From: Glassford, Correna [ Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 8:26 AM To: Leigh, Andria Subject: 5 Goss Rd. variance Hi, My name is Correna Glassford, I live at 8 Goss Rd, almost directly across the road from 5 Goss Rd. I only purchased there last year. One of my major concerns was the building that may be errected on 5 Goss Rd and the sight line I have with the water. Only 3.5 metres from the Road will interfere with the site line, but also, will drastically change the asthetic appearance of the road with a double story building that close to the road. This will also set presidence for other future construction along the road. That all said, I, Correna Glassford oppose the minor variance for 5 Goss Rd. I am unable to attend the meeting as I am a full time employee and these such set times are discriminatory to those who must work. Correna Glassford This e -mail and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and protected under the Education Act and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering the information to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, printing or copying of this e -mail and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If this e -mail and any attachments were received in error, please notify the sender by reply e -mail and delete the original message. Please consider the environment before printing this email or attachments. 1 Page 131 of 132 6.a) Correspondence dated November 21, 2013 from the Ontario... Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Ontario Municipal Board 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: Toll Free: Fax: Website: (416) 212-6349 1 -866 -448 -2248 (416) 326-5370 www.elto.gov.on.ca November 21, 2013 Tribunaux de I'environnement et de I'amenagement du territoire Ontario Commission des affaires municipales de ('Ontario 655 rue Bay, suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1 E5 Telephone: Sans Frais: Telecopieur: Site Web: Allan Baker Jarratt - Coulson & District Community Group Inc 638 Horseshoe Valley Road East RR #3 Coldwater ON LOK 1 E0 Subject: Case Number: File Number: Municipality: Municipal Number: Property Location: Hearing Start Date: (416) 212 -6349 1- 866 - 448 -2248 (416) 326 -5370 www.elto.gov.on.ca Sent by mail PL131115 PL131115 Township of Oro - Medonte A- 2013 -A -41 3009 Line 8 North February 06, 2014 Ontario -a NOV ? 5 2013 The Ontario Municipal Board has received your written confirmation that the above -noted matter has been withdrawn. As a result, the Board has cancelled the hearing event that was scheduled to commence on February 06, 2014. Yours truly, 0 for Maria Fernandes Hearings Coordinator /bs c.c. Braestone Development Corporation The Clerk (Oro - Medonte) Adrianna Spinosa Eldon Theodore Derek Witlib Bengt Schumacher David James Pryde Simcoe County Andria Leigh Andrew Neil McNiven John Louis Hare Ruth Kathleen Atwood Stephen Robert Gooch Lyle Clarence Johnston Gold Mountain Springs Inc. John Douglas Heintzman Gargano Development Corp. Edward Myles Hall Robert J. Ego Donald Joseph Charles Neil Andrew McNiven Steven Scott McCreary Assessment Review Board - Board of Negotiation - Conservation Review Board - Environmental Review Tribunal - Ontario Municipal Board Niagara Escarpment Hearing Office - Office of Consolidated Hearings Page 132 of 132