Loading...
04 01 2015 Development Services Committee Agenda44"AW Of Proud Ntritagr, Excifiq #-unite Page The Township of Oro-Medonte Development Services Committee Meeting Agenda Council Chambers Wednesday, April 1, 2015 5:30 p.m. 1. Opening of Meeting: 2. Adoption of the Agenda: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. 3. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest: 4. Adoption of Minutes: 4-13 a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting held on Wednesday, March 4, 2015. 5. Public Meetings: 14 - ( a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015-ZBA-01 (Lazy Dayz/Marrs), 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West, re: Requested to rezone the lands to a site-specific Agricultural/Rural Exception # (A/RU*#) Zone to permit indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar functions on the subject lands. (-Z b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015-ZBA-04 (Simcoe County District School Board), Concession 1, Part of Lot 12, known municipally as 204 Line 15 North, from the existing Institutional (1) and Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zones to the Institutional Exception (I* Exception) Zone to permit development of a 20 unit residential care facility with ancillary office and gymnasium space. 6. Public Hearings: -q3 a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services, re: Consent Applications 2015-B-03, 2015-04 & 2015-05, Peter Tsang, 1161 Line 15 North, Concession 2, Part Lot 4 (Orillia), Township of Oro-Medonte. b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-05, Andrew Simpson & Patricia Brunelle, 19 Stanley Avenue. Page 1 c) 7:00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-06, Bruce Archer, 776 Lakeshore Road East. d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-07, Mark Cameron, 18 Cook Lane. -,,-�3�/ e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-08, Alan & Karen Campbell, 321 Line 4 North. Imo_ PW f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-09, Sandra Hoffman & Todd Phillips, 5 Greenwood Forest Road, Plan 709, Lot 40 and Part of Block A (Oro). 7. Deputations: None. 8. Reports of Municipal Officers: a) Report No. DS2015-023, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner, re: Official Plan Amendment, 2014-OPA-02 and Zoning By-law Amendment, 2014-ZBA- 05 (Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision) Plan 51 M-1035, Lots 9-13 and Lots 45-48 inclusive. b) Report No. DS2015-024, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: Site Plan Agreement and Removal of Holding Provision (Democrat Maplewood Ltd.) 2015 -SPA -05, 10 Opal Court Plan 51 M-957, Lot 87 (Former Township of Oro). c) Report No. DS2015-025, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner, re: Site Plan Agreement, 2015 -SPA -01 (Caudry), 15 Pemberton Lane. �- d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services, re: "The Lodges" Draft Plan of Condominium Application 2015 -SUB -01 by Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc. e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services, re: Zoning By-law Amendment 2013-ZBA-13 (Modco Investments Inc.). 9. Reports of Members of Council: a) Councillor Jermey, re: Farmland Preservation. 10. Communications: None. 11. Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. 12. Questions from the Public Clarifying an Agenda Item, Excluding Public Page 2 Meeting 1 Hearings Items: 13. Adjournment: a) Motion to Adjourn. Page 3 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... 0 Totut=�� Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Wednesday, March 4, 2015 The Township of Oro-Medonte Development Services Committee Meeting Minutes Council Chambers Present: Mayor H.S. Hughes Councillor Barbara Coutanche Councillor John Crawford Councillor Scott Macpherson Councillor Phil Hall Councillor Scott Jermey Regrets: Deputy Mayor Ralph Hough Time: 5:35 p.m. Staff Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services; Janette Teeter, Present: Supervisor, Clerk's Services/Deputy Clerk; Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning Services; Marie Brissette, Coordinator, Corporate Services; Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner; Adriana Spinosa, Planner Also Ann Truyens, Jim Cooper, Marius Staicu, Michelle Cutts, Dave McNabb, Present: Przemyslaw (Peter) Latoszek, David Grzela, Mark Duffin, George Cochran 1. Opening of Meeting: Mayor H.S. Hughes opened the meeting and called the meeting to order. Councillor Crawford assumed the Chair for the remainder of the meeting. 2. Adoption of the Agenda: a) Motion to Adopt the Agenda. Motion No. DSC150304-1 Moved by Coutanche, Seconded by Macpherson It is recommended that the agenda for the Development Services Committee meeting of Wednesday, March 4, 2015 be received and adopted. Carried. Page 1 of 10 Page 4 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. 3. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest: None declared. 4. Adoption of Minutes: a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting held on Wednesday, February 4, 2015. Motion No. DSC150304-2 Moved by Hall, Seconded by Macpherson It is recommended that the draft minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting held on Wednesday, February 4, 2015 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. Page 2 of 10 Page 5 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. 5. Public Meetings / Hearings: a) Public Meeting, re: Proposed Amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning By -Law, 2014- OPA-02 & 2014-ZBA-05 (Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd.), Plan 51M-981 Lots 9-13 and Lots 45-48. Councillor Crawford called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. and explained the public meeting has been called under the authority of the Planning Act, Sections 34, R.S.O. 1990 c. P.13, to obtain public comment with respect to a Proposed Amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning By -Law, 2014-OPA-02 & 2014-ZBA-05 (Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd.), Plan 51M-981 Lots 9-13 and Lots 45-48. Notice Public Meeting was mailed to landowners within 120m (400 feet) of the specified site on February 6, 2015 and a sign posted on the subject property on February 6, 2015. The following correspondence was received: dated February 18, 2015, County of Simcoe; Helen MacRae dated February 27, 2015. Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Planner, explained the purpose and effect of the proposed amendment. A PowerPoint presentation was presented. Michelle Cutts, Rudy & Associates Ltd., on behalf of the applicant, presented an overview. The following public persons offered verbal comments with respect to the proposed amendment: Jim Cooper; Jeff McCuige; George Cochran; Mark Duffin; David Grzela. Councillor Crawford advised that no additional deputations to Council will be permitted with respect to the proposed amendment. A digital recording of the meeting is available for review through the Township's website. There being no further comments or questions, the meeting adjourned at 6:16 p.m. Page 3 of 10 Page 6 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. b) Report No. DS2015-018, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-02 (Farber), 45 Windfield Drive West. Przemyslaw (Peter) Latoszek, agent, was present. Correspondence dated March 2, 2015 from Chris & Diana Schroeter and correspondence dated March 2, 2015Wolfgang and Ingrid Schroeter was distributed to members of Council and staff. Motion No. DSC150304-3 Moved by Hall, Seconded by Jermey It is recommended that Minor Variance Application 2015-A-02 (Farber) be deferred, and that the Development Services Committee reserve its decision until comments from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority dated February 25, 2015 are addressed. Carried. c) Report No. DS2015-017, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Minor Variance Application 2015-A-03 (Fox), 1545 Line 11 North. Steven Fox, applicant, was present. Motion No. DSC150304-4 Moved by Coutanche, Seconded by Jermey It is recommended: 1. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-03 (Fox), being to permit construction of a 167.3 square metre detached garage, having a height of 5.33 metres and resulting in accessory structure lot coverage of 5.3% on the subject lands at 1545 Line 11 North, be approved. 2. That approval of the application be subject to the following conditions: a) Notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 (maximum accessory structure height), Section 5.1.5 (maximum accessory structure lot coverage) and Section 5.1.6 (maximum accessory structure floor area) of Zoning By-law 97-95, the proposed detached garage shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; b) That the proposed detached garage be constructed in general conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; c) That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding. Carried. Page 4 of 10 Page 7 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. d) Report No. DS2015-020, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Consent Application by Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc., 1101 Horseshoe Valley Road, Con. 4, Part Lot 1 (Oro). Paul Mondelle, agent, was present. Dave McNabb, Director of Horseshoe Valley Property Owners' Association requested clarification on the Hold provision, how service capacities were determined and traffic impact. Motion No. DSC150304-5 Moved by Macpherson, Seconded by Jermey It is recommended: That the Development Services Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2015-B-01 to sever a lot possessing an area of approximately 0.49 hectares (1.21 acres) for a proposed residential and commercial condominium development, together with an easement possessing an area of approximately 0.15 hectares (0.38 acres) for access and parking purposes, and consent to register a mortgage/charge, subject to the following conditions: a) 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; b) That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; c) That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and d) 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 5 of 10 Page 8 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. e) Report No. DS2015-022, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Consent Application 2015-B-02 and Minor Variance Application 2015-A-04 by Ian & Lori Webb, 3808 Line 11 North Con. 11, Part Lot 3 (Medonte). Doug Downey, solicitor, and Jamie Robinson, planner, on behalf of the applicant, were present. Motion No. DSC150304-6 Moved by Macpherson, Seconded by Hall It is recommended: That the Development Services Committee grant provisional consent to Application 2015-B-02 to sever a lot possessing an area of approximately 0.5 hectares (1.2 acres) for continued commercial use (veterinary clinic), subject to the following conditions: a) 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; b) That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; c) That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; and d) That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. Carried. Motion No. DSC150304-7 Moved by Macpherson, Seconded by Hall It is recommended: That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-04 to permit a minimum lot area of 0.5 hectares (1.2 acres), a minimum northerly interior side yard setback of 7.8 metres (25.6 feet) and a minimum southerly interior side yard setback of 16 metres (53 feet), be approved subject to the following condition: a) That notwithstanding Section 4.0 — Tables B4A and 134C of Zoning By-law 97-95, the use and development of the lands shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-law. Carried. Page 6 of 10 Page 9 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. 6. Deputations: None. 7. Reports of Municipal Officers: a) Report No. DS2015-015, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Site Plan Agreement 2014 -SPA -28, Concession 3, Part Lot 17, RP 51 R35633, Parts 3 and 4 (Orillia), Oro-Medonte as in 58567-0010 LT [Refer to Items 5a) & b) of the 03 04 2015 Council Meeting Agenda]. Motion No. DSC150304-8 Moved by Macpherson, Seconded by Coutanche It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-015, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Site Plan Agreement 2014 -SPA -28, Concession 3, Part Lot 17, RP 51 R35633, Parts 3 and 4 (Orillia), Oro-Medonte as in 58567-0010 LT be received and adopted. 2. That the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Site Plan Agreement with Lester Cooke and Christina Dominelli-Cooke to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling. 3. That the appropriate By -Laws for the Site Plan Agreement and to Remove the Holding Provision applying to the lands described as Concession 3, Part Lot 17, Registered Plan 51 R-35633, Parts 3 and 4 be brought forward for Council's consideration. 4. And That the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services' signature. Carried. Page 7 of 10 Page 10 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes – Wednesday, March 4, 2015. b) Report No. DS2015-016, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Implementation of Holding Provision — Condition of Consent 2014-B-06 (Bidmead) [Refer to Item 5c) of the 03 04 2015 Council Meeting Agenda]. Motion No. DSC150304-9 Moved by Coutanche, Seconded by Macpherson It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-016, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Implementation of Holding Provision — Condition of Consent 2014-B-06 (Bidmead) be received and adopted. 2. That Schedule 'A22' to the Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, is hereby further amended by added a Holding Provision to the land located in Concession 10 South Part Lot 21 (Medonte), Township of Oro-Medonte, located at 6055 Line 9 North from the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone to the Agricultural/Rural Hold (A/RU(H)) Zone. 3. And That the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Carried. c) Report No. DS2015-019, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Removal of Part Lot Control, Blocks 58, 59 & 60, Plan 51 M-1035 (Horseshoe Ridge) [Refer to Item 5d) of the 03 04 2015 Council Meeting Agenda]. Motion No. DSC150304-10 Moved by Jermey, Seconded by Coutanche It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-019, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re.- Removal e:Removal of Part Lot Control, Blocks 58, 59 & 60, Plan 51 M-1035 (Horseshoe Ridge) be received and adopted. 2. That a By -Law to exempt Blocks 58, 59 & 60, Plan 51 M-1035, within the Horseshoe Ridge Plan of Subdivision, from Part Lot Control be brought forward for Council's consideration. 3. That the By -Law be in effect for a period of 3 years from the date of passing. 4. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services' signature. Carried. Page 8 of 10 Page 11 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. d) Report No. DS2015-021, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Subdivision Agreement Reid's Ridge Estates, 2353970 Ontario Inc., Part of Lot 15, Concession 9 (Medonte), Application 2004 -SUB -02 [Refer to Item 5e) of the 03 04 2015 Council Agenda). Motion No. DSC150304-11 Moved by Hall, Seconded by Jermey It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-021, Andria Leigh, Director, Development Services, re: Subdivision Agreement Reid's Ridge Estates, 2353970 Ontario Inc., Part of Lot 15, Concession 9 (Medonte), Application 2004 -SUB -02 be received and adopted. 2. That the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Subdivision Agreement with 2353970 Ontario Inc., upon receipt of the appropriate Letter of Credit/financial requirements. 3. That the appropriate By -Law to enter into a Subdivision Agreement with 2353970 Ontario Inc. (Reid's Ridge Estates) be brought forward for Council's consideration. 4. And That the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services' signature. Carried. 8. Communications: None. 9. Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. 10. Questions from the Public Clarifying an Agenda Item, Excluding Public Meeting / Hearings Items: Page 9 of 10 Page 12 4.a) Minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting h... Development Services Committee Minutes — Wednesday, March 4, 2015. 11. Adjournment: a) Motion to Adjourn. Motion No. DSC150304-12 Moved by Coutanche, Seconded by Macpherson It is recommended that we now adjourn at 7:21 p.m. Carried. John Crawford, Chair Adam Kozlowski, Secretary -Treasurer Page 10 of 10 Page 13 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Notice of Receipt of a Complete Application Notice of Particulars and Public Access Notice of Public Meeting for ii�cjrjsz Proposed Amendments to the Zoning By-law of the Township of Oro-Medonte 2015-ZBA-01 (Lary Dayz) Take notice that the Township of Oro-Medonte deemed the following application to amend the Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, a "Complete" Application under the Subsection 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13 on the 13th day of February, 2015. Take notice that the Development Services Committee of the Township of Oro- Medonte will hold a Public Meeting on Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers. The purpose of the Public Meeting is to obtain public comments on a proposed Amendment to the Zoning By-law, under Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P. 13. The purpose and effect of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is to amend the zoning of the lands located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West, formerly in the Township of Medonte, in the Township of Oro-Medonte. The subject lands are presently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU). The Amendment has been requested to rezone the lands to a site-specific Agricultural/Rural Exception # (A/RU*#) Zone to permit indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar functions on the subject lands. A key map illustrating the location of the subject lands, and a copy of the applicants site plan including the lands to be rezoned are included with this notice. And take further notice that pursuant to Section 34 (10.7) of the Planning Act, the Application is part of the public record and is available to the public for viewing/inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Building. Any person wishing further information or clarification with regard to the application or to arrange to inspect the application should contact the Planning Division at 705-487-2171. If you are submitting letters, faxes, emails, presentations or other communications with the Township concerning this application, you should be aware that your name and the fact that you communicated with the Township will become part of the public record. The Township will also make your communication and any personal information in it available to the public, unless you expressly request the Township to remove it. If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Township of Oro-Medonte in respect to the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, you must make a written request. Written submissions should be directed to: Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2EO Attn: J. Douglas Irwin, Clerk Dated at the Township of Oro-Medonte this 6nd day of March, 2015. Andria Leigh, MCIP, P Director, Developmen Services Page 14 5.a} 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Location Map �parVT PINENE CATHEDRAL.. _INFR Z HORSESHo- VALLEY ROAD W 7 4 r 2 Subject Lands {754 Horsesh a Val y Road E s Site Plan 13 It, , � el Existing Garage I � 1' Existing Dwellings i_ ¢1 %I I I 1 I s I I 1 1 I, fr I I'� I 7 >ia �l Lawn f1 I ir. ---------------------------------- .._ __R`_y_-. '�__—_=4._1._=..__—_—_S_— ,>xn.rs '-r, •.s'xr'-� LAZY DAYZ Larger drawings available for viewing at the Township Administration Building or by contacting Adrianna Spinosa, aspinosa(a)oro-medonte.ca, 705-487-2171. Page 15 ..ow-woluft S1COUNTY OF MC� f.WWW► March 25, 2015 Adrianna Spinosa Planner Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7, Box 100, Oro, ON LOL 2E0 Dear Ms. Spinosa, 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... County of Simcoe Planning 1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1X0 Main Line (705) 726-9300 Toll Free 1-866-893-9300 Fax(705)727-4276 simcoe.ca RE: Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 South Part Lot 1, Concession 5, 754 Horseshoe Valley West Township of Oro-Medonte a PLANNING ' VIA EMAIL Thank you for circulating the above noted application to the County of Simcoe for comment. It is County planning staff's understanding that the applicant is proposing a site specific exception in the `Agricultural/Rural' Zone to permit indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar functions on the subject lands. It is also understood that the proposal will be subject to site plan approval. The subject property is 3.6 hectares (8.9 acres) in area with frontage onto County Road 22 (Horseshoe Valley Road West). Planning Comments The subject lands are designated `Greenland' in the County Official Plan (consolidated 2007). The subject lands are primarily designated `Rural' within the Local Official Plan and are therefore subject to the General, and Greenland policies of the approved County of Simcoe Official Plan. Section 3.7.6 of the County Official Plan lists uses that are permitted conditionally within the Greenland designation following the acceptable results of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). Country recreational facilities are identified as a permitted use subject to an acceptable EIS and are defined as "recreational uses however the prime reason for the location in rural areas is to take advantage of natural physical features, including the availability of large lots or land area ... They include, but are not limited to, golf courses, campgrounds, lodges and resorts, conference centres, skiing facilities, and special event facilities." Section 3.7.7 states that "where an EIS has indicated that a development proposal would have a negative impact on the natural features or associated ecological functions for which the lands were identified, the application will not be supported or approved." Therefore, the County would request that an EIS is completed to review the application and the impact of the proposal on the natural features on the subject property. Policy 1. 1.5 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014) and Policy 2.2.2.1(i) of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) are also applicable to the development proposal. The County would request that a Planning Justification Report be required to ensure the proposed development conforms and is consistent with Provincial policy. PLD -003-001 Page 16 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Transportation/Engineering Comments County Road 22 (Horseshoe Valley Road West) The County's Transportation and Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed zoning by-law amendment to permit indoor and outdoor special events. The Transportation & Engineering Department does not oppose the zoning amendment but would like the opportunity to review and comment on the site plan control application when submitted. The County may request that the applicant complete the following prior to site plan approval. 1) Complete a Site Plan Review form and return it to the County with payment. 2) Apply for an Entrance Permit from the County of Simcoe for the proposed use in accordance with the requirements of County Entrance By-law 5544; 3) Submit a Traffic Impact Study, to the satisfaction of the County, which assesses the effects that this development's traffic will have on the transportation network in the community; 4) Submit a Site Plan to the County's Transportation and Engineering Department for approval to ensure that the development meets the requirements of the County's Road Setback By-law 5604. The Road Setback By-law requires all above and below ground buildings and structures to be located a minimum of 15.0 metres from the limit of the County Road. 5) The existing right-of-way on County Road 22 adjacent to the subject property is approximately 30.0 metres wide. In accordance with Schedule 5.5 of the Simcoe County Official Plan, the required basic right-of-way width for County Road 22 is 36.0 metres. County staff has reviewed this requirement and feel that the full right-of-way width is necessary for future road maintenance, road improvements and stormwater flow from County Road 22. In order to meet this right-of-way requirement, the County will require a road widening of approximately 3.0 metres. All costs associated with the land transfer, including costs relating to surveying, legal fees, and disbursements, agreements, HST, etc. shall be fully borne by the applicant. The applicant shall employ a Solicitor, entitled to practice law in Canada, being a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada to facilitate the transfer of the real property and in effect represent both parties in the subject transaction, at no cost to the Corporation of the County of Simcoe. The Solicitor shall carry transfer insurance that will indemnify the transfer. The applicant must contact the County for detailed transfer specifications. The County of Simcoe is requesting the road widening, daylight (sight) triangle and 0.3 metre reserve pursuant to section 53(12) of the Planning Act and such land will form part of the highway to the extent of the designated widening in accordance with section 31(6) of the Municipal Act, 2001. The widening of County Road 22, the daylight (sight) triangle and the 0.3 metre reserve are required pursuant to the County's standards for the construction and is consistent with proper safety standards. Summary The County would request that a Traffic Impact Study, an Environmental Impact Study, and a Planning Justification Report be submitted for review by the County prior to any further consideration of the proposal. Therefore, County of Simcoe Planning staff would ask that the application be deferred until the requested studies and review have been completed. Page 17 - 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... However, if a decision is made on this application without the requested supporting studies, please circulate a copy of the Notice of Decision. If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 705-726-9300 Ext.1185 or tiffany.thompson(cDsimcoe.ca Sincerely, The Corporation of the County of Simcoe y Tiffany Thompson, BES MCIP RPP Planner II cc: Nathan Westendorp, Manager of Development — County of Simcoe Paul Murphy, Engineering/Planning Technician — County of Simcoe Page 18 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie To: I azyd ayz Subject: RE: LazyDayz zoning From: lazydayz [mailto:lazydayz@on.aibn.com] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 11:48 AM To: Spinosa, Adrianna Subject: Fw: LazyDayz zoning Hello Adriana Thanks for coming by today with Adam ..... I hope we were able to answer your questions. As we chatted about, here is a letter from a guest last year. Please feel free to share with council as needed. I will also send the letter from our neighbour by separate copy. thanks again Kate Marrs & Jamie Anderson LazyDayz Bed, Breakfast & Rustic Barn ----- Original Message ----- From: Kaitlyn To: harry. hughes(cD-oro-medonte.ca Cc: lazydayz Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 7:11 PM Subject: LazyDayz zoning To whom it may concern, I am writing to you in regards to Lazydayz Bed and Breakfast's zoning request. First let me start by saying that when I originally had booked my wedding at LazyDayz Kate and Jamie weren't the owners. I must admit that I was little offput by the transfer of ownership but couldn't have been happier with the result. They are awesome hosts! Kate and Jamie are very welcoming and helpful which helps ensure that everyone is comfortable and that things run smoothly. They put in a lot of hardwork and effort to update everything to ensure the safety of their patrons. Kate and Jamie make sure that their patrons are aware of the rules and regulations and of all permits they need to acquire previous to their event. They are very firm and follow all aspects outlined by the county. They always have their neighbour's in mind and ensure the noise is kept at a respectable level. They also enforce that all food waste is removed from the premise the night of the event by the caterers. Kate and Jamie Page 19 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... are also environmentally concious and leave out multiple recyclying receptacles for patrons to dispose of recyclable material. As for their guests safety they have abided by all laws stipulated by the county. They have even gone so far as to add a pumping station in case emergencies. Another safety precaution they take is that all guests in the Bed & Breakfast must register so in the event of a fire they can inform the fist responders of how many guests were on the property. Both Kate and Jamie are very involved in the business resulting in a pleasureable expierience and safe environment for all guests, patrons and neighbours. I would gladly recommend LazyDayz to anyone looking for a fantastic and affordable wedding venue or even a simple weekend getaway. I hope you take their request into consideration and I wish them the best of luck in their future endeavours. Sincerely, Kaitlyn Pascoe Page 20 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: Rezoning Application - 754 Horseshoe Valley Road From: Michael Frederiksen [mailto: Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 7:54 PM To:; Coutanche, Barbara Cc: Spinosa, Adrianna; Hughes, Harry; Irwin, Doug; Teeter, Janette Subject: Rezoning Application - 754 Horseshoe Valley Road To: Barbara Coutanche Councillor Ward I Township Oro Medonte Re: Rezoning Application 754 Horseshoe Valley Road Please find attached a letter addressed to J. Douglas Irwin, Clerk of the Township of Oro Medonte. Issues we have addressed include contraventions of existing Township By-laws and concerns related to the Highway Traffic Act. We are on public record to urge you and the entire Oro Medonte Township Council to deny said application. A signed letter will be hand delivered to the Township Municipal Office. With respect Michael and Linda Frederiksen 8 Pine Lane RR#1 Barrie ON Canada L4M 4Y8 705 - Page 21 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... March 16, 2015 Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2E0 Att: J. Douglas Irwin, Clerk Re: Application of Lazy Dayz Proposed Amendment to Zoning By -Law (S34 Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P. 13) Dear Sir It is our understanding that there is a proposal to amend the zoning of the lands located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West, formerly in the Township of Medonte, now in the Township of Oro-Medonte. The subject lands are presently zoned Agricultural/Rural (A/RU). Rezoning the lands to a site specific exception to permit indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions or similar functions is problematic and is strongly opposed on the following grounds: a) the property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road is immediately adjacent to a residential area where ten (10) homes/family dwellings are presently situated. In addition, there are twenty-one (2 1) homes/family dwellings that lie within a distance where noise levels will disturb residents. b) the property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road backs onto the property of 8 Pine Lane, a location where activities at Lazy Dayz will affect the residents of 8 Pine Lane and thus be in contravention of By -Law No. 2012-167. The By -Law provides for the regulation and prohibition of noises likely to disturb the public. "Noise", according to the By -Law means any unwanted sound that is of such volume or nature that it is likely to disturb the inhabitants and that is clearly audible at a point of reception. 52.1 of the By -Law indicates that no person shall create the emission of noise that disturbs or is likely to disturb any inhabitant of the Township. Page 22 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... c) the property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road is located on an Ontario Highway where the speed limit is 70km per hour. That notwithstanding, there is significant traffic on this roadway and there is a strong likelihood that those parking at or near 754 Horseshoe Valley Road will be forced to do so when there is insufficient space on the property to park. There are no authorized signs erected on Horseshoe Valley Road that permit parking on the shoulder of the roadway. By -Law No. 2012-168 restricts parking, standing and stopping on parts of the highway; that includes this section of Horseshoe Valley Road. The intention of the by-law is to ensure safety for all who use the highway, including those attempting to park, exit their vehicles and proceed to Lazy Dayz as well as others lawfully using the roadway. With added traffic at key times on the weekend, there is greater risk to children and others walking across Horseshoe Valley Road at 4th Line North to access the playgrounds and park area. Motor vehicles using the highway when impeded by others trying to park and exit their vehicles could exercise unsafe measures that would place pedestrians at risk. History Up until 2013 the residents of the property at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road operated a B&B. In the summer and fall of 2014 Lazy Dayz under new ownership sponsored activities that included weddings and other public gatherings and receptions. These were mainly on weekends where residents of Cathedral Pines would naturally anticipate quiet family gatherings and general enjoyment of their property. Public address sound checks would begin in the early to mid afternoon. The events lasted as late as 11pm. The nature of the activities ensured an unreasonable noise level that would force us to move inside. Even inside our home we heard speeches, cheering and music levels that were unwanted. On one occasion there was a loud and unpleasant argument between what appeared to be two men. The nature of the communication was one where alcohol could have been a factor. Reality: People come together at a wedding or similar function to party and have a good time. There is no possible way that Lazy Dayz can regulate what would be a reasonable amount of noise. Sounds from inside the barn are clearly heard outside because there are no baffles or sound Page 23 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... insulation to contain the sounds. In addition, people need to park somewhere. Last season there were motor vehicles parked outside of the property at or near 754 Horseshoe Valley Road. It is our opinion that there is a safety issue here that potentially could put people at risk. Conclusion: In the summer of 2014 the owner of Lazy Dayz spoke with ine (Michael Frederiksen) at our mutual property line. She indicated what the nature of the events would be and that for each event there would be a notice to neighbours indicating the date and time of the event. To date we have received no communication as to the events taking place behind us at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road. We are on record to indicate that the application for a specific exemption to rezoning the property of 754 Horseshoe Valley Road violates a reasonable expectation of privacy at 8 Pine Lane. Our property is a distance of 50 meters from the barn, the source of the noise and sounds we hear. As residents of Oro Medonte we have the right to enjoy our property without having to accede to activities that create unsolicited and unwanted sounds that are unduly loud. We live in a residential area where we all must respect our neighbors and get along with each other. We are also entitled to a reasonable amount of peace and quiet. That is what living in community is all about. There is no possible way for the owner and operators of Lazy Dayz to assure us that these rights and expectations will be maintained. To rezone the property at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road to permit indoor and outdoor special events will allow even more events to take place. A greater number of disruptions throughout Spring, Summer and Fall are likely to occur. To do so will potentially also devalue the properties that already exist close to the place known as Lazy Dayz. Therefore, we urge the Township of Oro Medonte to deny the application to amend the zoning by-law for 754 Horseshoe Valley Road. Linda and Michael Frederiksen 8 Pine Lane RR1 Barrie, ON L4M 4Y8 Page 24 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: Lazy Dayz zoning application -----Original Message ----- From: John McGee [mailto:] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 1:43 PM To: Irwin, Doug Cc: Subject: Lazy Dayz zoning application Dear Mr. Irwin We are the owners of 6 Pine Lane a property directly adjacent to and behind the Lazy Dayz B and B. We have been made aware of an application to rezone this property from A/RU to anther category related to indoor/outdoor special events. We strongly wish to express our opposition to this application for a change in zoning. When we purchased our property in 1992, Lazy Dayz was exactly that. A small quaint bed and breakfast that was identified by a small sign at the front of the property. Over the years we have enjoyed an uneventful relationship as the property was quiet and well kept. We understand the property is under new ownership and the new owners have already taken liberties to improve their revenue sources by booking weddings and other events. As a registered Bed and Breakfast, did they have the approval of the county to host these special events? This is taking place in a residential neighbourhood, our neighbourhood. Now they're making an application to completely change the venue, increase noise levels, promote alcohol consumption and change the fabric of the community that directly impacts our right to peaceful enjoyment of our property and general safety in our neighbourhood. These events will cause the new owners to expand parking facilities, increase sanitation and water requirements. I don't want any of this in my back yard... literally!!! We are not able to attend the public meeting on April 1, 2015 but want our opposition to this request recorded. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. John and Ann McGee Sent from my iPad Page 25 Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Oro-Medonte, Ontario LoL2E0 Attn: J. Douglas Irwin, clerk Dear Council, March 13, 2015 I purchased my house and closed on April 18, 2014. 1 moved up to Horseshoe to get away from the city. I was told by my real estate agent that the property that mine backed onto was owned by a bed and breakfast. Imagine my surprise that all summer long there were events going on virtually in my back yard. I could not sit outside on Saturday evenings as I could hear perfectly the speakers for the wedding. Even with the doors and windows closed the music came through. I know that my neighbours had the same experience. I moved from downtown Toronto and it is noisier on Saturday night than my condominium at St.Laurence market. I don't think it is appropriate to have that level of noise in a residential neighbourhood on an ongoing basis. It will certainly lower property values. I oppose the application to formalize the zoning for special events at Lazy Dayz. I will not be able to attend April 152 as I am out of the country on vacation but please make my views known. This is also a formal request to be notified of the decision. Jane Ravenshaw 73 Cathedral Pine RD L4M4Y8 Page 26 MAR 1 P 2915 ORO-MECJON'TE TOWNSHIP 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: Amendment to 754 Horseshoe Valley Rd. From: ebony ebony [mailto: ) Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:00 AM To: Coutanche, Barbara Cc: Spinosa, Adrianna; Hughes, Harry Subject: RE: Amendment to 754 Horseshoe Valley Rd. Please see an email here below that I hand delivered to the Township offices March 25th 2015 Dear Mr. Irwin I am the property owner of 10 Pine Lane Cathedral Pines in the Township of Oro Medonte. My property is behind and adjacent to the Lazy Dayz Bed and Breakfast located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road. I would like to strongly express my opposition and concern to a change in the application for rezoning Layz Dayz from Agricultural/Rural(A/RU) to another category that would allow indoor/outdoor special events on a more regular basis. I built my house in the late 80's knowing what a friendly quiet neighbourhood it was. In 2013 that all changed when over many weekends our peace and tranquility of our own back yard was shattered with loud music (which starts the neighbourhood dogs barking),and shouting from their property. The noise began around noonish most of the time ending sometimes past 11pm. Unfortunately in 2014 the noise level increased with a very annoying loud base component and microphones so loud causing us to hear even the ceromonies most intimate parts.The amount of functions allowed there also increased in 2014. We were no longer able to enjoy our quiet backyard and were forced inside and still were able to hear their chaos. Upon speaking with one of the owners we were informed of her wishes to expand her services and the potential of winter activities outside as well and extending to include the rest of her acreage. This area was sold to me as residential and should remain so.!!!! The approval of this application in my opinion would allow: (1) Noise levels to continue and potentially increase year round. (2) Promote alcohol consumption which worries me as we are generally a fence free neighbourhood which may encourage unwanted strangers to straggle into our yards. (3) Cause major traffic problems with parkingon and entering and exiting the Horseshoe Valley Road. (4) Great risk to families well being, with the entrance to Lazy Dayz property being only yards from the entrance of our residentioal subdivision which homes many children and animals that cross Horseshoe Valley road constantly to get to the public park on the other side. I personally have witnessed many near collissions with cars appearing to look for the entrance to the Lazy Dayz. Page 27 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... They are obviously not paying attention to who maybe crossing the road or to the speed of the traffic traveling up the hill in this area. You as our elected council HAVE the ability to make the right decision in this issue. Hopefully you will before the death of someones loved one,( an adult or child or beloved pet.) In closing if this Amendment is successful and approved our whole lifestyle and that of our neighbours will be changed FOREVERM I would like this letter to be recorded and would welcome it to be read out at the meeting of April 1st 2015 which I will be attending. Your attention to this matter would be appreciated. Stephen Ward and Tracy Hall Page 28 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: MC 2 DH / RE: Lary Dayz B&B From: Brandon [mailto:] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:23 PM To: Barbara Coutanche Cc: Spinosa, Adrianna Subject: Fwd: MC 2 DH / RE: Lazy Dayz B&B Hello Barbara I am forwarding you the email I sent Mel last fall about the issues at the Lazy Dayz. We received our notice about the public notice for the zoning change today, and I know my husband has contacted you. I know from speaking to you last fall you are aware of the importance this issue has for our family and the residents of Cathedral Pines. Your input and advice on how to proceed would be appreciated. Diane House Begin forwarded message: From: "Coutanche, Mel" <mel.coutanchena oro-medonte.ca> Subject: MC 2 DH / RE: Lazy Dayz BSB Date: September 3, 2014 at 7:51:26 AM EDT To: B House < > Good morning Diane Thank you for the extra information. I've forwarded it to senior staff and council and will be surer to include it for discussion(s) today. It is Agenda Item 11b. Mel From: B House [mailto: ] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 9:51 PM To: Coutanche, Mel Cc: Hughes, Harry; Shelswell, Curtis Subject: Lary Dayz B&B Good Evening, Mr. Coutanche, We dropped off an envelope to the administration centre late this afternoon which contained a 2 page petition signed by a number of residents of Cathedral Pines. We actually forgot to sign it ourselves, oops! Page 29 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Due to the time sensitive nature to provide this petition we were unable to reach all our neighbours. We will continue to canvas our neighbourhood if you advise us additional support is required. Neither my husband, Brandon, or I are able to attend the council meeting tomorrow as we are both working. We do have many concerns about the existing permit and possible future zoning to host weddings and such events at the Lazy Dayz B&B. It has been brought to our attention from several neighbours that there are other concerns besides the noise and disruption from the events held at the Lazy Dayz B&B. Patrons of Lazy Days have been parking along Horseshoe Valley Road and at the parking lot at the 4th Line Park, then crossing horseshoe valley rd. to attend the event. I am sure you are aware of the concern many residents have of the traffic along Horseshoe Valley Road at Line 4 and the access to the 4th line park. This is adding to the dangerous situation that already exists. There is also growing concern with the traffic congestion that takes place when patrons of events at Lazy Dayz are attempting to turn left into the establishment and backing up traffic into the intersection at 4th line and Horseshoe valley rd. This is already an awkward intersection. Patrons of these events are arriving in large numbers, obviously due to a prearranged time; so this is a serious situation, given the nature of this business. Like many of our neighbours we moved to this community to enjoy all Oro Medonte has to offer, and it has so much going for it; and the events being held at this establishment under the supervision of the current owners are not in any way adding a positive effect to our residential community. The owners have been contacted by phone and in person and residents have presented their concerns. However, absolutely no attempt has been made by the owners of Lazy Dayz to keep the noise level down to acceptable levels. The hooting and hollering that takes place between the hours of l lam until after lam is overwhelmingly unacceptable. We were all aware of the amenities and events hosted by nearby Horseshoe Valley Resort and for many of us, this was an attraction to our community. We were personally aware of the B&B abutting our property's backyard when we moved to our neighbourhood 5 years ago. There were no issues with the few subdued events the previous owners hosted. We, as a community, have absolutely no confidence in the ability of the current owners to make this situation an acceptable, or livable one. Their priority is with their clients/customers. The following is a summary of the issues we have, regarding the "Event Barn" at Lazy Dayz. - Excessive noise from lawnmowers at 7:30am on Saturday mornings - Excessive noise of music (starting early afternoon through to and sometimes after l 1pm) - Wedding Speeches, laughter, hooting and hollering throughout afternoon, into the evening, and sometimes after lam - a general din of noise (talking and laughing) that transpires throughout any particular event that worsens as night falls and noise travels easier; some of the events being hosted are very large! - Parking along Horseshoe Valley Road and within the lot at the 4th Line Park - Excessive garbage and recycling created from events; covered by residential pick up (how long does a truck have to stop on Horseshoe Valley Rd for pick up?) Page 30 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... - The level of noise created by the patrons at the Lazy Dayz has continuously disturbed the sleep of children and adults alike; and has honestly and sincerely increased in decibel level over the summer. - A Local real estate agent has expressed a concern of a possible decline in residential property values if this venue is able to continue and establish permanent zoning for hosting such events. According to Report No. DS2014-028, June 4, 2014: b) The proposed use shall be compatible with adjacent land uses and the character of the surrounding neighbourhood. It should be evident to council this is no longer the case. c) The proposed use shall not require the extension or expansion of existing municipal services. This has been violated due to excessive garbage and recycling created by the events. d) The proposed use shall not create any traffic circulation problems within the area nor shall it adversely affect the volume and/or type of traffic serviced by the area's roads. This has been violated due to volume of traffic congregating at the same time to enter/attend events and adding to existing issues of access to the 4th line park e) Parking facilities required by the proposed use shall be provided entirely on-site. This has been violated by patrons parking along Horseshoe Valley Road and parking at the 4th Line Park. g) The proposed use shall generally be beneficial to the neighbourhood or the community as a whole. This has been violated as residents in Cathedral Pines subdivision have been subjected to excessive noise and general disturbances from events at the Lazy Dayz EVERY Saturday and the occasional Sunday since June. This has been an exhausting issue for our family and created unacceptable disturbances for the residents of Cathedral Pines. We hope council will readdress the temporary Use By-law granted to Lazy Days and side in favour of the residents of Cathedral Pines to consider revoking the current by-law and at the very least never allow such permits to ever be granted to this facility. Sincerely, Diane House 71 Cathedral Pines Page 31 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: lazy dayz concerns From: Brandon [mailto:] Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 7:49 AM To: Spinosa, Adrianna; Hughes, Harry; Barbara Coutanche Cc: Brandon house Subject: fwd: lazy dayz concerns Good day, Below is a forwarded communication, dated last October 3, 2014. No one on council replied, and this certainly could have been due to the timing, being close to the election about to take place. Concerns re: Lazy Dayz are on many levels; below is only one. However, I wish I had followed this up, as we are now in a serious situation with the rezoning application. I know the temporary permit stipulates that it ends on June 24th, 2015, but we worry that Lazy Dayz will still be allowed to fulfill already booked events this summer. According to the temporary permit, Lazy Dayz owners were cautioned against this. Some of the questions below have come to fruition and I feel the concerns listed below should be on public record. Thank you for your time, Brandon House 71 Cathedral Pines Begin forwarded message: From: B House > Subject: Re: Lazy Dayz parking issue Date: October 3, 2014 at 1:56:37 PM EDT To: "Coutanche, Mel" <mel.coutanche(c-)oro-medonte.ca> Cc: "Shelswell, Curtis" <CShelswella_oro-medonte.ca>, 'Dunn, Robin" <rdunn(aoro- medonte.ca>, "Hughes, Harry" <harry.huahes(a)oro-medonte.ca> Good day, It was a beautiful weekend last Saturday. Lazy Dayz held another wedding event which began at 2 in the afternoon. We were chased from our back yard again. Country music genre! Hooting and hollering at midnight is really getting to be a integral part of the festivities at these events. Couple questions: 1. We sense that nothing is going to be done about this situation until the Lazy Dayz owners apply for another permit or zoning change. S0000, this all starts up in the Spring again? Page 32 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 2. And if so, what happens to all the bookings they have that go past the June 24th, 2015 expiration date; assuming we are even successful in stopping these events and the disruption to our lives EVERY Saturday. We see this unfolding in a manner that will allow Lazy Dayz to fulfill obligations to customers they have booked; not wanting to leave wedding couples to scramble and find new venues at the last minute. Certainly unacceptable to many of us over in Cathedral Pines. We are simply the unofficial spokespersons for this situation. 3. We would like to know if something can be done now. They are currently booking for next season, according to friends who have called to reserve a date. Please tell us that we don't have to live through another season of this? Please, please, please!!!! 4. Could we invite any and all of you over for a bbq so you may witness this disruption first hand? Regards, Brandon House 71 Cathedral Pines On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Coutanche, Mel <mel.coutancheng,oro-medonte.ca> wrote: Will follow up this week. Mel Mel Coutanche Councillor Ward 1 Township of Oro-Medonte Notice of Collection/Use/Disclosure: All information about municipal services is collected in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001, under s.8 and for Council's purposes under s.239(1) and may be used in Council deliberations, and disclosed in full, including email, names, opinions and addresses to other persons requesting access to records, or as part of a public agenda. All information submitted to the municipality is subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information Act (MFIPPA). Questions about this notice of collection should be directed to the Clerk's Office (705) 487-2171, ext. 2132. Please consider the environment before printing this email. This e-mail may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail. Further, you should not copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. The Township of Oro-Medonte has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. The Township of Oro-Medonte reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Township of Oro-Medonte's e-mail system. ------Original Message ------ From: B House Page 33 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... To: Mel Coutanche To: Curtis Shelswell Subject: Lazy Dayz parking issue Sent: Sep 17, 2014 7:11 AM Hello Gentlemen, I apologize for taking up more of your time. But there were several witnesses to the parking issue at Lazy Dayz this past weekend, and we feel it is important to explain this issue. Cars are parked on the front lawn, and arranging the cars is a slow process, since they are parked rather tightly in there (in an attempt to avoid parking on Horseshoe Valley Rd. I imagine); when many cars arrive northbound, they have no choice but to stay in their lane on Horseshoe Valley Rd and wait for the driveway to be clear. Northbound thru-traffic leaves the road and travels on the gravel at the side of Horseshoe Valley Rd. to go around these cars. Children and families travel along this road sometimes, to get to the fourth line park. They have basketballs and tennis racquets with them, which is why I say they are going to the park. We ourselves, came home from Orillia and witnessed the cars parked on the road this past Saturday. We don't know where this issue stands, but again, we hope you will understand that we take this seriously and can't imagine living through any more of this disruption in our lives. I have better things to do with my time; and I'm sure you do .... but these events have to stop. Thank you for your time and I hope this is the last of my correspondence to you re: this issue. sincerely, Brandon House 71 Cathedral Pines Regards, Brandon Page 34 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Brissette, Marie Subject: RE: Lazy Dayz Zoning From: [mailto:] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 12:51 PM To: Spinosa, Adrianna Subject: Lazy Dayz Zoning Good afternoon Adrianna, I'm emailing you in regards to the proposed amendments to the zoning by-law 2015-ZBA-01 (Lazy Dayz). I own a neighbouring house on pine lane and share the back property line with 754 Horseshoe Valley Road. I would like the committee to know that I am against this proposal. My main concern is noize. One reason I moved from the city to horseshoe valley to get away from the noize of the city. Lazy Dayz in the past have had some late functions and they were quite loud, and with my property so close to theirs the sound travels easily into my yard and house. On a warm Saturday evening the last thing I want to hear is somebody's wedding toasts. I have heard this in the past from this location. I fear if they get approved zoning they would be able to promote more functions and be loud more frequently. I plan on attending the April 1st meeting to hear what everyone has to say about this, but for the time being I am 100% against the proposal. Thanks for hearing me out Dave Page 35 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... March 14, 2015 To Whom It May Concern, I have been a resident of 12 Pine Lane for almost three years, with a property that backs onto the existing Lazy Dayz Bed, Breakfast and Rustic Barn. In regards to the request for the permanent zoning proposal, I would like to offer some information regarding our involvement with the owners of Lazy Dayz. Last summer, as we sat in our back yard, there was quite a lot of noise coming from the Lazy Dayz property. This was just some loud music, as there was likely an event that was running. I called the owners to let them know that the sound was quite excessive, particularly, the bass. Kate called me back within the hour to address the noise and to apologize for the inconvenience. She had also expressed that they were looking into the issue as it had been a complaint from some residents in Cathedral Pines. Not long after, Kate came over (after I had invited her) to listen to what we were experiencing in our own back yard. Since that time, Kate has attempted to be involved with the residents of Cathedral Pines. They held an open house "Grand opening" BBQ and invited the entire neighborhood. She has reached out in a positive way, addressing the concerns of the residents and to inform us that they are working on correcting all concerns of those who are affected, and who live here. At times, I am still affected by the music as no one can predict the direction and strength of the wind, however, the volume of the music had subsided by the end of the summer, and into the autumn months. Having known the former owners, and having worked closely with them (they gave us the venue for a community fund raising event for the 4th Line Park children's playground equipment), I think the business itself has flourished and the continued and growing success is as a result of the passion of the new owners. This is a wonderful location for events and brings a wealth of business to this community. This extends to Horseshoe Resort for accommodations, increased volume of visitors for our restaurants, decor shop, Trading Company, and for local farmers who are also selling their produce. It also draws people to explore our wonderful community. I do not see intermittent loud music as a disruption to my Saturday night. If and when it is, it has been quickly addressed. I have confidence that the new owners, Kate and Jamie, will work diligently to contain or fix the problem as they have shown they have been respectful of the community residents and have reached out to ensure they are involved. I support the request for permanent zoning by Lazy Dayz Bed, Breakfast and Rustic barn, and wish them continued success in our thriving community. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Page 36 Qj 5.a 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to-t�in5 lyyy r To Whom It May Concern, I have been a resident in Horseshoe Valley since 2005. Our family home was the first home built in the Horseshoe Highlands. My husband's parents decided to move into town to be closer to medical facilities, and the opportunity presented for us to purchase the family home. My husband, grew up in this community. Went to school at WR Best, worked at Horseshoe through his teens and now, we enjoy raising our children in the same rural community, with modern appeal. We have seen the area develop around us. Such developments as the Highlands Golf Course & Club House, Carriage Hills, Settlers Ghost, Foodland, Horseshoe Adventure Park, and recently the Nurse Practitioner -LED Clinic. We are so very lucky to live where others look forward to vacationing and enjoy what our community new developments offer... • Horseshoe adventure park— entertainment for our family celebrations • Settlers Ghost - golf and special dinners out with neighbourhood friends • Foodland - convenient local shopping • Egos — nursery and decorative shop • Nurse Practitioner Clinic —medical services I am writing this letter is support of Kate and Jamie. I met Kate and Jamie through our daughters, Ella & Emma. Ella & Emma attend WR Best Public School, which I will add has also developed since my husband attended in the 80s. On New Years' 2014, Kate and Jamie held a New Years' celebration for close friends and invited us to join them. This was my first visit to Lazy Dayz. Since then, seeing what they have done to restore the barn and to the landscape is amazing. Kate and Jamie are open with their thoughts and often seek ideas from friends. We recently attended a local evening event where several of us with Kate talked about local events like fundraising and graduation to be held at Lazy Dayz. They want to help support and be involved in the community. Kate and Jamie are responsible parents and I can vouch that they are reasonable neighbours. For them, Lazy Dayz is their full-time home. They are owners, living on-site and are available to address any need at any time. They are "our" neighbours and look forward to seeing local residents prosper in the area. Sincerely, Tracy Sharpe Page 37 i 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment tole"aw, File No.: 2015-ZBA-01 (LAZY DAYZ) ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE IN THE MATTER OF an Application pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13. RESPONDING SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESIDENTS OF 7 PINE LANE DOOLEY LUCENTI Barristers and Solicitors 10 Checkley Street Barrie, Ontario L4N 1W1 Drew R. Sinclair LSUC #536001 Tel: (705) 792-7963 Fax: (705) 792-7964 Page 38 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... File No.: 2015-ZBA-01 (LAZY DAYZ) ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE IN THE MATTER OF an Application pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13. RESPONDING SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESIDENTS OF 7 PINE LANE PART 1 - OVERVIEW (A) Summary 1. These submissions are made in response to an application for a permanent zoning change to the property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road (the "property"). The Applicants request permission for a permanent right to hold indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar function ("special events"). 2. The Respondent respectfully requests that if the application is allowed, the amendment attach the following two restrictions to the use of the property: 1. The property remains subject to the Township of Oro-Medonte's noise by-law; and 2. The number attendants at the special events be limited to 65 people. Page 39 - 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 2 (B) Outline of Argument 3. The property is fully bounded on two sides by Cathedral Pines, a quiet residential community. 4. The community members object to the inevitable noise that accompanies the special events. 5. The Township of Oro-Medonte's By -Law Enforcement Office has confirmed that if the zoning amendment is passed, the Applicants will not be subject to Noise By -Law No. 2012-167. 6. _ _ It is requested that if the application is allowed, the amendment— specify the property remains subject to Noise By -Law 2012-167 at all times, including when hosting special events, whether indoor or outdoor. 7. The Applicants claim throughout their application that they want to be "a part of the community" and "good neighbours." If that is their position, then they ought to agree to being subject to the same noise tolerances as the rest of the community. & It is also requested that if the application is allowed, the amendment specify the maximum occupancy of special events not exceed 65 people. amut 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 3 9. That figure is premised upon the limited number of parking spaces available on the property (26 spots). Overflow parking on Horseshoe Valley Road is a serious safety concern and inconsistent with the Ministry of Transportation's Geometric Design Standards for Ontario roads. PART 2- PLANNING ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATION (A) Official Plan 10. The Applicants' proposed amendments are inconsistent with the Township's Official Plan. 11. At least 50% of the Applicants' property borders quiet residential lots. 12. The defining characteristics of the Cathedral Pines community are quiet and solitude. This is achieved by the natural landscape and large heavily treed lots. It is maintained and protected by the Township's designation as a low density residential zone. Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan, Schedule D — Horseshoe Valley Development Node. 13. The Applicants claim their proposed usage of the property is consistent with the Township plan because lands on the south side of Horseshoe Valley Road are zoned for resorts. Page 41 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 14. That is a misrepresentation. The property is a play park with children's equipment and tennis/basketball courts. Indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar functions are not held there. More, the park remains subject to the Township's noise by-law. Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan, Schedule D - Horseshoe Valley Development Node. Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning Map - A15. 15. The Applicants' property is zoned Agricultural/Rural. By operating a bed and breakfast they are already pushing the limits of the Township's intended use. The Applicants have not provided sufficient reason why they ought to be permitted to operated even further outside the Township's planned use of the property. (B) Noise 16. The proposed amendments will allow the Applicants to be exempt from the Township's noise by-law. 17. This is unfair to the residents of Cathedral Pines and there is no valid reason at law for granting such exemption. 18. By -Law No. 2012-167 (the "Noise By -Law") provides for the regulation and prohibition of noises likely to disturb the public. By -Law No. 2012-167. Page 42 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 19. Subsection B to Schedule "A" prohibits noise by yelling, shouting, hooting, singing, or other boisterous activity after 11:00 p.m. By -Law No. 2012-167, Schedule "A" (B). 20. Subsection E to Schedule "A" prohibits noise or sound from any radio, stereo, phonograph, public address, system, sound equipment, loud speaker, musical equipment, or electronic device designated to amplify sound that is operated in such a manner that the sound or noise made disturbs the peace, comfort or repose of any person. The no limitation on the time of day and therefore the restrictions apply at all times. By -Law No. 2012-167, Schedule "A" (E). 21. On March 27, 2015 1 discussed the Noise By -Law with Municipal By -Law Enforcement Officer Curtis Shelswell. He confirmed that if the proposed amendments are made, the property will be exempted from the Noise By -Law. 22. The Applicants have implicitly confirmed they have no intention of respecting the intent or purpose of the Noise By -Law even if they do not fall under its jurisdiction. Part of the Applicants' application package includes an "Event Checklist." The Applicants indicate this is used to communicate to their guests what acceptable noise levels will be. It indicates "music is to be turned down at 11:00 p.m." and that events must be end by 12:00 a.m." Application Package, Event Checklist, 1(d). Page 43 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... X 23. Turning music "down" is not the same as turning it off. Moreover, any music that disturbs the peace, comfort or repose of a neighbor is in violation of the by-law, not just music played late in the evening. 24. This is unfair. All the residents of Cathedral Pines are subject to the limitations in the Noise By -Law. The subject property is physically nestled within the Cathedral Pines community. It ought to be subject to the same noise limitations. (C) Parking 25. The property does not have enough parking spaces to accommodate the number of vehicles typically expected for the special events. This will inevitably lead to vehicles parking on Horseshoe Valley Road. 26. The site plan for the property indicates 26 parking spaces are available in the designated parking lot. A further 14 spots are created by parking vehicles on the lawn and squeezing them into various locations around the yard. Accordingly, they are able to improvise up to 40 parking spaces if pressed to do so. 27. The Applicants admit that a typical event will draw 40 vehicles. That figure originates, they suggest, from 100 guests. That is a not a worse -case Page 44 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 7 scenario or a maximum. That is what they expect on average. Accordingly, on average, the subject property will not have appropriate parking space. 28. The Applicants claim they have adequate parking for 40 vehicles. But the suggestion that vehicles will be parked in the improvised spots around the property each time a "typical" event is held is at odds with reality. Regardless of the diligence of the Applicants in trying to keep vehicles off the road, motorists attending the property are going to park on Horseshoe Valley Road if formal and recognizable parking spaces are not available. This will occur with each typical event. 29. This is dangerous to all motorists on Horseshoe Valley Road. The subject property is located on the crest of a hill. Sightlines are reduced for motorists approaching form both the east and west. 30. To knowingly allow unexpected vehicles to park on the side of the road with drivers and passengers exiting onto a busy road is inappropriate and inconsistent with MTO design policies. 31. There is no dedicated MTO Geometric Design Standard for vehicles parked on the side of the road of a hill crest. But there are standards for sightlines required for safe stopping distances. These standards are based upon an average driver's reaction time to an unexpected event and time to take Page 45 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 0 appropriate braking and steering action. These standards provide guidance on the distance that would be required for a motorist to safely react to an unexpected event — like an unexpected vehicle parked on the road, the side of the road, or a driver or passenger exiting a vehicle onto the road. 32. The MTO Geometric Design Standards provide the following policy statement relating to sight distance: The safe and efficient operation of a vehicle on a highway is affected by the availability of a driver to see ahead and is of fundamental importance in the road systems. Sufficient sight distance must be provided so that drivers can control the speed of their vehicles to avoid striking an unexpected obstacle in the travelled way. MTO Geometric Design Standards, C.2.1 [emphasis added]. 33. According to the MTO Geometric Design Standards, the minimum stopping sight distance on wet pavement for a posted 70 km/h road with a maximum design speed of 90 km/h (posted speed plus 20 km/h) is 160 m. MTO Geometric Design Standards, Table C2-1, Minimum Stopping Sight Distance On Wet Pavement. 34. The Applicants have provided no proof the driveway of the property, and surrounding area where motorists are apt to park, is clearly visible from more than 160 m for both eastbound and westbound traffic on Horseshoe Valley Road. 35. The citizens of Cathedral Pines and all motorists using Horseshoe Valley Road are entitled to the safety standards dictated by the MTO Geometric Page 46 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Design standards. As the standards indicate, it is of fundamental importance to the road systems. 36. Allowing the Applicants unfettered reign over the number of vehicles attending their special events is implicitly allowing a special and highly dangerous condition to exist on Horseshoe Valley Road. The overflow of vehicles on the road, resulting from "any typical event," will be a fundamental breach of every motorist's right to a safe and efficient roadway. 37. If, as the application materials suggest, 100 guests will require 40 parking spaces, then they anticipate 2.5 guests per vehicle. Because the property has 26 parking spots, it ought to be .limited to 26 vehicles, or 65 guests (26 x 2.5). PART 3 - LEGAL ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATION (A) Obligation On Municipal Council 38. The Ontario Court of Appeal has held there is an obligation on municipal council when planning for growth and development to recognize that the rights of the community are paramount to the rights of individual property owners. Bruce v. Toronto (City), [1971] 3 O.R. 62 at para 15 (C.A.). 39. The community members of Cathedral Pines have a right to the quiet enjoyment of their property. Their rights are paramount to the rights of the Applicants. Page 47 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... all (B) Legal Test for Variance 40. The council must be satisfied that the following requirements have been met before it approves a variance: 1. The variance must be a minor variance from the provisions of the by-law; 2. The variance must be desirable in the opinion of the committee for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure; 3. The general intent and purpose of the by-law must be maintained; and 4. The general intent and purpose of the official plan, if any, must be maintained. Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. PA 3, s. 45(1). 41. A variance request that gives rise to a noise impact that is significantly adverse from within a residential dwelling is not minor in nature. The foregoing holds true even when the application maintains the intent and general purpose of the Official Plan and the zoning by-law. Walters v. Toronto (City), 41 O.M.B.R. 476 at paras. 12-13. 42. In Walters, at issue was the use of a property for a place of worship adjacent to a residential dwelling. The church had invested significantly into the building over a 5 year period and strived to make it an integral part of the Page 48 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 11 community. Nevertheless, a noise complaint arose from a single resident regarding services with joyous singing and loud instrumental music. Walters v. Toronto (City), ibid., at para. 11. 43. The Ontario Municipal Board concluded that the place of worship use from the appearance of the structure and the nature of structure fit into the residential neighbourhood. But, the actual use inside significantly and adversely impacted the abutting residential dwelling. On that basis the variance was 171 - . Walters v. Toronto (City), ibid., at para. 14. 44. The foregoing is analogous to the Applicants' contention that their renovation of the barn for special events is consistent with the neighbourhood and official plan for the property. As Walters shows, this is irrelevant if the noise of the use disturbs nearby residential dwellings. 45. In Re Papatragiannis, the Ontario Municipal Board was asked to consider a variance that would permit a restaurant patio adjacent to private dwellings. The Board denied the application on the following grounds: The Board has carefully reviewed all the evidence regarding whether the proposed variances satisfy the four tests pursuant to subsection 45(1) of the Planning Act, The Board makes the following findings: • The proposal and proposed variances are not compatible with the area and therefore will not maintain the general purpose and intent of the Official Plan. Page 49 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 12 • The purpose/intent of the ten metre separation distance provision is to minimize the possible noise, overlook, privacy; • cigarette smoke and lighting impacts of restaurants and accessory, in this case patios on nearby residential properties. Even with the mitigation measures noise can still travel further than ten meters. Thus, the intent of the Zoning By-law will not be maintained. • The patio is too close to the residential units and the conditions provided by the Applicants will not mitigate the noise to an acceptable level. • The noise from the proposed patio and the requested variances are not minor due to the close proximity to the residents and would result in an unacceptable adverse impact on the residents in the neighbourhood; • The proposed patio and the requested variances are not appropriate and/or desirable. The proposal would destabilize the neighbourhood as the proximity between the outdoor patio and the adjacent residential land use would cause disharmony in the community. Re Papatragiannis, 2010 CarswellOnt 5041 at para. 60 (O.M.B.). 46. The Respondents submit the foregoing bulleted points apply with equal force and effect to deny the variance requested by the Applicants. PART IV — ORDER REQUESTED 47, The Respondents respectfully request that this application for a permanent zoning change to the property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road be limited such that: 1. The property remains subject to the Township of Oro-Medonte's noise by-law; and Page 50 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 13 2. The number attendants at the special events be limited to 65 people. All of which is respectfully submitted. DATE: March 31, 2015 DOOLEY LUCENTI Barristers and Solicitors 10 Checkley Street Barrie, Ontario L4N 1 W1 Drew R. Sinclair LSUC #536001 Tel: (705) 792-7963 Fax: (705) 792-7964 Page 51 r r, 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendme� Marie Subject: RE: Horseshoe Resort re: Lary Dayz - rezoning From: lazydayz [mailto:lazydayz@on.aibn.comj Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 7:34 PM To: Spinosa, Adrianna Subject: Fw: Horseshoe Resort re: Lazy Dayz - rezoning Importance: High Hello Adriana Better a bit late than never.....it turns out the contact I had been speaking with previously, has left Horseshoe Resort. However I was able to connect with Dallas Lombardi, and as you will see, she has been able to confirm the positive impact LazyDayz has on business revenue at Horseshoe Resort. Please share this email with committee and council. Thank you in advance Kate Marrs LazyDayz Bed, Breakfast & Rustic Barn ----- Original Message ----- From: Dallas Lombardi To: lazydaVz@on.aibn.com Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 4:55 PM Subject: Horseshoe Resort re: Lazy Dayz Kate, It was a pleasure speaking with you a moment ago. I very much look forward to meeting with you and touring your facility. I have heard great things and the photos on your website are stunning! As requested, this letter is to confirm that due to the partnership between Horseshoe Resort and Lazy Dayz, we have had the opportunity to benefit with the gain of business in our room revenue because of the business that Lazy Dayz drives. We are happy to continue working together and look forward to future success. Please let me know if you require anything further and I will be happy to assist. Have a great evening. Dallas Dallas Lombardi I Director of Catering and Conference Services Horseshoe Resort, Skyline Hotels & Resorts 1101 Horseshoe Valley Road, Barrie, Ontario, Canada, L4M 4Y8 T: 705.835.2790 x 1396 1 C: 705.241.0794 E: dallasl@horseshocresort.com ( W: www.horseshoeresort.com Page 52 - 5.a 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment, Marie i Subject: RE: Zoning by-law change / H Valley Road From: TOM FENDLEY Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 11:35 PM To:. Council Subject: Fwd: Zoning by-law change / H Valley Road Members of council, As discussed at tonights zoning by-law change for Lazy Dayz on Horseshoe Valley Road. Below is my submission e-mailed March 17 th 2015. In addition: Note: Parking / Safety on HV Road At tonight's meeting the owners acknowledged they have parking for forty vehicles. Two persons per vehicle would equal eighty people. She mentioned the barn could hold up to 150 people. That is a lot of extra vehicles they need to park. Noise I believe we can agree there is no efficient way to sound proof a barn. They just were not built for that. The owners seem like wonderful people trying to do things right. Unfortunately, it is in the wrong location right next to a quiet residential subdivision. As a property owner - if you buy property near a railway line you would expect to hear noise. However, if you buy property in a tranquil passive setting you would not expect this type of activity next door. Thank You, Tom FendIey Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: Harry Hughes Mayor Township of Oro-Medonte From: TOM FENDLEY < Date: March 16, 2015 at 9:43:06 PM EDT To: "eouncil�aoro-rnedonte.ca" <councilLi?oro-rnedonte.ca> Subject: Zoning by-law change / H Valley Road Page 53 - 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... March 17, 2015 Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2E0 Att: Mayor H. Hughes Township of Ora-Medonte Council By -Law Department Re: Application of Lazy Dayz Proposed Amendment to Zoning By -Law (S34 Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 C. P. 13) As per the notice issued by the Township of Oro-Medonte to amend the zoning of the lands located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West, we would like to submit our feedback. We have been residents of the Township of Oro-Medonte for thirty six years. Until some time in 2013 the subject property was operated as a bed & breakfast. A very passive activity that did not impact the residents in the area. We would submit the rezoning of these lands to allow a site specific exception to permit indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions or similar functions is not in the best interest of the residents of Oro-Medonte, or the township itself. 1) The property located at 754 Horseshoe Valley Rd is adjacent to a residential area known as Cathedral Pines, and very near a residential area known as Oro Hills. These residents will be directly affected by the noise levels and traffic of this activity. The noise has been an issue for events held at this property since it has changed ownership. A barn type building provides no noise barrier for members of the public living near this location. Many residents make the decision to reside in the Township of Oro-Medonte for its tranquil setting, recreation and distance from a larger urban setting. 2) The property is currently not zoned for this activity and therefore the current owners have been in contravention of By -Law No. 2012-167. In addition there appears to be insufficient parking for these activities on the property, as vehicles have been parking on the shoulder of Horseshoe Valley Road ( a County highway ). This has created a traffic hazard when traffic is arriving at and leaving these premises ( late in the evening or in the early hours of the morning ). There is also concern for the event attendees leaving the premises ( who may or may not have been drinking ), who have to negotiate past the vehicles parked on the side of Horseshoe Valley Road. We feel this is a concern for the Township of Ora-Medonte ( and The County of Simcoe ). This is a safety concern for all who use the highway Noise By -Law: Our current Noise By -Law provides for prohibition of noises likely to disturb the public. "Noise", according to the By -Law means any unwanted sound that is of such volume or nature that it is likely to disturb the inhabitants and that is clearly audible. Suggestion: This a wonderful township we live in, with wonderful neighbours who contribute to the quality of life for others in the township. We have an expectation of peace and quiet. This is what living Page 54 5.a) 5:30 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... in this community is all about. A change in the zoning by-law to accommodate the proposed activities does not enhance the experience of citizens residing in the Township of Oro-Medonte. In addition we have identified safety concerns. Therefore, we suggest this type of activity - indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions or similar functions, be located in a commercial /retail / industrial area of the Township of Oro-Medonte. This would be a more appropriate location for the proposed activities. Tom & Shawn Fendley 11 Pine Lane ( Horseshoe Valley) RR1 Barrie, ON L4M 4Y8 Sent from my Wad Page 55 Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 Kate Marrs (Lazy Dayz Bed, Breakfast & Rustic Barn) Location: 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West Current Zoning: Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Current Official Plan Designation: Rural Existing Development: Single detached dwelling; Bed and Breakfast; Barns; and Accessory Building t (� Proud Heritage, Exciling Fururt F) Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 Kate Marrs (Lazy Dayz) Purpose of Application: Zoning By-law Amendment — rezone 754 Horseshoe Valley Road West from the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone to an Agricultural/Rural Exception (A/RU*) Zone to permit: • Indoor and outdoor special events such as banquets, weddings, receptions, or similar functions. oil Shil Proud Heritage, C.%ciring Purure Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 Kate Marrs (Lazy Dayz) III Site Plan 2-14— Townshippo.%V��r' Proud Heritage, Exciting Future j i I I --. - - 1W,----- - --'-- ----- HY.AP YAH: smTNACK -..-_. _..__.____ PRn PI p+ I�IG HCAk 'tApD DY.tNA[:K �. j, I ' �iq �m 1 CI Ih _ jW I I GI `Di I I I - _ STI Di IDI _Ial I I , i2 I i 1 I P - ' I 3 in la lu I I. � :_•.. Jj ,1 rHnv. rAkc ncra.cK I le �• \ lyl9 D �a i.m_Fr_FDv+•n ---- nrrNhDK_-___ .______________ ----________________________ ------------------------------------------------ .__ n — J n — —----- wpn n�kn L — z�w------- III Site Plan 2-14— Townshippo.%V��r' Proud Heritage, Exciting Future j ma it an =ME Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 Kate Marrs (Lazy Dayz) �j Public Meeting sign posting Horseshoe Valley Road West t _,t'CLIl/ZtPi ` Frond Hrriarge, Gxcilirrg Fnnur NOW ARM W-� �, • � _ .L'�1��1 "icy .i. 'Se-�.. ZZON 4 Ask ;,;,� •1tYx�� f' il�It�`�j %�r,�`'l�,�;� aid 1, ��� /,�11II� i4'�� nY- �(� � ! ("1. �f,;Ttam..•v��-o4es'� ie �, � �� � �I�M4� �yf!,I�1 /f�'�i� y,E�, /�/rte 5. � .,;�^�.��, •'4.a'�:-�ps�" �,6i!!/�r! �t�y OWN �- "ilk `6 Looking north I. •!fir . i`ir Looking east (9��wvns`%°' Proud Heritage, Lxciliug Future v4k, Nz. '� J'V Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-01 Kate Marrs (Lazy Dayz) Conclusion This concludes staff's overview of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment application. Questions or comments from the public and members of the Committee will now be heard. 7uwnship of ProuA H<•rifn,�r, F,aci(iug Fuiuve 5.b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015 NOTICE OF A COMPLETE APPLICATION AND PUBLIC MEETING FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE 2015-ZBA-04 (Simcoe County District School Board) TAKE NOTICE that the Township of Oro-Medonte deemed the following application to amend the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, as a "Complete" application under Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P_13 on the 10th day of March, 2015. AND TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte will hold a Public Meeting on Wednesday April 1, 2015, at 5:45 p.m. in the Municipal Council Chambers, 148 Line 7 South. The purpose of the Public Meeting is to obtain public comments on proposed Amendment to the Zoning By-law, under Section 34 of the Planning Act. THE PURPOSE of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is to rezone Concession 1, Part of Lot 12, known municipally as 204 Line 15 North, from the existing Institutional (1) and Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zones to the Institutional Exception (1' Exception) Zone to permit development of a 20 unit residential care facility with ancillary office and gymnasium space. A KEY MAP illustrating the location of the subject lands is provided with this Notice. ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of, or in opposition to, the proposed Amendment. Please be advised that your comments and submissions will become part of the public record. If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Township of Oro-Medonte before the proposed zoning by-law amendment is adopted, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte to the Ontario Municipal Board. If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Township of Oro-Medonte before the proposed zoning by-law amendment is adopted, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to add the person or public body as a party. If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Township of Oro-Medonte in respect to the proposed zoning by-law amendment, you must make a written request to: Township of Oro-Medonte, 148 Line 7 South, Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2EO Attention: J. Douglas Irwin, Clerk ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Township of Oro-Medonte Administration Building. For further information, contact the Planning Department at 705-487-2171. DATED at the Township of Oro-Medonte this 11th day of March, 2015. Andria Leigh, MCIP, RPP Director of Development Services Page (G-9" 5.b) 6:00 p.m. ProP0tfb9% rMdment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... (Simcoe County District School Board) SUBJECT LANDS — 204 Line 15 North CITY OF ORILLIA Z2d C �m b20 UBJECT LAN[)S 4 LINE 15 NORTH ; 2 n s rmo ,00c 10 a � 12 1.0 ,x Y^1 (% „i lot 45, At, '45 P N °t s+ a CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN — PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY Page (CQL 5.b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... Earl and Susan Hutchinson 192 Line 15 North, Orillia,Ontario L3V 6111 March 24, 2015 The Township of Oro-Medonte, 148 Line 7 South, Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2E0 Attention: J. Douglas Irwin, Clerk Adam Kozlowski, Planner Scott Jermey, Councillor Ward 5 Dear Sirs, Re: Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-law William B. Wright School site 204 Line 15 North, Orillia, Ontario Application no: 2015-ZBA-04 Faxed to: 705-487-0133 Emailed to: info@oro-medonte.ca Emailed to: scottaermeyt oro-medonte.ca Emailed to: dirwinna-medonte.ca Emailed to: akozlowski@oro-medonte.ca We are owners of the property immediately west and south of the subject property. We are in receipt of your Notice for a proposed amendment to the Zoning By-law to Institution Exception (I* Exception) to allow a 20 Unit residential care facility with an office and gymnasium. A "spot' zoning amendment for such a development concerns us as follows: 1) Densi This is a low density rural residential/agricultural area. The newest Subdivision was built approximately 27 years ago (ShelsweIl Subdivision) and contains only 15 homes on approximately 10 acres. The Jamieson subdivision south of Memorial Avenue contains approximately 23 homes on even more acreage. Page (.0-7 5.b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 2 The majority of the parcels of land north of the Forest Home Church on Line 15 are single family homes with and without acreage, swamp land and Scout Valley. "Institution" zoning allows for cemeteries, community centers, day nurseries, libraries, museums, public parks, places of worship, and public schools... all of which are low density ... not a 20 unit residential care facility. To put a high density project into a 2.39 acre parcel in this area would not be keeping with the area density, use, or neighbourhood, and would not enhance the neighbourhood. The project would forever change the character of the neighbourhood and could possibly open the area up for similar projects. 2) Water/Sewage A development of this nature would be harmful to the water table in this area. When the Shelswell Subdivision was put in a number of the neighbours' wells went dry, causing new wells to be drilled, at no cost to the developer. We do not believe that 20 units on this 2.39 acre site, each using water for kitchens, bathing, washing clothes, toilets, cleaning purposes, and water used by staff for their washrooms, kitchens, etc., can be contemplated without a detrimental effect on the water table and local wells. We are also concerned that the output of sewage/grey water (including water with commercial cleansers in it) from the 20 residences would affect the quality of the ground water with the potential of rendering the local well water unpotable. 3) Drainage Drainage for a building and parking area this size will tax our already overtaxed ditches and culverts, and neighbouring properties to the south of the site on both sides of Line 15. 4) Infrastructure There are no buses, businesses, stores, or free delivery services available in this area. All staff would have to drive to and park at work. Residents of the complex would have to rely on their own vehicles, taxis, bicycles, scooters or walk to get into town to go to work, shop, doctor appointments, etc. Walking can be problematic as there are no side walks from the site until you reach Georgian College. Safety is an issue here for the residents. If the residents have their own cars, then why are they eligible to live there? Page 5.b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 5) Traffic The subject property is located on the north side of Line 15, south of Scout Valley and north of the church at the bottom of the hill. There are therefore some sight restrictions. Due to the sight restrictions, egress and ingress for vehicles attending this site would put at risk, as would vehicles travelling on the road, even if the speed limit was lowered from the existing limit of 60 kni per hour. We are assuming that there will also be delivery trucks in addition to the residents, staff and visitors driving to and from the site. The addition of this traffic will put a strain on road safety for everyone in the neighbourhood. 6) Securi This is a quiet neighbourhood. The character of the 20 plus individuals residing in the complex is also a concern. Are we and our children to feel safe with an additional 20 plus people living in such close quarters? We are unsure as to the criteria that must be met for individuals to occupy these units. What kind of disability must they have to occupy the residences? Assuming that the residents must be on a disability, Ontario Works or some other government pension, how can we as neighbours be assured that the property is not being treated as a half -way house, subsidized housing or rent geared to income, and that it will continue not to be treated as such? i) How many individuals will be allowed per unit? ii) Will adults with their children be allowed? iii) Will residents be allowed to have pets? iv) What is the ratio of staff to residents, and how will the residents be supervised? v) What qualifications must the staff in this residence have in order to supervise the residents? vi) Will we be finding residents on our property, in the forest? Fire is always a concern. 7) Garbage Because of our immediate proximity to the site, garbage is a concern. i) The noise of garbage trucks picking up garbage before dawn. ii) With garbage of course comes rodents. iii) Garbage/litter (pop cans, cigarettes, candy wrappers, beer bottles/cans, etc) tossed over the fence onto our property. Page `q( 5.b) 6:00 p.m. Proposed Amendment to the Zoning By -Law, 2015... 11 8) Noise With the occupants of the 20 units, and the staff, will come noise that will be disturbing to the neighbours and scare off the wildlife. 9) Light Pollution Again, because of our proximity to the site, light pollution is a concern. Lights from the rooms, lights from the office, lights from the gym, lights from the parking lot all night long, Iights from the loading docks (if any), etc. This is a rural/agricultural area, and the amount of lighting required for this development is disturbing. 10) Property Values What will this project do to our property and resale values? Will someone that wanted to live in a quiet rural area, with wild life and stars to gaze at, without Iight pollution, noise, neighbours close by, want to purchase these lands with this project a mere 30 feet from our property line? Will they want to see this huge "institution" from the kitchen bay window? Will they be enthused by the sight of your residents gathering outside of the common area in front of our kitchen? Asset or liability? Who knows if they will think this project is a plus, a selling feature to this home, but we doubt it. Will a prospective purchaser want to pay more for this property because of this proposed residence? We doubt it. Who will compensate us for this loss? What will the government say? Will MPAC increase our realty taxes because of this development? Can you guarantee any of these? Although the rest of the neighbourhood will be viewing this project from the street, we will be viewing it from the rear. Is this where the garbage will be stored and picked up from? Perhaps excess furnishings or construction waste? Discarded gym equipment? All possibilities and not something we want in our view. We have lived in this location for over 30 years. It is a park like setting. Trees, birds, squirrels, fox, wolves, turtles, snakes, skunks, gophers, deer, bears, horses, owls, etc. A "spot" re -zoning for a high density institution, jammed into a 2.39 acre lot, does not have any place in this neighbourhood. We look forward to your response. Yours truly Earl and Susan Hutchinson /sh PageZ 5.b) 6:00 ppWfft%pW00AjWdrnent to the Zoning By -Law, 2015 THE 20 UNIT RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY FOR THE WILLIAM B. WRIGHT SCHOOL SITE at 204 Line 15 North, Orillia I am opposed to the 20 Unit Residential Care Facility proposed for the William B. Wright School Site. Date Name Address Phone _Sox - C c Qle C, T tA. (24; )h Page' Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 (SCDSB) Location: 205 Line 15 North Current Zoning: Institutional (1) Zone Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone Official Plan Designation: Restricted Rural Existing Development: Former William B. Wright Memorial School 360 square metres (3900 sq. ft.) Toumshiy '�91� W," 4 Proud H<'ri/nlr, Exciting Pnn,rc Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 Simcoe County District School Board Purpose of Application: Zoning By-law Amendment — rezone 204 Line 15 North from the Institutional (1) Zone and the Agricultural/Rural (A/RU) Zone to the Institutional Exception (1*) Zone to permit: • New 2550 sq. m (27,500 sq. ft.) 20 unit "Residential Care Home" facility with accessory Offices and Gymnasium. Toivnskip of Proud Heiihnge, (ixciling Furwe Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 Simcoe County District School Board SITE SKETCH — proposed 20 unit Residential Care Home -455 sq. m. gymnasium -290 sq. m. offices -185 sq. m. common area -1625 sq. m. residential area -Septic and well servicing -30 parking spaces -Proposed landscaping along Line 15 North -Development subject to Site Plan Control. LINE 15 NORTH 0; �i�/G'f2tPi Proud Heritage, Gzcitiug Purnre Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 Simcoe County District School Board III Public Meeting property posting 7oivtuhip of (9tv�ec�r�te� Proud Heritage, Psolblaq Puraire Line 15 North - looking south from subject Line 15 North - looking north from subject lands lands Tottms{tip of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future ci Existing (former) school - looking west from School, parking area - looking southwest Line 15 North from Line 15 North If Ifta To of Proud Heritage, Exciting Future /ow IYI r. y w. Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 Simcoe County District School Board The applicant has submitted the following supporting material: ■ Land Use Planning Report — Wayne Simpson & Associates 7bumskip of Proud Flerita,�r, Fxotil,q ha me Zoning By-law Amendment 2015-ZBA-04 Simcoe County District School Board Conclusion Questions or comments from the public and members of Development Services Committee will now be heard. 7bi reship of Proud Hrrifngr, Esciling Future 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Township o, f Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-031 Development Services Derek Witlib, Manager, Committee Planning Services Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Consent Applications 2015-B-03, 2015-04 & 2015-05 (Peter Tsang) 1161 Line 15 North, Roll #: 4346-030-010-28700 R.M.S. File #: D10 48695 Concession 2, Part Lot 4 (Orillia), Township of Oro- Medonte Recommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only F1___1 It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-031 be received and adopted. 2. That Consent Applications 2015-13-03, 2015-B-04 and 2015-B-05 by Peter Tsang, for the creation of 3 new lots, for future single detached residential use, on lands located in Concession 2, Part of Lot 4, Township of Oro-Medonte (Orillia), be approved, subject to the following conditions: a) 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; b) That the applicant's solicitor prepare and submit a copy of the proposed conveyance for the parcel severed, for review by the Municipality; c) That the applicant satisfy any permits and/or approvals required by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; d) That the applicant enter into a Site Plan Agreement with Council; e) That all municipal taxes be paid to the Township of Oro-Medonte; f) That the conditions of consent imposed by the Committee be fulfilled within one year from the date of the giving of the notice. 3. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 1 of 10 Page 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Background: The purpose of this report is to consider consent (severance) applications submitted by Morgan Planning on behalf of the landowner, Peter Tsang, for the creation of 3 new lots and 1 retained lot, for a total of 4 lots for future single detached residential uses. A location map of the subject lands is included as Schedule #1. The subject lands possess a frontage along the east side of Line 15 North of approximately 122 metres (400 feet), a depth of approximately 180 metres (591 feet) and a total area of approximately 2.34 hectares (5.78 acres). The lands are mostly tree covered and contain a building, now in disrepair, which was formerly a store. The applicant's proposed severance sketch is included as Schedule #2. The lands are proposed to be severed as follows: Lands to be Severed Lot Frontage Lot Area Lot 1 27.0 metres 4,937 sq. metres Lot 2 25.0 metres 4,571 sq. metres Lot 3 25.0 metres 4,571 sq. metres Lot Fronta e Lot Area Lands to be Retained 144.9 metres 19,604 sq. metres Land uses surrounding the subject lands consist of: • To the north: stormwater management pond and single -detached dwellings along Line 15 N; • To the east: stormwater management pond and single -detached dwellings along Sunset Crescent; • To the south: single detached dwelling and a seasonal trailer park; • To the west: Line 15 North and single detached dwellings and cottages along Bass Lake. The lands were the subject of Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2010-ZBA-04, which was approved by Council on December 10, 2014, and which rezoned the lands from the Agricultural/Rural Exception 90 (A/RU"90) Zone to the Shoreline Residential Exception 255 Holding (SR*255(H)) and the Environmental Protection (EP) Zones. The purpose of the Zoning By-law Amendment was to establish the zoning necessary to facilitate the severance of the proposed lots. The rezoning included a Holding provision to ensure the completion of a Site Plan Approval process to the satisfaction of the Township and the NVCA prior to consideration of any Zoning Certificate or Building Permit. The Zoning By-law Amendment application was originally submitted in 2010 and was the subject of the legislated Public Meeting in June 2010. During the period of 2010- 2014 the appiicant submitted/commissioned the completion of a number of technical Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 2 of 10 Page tH 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... reports in support of the application and to address issues raised by commenting agencies and the Township. These reports included: • Proposed Septic System Design — Soil -Eng Limited • Land Use Planning Report — Morgan Planning and Development; • Environmental Impact Study (EIS) and Addendum — Beacon Environmental; and • Natural Hazards Study — Gerrits Engineering. The EIS and Natural Hazards Study were approved by the NVCA in 2014 and the recommendations of these reports include: • Split zoning between the Shoreline Residential Exception and Environmental Protection Zones to direct development away from the portions of the property that are required to be protected for natural heritage and drainage purposes; • Specific building/septic envelopes in the Shoreline Residential Exception Zone and specific driveway locations minimize tree removal; and • The use of Site Plan Control to regulate and enforce the details of development on each lot. Analysis: Does the application conform to the following policies? Township's Official Plan The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township's Official Plan and currently contain an abandoned local commercial building. Permitted uses in this designation include residential uses, small scale commercial uses, and home occupations. The proposed use of the lands for residential purposes would conform with these policies. The intent of the Shoreline designation is to maintain the character of this predominantly residential area, to protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline, and to ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sewage. The proposed consent applications would create single detached residential lots consistent with surrounding land uses. The Shoreline designation does contain development policies however none of these policies is specific to the proposal for the creation of three new residential lots by consent. Therefore a review of the policies in Section D2.2.1, New Lots by Consent - General Criteria, is required: Prior to issuing provisional consent for a new lot for any purpose, 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 on a year-round basis; Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 3 of 10 Page 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Staff comment: the lands front on to Line 15 North which is a Township road maintained year-round; b) does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County supports the request; Staff comment: the lands do not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road. c) will not cause a traffic hazard; Staff comment: no traffic related concerns were identified by the Township's Transportation Division d) has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and is compatible with adjacent uses; Staff comment: the lots comply with the Zoning By-law; their size, shape and use are compatible with surrounding residential lots, and the lots have been designed to mitigate conflicts with natural features and hazards. e) can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal; Staff comment: a professionally prepared septic system design was prepared in support of the development and concluded that the lots can be serviced by individual on-site septic systems. In addition, septic system permits will be required prior to construction. f) will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; Staff comment: a Natural Hazards Study has been completed for this development and approved by the NVCA, to ensure that drainage patterns will not be negatively affected. In addition, Site Plan Approval and individual grading plans will be required for the lots prior to construction. 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; Staff comment: the lots have been laid out with direct access from a Township road and the Natural Hazards Study has addressed driveway access design. Site Plan Approval and driveway entrance permits will be required prior to construction. Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-431 April 1, 2015 Page 4 of 10 Page, 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... h) will not have a negative impact on the features and functions of any ecological feature in the area; Staff comment: an EIS has been completed to the satisfaction of the NVCA. Site Plan Approval will be required prior to construction and the NVCA will be a participant in this process. Furthermore, the NVCA has permit authority on the lands and will not issue a permit until satisfied that the recommendations of the EIS have been implemented. i) will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; and, Staff comment: a Natural Hazards Study and a septic system design have been completed for this development and have satisfactorily addressed groundwater impacts. Further required approvals (Site Plan Approval and septic system permit) will ensure that site-specific development details, including groundwater impacts, are addressed to the satisfaction of the Township and the NVCA. j) will conform to Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, as amended. Provisional consent may be granted subject to appropriate conditions of approval for the severed and/or retained lot. Staff comment: the applications conform to the Planning Act and staff is satisfied that the lots may be created by consent rather than by a plan of subdivision. Based on the above, it is Planning staff's opinion that the applications conform to the Official Plan. Township's Zoning By-law 97-95 The subject lands are zoned Shoreline Residential Exception 255 Holding (SR*255 (H)) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zones. The SR*255(H)) Zone applies to the easterly or rear portion of the property where it has been determined through the technical studies that buildings and septic systems can be located. The SR*255 (H)) Zone establishes a minimum lot frontage of 25 metres and a building setback of 0 metres from the EP Zone. A Holding (H) provision was placed on the SR*255 Zone to ensure that Site Plan Approval is obtained prior to any development. Site Plan Approval will ensure that the recommendations of the EIS, the Natural Hazards Study, as well as ano other requirements of the NVCA and the Township are implemented. The westerly of front portion of the property is zoned EP in order to prevent development in the natural features and hazard prone (woodland and wetland) portion of the property. The applications comply with the Zoning by-law. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 5 of 10 Page 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... County's Official Plan The subject lands are in the area designated as Rural and Agricultural and Greenlands in the County of Simcoe Official Plan. The objectives of the Rural and Agricultural designation include 3.6.2: To provide in non -prime agricultural areas for rural uses such limited residential, subject to the other policies of this Plan including Section 3.6.8, while protecting the rural character (Section 3.6.2) and to encourage maintenance and restoration of natural heritage areas where appropriate (Section 3.6.3). In addition, Section 3.6.7 states that in rural areas, permitted uses include residential lots created by consent, as proposed by this application. Residential use and the creation of three residential lots by consent are in conformity with the objectives of the County Plan, Policy 3.7.3 seeks to protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater and the function of sensitive ground water recharge/discharge areas, aquifers, and headwater areas within the County. The zoning of the lands prohibits development within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone to ensure the hazard feature is identified and protected from development. The proposed lots reporesent limited residential development by consent (severance) and would provide protection of the natural hazards identified on the property, all of which is consistent with the policies of the County Plan. Provincial Policy Statement (2014) 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 1.1.1 of the PPS seeks to manage and direct land use patterns to achieve efficient and resilient development and land use patterns whereby healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by: promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the municipality over the long term and through accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential. Further Section 1.1.5 Rural lands permits limited residential development and promotes development that is compatible with the rural landscape and is sustained by the rural service levels. The proposed residential development of the subject lands with a lot fabric that is consistent with the surrounding properties is considered to be consistent with these policies. In addition, Section 3.1 of the PPS directs development away from areas of natural or human -made hazards where there is a risk to public safety or property damage. Through the review of the related Zoning By-law Amendment Application, a Natural Hazards Assessment and Environmental Impact Study were reviewed and approved by the NVCA and the lands are now subject to a Holding provision for the implementation of Site Plan Control to specify the location of development within each of the residential lots to the satisfaction of the NVCA and the Township prior to construction on the site. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 6 of 10 Page 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Planning Staff is of the opinion that since the proposed lots would result in residential development compatible with the rural landscape and sustained by the existing rural service levels, and since there are now planning measures in place that would ensure the long term protection from development of the existing natural and hazard features (woodland and wetland), the applications are considered to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014. Places to Grow — Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2006 The application has been reviewed with reference to the Places to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. In Policy 2.2.9.2 — Development outside of settlement areas may be permitted in rural areas in accordance with Policy 2.2.2.1(i). Policy 2.2.2.1 (i) further states that development should be directed to settlement areas except where necessary for development related to the management or use of resources, resource-based recreational activities and rural land uses that cannot be located in settlement areas. In addition Policy 2.2.9.3 states that new multiple lots for residential development will be directed to settlement areas and may be allowed in rural areas, such as proposed though this development, in site specific locations with approved zoning or designation that permits this type of development in a municipal official plan, as of the effective date of this Plan. As stated above, the subject lands are located within the Shoreline designation which was in effect at the time of the Growth Plan coming into effect and did provide for limited residential development to occur. On the basis of the above, it is Planning Staff's opinion that the proposed consent applications would conform to the applicable policies of the Growth Plan. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of Council be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act RSO c.P. 13 • Provincial Policy Statement 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 • County of Simcoe Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life — To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015.031 Page 7 of 10 Page 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Sustainability — To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: Notice of these applications was circulated to the public and to various review agencies and Township departments. Public notice signs were also posted on the subject lands. As of the preparation of this report, no public comments have been received and the following agency/department comments have been provided: Building Division — no comments Transportation Division — Significant amount of surface water and a natural watercourse; requires special attention for grading and accommodating existing drainage. Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Severance Sketch Conclusion: The applications conform to the Planning Act and to all relevant Provincial, County and Township policies, and are supported by the appropriate technical studies which have been approved by the relevant agencies. On this basis, it is recommended that Consent Applications 2015-B-03, 2015-B-04 and 2015-B-05 by Peter Tsang, for the creation of 3 new lots for future single detached residential use, be approved. Respectfully submitted: /I L-� Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 8 of 10 Page 90 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager Schedule 1: Location Map UTeEDGE •Township of Severn DEVITT STREET BARB -AVENUE GAN — D Base Lake f SUNSET T LU Z L Z BASS LAKE SID EROAD Q I M City of Orillia Subject Lands to be rezoned 0 3060 120 130 240 Meters Q. UJ 2:1 Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 9 of 10 Page, 9 1 - 6.a) 6:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-031, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Schedule 2: Severance Sketch f -- ---#44.7 I' A � f 7 R ET&ME"Ei r jjLOT #1 LOT #2 r LOT #3 —#,An � l (4,9372) I (4, IMI) (4 72 M2) �, ~ z ■ , s � ✓" rr �trxt I 1 ! ' !'O`ifstyll: PfmFOSED f i� tUBDOrG FOOSi]l,tt 5.0 , , Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 10 of 10 Page 9 2 r' t C � S t i — t i y 5 I , F I i t , , Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-031 Page 10 of 10 Page 9 2 6.a 6:30.m. Report No. DS2015-031� [� P p f dkk N Z March 30, 2015 • I a Adam Kozlowski, Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Anon A Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario, LOL 2EO Dear Mr. Kozlowski; Member of Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On LOM 1TO ONTARIO w, ce,myar= Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.nvpQ ? _'_:- onvca.on.ca Ce Re: Applications for Consent 2015-8-03, 2015-B-04 & 20'15-B-05 Member 1161 Line 15 North, Concession 2, Part Lot 4 (Orillia) Municipalities Township of Oro-Medonte Adjaia-Tosorontio The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed these Amaranth applications for consent and based upon our mandate and policies under the Barrie Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to their approval. The Blue Mountains Bradford -West Gwillirnbvn As you are aware, the property was recently subject to a Zoning By-law Clearview amendment. Through this process, the NVCA reviewed and accepted the results of the Scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS) prepared by Beacon Col,ingwood Environmental and the Natural Hazards Assessment Gerrits Engineering. The Essa detailed floodplain analysis identified that the front of the property could be Grey Highlands affected by a spill from a watercourse to the south of the property during the lnnisfil Regional Storm flood event. The spill flow from the watercourse will be conveyed across the front (western portion) of the severed lots and the Melancthon building envelops will be located on the eastern portion of the lots outside of Mono the spill zone. Safe access and egress has been demonstrated and culverts Mulmur are required under the driveways to provide for free movement of water. It is NewTecumseth our understanding the spill zone and the environmental features at the front of the property have been rezoned to Environmental Protection (EP). Oro-Medonte Shelburne Please note that the property is under the regulatory jurisdiction of the NVCA Springwater whereby a permit is required from the NVCA prior to development of the lots. Wasaga Beach Through this process, the NVCA will require final plans and design features and mitigation measures identified in the Natural Hazards assessment and the EIS will be implemented. Watershed Counties Thank you for circulating this application and please forward a copy of any Dufferin decision. Grey Sincerely; Simcoe Member of Tim Salkeld, Resource Planner NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On LOM 1TO ONTARIO w, ce,myar= Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.nvpQ ? _'_:- onvca.on.ca Ce 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... TownsI , o, f Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-029 Development Services Adam Kozlowski Committee Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Minor Variance Application 2015-A-05 (Simpson/Brunelle) 19 Stanley Ave. Roll #: 4346-010-010-14100 R.M.S. File #: D13 48734 Recommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only It is recommended: 1. That Report DS2015-029 be received and adopted. 2. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-05 (Simpson/Brunelle), being to permit construction of a 70 square metre (140 square metre gross floor area) two-storey dwelling addition having an interior side yard setback of 0.92 metres on the subject lands at 19 Stanley Avenue be approved. 3. That approval of the application be subject to the following conditions: a. That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the foundation wall and 2) verifying by way of survey/real property report, prior to pouring of the foundation, that the dwelling addition be located no closer than 0.92 metres from the interior side yard lot line; b. That the applicant apply for and obtain any necessary permit(s) from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; c. That the appropriate zoning certificate be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding. 4. That the applicant be advised of the Committee's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Background: The Owner proposes to construct a 70 square metre (140 square metre gross floor area) 2 storey addition onto a 1.5 storey dwelling having an existing non -complying side yard setback of 0.63 metres, and requests variance to the following Section of Zoning By-law 97-95: Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 1 of 13 Page 9q A)-45pM Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm i Section 4.0 Table>16xh um -required interior ... side yard Minimum side yard Proposed side yard 3 metres 0.92 metres The Applicant's Site Plan is Attachment 3. Proposed building elevations are in Attachment 4. Property Description The subject property is a "waterfront" lot, having an area of 0.087 hectares (0.22 acres) 15.25 metres (50 ft.) of frontage on both Stanley Avenue and on Lake Simcoe. The property contains an 83 square metre (900 sq. ft.) 1.5 storey dwelling. The dwelling has an existing non -complying side yard setback of 0.63 metres. A survey of the subject lands also reveals that the neighbouring residential dwelling to the west also has a non- complying side yard setback of 1.61 metres. Surrounding parcels to the east and west along the south side of Stanley Avenue consist of lakefront properties having a mix of seasonal and year-round dwellings. Properties to the north consist of low density residential dwellings. A map of the subject lands and site photos are in Attachment 1. Oro-Medonte Official Plan The subject land is designated "Shoreline" by the Official Plan (OP). Permitted uses include single detached dwellings and accessory structures, small scale commercial operations, and bed & breakfast establishments. Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 The subject lands are zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. Permitted uses in the SR Zone include single detached dwellings, and accessory structures such as detached garages, storage sheds and boathouses. Analysis: 1) Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan (OP)? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township OP. The policies of the OP permit single detached dwellings and accessory buildings to residential uses on lands within the Shoreline designation. The proposal seeks to modify zoning provisions that apply to an otherwise permitted use in the underlying designation, and would otherwise conform to the general intent of the OP. 2) Does the variance maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law? 3) Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 2 of 12 Page 9 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Zoning By-law 97-95 contains performance standards for dwellings to ensure that adequate spatial buffering from the traveled portion of roads, shorelines, and neighbouring dwellings is maintained, and to provide space around structures for maintenance and access to the shoreline.'The proposed variance maintains the intent of the zoning by-law and is considered appropriate for the following reasons: • The dwelling on the subject lands has an existing non -complying side yard setback of 0.63 metres at the front of the dwelling, and the neighbouring dwelling also has a non -complying side yard setback of 1.69 metres at the front of the dwelling. The proposed addition would be located 0.92 metres from the side lot line, and would therefore not further reduce the situation of non-compliance. A survey of existing development is in Attachment 2. • Attachment 3 depicts the existing dwelling, proposed addition, and dashed line depicts the required 3 metre side yard setback. Notwithstanding the reduced side yard, only a small portion of the proposed addition would be within the required 3 metre side yard, where the majority of the new building would be beyond 3 metres from the lot line. • The proposed addition at the point of connection with the existing dwelling complies with the required 3 metre setback, and then "tapers" down to the proposed 0.92 metre side yard setback. Notwithstanding the reduced side yard, adequate space would exist between the side lot line and addition for maintenance access around the building. • Prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner will be required to prepare an engineered lot grading and drainage plan, subject to municipal approval. The plan will ensure that water drainage resulting from the proposed addition will be mitigated on the subject lands and not impact neighbouring lots. • The subject lands are within the "regulated area" of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA). The LSRCA was circulated and provided comments indicating "no objection" to the application, subject to the owner receiving necessary approvals. LSRCA comments are at Attachment 5. • No negative visual or environmental impacts would result from the proposed development. Notwithstanding the requested side yard setback variance, the proposed addition would otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of Zoning By-law 97-95. As of the writing of this report, no written comments or objections have been received from neighbouring landowners. The proposed variance is deemed to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. 4) Is the variance minor? As the application conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By -Law and is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, the proposed variance is considered to be "minor". Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Development Services Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Paae 3 of 13 Page 9(1�1_ term Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act • Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life: To contribute to enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro- Medonte's natural beauty and country -like character and by providing opportunities that encourage community participation in activities and recreational programs. Sustainability: to build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: Internal Township Departments: No objections received. Neighbouring landowners within 60 metres (200 feet): No objections received. Attachments: Attachment 1: Location Map & Site Photos Attachment 2: Applicant's Survey Attachment 3: Applicant's Site Plan Attachment 4: Applicant's Elevations Attachment 5: Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority comments Conclusion: Planning Staff recommends that Minor Variance Application 2015-A-05 be approved, specifically to permit the construction of a dwelling addition, for the reasons that the variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted Adam Kozlowski, MCIP RPP Intermediate Planner SMT Approval / Comments: Reviewed / J_ -11 ok_� Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Paae 4 of 12 Page q -4 - Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 5 of 12 Page Interm... 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 6 of 12 Page -rI Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 7 of 12 Page )CO Interm... Fou. Cw a10 r 6.b) 6'A§a r leWROpMqnRW(4- 029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... ' T•bt LAKE Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-029 €� /Ip SAWCO r ZZ" +ZZ&00 April 1, 2015 Page 8 of 12 Page loj 6.b) 6A4a7bR n RgoiWt,p§?eCpI§n029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... r � I r -- r t i � � r J � J J t J r } I _J N 45o 14' WE J _ t 14.06 t" J J J J ; t /to 1� rrrwr�i� � wl.s.sr LAKE SIMCOE Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 9 of 12 Page COZ. - - ll� m ol�Ia i�■i1 � �Mi'i'i 1'i�l�l' �"' �ilr � � Itltitiiltltitl� iMi�r Man� ■r�trri Eitt��t't�itl�irit; AttachmenA!D�,44& ij66Rsp§ gQd �-it0&9-%Wlowski, Interm... Lake Simcoe Region conservation authority A Watershed for Life Sent by email. akozlowskifore-medonte.ca March 25, 2015 File No: 2015-A-05 IMS Pile No: PVOC144SC2 Mr. Adam Kozlowski, MCIP, RPP Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 S Oro-Medonte, ON LOL 2EO Dear Mr, Kozlowski: Re: Application for Minor Variance 2015-A-05 19 Stanley Avenue Township of Oro-Medonte, County of Simcoe Thank you for circulating the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority on the above -noted Application for Minor Variance. It is our understanding that the applicant is requesting relief from Section 4.0 fable B1 of Zoning Bylaw 97-95 to allow for a 0.929m interior side yard setback where the bylaw requires 3 metres. The property in question is adjacent to the Lake Simcoe shoreline, and is subject to the associated shoreline hazards (ie wave uprush, floodplain etc.). It also contains a steep shoreline slope (ie, greater than 3:1) and associated erosion hazards. The LSRCA has reviewed this application in the context of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP), Ontario Regulation 179/06 under the Conservation Authorities Act. As proposed, the development is within hazardous lands adjacent to the shoreline of Lake Simcoe as defined in the PPS. Based on our review, 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 any development within the regulated area of the property. 2. That prior to issuance of any municipal or LSRCA development permits, the owner shall provide a geotechnical slope stability report to the satisfaction of the LSRCA. Page 1 of 2 Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-029 Page 11 of 12 Page' ! CH March 25, 2015 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2O15-029, Adam Kozlowski, lnterm... File No: 2015-A-05 IMS File No.: PVOC1445C2 Mr. Kozlowski Page 2of2 3. That prior to issuance of any municipal or LSRCA development permits, the owner shall provide a planting plan (comprised of native, non-invasive species) to the satisfaction of LSRCA for a minimum of 3 metres width adjacent to the fake Simcoe shoreline in accordance with Designated Policy 6.11 of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Please advise us of any decision made with regard to this application. Please reference the above file numbers in future correspondence. Sincerely, Lisa -Beth Bulford MSc. Development Planner LBB/ph c. Charles Burgess, LSRCA, Planning Coordinator (email only) Taylor Stevenson, LSRCA, Environmental Regulations Analyst (email only) Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-029 Page April 1, 2015 Page 12 of 12 10� 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Adam Kozlowski, MOP, RPP Secreatary - Treasurer Township of Oro-Medonte Council chambers 148 Line 7 South, Oro-Medonte, On LOL 2EO Dear Mr. Adam Kozlowski, RE : 2015-A-05 : 19 Stanley Avenue Oro-Medonte, On Subject : Objections to Proposed Addition An Jae Won ,Jin Soon AE 17 Stanley Ave Oro-Medonte, On LOL 1TO Mar. 27, 2015. We, the owners of 17 Stanley Avenue Oro-Medonte, An immediate neighbour to the site of 19 Stanley Avenue, wish to make you aware of a number of strong objections that we have with regard to the proposed development of an additional property on open space to the side of [ 17 Stanley Avenue ]. As an immediate neighbour to the site of the proposed development, we are of the view that the proposed development will have a serious impact on our standard of living. Our specific objections are as follows: 1. Neighbour's work doesn't comply with Regulations - Need access for constrution vehicles or emergency vehicles into the back yard. -No matter how much closed to each side of the exighting dwellings and the garage, They'd been built up before we owned the house of 17 Stanley, Oro- Medonte 2. Detrimental impact upon residential amenities 3. Loss of privacy and overlooking Page JG� 6.b) 6:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-029, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... 4. Noise, smell and disturbance resulting from use 5. Risk of fire and Nock thousand off the value of of our house Yours sincerely, Jin Jae Won, lin Soon Ae MAR 2 7 1015 ORO`MEJ)4INTE Page gyp'+ 6.c) 7:00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... township f Report Proud Heritage, ExcitirW Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-028 Development Services Adam Kozlowski Committee Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Minor Variance Application 2015-A-06 (Archer) 776 Lakeshore Rd. E. Roll #: R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-009-82900 D13 48735 Recommendation(s): Requires Actiona For Information Only It is recommended: That Report DS2015-028 be received and adopted. 2. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-06 (Archer), being to permit construction of a 90 square metre detached garage on the subject lands at 776 Lakeshore Road East, be approved. 3. That approval of the application be subject to the following conditions: a) Notwithstanding Section 5.1.6 (maximum accessory structure floor area) of Zoning By-law 97-95, the proposed detached garage shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By -Law; b) That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the foundation wall; 2) verifying by way of survey/real property report, prior to the pouring of the footing and if no footing, the foundation, that the detached accessory building does not exceed a floor area of of 90 square metres. c) That the appropriate zoning certificate and building permit be obtained from the Township only after the Committee's decision becomes final and binding. 4. That the applicant be advised of the Committee's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 1 of 10 Page© Background: -1-1 � " Development Proposal The Owner proposes to construct a 90 square metre detached accessory garage, and requests variance to the following Section of Zoning By-law 97-95: 1) 5.1.6 — Maximum accessory structure floor area Maximum floor area Proposed floor area 70 sq. m. _ 90 sq. M. The Applicant's Site Plan is attached in Schedule 2. Proposed building floor plans and elevations are attached in Schedule 3. Property Description The subject lands are a "low density residential" lot, having an area of 0.71 hectares (1.75 acres) and 59 metres (194 ft.) of frontage on Lakeshore Drive East. The property contains a 104 square metre (1120 sq. ft.) 1 storey dwelling, a detached 70 square metre (756 sq.ft.) garage, and several smaller temporary storage sheds. The rear of the Lot is heavily treed, and mature tree growth exists along the side lot lines and within the front yard between the dwelling and Lakeshore Road East. Surrounding parcels to the north, east and west along the north side of Lakeshore Road East consist of larger residential parcels with a more "rural' character, compared to the smaller lots located on the south side of Lakeshore Road E. A location map and site photos are attached in Schedule 1. Oro-Medonte Official Plan The subject lands are designated "Shoreline" by the Official Plan (OP). Permitted uses include single detached dwellings and accessory structures, small scale commercial operations, and bed & breakfast establishments. Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 The subject Lands are zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone. Permitted uses in the SR Zone include single detached dwellings, and accessory structures such as detached garages and storage sheds. Section 5.1.4 permits a maximum accessory structure height of 4.5 metres. Section 5.1.5 permits a maximum accessory structure lot coverage of 5%. Section 5.1.6 permits a maximum accessory structure floor area of 70 square metres. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 2 of 10 Page jC5) rm... Analysis: 1) Do the variances conform to the general intent of the Official Plan (OP)? The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Township OP. The policies of the OP permit single detached dwellings and accessory buildings to residential uses on lands within the Shoreline designation. The proposal seeks to modify zoning provisions that apply to an otherwise permitted use in the underlying designation, and would otherwise conform to the general intent of the OP. 2) Does the variance maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law? 3) Is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? Zoning By-law 97-95 contains performance standards for accessory structure height, floor area and lot coverage to ensure that the primary permitted use of the subject lands remains predominant, and to prevent overdevelopment of residentially -zoned properties with accessory structures. The proposed variance maintains the intent of the zoning by- law and is considered appropriate for the following reasons: • The proposed garage would have a floor area of 90 square metres. The maximum floor area for a garage is 70 square metres to ensure that individual detached accessory structures remain secondary and subordinate to the primary permitted use of the lands. • In this case, the existing dwelling has a floor area of 104 square metres, where the proposed garage, at 90 square metres, would remain smaller than and secondary to the dwelling. The proposed 90 square metre garage would therefore result in an accessory structure that exceeds the zoning by-law provision by 20 square metres. The additional floor area however would be visually imperceptible, and would be suitably mitigated and screened by mature tree cover and natural vegetation from neighbouring residential dwellings and the traveled portion of Lakeshore Road East. Further, the proposed garage would have an enhanced 58 metre (190 feet) front yard setback, 20 metre (66 feet) side yard setbacks, and would be located in the north portion of the lot screened from view behind an existing detached garage, and away from the main dwelling amenity area and principle access to the property. • No negative visual or environmental impacts would result from the proposed development, and the garage would remain secondary and subordinate to the primary dwelling on the subject lands. Notwithstanding the requested variance, the proposed garage would otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of Zoning By-law 97-95. The proposed variances are deemed to be appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 3 of 10 Page j 0 U111110 2) Is the variance &RS( :00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... As the application conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By -Law and is appropriate for the desirable development of the lot, the proposed variance is considered to be "minor". Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Development Services Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and Council chooses to defend the Committee's decision. Policies/Legislation: Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95 Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life: To contribute to enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro- Medonte's natural beauty and country -like character and by providing opportunities that encourage community participation in activities and recreational programs. Sustainability: to build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: Internal Township Departments: No objections received. Neighbouring landowners within 60 metres (200 feet): No objections received. Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map & Site Photos Schedule 2: Applicant's Site Plan Schedule 3: Applicant's Garage Elevation Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 4 of 10 Page i t I 6.c) 7:00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Conclusion: Planning Staff recommends that Minor Variance Application 2015-A-06 be approved, specifically to permit the construction of detached garage, for the reasons that the variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted Ad ozlowski, MCIP RPP Intermediate Planner SMT Approval / Comments: Reviewed � X) Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Schedule 1: Location Map & Site Photos Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-028 April 1, 2015 Rape 5 of 10 Page 1 i Z 6.c) 7:00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Photo 1 — Prot)erty Posting flookina north from Lakeshore Rd) Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 6 of 10 Page ! j g 6.c) 7:00 p.m. Report No. DS2015-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-028 Page April 1, 2015 Page 8 of 10 IIs 6.c) 7�c%pdg?6 Ve'fpc r man 's� e � a5-028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... N58' 18'S0'E P,P9 P2d�tYl 58,922 P,P?&S W T v L V T 5 P L A N Proposed Garage P l N 7 4 0 3 — 0! 0 3 f (LT) Location td. e9 42 771 FRAME SHED S� i1 �A 12.16 t STOREY BRICK DWELLING MUN. 144. 776 12.32 DECK 32.38 O O PLASTIC SEPTIC u0s � 5 N ;P U, � o _ 58.$22 P,P1 atS (P,P i'2&&4) (9 E A R i N G LAKESHORE ROAD EAST Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-028 20.02 19.46 April 1, 2015 Page 9 of 10 Page 1 b 0+26.60 HEDGE 0.16 NORT1EE R E F N 0+00 April 1, 2015 Page 9 of 10 Page 1 b 6.c) Zcl gAjen :; exp se'd,6 Dage��,ot028, Adam Kozlowski, Interm... Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-028 Page 10 of 10 Page J4 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... 1ownsh- cf Report f Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-026 Development Services Adrianna Spinosa, Committee Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Minor Variance Application 2015-A-07 Mark Cameron Roll #: R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-005-40400 18 Cook Lane D13-48773 Recommendation(s): Requires Actiona For Information Only It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-026 be received and adopted. 2. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-07 by M. Cameron, specifically to permit a boathouse with an increased height of 6.0 metres, on lands located in Plan 794, Lot 8 and Lot 9 (Oro), Township of Oro-Medonte, known as 18 Cook Lane, be approved. 3. That the following conditions be imposed on the Committee's decision: a) That notwithstanding Section 5.6.g of Zoning By-law 97-95, the proposed boathouse shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-law; b) That the proposed buildings/structures and landscaping on the property be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; c) That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township compliance with the Committee's decision prior to approving the framing inspection to confirm that the maximum height of the boathouse is no more than 6.0 metres (19.7 feet) measured from the average high water mark; d) That the applicant satisfy any permits and/or approvals required from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; e) 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. 4. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page 1 of 9 Page I I1 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Background: The subject property is 0.30 hectares (0.73 acres), contains a single detached dwelling, a boat house, and a detached garage, and is located on Bass Lake. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing one -storey boathouse (50.3 sq.m. footprint) and construct a new two-storey boathouse (55.8 sq.m.footprint) with a cantilevered deck in its place. The property is zoned Residential Limited Services Hold (RLS (H)) in the Township's Zoning By-law and the applicant is requesting the following relief from By-law 97-95: Required Proposed Section 5.6.5 — Maximum height of boathouse 4.5 metres 6.0 metres (14.7 feet) (19.7 feet) Analysis: Provincial Policies The policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe have been reviewed and do not affect in the context of the proposed development. The subject lands are regulated by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and as of the preparation of this report, Development Services Staff is awaiting comments from the NVCA relating to Ontario Regulation 197/06 under the Conservation Authorities Act. The members of the Committee should have significant regard to any comments or requirements of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. The Provincial Policy Statement provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Sections: 1.1.4 — Rural Areas; 2.1 — Natural Heritage; 2.2 — Water; and 3.1 — Natural Hazards are applicable to this application. The application represents limited, resource-based (waterfront) residential development that is consistent with the PPS with respect to Rural Areas. Development Services Staff is of the opinion that this application is consistent with the Natural Heritage, Water, and Natural Hazards policies of the PPS, subject to Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority comments. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Shoreline within the Township's Official Plan. Section C5 of the Township's Official Plan contains policies related to the Shoreline designation and specifically, Section C5.1 sets out the following objectives: • To maintain the existing character of this predominantly residential area; and • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. The proposed variance relates to the replacement of an existing boathouse that is accessory to a residential use. Provided this, the requested variance conforms to the intent of the Township's Official Plan. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page 2 of 9 Page Iq 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Does the variance conform to the -general intent of the Zoning By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Residential Limited Service Hold (RLS (H)) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95. The subject property is zoned RLS (H) because all lots within the Township that do not have direct access to a public road "shall be placed in a Limited Service Residential Zone in the Zoning By-law and shall be subject to Section D1 of the Official Plan" (OP Section C5.3.1). Conditions under which a Holding Provision will be removed are outlined in Section D1.4.2 however, the proposed development is to replace an existing boathouse of approximately the same size and therefore will not require the execution of a Site Plan Agreement. Table Al of the By-law identifies permitted uses within the RLS zone and single detached dwellings are a permitted use; the proposed boathouse is accessory to the existing dwelling and therefore, is a permitted use. Section 5.6 of the By-law identifies the standards for boathouses. The proposed development of the lands complies with the required setbacks however, requires relief from the maximum height of the boathouse from the average high water mark of Bass Lake, 4.5 metres (14.7 feet). Upon site visit, Staff has identified that the shoreline primarily consists of one -storey boathouses with the exception of a two-storey boathouse located at 12 Cook Lane. In March of 2010, the Committee of Adjustment approved a boathouse height increase to 5.2 metres from the average high watermark [to the midpoint] whereas the peak of the roof is approximately 6.1 metres high (application number 2010-A-06). This is noteworthy as it is approximately the same height as the boathouse subject to this report. The Zoning By-law's requirement for a 4.5 metre height restriction is intended to restrict development at the shoreline. The proposed boathouse height will exceed the maximum height standard by 1.5 metres (4.9 feet) to allow for a full second floor. The proposed second storey is a storage loft and is not to be used for human habitation. The proposed location appears to have little to no impact on the neighbouring properties as the interior side lot lines are lined with trees. The tree line provides privacy to the property and assists to buffer the proposed development from the adjacent neighbours. For the reasons outlined above, the requested variance is 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 is related to the construction of a boathouse, is 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, and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on Bass Lake or on the character of the surrounding area, the variance is considered to be minor. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page Paae 3 of 9 1?_0 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: 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. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 • Lake Simcoe Protection Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended • County of Simcoe Official Plan Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and country -like character and by providing opportunities that encourage community participation in activities and recreational programs. Sustainability To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: • Transportation & Environmental Services Division: • Building Division: • County of Simcoe: • Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority: Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Applicant's Site Plan Schedule 3: Floor Plans Schedule 4: Elevations Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page Page 4 of 9 g _1 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Conclusion:: Based on the plan submitted, Planning Staff recommends that Variance Application 2015-A-07 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of a boathouse, on the basis that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully s miffed: Adrianne i sa Planner SMT Approval / Comments: Development Services Report No. DS2015-026 Reviewed by: Derek Witlib, MCIP RPP Manager, Planning Services Page April 1, 2015 Page 5 of 9 I?Z 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Schedule 1: Location Map 2015-A-07 (Cameron) Bass Lake Z w z 81MELL ROACH Subject Lands' 18 Cook lane Development Services Report No. DS2015-026 Page April 1, 2015 Page 6 of 9 I-2-3 I [L;u v cut co cco�o Z� Q N N OnO�. (60 Q N O LO V— C) N w mr Q _LO ti of���trte:wf rc::iwiww-r' �.�'r ""�'~►� i «---_---__— ----- - r 1 a CD 0 F 'D 1 + t l O 0 t eft ,� _• r 1 U)(D 1 ptJ CD 1 t "row t t t ! f r r 1 r t i ' i WxW''w.hCM di t 1 1 J ruvxf.: t±ahr 1 J J 1 1 J t t J t liJ a>•xr:.x�me^'catsrr Jt 1 ! J J t / 1 t r / 1 t / o cam, cn N C O CD i7 N D CD O N CD iU (D a- 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Schedule 3: Floor Plans 2015-A-07 (Cameron) Development Services Report No. DS2015-026 April 1, 2015 R of 9 Page Z ; a •� , � � 15 I Development Services Report No. DS2015-026 April 1, 2015 R of 9 Page Z 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Schedule 4: Elevations 2015-A-07 (Cameron) Front Elevation Rear Elevation - }_ ■waaun armee ' " � - t - _ i aw•.�+uw Left Elevation Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page ��pary� 9 Of 9 x Front Elevation Rear Elevation - }_ ■waaun armee ' " � - t - _ i aw•.�+uw Left Elevation Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-026 Page ��pary� 9 Of 9 NSACA A noel Member Municipalities Adjala-Tosorontio Amaranth Barrie The Blue Mountains Bradford -West Gwillimburp Clearview Collingwood Essa Grey Highlands Innisfil Meiancthon Mono Muimur 6.d) 7:15 p.m. Report No. DS2015-026, March 26, 2015 Adam Kozlowski, Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2EO Dear Mr. Kozlowski; Re: Application for Minor Variance 2015-A-07 18 Cook Lane Township of Oro-Medonte (Formerly Township of Oro) The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) has reviewed this application for minor variance which would allow for an increased height to a proposed boathouse. Based upon our mandate and policies under the Conservation Authorities Act, we have no objection to the approval of this application however we offer the following for consideration by the Committee. As you are aware, the proposed boathouse is immediately adjacent to Bass Lake and a permit is therefore required from the NVCA under the Conservation Authorities Act prior to construction. The boathouse will need to be elevated 0.3 metres above the Regional Storm flood elevation of 252.26 metres for floodproofing and this will need to be demonstrated through site specific topographic survey. We advise that with this floodproofing provision, the height of the proposed boathouse may exceed the variance requested. New Tecumseth Please note that the natural shoreline with vegetative cover should be Oro-Medonte preserved and in water works will not be supported. Shelburne The purpose of the permit under the Conservation Authorities Act is to insure Springwater adequate floodproofing of the structure and protection of environmental Wasaga Beach attributes associated with Bass Lake. Watershed Thank you for circulating this application for our review and please forward a Counties copy of any decision. ©ufferin Sincerely, Grey Simcoe Tim Salkeld Resource Planner Member of 'v y NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Centre for Conservation Conservation John Hix Conservation Administration Centre Tiffin Conservation Area 8195 8th Line Utopia, On LOM 1 T ONTARIO xa:anl CA—P_t' Telephone: 705.424.1479 Fax: 705.424.2115 Web: www.pycconn.c- _^� i admin®nvca.on.ca a. g I TT 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... 7" h of Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-027 Development Services Adrianna Spinosa, Committee Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Minor Variance Application 2015-A-08 Alan & Karen Campbell 321 Line 4 North Roll #: 4346-010-002-24700 R.M.S. File #: D13-48774 Recommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-027 be received and adopted. 2. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-08 by A. & K. Campbell, specifically to permit an accessory building with an increased floor area of 83.61 square metres and an increased height of 4.95 metres, on lands located in Concession 5, West Part Lot 19 of Registered Plan 51 R2068 Part 1 (Oro), Township of Oro-Medonte, known as 321 Line 4 North, be approved. 3. That the following conditions be imposed on the Committee's decision: a) That notwithstanding Section 5.1.4 and 5.1.6 of Zoning By-law 97-95, the proposed accessory building shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-law; b) That the proposed buildings/structures and landscaping on the property be substantially and proportionally in conformity with the dimensions as set out on the application and sketches submitted and approved by the Committee; c) That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by 1) pinning the foundation wall; 2) verifying by way of survey/real property report, prior to the pouring of the footing and if no footing, the foundation, that the detached accessory building does not exceed a floor area of of 83.61 square metres; 3) Confirming, prior to approving the framing inspection that the maximum height of the accessory building is no more than 4.95 metres measured from grade to the midpoint of the roof; d) 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. 4. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Development Services Report No. DS2015-027 Page April 1, 2015 Page 1 of 7 1_)G 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Background: The subject property is 0.40 hectares (1.00 acres) and contains a single detached dwelling and a garden shed. The applicant is proposing: • To demolish the existing garden shed; and • To construct an accessory building to serve as a garage (2 -car). The property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) in the Township's Zoning By-law and the applicant is requesting the following relief from By-law 97-95: Analysis: Provincial Policies The policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe have been reviewed and do not affect in the context of the proposed development. The Provincial Policy Statement provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Sections: 1.1.4 — Rural Areas and 2.3 — Agriculture are applicable to this application. These sections have been reviewed and Staff is of the opinion that this application is consistent with the policies in the PPS. Does the variance conform to the General intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C1 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. Permitted uses include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, as outlined in section C1.2. One of the Official Plan's stated objectives (Section CIA) of the Agricultural designation is "to protect land suitable for agricultural production from development and land uses unrelated to agriculture." The subject property does not permit for agricultural production and although the proposed structure is not directly intended for agricultural uses, the structure -type fits in with the agricultural surroundings. Furthermore, the proposed detached garage is accessory to the single detached dwelling which is a permitted used. Based on the above, the requested variances conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoninq By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95. According to the Township's Zoning By-law, an accessory Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 2 of 7 Page j � I Required Proposed Section 5.1.4 — Maximum height of any 4.5 metres 4.95 metres detached accessory building or structure (14.76 feet) (16.24 feet) Section 5.1.6 — Maximum floor area of 70 sqaure metres 83.61 square metres any one detached accessory building (753 square feet) (900 square feet) Analysis: Provincial Policies The policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe have been reviewed and do not affect in the context of the proposed development. The Provincial Policy Statement provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Sections: 1.1.4 — Rural Areas and 2.3 — Agriculture are applicable to this application. These sections have been reviewed and Staff is of the opinion that this application is consistent with the policies in the PPS. Does the variance conform to the General intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan, and Section C1 of the Official Plan contains policies related to the use and development of lands in this designation. Permitted uses include single detached dwellings and accessory buildings, as outlined in section C1.2. One of the Official Plan's stated objectives (Section CIA) of the Agricultural designation is "to protect land suitable for agricultural production from development and land uses unrelated to agriculture." The subject property does not permit for agricultural production and although the proposed structure is not directly intended for agricultural uses, the structure -type fits in with the agricultural surroundings. Furthermore, the proposed detached garage is accessory to the single detached dwelling which is a permitted used. Based on the above, the requested variances conform to the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoninq By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Rural Residential Two (RUR2) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95. According to the Township's Zoning By-law, an accessory Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 2 of 7 Page j � I 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... building is 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 floor area and maximum height permitted in the Zoning By-law. Accessory Building is defined in the Zoning By-law as "a detached building or structure, the use of which is naturally and normally incidental to, subordinate to, exclusively devoted to, the principal use or main building on the same lot." The Zoning By-law restricts the size of accessory buildings 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 character of the area. The primary building on the lot is about 213 square metres which is approximately 2.5 times larger than the proposed accessory building. However, it is important to consider that "secondary" is not only defined by size. Based on the proposed use of the building, the accessory building remains subordinate to the residential use. Upon site visit, Staff has identified that the proposed location appears to have little to no impact on the neighbouring properties. The detached garage is proposed to be located behind the single detached dwelling, surrounded by open field. It is in Planning Staff's opinion that the proposed location of the structure suggests it is not the dominant use of the property. For the reasons outlined above, the requested variance is 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 is related to the construction of an accessory building is 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, and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character of the surrounding area, the variance is considered to be minor. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: 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. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 • Lake Simcoe Protection Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended • County of Simcoe Official Plan Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 3 of 7 Page 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and country -like character and by providing opportunities that encourage community participation in activities and recreational programs. Sustainability To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: Transportation & Environmental Services Division: Building Division: County of Simcoe: Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Applicant's Site Plan Schedule 3: Floor Plan & Elevations Conclusion: Based on the plan submitted, Planning Staff recommends that Variance Application 2015-A-08 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of an accessory building, on the basis that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectful) submitted: Adrianna pinosa Planner SMT Approval 1 Comments: Reviewed by: Derek Witlib, MCIP RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 4 of 7 Page 131 - - 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Schedule 1: Location Map 2015-A-08 (Campbell) Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 5 of 7 Page 3z it :7 z z� HIGHWAY 11 N Subject Lands 321 Line 4 North MECVILLE-COtiRT ti1GHWAY-91-S I Ila' Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 5 of 7 Page 3z X CD m o(D ;a C CD v� 60 N � `4 ROAD UNF4N -D to cQ ffCD 0, N -�#I O V U1 66.44 M" _ _ _ to � PRQPfA7Y klN6 ,, ,, 0 m CL PLAN #s L0719 RP51R 2068 PART 1 RML #: 4346-0i 002, 7(yp.Q 00 0 w D CDD ' O CD i s Y9 CL x0 co rats Ar es G) w (a C 9 N S�CL M-0 ALAN & KAREN CAMPBELLID CD 0 { �xx CD LINE 4N N ORq»MEDQNTE cn LOL 21.0 ro P I � k SEPtfE: YMEEPIN& 8Et7 � 1 34M I Sack of ArrR, *%*d Geri to Property Une I I 60.96 M S 4.67 M \ a se* t s8,?SM � k Holding; TM T. a m 1 i i r r 0.6 M 6.4 nt +�At{ 3s pR(3�p D a p 9.s M 2 2/2 storey House Z car $,A M ` _ e 4'. a GARAGE r e{sY ` YerharWa parch y .firt7,37 4:1 PA DRIVEWAY 4.7.6 M wrde UNE w.senx '� L i cL 2.74 M Gallen Sheri SA9M ( n e I ti� isas ar j Front o4 Gaspe to Field Fence Use tpPro FJne j I I rn iD W C) T N O Z O N O i O N 4 Q N cn O N 6.e) 7:30 p.m. Report No. DS2015-027, Adrianna Spinosa, Plan... Schedule 3: Floor Plan & Elevations 2015-A-08 (Campbell) .,± 11111 IIIII Ry IMI IIIII IIM IIIII Illll r g:: IIIII Iill! IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII a �e�'. 05MORE IIIII IIIII Iilli Iilll 11111 IIIII ���t� IIIII IIIII Iflll IIIII ����' IIII! Illlt g1i1 IIIII tw��� '1 I ------------- ■ `---wwwww =i r — — • wwwww—www ■wwwwwwwww ■ �w �w i_w_r_w_ww_��w.•.w_w ----- ��wrww www w • ��wrrww■ w wwwww■ wwwww �--r---. -------- —wwrww--wwwwwww+—■olo ---------- It f f I I solo SEE VolME I ------------- I �1I RI =i f; f It f f I I fbor Ox Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-027 Page 7 of 7 Page 1:2,44 - - 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Twnshr- of Report Proud .Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-030 Development Services Derek Witlib, Manager, Committee Planning Services Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Variance Application S. Hoffman & T. Phillips 5 Greenwood Forest Road Roll #: R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-008-19400 plan 709, Lot 40 and Part of D13-48781 Block A Oro IRecommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-030 be received and adopted. 2. That Minor Variance Application 2015-A-09 by Sandra Hoffman and Todd Phillips, specifically to permit: the replacement of a residential dwelling with an increase in the amount of floor area and volume in the required interior side yards and to recognize existing interior side yard setbacks (1.71 metres west side and 0.94 metres east side); a reduced rear yard (0 metres as measured from the SR Zone boundary) for a dwelling; and a reduced front yard (5.97 metres) for a detached garage, with respect to 5 Greenwood Forest Road, Pian 709, Lot 40 and Part of Block A (Oro), be approved. 3. That the following conditions be imposed on the Committee's decision: a) That notwithstanding Table B1, Section 5.1.3. (a) and Section 5.16.1.(a) of Zoning By-law 97-95, the proposed single detached dwelling and detached garage shall otherwise comply with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning By-law (including interior side yard setback of proposed garage and lot coverage for accessory buildings); b) That an Ontario Land Surveyor provide verification to the Township of compliance with the Committee's decision by: 1) pinning of the foundation wall of the dwelling and verifying by way of survey/real property report, prior to pouring of the dwelling foundation that the dwelling be no closer to the west interior side lot line than 1.71 metres; no closer to easty interior side lot line than 0.94 metres; and no closer to the Easement as in SC352811 than 0 metres; and 2) pinning of the foundation wall of the detached garage and verifying by way of survey/real property report, prior to pouring of the garage foundation that the garage be no closer to the front lot line than 5.97 metres Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 1 of 10 Page I 3 6.0 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... c) That the applicant satisfy any permits and/or approvals required from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority; d) That a septic design be submitted to the satisfaction of the Township; and e) That the appropriate Zoning Certificate, Engineered Lot Grading Plan, and Building Permits 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. 4. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Background: The subject property possesses a lot area of 1130.4 square metres (0.28 acres), a frontage on Greenwood Forest Road of 15.277 metres (50 feet) and contains a dwelling and 4 sheds. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 1 -storey dwelling, construct a new 1.5 storey dwelling, as well as construct a detached garage. The subject lands abut the Lake Simcoe shoreline and are surrounded by similar residential properties. The lands are also subject to a shoreline right-of-way which grants other property owners in Plan 709 certain rights with respect to shoreline access. The property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) in the Township's Zoning By-law and the applicant has requested the following relief from By-law 97-95: 1) Section 4.0 Table B1, SR Zone — Minimum Required Interior Side Yard 2) Section 5.16.1 (a) A (existing) non -complying building may be replaced provided that it does not increase the amount of floor area and volume in a required yard. Minimum Required Existing and Proposed Interior Side Yard Interior Side Yards 3.0 metres 1.71 metres (west side) 0.94 metres (east side) 3) Section 4.0 Table B1, SR Zone — Minimum Required Rear Yard Min. Required Rear Yard Existing and Proposed Rear Yard (setback from SR Zone Boundary) 7.5 metres 0 metres 4) Section 4.0 Table B1, SR Zone — Minimum Required Front Yard 5) Section 5.1.3 (a) Setback for accessory building in front yard Required Proposed 7.5 metres 5.97 metres Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 2 of 10 Page j�36 1 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Analysis: Provincial Policies and County Official Plan The subject lands are not within a designated settlement area and the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe do not affect the review of this application. The lands are subject to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and to the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, both of which contain policies pertaining to Natural Heritage and Natural Hazards. The application represents limited, resource-based (waterfront) residential re -development that is consistent with the PPS and which conforms to the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. With respect to the County Plan, the application is considered to confirm to Section 3.13 -Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. Additional comments in this regard to Provincial policies or the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan may be received from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) and the Committee should have regard for any correspondence that may be received from the LSRCA. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated "Shoreline" by the Official Plan. Permitted uses in the Shoreline designation include single detached dwellings and the Official Plan establishes the following objectives for the Shoreline designation: • To maintain the existing character of this predominantly residential area. • To protect the natural features of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline. Based on Development Services Staffs visits to the site and the surrounding area, as well based on a review of 2012 aerial photography, the proposed development of the lands appears to be similar to much of the existing development along Greenwood Forest Road, in terms of the land use (single detached residential), setback from the road and proximity to Lake Simcoe. The proposed development would, therefore, appear to be consistent with the existing land uses and built form of the surrounding area. No encroachment towards the shoreline area or alternation of the shoreline is proposed. Staff is of the opinion that the application conforms to the Official Plan. Does the variance conform to the general intent of the Zoning By-law, and is the variance appropriate for the desirable development of the lot? The subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential (SR) Zone in the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95., which permits dwelling and accessory buildings. There is also an Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 3 of 10 Page j�- 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Open Space (OS) Zone along the shoreline of this property and adjacent properties. The OS Zone on the property corresponds with a right-of-way which grants other residents in the area common access to the shoreline. No development is proposed within the OS Zone or the right of way, but both the existing dwelling and the proposed dwelling are positioned close to the boundary of the OS Zone. The proposed dwelling is identified to be generally, but not exactly, in the same location and foot -print of the existing dwelling; is not proposed to be any closer to the side lot lines than the existing dwelling; and is to be positioned slightly farther back from Lake Simcoe than the existing dwelling. The proposed new dwelling would be entirely outside of the shoreline access easement that crosses the subject lands and other waterfront properties in this area. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the impacts of a dwelling in this location have long been established by the existing dwelling and that the proposed new dwelling, being of a similar foot -print and moderately greater height, will not create any new negative impacts on Lake Simcoe or with respect to the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties. The proposed side yard setbacks, although substandard, are no less than those that are existing and which still provide space for access and maintenance around the building. The proposed re -development will not worsen a situation that seems to have functioned satisfactorily for many years. With respect to the proposed detached garage, staff is satisfied that the proposed setback of 5.97 metres (19.5) is an adequate space in which to park car in the driveway, while at the same time achieving a greater setback from Greenwood Forest Road than most of the other existing garages along the same side of the road. Based on the above, the requested variances are considered to meet the purpose and intent of the Zoning By-law and would be considered appropriate for the desirable development of the lot. However, staff wishes to point out that the proposed garage and the existing 4 sheds on the property would exceed the Zoning By-law's maximum permitted 5 percent lot coverage for accessory buildings. Also, the location of the proposed garage must be adjusted to comply with the required 2 metre (4 feet) minimum side yard setback for an accessory building. Building staff has noted that additional septic design information is required to ensure that a septic system can be accommodated in the area between the proposed dwelling and the proposed garage. Based on the above, any plans submitted for the purposes of a Zoning Certificate or Building Permit will need some revisions in order to address the need for an increase to the garages east interior side yard setback and to potentially reduce the floor area of the proposed garage. 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, and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character or uses of the surrounding area, the variances are considered to be minor. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 4 of 10 Page [- 8 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... and is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the character or uses of the surrounding area, the variances are considered to be minor. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: 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. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe • Lake Simcoe Protection Plan • County of Simcoe Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended I Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and country -like character and by providing opportunities that encourage community participation in activities and recreational programs. Sustainability To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: • Transportation & Environmental Services Division - no concerns • Building Division — Septic design required for further review/comment. Permit drawings are to include spatial separation design due to limiting distance. • County of Simcoe - • Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority - Attachments: Schedule #1: Location Map Schedule #2: Applicant's Site Plan Schedule #3: Elevation Drawings Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 5 of 10 Page (-;q 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Conclusion: Based on the plan submitted, Planning Staff recommends that Variance Application 2015-A-09 be approved, specifically, to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling and a detached garage, on the basis that the application meets the four tests of the Planning Act. Respectfully submitted: 46rekWitlib, MCI RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 6 of 10 Page 'A-10 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Schedule 1: Location Map Al W z z a W 0 �n GREEIWOOD F04 STR�O nBALSAMLANE Subject Lands 5 Greenwood Forest Road Lake Simcoe Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Paae 7 of 10 Page /J—// - 6.f) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Schedule 2: Applicant's Site Plan 1 61 t N TBU 22L56 NAIL IN UTIL.IT`.' POLE It a" DRUM 1 r .c \ WELL $OI O�i1 21O.ZP \ FIMRH _ .e _ �• I meg, +Gi�/ IN y s•, ,R` �;Mk J i J � 2.• y�. S4 s\' Nl \ b Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-030 Page 8 of 10 Page P-41 M -Ott-- 6J) 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS2015-030, Derek Witlib, Manager Schedule 2: Elevation Drawings Front: Rear -- ------------------ Development Services Report No. DS2015-030 ----------------------- --------- -- -------- ............. --- - - --------------------------- ------ April 1, 2015 Page 9 of 10 Page 6.f} 7:45 p.m. Report No. DS201 5-030, Derek Witlib, Manager,... Schedule 2: Elevation Drawings Cont. Right: 1. n Left: lt_...• Development Services Report No. DS2015-030 r' April 1, 2015 Page 10 of 10 Page fj-lq 8.a) Report No. DS2015-023, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Townslatp of Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-023 Development Services Adam Kozlowski Committee Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Official Plan Amendment 2014-OPA-02 and Zoning Roll #: R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-002-15901 By-law Amendment 2014-ZBA-05 (Horseshoe D09 47420 Ridge Subdivision) D14 47420 Plan 51 M-1035, Lots 9-13 and Lots 45-48 inclusive Recommendation Requires Action f For Information Only It is recommended that: 1. That Report DS2015-023 Re: Official Plan Amendment Application 2014-OPA-02 and Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2014-ZBA-05 affecting Plan 51 M-1035 Lots 9- 13 and Lots 45-48, Township of Oro-Medonte, for Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd., be received and adopted; 2. That Official Plan Amendment 2014-OPA-02 being to re -designate the subject lands from "Horseshoe Valley — Low Density Residential" to "Horseshoe Valley — Medium Density Residential" on Schedule D of the Official Plan, and to amend the text of Section C143.6 by adding Section C14.3.6.10 to the Official Plan as a site-specific policy on the subject lands, be approved. 3. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2014-ZBA-05, that would rezone the subject lands from the Residential One Exception Two Hundred Thirty -Two (R1 *232) Zone and the Residential One Exception Two Hundred Thirty -Three (111*233) Zone to the Residential Two Exception Two Hundred Fifty -Six (R2*256) Zone and the Residential Two Exception Two Hundred Fifty -Six Hold (R2*256)(H) Zone on Schedule A15 to Zoning By-law No. 97-95, be approved. 4. That the Clerk bring forward the appropriate By-law to amend the Official Plan to re- designate the subject lands from the "Horseshoe Valley — Low Density Residential" Designation to the "Horseshoe Valley — Medium Density Residential" Designation for Council's consideration. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 1 of 14 Page I/_/5 5. That the Clerk bri&R� AW %ptb�Q ��; OggAI1Y�ri� }�ft1t"c�iir �i(' to Pla... consideration, with the required Holding (H) Provision not to be removed until such time as road, water and sewer infrastructure is available for the lands and that the Certificate of Substantial Completion Acceptance (municipal underground services) has been issued by the Township. 6. That the Applicant be notified of Council's decision in accordance with the Notice of Amended Conditions of Approval. Background: Property Description The subject lands are located within the Horseshoe Valley settlement area, known as "Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision" (formerly "Landscapes Phase 3") which was registered on September 5th 2014 as Plan 51 M-1035 and is currently under construction. The subdivision has a land area of 10.2 hectares (25 acres) and is approved for a total of 84 residential units. Official Plan Amendment 35 (OPA 35) was approved in 2013 to re -designate a portion of the subject lands to the Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential designation to permit conversion of single detached dwelling lots to townhome lots, having a maximum density of 15 units/hectare. The subdivision is currently approved for development of 57 single detached dwellings and 27 townhome units. The subject lands are serviced by an existing municipal water and private communal sewage system. The subject lands abut Line 3 North to the west, existing residential development and golf course facilities to the north and east, and vacant lands to the south and southeast that are approved for future residential development. Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision is designated "Horseshoe Valley Low Density Residential" and "Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential" by the Official Plan. Permitted uses in the "Low Density" designation include single detached dwellings, having a maximum density of 7 units per hectare. Permitted uses in the "Medium Density" designation include townhome dwellings, having a maximum density of 15 units per hectare as per OPA 35. Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision is zoned with various Residential One Exception and Residential Two Exception Zones, permitting single detached dwellings and townhomes. Minimum lot areas for the Residential Zones range from 570 sq.m. to 750 sq.m. (0.15 to 0.18 acres), and minimum frontages range from 19.25 metres to 25 metres (63 to 82 feet). The Residential Two Exception Zone requires a minimum lot area of 350 sq.m. (0.08 acres) and frontage of 10.15 metres (33 feet). Attachment 1 contains a map of Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision Plan 51 M-1035, Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015.023 Page 2 of 14 Page 1.44.1 8.a) Report No. DS2015-023, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Development Proposal The purpose of this report is to consider applications made by Rudy & Associates on behalf of Horseshoe Valley Lands Ltd. to amend the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan and Zoning By-law 97-95 affecting lands known as "Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision", Plan 51M-1035, specifically Lots 9-13 (fronting on Landscapes Drive) and Lots 45-48 (fronting on Oakmont Avenue). The applicant proposes to convert 9 existing lots designated for single detached dwellings to permit 19 "townhome lots", 8 of which would front on Oakmont Avenue, and 11 of which would front on Landscapes Drive. A concurrent zoning by-law amendment has been submitted to rezone the lands to permit townhomes. Details of the amendments are as follows: Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 2014-OPA-02 The text of Section C14.3.6 — Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential would be modified to add a new site-specific policy to permit townhomes on the subject lands, having a maximum density of 23 units/hectare. Schedule D would be amended to re- designate the subject lands from the existing "Horseshoe Valley Low Density Residential" Designation to the "Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential" Designation to permit townhome development. Attachment 2 depicts lands subject to OPA. 2. Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) 2014-ZBA-05 The ZBA proposes to rezone Lots 45-48 (Oakmont Ave.) from the existing R1 *232 and R1 *233 Zones to the Residential Two Exception Two Hundred Fifty Six (R2*256) Zone to permit townhome dwellings, and to modify the lot frontage and area requirements. Lots 9-11 (Landscapes Dr.) are proposed to be rezoned from the R1 *232 and R1 *233 Zones to the R2*256 (H) Zone. The (Holding) provision is necessary as road, water and sewer infrastructure is not yet available for these lots. The R2*Exception 256 would establish the following performance standards on the subject lands: R2*256 Permitted Uses a) Townhouse Dwellings b) Home Occupations c) Private Home Daycares d) Residential Care Homes R2*256 (H) — applies to Plan 51 M- 1035 Lots 9-13 (Landscapes Drive) Removal of Hold conditional upon installation of necessary road, water and sewer infrastructure and confirmation of sewage plant capacity for 11 additional units. Development Services Report No. DS2015-023 R2*256 Zone Requirements a) Minimum Lot area - 324 square metres b) Minimum Lot Frontage - 9 metres c) Minimum Front Yard: i) to dwelling - 4.5 metres ii) to garage - 6.0 metres d) Minimum Rear Yard: i) to dwelling - 7.5 metres ii) to deck on golf course lot - 4.5 metres iii) to deck not on a golf course lot - 5.5 metres e) Minimum Exterior Side Yard: i) to dwelling - 3.0 metres ii) to garage - 6.0 metres f) Minimum Interior Side Yard: April 1, 2015 Page 3 of 14 Page IH71- 8.a) Report No. DS2q)15 iQ,,0 fatrn�Cm°et�esski, Intermediate Pla... ii) end unit - 1.5 metres g) Maximum Building Height - 11.0 metres h) Maximum Building Coverage (Including deck) — 50 percent Attachment 3 depicts the lands subject to zoning by-law amendment. Analysis: Planning Staff has reviewed the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications in context to relevant planning policies and legislation contained in the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan, County of Simcoe Official Plan, "Places to Grow" Plan, and 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, as detailed below: Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan The subject lands are located within the Horseshoe Valley Settlement Area, and are designated Horseshoe Valley Low Density Residential and Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential designations. Permitted uses in these designations include single detached, townhome and multiple dwellings, home occupations, golf courses, and bed & breakfast establishments. The maximum density within the "Low Density" designation is 7 units/hectare, and the maximum density within the "Medium Density" designation is 30 units/hectare, in accordance with Section C14.3.6 of the Official Plan. The following policies would apply to the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments: A2.6.1 Goal It is the goal of this Plan to direct most forms of residential development to settlements where full sewer and water services are available or can be made available in the future. A2.6.2 Strategic Objectives a) To direct the majority of new residential growth to settlements. d) To encourage the more efficient use of land in settlements, where appropriate. C14.3.8 Conditions for Approval This policy applies to all lands that are subject to Sections C14.3.5 and C14.3.6 of this Plan. Prior to the approval of a Plan of Subdivision and/or a Plan of Condominium application and/or a request to re -zone the lands, Council shall be satisfied that: Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 4 of 14 Page P�iC� a) the proposeANri bKggiCil�g ttSr ��l� d �� riateoan� agreibl oeby ediate Pla... the Township and the appropriate agencies; b) the proposed location, nature and timing of improvements to Horseshoe Valley Road and other roads is appropriate and agreed to by the Township and the appropriate agencies in accordance with Section C14.3.1; and, c) the phasing of development is appropriate given the timing of the installation of services and the improvements to Horseshoe Valley Road and other roads. Staff comment: The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment would result in conversion of 9 single detached dwelling lots to 19 townhome lots, and have a maximum residential density of 23 units/hectare in general conformity with the intent of Section C14.3.6 of the Official Plan and within the maximum densities permitted for the Horseshoe Valley Settlement Area. The development would occur within an existing registered plan of subdivision utilizing existing road, sewer and water infrastructure, and would result in lots that have modified frontage and area requirements that are in keeping with the existing zone standards for adjacent townhome development. The proposed amendments would result in an increase of residential lots within an existing and established settlement area, and would not require changes to the existing subdivision layout or road configuration. County of Simcoe Official Plan The County of Simcoe Official Plan contains policies that provide guidance for residential growth and development of settlement areas: 3.5.1 To utilize existing settlements where appropriate in accordance with the policies of this Plan, as the setting for urban uses and/or most non - resource related growth and development. 3.5.2 To develop a compact urban form that promotes the efficient use of land and provision of water, sewer, transportation, and other services. 3.5.4 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted... 3.5.9 Where a settlement has municipal water and sewer services, compact development shall be promoted. Staff comment: the proposed conversion of single detached dwellings to townhomes within an existing approved and registered plan of subdivision would result in residential intensification and compact form that is in conformity with the County Official Plan policies. Development Services April 1 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 5 of 14 Page P� The County of Simc�ear5'trtrl'�ta�alQa�i�iQ�it�i Qar3a8"'o�g'�ate Pla... Official Plan, and was circulated for comments on the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments. Comments were received on February 18, 2015, and aside from minor requested amendments to the wording of the draft Official Plan amendment, there was otherwise "no objection" to the proposed re -designation or rezoning of the subject lands. Provincial Policy Statement 2014 (PPS) The PPS contains policies for the orderly development of settlement areas, and promotes intensification of existing settlements where full servicing exists. The following PPS policies are applicable to the applications: 1.1.3.1 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. 1.1.3.2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on: a) densities and a mix of land uses which: 1. efficiently use land and resources; 2. are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service facilities which are planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified and/or uneconomical expansion; and 1.1.3.3 Planning authorities shall identify and promote opportunities for intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, including Brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs. 1.1.3.4 Appropriate development standards should be promoted which facilitate intensification, redevelopment and compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of public health and safety. Staff comment: The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications are in conformity with the objectives of the PPS, as the proposed development would be located within an existing serviced settlement area, would result in the efficient intensification of a residential land use, and would provide for an enhanced range of housing opportunities utilizing existing infrastructure. Places to Grow - Growth Plan The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe ("Growth Plan") contains policies to foster development of compact communities and promote growth and economic development within settlement areas: Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 6 of 14 Page f' 2.2.2.1 Population §rfW eV el'rt' (Y@VvitslVGiIP Mno8AOd^'> y I:. Varec i�ig to Pla... development to settlement areas..." 2.2.9.1 Rural settlement areas are key to the vitality and economic well-being of rural communities. Municipalities are encouraged to plan for a variety of cultural and economic opportunities within rural settlement areas to serve the needs of rural residents and area businesses. 2.2.9.3 New multiple lots and units for residential development will be directed to settlement areas..." Staff comment: The proposed development will occur within an existing established settlement area on full water and sewer services. The applications conform to the policies of the Growth Plan. Supporting Studies In support of the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment, the applicant submitted the following reports: 1. Land Use Planning Report — Rudy and Associates 2. Servicing Revision Report — Gerrits Engineering The reports have been reviewed by Township Staff, the Township's engineer (AECOM) and commenting agencies. Development Services Staff concur with the Land Use Planning Report prepared by Rudy & Associates and the analysis and conclusions that support the applications as representing good land use planning. The Servicing Revision Report prepared by Gerrits Engineering fundamentally supports the proposed conversion of single detached dwelling lots to townhorne lots, where stormwater management and drainage works, road, water and sewage infrastructure installation may be addressed through detailed design drawings review. The report also indicates that the Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision has previously -allocated sewage plant capacity for 100 units, and that the proposed increase in units from 84 to 93 can be serviced within the allocated capacity. AECOM has reviewed the Gerrits report and provided preliminary engineering comments. In general, AECOM has advised that revisions to water, road, and stormwater infrastructure works may be addressed at the time of detailed design. However, there are concerns over sewage allocation calculations based on the number of bedrooms per proposed unit and the "design population" (i.e. persons per residence). While the proposed Official Plan and zoning by-law amendment applications may proceed toward approval, further discussion will be required with respect to sewage capacity design and relevant calculations relating to the increase in units from 84 to 93. With respect to the proposed townhome conversions affecting Lots 45-48 and increase in units from 4 singles to 8 townhomes, Township Transportation & Environmental Services has confirmed that Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 page 7 of 14 Page (j I capacity exists for S^pbWi'11+t'oQi S'�rt � V e i Adam iI�WRki,. Intl me diate Pla... p y o ire. ow a er �nve iga ion is required to determine if capacity is available for the proposed 11 townhomes on Landscapes Drive. Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Further to the proposed Official Plan Amendment, Development Services Staff recommend approval of Zoning By-law Amendment 2014-ZBA-05 on the basis that the proposed lot area of 324 sq.m. per unit would be in keeping with the adjacent townhome lots that have a minimum lot area of 350 sq.m. As well, the proposed minimum lot frontage of 9 metres would be in keeping with adjacent townhome lots that currently have a minimum lot frontage of 10.15 metres. Proposed performance standards of the R2*256 Zone (such as lot line setbacks, building height, and lot coverage) are identical to the adjacent R2*234 Zoned properties. The R2*256 Zone would therefore result in future structures that are similar to surrounding townhome development, and would preserve the continuity of medium density residential character and built form of the neighbourhood once the subdivision has been built -out. With respect to sewage capacity, Development Services Staff recommend that a Holding (H) provision be included as part of the proposed zoning by-law amendment. As sewage capacity is confirmed for 84 lots, the proposed conversion for 8 townhomes on Lots 45- 48 on Oakmont Avenue may be rezoned to R2*256 for issuance of building permits. The R2*256 Holding (H) provision would be applied to the proposed 11 townhomes on Lots 9-13 that would front on a future extension of Landscapes Drive. Removal of the Hold (H) and issuance of building permits would not occur until such time that the Township is satisfied that all development related matters, including servicing capacity, are addressed. Public Meetin A statutory public meeting was held on March 4, 2015 regarding the proposed amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Comments expressed at the meeting included construction traffic concerns, topsoil erosion, unsightly outdoor storage of equipment and building material, along with requests to clean up lands adjacent to existing occupied dwellings. The developer was present and made commitment to address concerns from neighbours, and to ensure that contractors and machinery use dedicated construction routes. Notwithstanding these comments, there were generally no overarching concerns from the public with respect to the conversion of lands for additional townhome development or for the related zoning amendment. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of Development Services Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Development Services April 1 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 8 of 14 Page ],:�;Z 8.a) Report No. DS2015-023, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Policies/Legislation: Planning Act Places to Grow Provincial Policy Statement 2014 County of Simcoe Official Plan Oro-Medonte Official Plan Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life Safe & Healthy Communities Sustainability Consultations: Township Transportation & Environmental Services — No objection. Township Engineer (AECOM) — Additional servicing investigation needed. County of Simcoe — No objection. County of Simcoe District School Boards — No objection. Attachments: Attachment 1: Horseshoe Ridge Subdivision Plan 51 M-1035 Attachment 2: Proposed Official Plan Amendment Attachment 3: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Conclusion: On the basis of the analysis provided above, staff recommend the approval of the Amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. All other conditions from the original draft plan will continue to be required to be satisfied prior to the execution of a subdivision agreement with the Township. The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments would conform to the development policies of the Township Official Plan, County of Simcoe Official Plan, and Provincial policies and Legislation, and represents good planning. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 9 of 14 Page iS:5 Respectfully submittAa) Report No. A! m Kozlowski, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner DS201 R JA Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services STMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: Development Services Report No. DS2015-023 April 1, 2015 Page 10 of 13 Page J!Sxy AttachAA Intermediate Pla... 6N- ,OX ,O +I 57 Single detached dwelling lots Designated "Horseshoe Valley Low Density Residential" ®27 Townhome dwelling lots Designated "Horseshoe Valley Medium Density Residential" Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-023 Page 11 of 13 Page /57 Af.Aa,.A Re,Ra:Propo�ed2Sfficr. d Admendmentowski, Intermediate Pla... 32 : la ewe Y awxa7"-'- � jt�. 3.35 44 34 r9xr Y° 4P 137 49 $ `lt PM{ 11 PL" 51R-3071 s 35 ! '`fig "' �'4348 z i �!1 BLOCK 59 � " �} > 42 8 �'Yii � ? " N .. .7n ngy BLOCK 58 FfN IVC I:tA` 1 9ve, 25 `4.1 ' •i `Y` � .901 Y \ Mk�tlCl 4 �'y 26 CONCESSION S� TWX 14 TS'YY Yy a 15 16 s�, $ 36 R 39 t BLOCK 6O 3$ ,di a, xHS�3`� nt; 7ic5s-ata r• Edi 37 ' ,a.f a, T. i v M �; : •4. ' BLOCK 64 - 'i WAC �w. >,f>,,.cr 1J � . •11 f — ~,�1 Tr ow :iQft: Yi •�' . 5?96aC'f Lands to be re -designated from Horseshoe Valley — Low Density Residential to Horseshoe Valley — Medium Density Residential and subject to Section G 14.3.6.16 Development Services Report No. DS2015-023 April 1, 2015 Page 12 of 13 Page t --S(--" w i ',r c ' •M � LL i� � 1 i�J�J6�J1oJJ�-�•. u.1J�1vJ�u1�1w�J1�. i�. i •�AISJ�OL�I,S�J�� rmouoa • • r • • � i • • ' i f � ' t ' f • i • i • ' • • • i MOMMI M OR all Development Services Report No. DS2015-023 April 1, 2015 Page 13 of 13 Page�` —7- 8.b) Report No. DS2015-024, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: S... 1- h- )f Report Proud Heritage, Exeitinf Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-024 Development Services Adrianna Spinosa, Committee Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Site Plan Agreement and Removal of Holding Provision (Democrat Maplewood Ltd.) 2015 -SPA -05 Roll #: 4346-010-003-26587 R.M.S. File #: D11- 48783 10 Opal Court Plan 51M-957, Lot 87 Former Township of Oro) Recommendation(s): Requires Actiona For Information Only n-1 It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-024 be received and adopted. 2. That the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Site Plan Agreement with Democrat Maplewood Limited thereby permitting the removal of the Holding Provision applying to Lot 87 for the construction of a single detached dwelling; 3. That the Clerk bring forward the by-laws for Council's consideration to enter into a Site Plan Agreement with Democrat Maplewood Limited and to remove the Holding Provision applying to the lands described at Lot 87 of Plain 51 M-957, respectively; and 4. And that the applicant be advised of the decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Background: The applicant is proposing to have a Site Plan Agreement registered on title for the construction of a 253.07 sq.m. (2,724 sq.ft.) single detached dwelling with a 88.20 sq.m. (1,057 sq.ft.) attached 3 -car garage on Lot 87. The zoning presently in effect for the subject land is Residential One Holding Provision (R1 (H)) Zone and, as such, the owner must enter into a Site Plan Agreement prior to the issuance of a Zoning Certificate and Building Permit related to the construction of the dwelling on the respective Lot. The owner must enter into a Site Plan Agreement before the Holding Provision can be removed. Due to the discovery of a potential ossuary on Lot 122 of the Diamond Valley Estates Subdivision, Planning staff have now incorporated additional wording into all site plan agreements that requires the owner of a lot and/or their agent to: Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-024 Page 1 of 4 Page %,�, 8.b) Report No. DS2015-024, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: S... retain the services of a consulting archaeologist for their on-site presence and monitoring of any grading or ground alterations within 50 metres of a potential ossuary; assume all liability with respect to the discovery of any ossuary and/or archaeologically sensitive features or areas through any development; and cease work immediately upon the discovery of a potential ossuary and/or archaeologically sensitive feature, and to notify all appropriate Ministries and Agencies, including, the Registrar of Cemeteries and the Township. Analysis: The property is designated Residential by the Township's Official Plan, and is zoned Residential One Holding Provision (R1 (H)) Zone by the Township's Zoning By-law 97- 95. The Site Plan Agreement and Removal of Holding Provision would permit construction of a Single Detached Dwelling in conformity with the permitted uses of the Official Plan and in compliance with the use and setbacks contained in the Township's Zoning By-law. The applicant is required to enter into a Site Plan Agreement with Council with respect to the removal of the Holding Provision on the subject Lot. These provisions were imposed through the subdivision approval process in order to determine appropriate building envelopes and the protection of the tree canopy. Further, Planning staff have reviewed the submission related to the proposed construction of a dwelling on the subject lot, and confirmed its compliance with applicable provisions of the Township's Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended. Comments have been received from Transportation and Environmental Services Department pertaining to the location of the water service connection and the width of the driveway where it meets the property line. Provided this, Development Services Staff will ensure that the proposed site plan is revised to the Township's satisfaction for final approval of the drawings. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potentialfinancial and legal implications should the decision of Council be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 • County of Simcoe Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Township of Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-024 Page 2 of 4 Page IS9 8.b) Report No. DS2015-024, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: S... Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life — To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Sustainability — To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: Transportation & Environmental Services: • Relocation of water service connection is required; • Driveway width from edge of pavement to property line shall be 7.0 metres wide and may flare out on private property. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority: Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map Conclusion: The purpose of the Site Plan Application is to register a Site Plan Agreement on title for the subject Lot, with respect to the construction of a single detached dwelling on Lot 87 of the Diamond Valley Estates Subdivision (Plan 51 M-957), due to the Holding Provision applying to the zoning of the Lot. It is recommended that Site Plan Application 2015 -SPA -05, be approved and the associated by-laws for Site Plan Approval and Removal of the Holding Provision be adopted by Council. Respectfully submitted: Adrianna Spi Planner SMT Approval / Comments: Reviewed by: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning Services Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-024 Page 3 of 4 Page i6�CD 8.b) Report No. DS2015-024, Adrianna Spinosa, Planner, re: S... Schedule 1: Location Map 2015 -SPA -05 (Plan 51 M-957 Lot 87) c ion ap IS OPAL COURT ® Subject Lands (10 Opal Court) Plan 51 M-957, Lot 87 Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-024 Page ) �,o-^n n of 4 8.c) Report No. DS2015-025, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Za 70, W11SJz ip f Report f �� Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-025 Development Services Adam Kozlowski, Committee Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Site Plan Agreement 2015 -SPA -01 (Caudry) 15 Pemberton Lane Roll #: 4346-010-007-08600 R.M.S. File #: D1 1- 48527 Recommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only —1 It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-025 be received and adopted. 2. That the Township of Oro-Medonte enters into a Site Plan Agreement with Suzanne Caudry to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling and in -ground swimming pool. 3. That the appropriate by-laws for the Site Plan Agreement and to repeal the previous Site Plan Agreement applying to the lands described as Pt Lot 1, Range 1 Oro, Parts 1 & 2 51 R-19045 (Oro) be brought forward for consideration. 4. And that the applicant be advised of the decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Background: The applicant is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling with a building footprint of 330 square metres (3,500 square feet) and in -ground swimming pool. The subject lands are located within the "regulated area" adjacent to Lake Simcoe, and the Owner has received previous approval from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (Permit OP.2014.045) for construction of the dwelling and pool. The swimming pool was also the subject of variance application 2015-A-01 which permitted a reduction of the required 20 metre shoreline setback to 17.45 metres. A condition of variance approval required that the Owner enter into a Site Plan Agreement for the proposed development, and is also required as the property is located on and fronts on a private road. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-025 Page 1 of 5 Page QJZ - - 8.c) Report No. DS2015-025, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... A previous Site Plan Agreement (2009 -SPA -13) was registered on title of the subject lands for construction of a boathouse through By-law 2010-007, The Holding (H) provision was previously lifted from the lands in 2010. As part of the current Site Plan application, the previous By-law 2010-007 will be repealed and the new agreement will be registered on title of the lands. Analysis: Oro-Medonte Official Plan The subject lands are designated Shoreline in the Official Plan. Section C5.2 identifies single detached dwellings as permitted uses in the Shoreline designation. Zoning By -Law 97-95 The subject lands are zoned Residential Limited Service (RLS) Zone. Permitted uses in the RLS Zone include single detached dwellings, boathouses, pools, and detached garages. The drawings submitted with the Site Plan application have been reviewed by Staff and are deemed to comply with all applicable zoning provisions and variance approvals. Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authoritv (LSRCA) The subject lands are partially regulated by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, and the LSRCA has reviewed the application and drawings in context of the Provincial Policy Statement, the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, and Ontario Regulation 197/06. The LSRCA has no objection to the application, and has requested specific clauses be included within the agreement to ensure that natural features on the subject lands and any remediation works resulting from development are carried out in accordance with Permit OP.2014.045. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of the Development Services Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Policies/Legislation: • Planning Act, Section 41 • Lake Simcoe Protection Plan • Oro-Medonte Official Pian • Oro-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-025 Page 2 of 5 Page )lo3 8.c) Report No. DS2015-025, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Sustainability To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: • Township Departments: No concerns • Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority: No objection. Requested clauses have been included in Site Plan Agreement document. Attachments: Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Site Plan Drawing Excerpt Conclusion: Development Services Staff hereby recommended that Site Plan Application 2015 -SPA - 01 be approved and that the required by-laws to repeal the previous Site Plan Approval on the subject lands, and approve the current Site Plan Agreement be adopted by Council. Respectfully submitted Acf' Kozlowski, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner SMT Approval / Comments: Reviewed Derek Witlib, MCIP RPP Manager, Planning Services Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-025 Page 3 of 5 Page i (C)(-/' 8.c) Report No. DS2015-025, Adam Kozlowski, Intermediate Pla... Schedule 1: Location Map 2481 1131 5 66V�•�O� `J - 73 17 21 SUBJECT LANDS 2597 15 PEMBERTON LANE' LAKE SIMCOE Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-025 Page 4 of 5 Page (cf—S- SUBJECT TO RIGHT-OF-WAY PART 6; PLAN 51R - 31725 FNRO1064107 x r r z \ t T_ ctov "� / r 31 Nw, Drlvel,rayQ CL M r LOT 1, ;� RANGE 1 a co �.-.�%,-.,-�.....�.. �u � . Jam. ....., _-� � r ' ! �-- '-¢..' " Y .r• -. � ,�e'�''.w,•Mw.. �+ � •`f I :. ! 'h .Y I 1 •,r.e«wn«r r r' ��� � ,w •=vaf CD v I PgRTi 1 l 7i "I•. I PLAN 51 R- Z 5 ( '0 O x Vii` i i i i I i i 1 4- �•- Z x C , I ( I I I P.11N. I i I �t - 0100(LT) t_ f .• N � �• a:�rbra>M:r i Ne•,r2Storey ." •. ____ 'h; I i I wrn«r., I 'I I :� { Residence /� �\ " A j 4 Tl (31 ��CD C .•+Y+,ddciw�w' .�rcaw—,,..�' J w — tl.rF. '09 r _;- . .:. w ` zr-:ror�:amr. Y' �, c.wwwrwew.a' iv (JJ ,. .. _ - - --_-_.1Z-OY NtYt_6'E x ` sus n•ra mit { _� M„e,�, R 7�;{6 - , O �. Y r-� 4M•Chypptl� •,i9: >/. '�14 R •.if✓4r 41. ... _' I ,w La > Y' CD i �� -_ � 1 � •L r , ttt yam"., lV r i 'r i7 Z a. Z (D rn+xwxxn N / 1. ? 0 '- C_' — \ C, EDGE OF WAWR JULY 24,2014. LAKE SIMCO£ ^ _- IPI1ry 4718 CAI 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Township o_ f Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. DS2015-032 To: Development Services Prepared By: Derek Witlib, Manager Committee Planning Services Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 "The Lodges" Draft Plan of Condominium Application 2015 -SUB -01 by Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc. Roll #: 4346-010- 002-03502 R.M.S. File #: Recommendation(s): Requires Action For Information Only It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-032 be received and adopted. 2. That Draft Plan of Condominium (Standard) Application 2015 -SUB -01 (Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc.) as shown on Schedule #2, be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Schedule #3. 3. And that the applicant be advised of Council's decision under the Director, Development Services signature. Background: This application for Draft Plan of Condominium applies to an existing five -storey residential building containing 40 two-bedroom units and known as "The Lodges". Township records indicate that since the early 1980's the building has operated as a time- share within Horseshoe Valley Resort. The applicant now wishes to convert the tenure of the existing units to condominium ownership. There is no new development proposed. The subject lands are located Part of Lot 1, Concession 4 (Oro), south of Horseshoe Valley Road and within the Horseshoe Valley Resort complex. A Location Map is included as Schedule #1. This application was originally considered at the February 4, 2015 meeting of the Development Services Committee. At that meeting representatives of a group of timeshare owners requested verbally and through correspondence that the application be deferred and expressed concern that approval of the application might negatively Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 1 of 17 Page 10-7- 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... impact legal arrangements between the applicant and the timeshare owners. Council agreed to defer the application to afford the parties the opportunity to review the matter and provide their written responses to the Township. Consequently, letters have been received from the applicant (Skyline) and from the Horseshoe Valley Timeshare Owners Association, and those letters are included as Schedules 4 and 5 to this report. The letters have been reviewed by the Township's Solicitor who has advised staff in writing that: • It does not appear that the timeshare owners have any form of ownership interest in the property such as to prevent the Township from considering the condominium application; • The concerns of the timeshare owners are a private matter and should be dealt with directly by the timeshare owners with Skyline; • It is neither appropriate nor part of the Township's mandate when considering a plan of condominium to consider the enforcement of those private interests; • Council should continue to evaluate the condominium application in accordance with provisions of the Planning Act and the Condominium Act based upon the principles of good planning and should not consider attaching the additional conditions suggested by the timeshare owners' group. Analysis: Planning Act and Condominium Act This application is for a standard condominium, which consists of both individual free- hold units and the shared ownership and maintenance of common elements such as parking areas. A standard condominium is one of the six forms of condominium ownership authorized pursuant to the Condominium Act: 1. Standard condominium; 2. Phased condominium; 3. Common elements condominium; 4. Vacant land condominium; 5. Amalgamated condominium; and 6. Leasehold condominium. The Township of Ora-Medonte has delegated approval authority with respect to subdivision and condominium applications pursuant to Section 51.2 of the Planning Act. Section 51(25) of the Planning Act authorizes approval authorities to impose conditions on such approvals. Pursuant to Ontario Regulation 544/06 (O. Reg. 544/06, s.5(4)-(5)) which sets out public meeting requirements for subdivision and condominium Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 2 of 17 Page Acs 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Section 51(25) of the Planning Act authorizes approval authorities to impose conditions on such approvals. Pursuant to Ontario Regulation 544/06 (O. Reg. 544/06, s.5(4)-(5)) which sets out public meeting requirements for subdivision and condominium applications, a standard condominium does not require notice or the holding of a public meeting. Provincial Policies This application and the existing development on the lands are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform to the Growth Plan, both of which contain policies that promote growth and development in settlement areas. Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan The lands to be rezoned are located within the Horseshoe Valley Settlement Area and are designated Horseshoe Valley Village according to Schedule D to the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan. The Horseshoe Valley Village designation applies to lands located at the bottom of Horseshoe Valley and it is intended that the main commercial and resort facilities be located in this designation. The permitted uses of this designation include a range of resort related and commercial uses, as well as residential uses in the form of timeshares, townhouses, apartments and multiple dwellings. This application for a standard condominium applies to an existing residential building, the use of which conforms to the Official Plan. Township of Ora-Medonte Zoning By-law 97-95 The subject lands are zoned Future Development 68 (FD*68). This zone was put in place to limit the uses of the lands to those there are existing, while permitting only minor development or expansions. No new development is being proposed and the existing building is considered to comply with the zoning by-law. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of Development Services Committee be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Policies/Legislation: • Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 • Growth Plan for the Greater Gold Horseshoe • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 19 • Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan • Zoning By-law No. 97-95, as amended Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 3 of 17 Page AQ9 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life — To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Sustainability — To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: • Chief Building Official— Development Services Department • Transportation & Environmental Services Department • Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board • Simcoe County District School Board • Township Solicitor Attachments: Schedule #1: Location Map Schedule #2: Draft Plan of Condominium Schedule #3: Recommended Conditions of Draft Plan Approval Schedule #4: Letter dated February 12, 2015 from Skyline Schedule #5: Letter dated March 3, 2015 from Horseshoe Valley Timeshare Owners Association Conclusion: This application for a standard condominium will not result in any new development or any new land uses. The application, if approved, only has the effect of changing the form of ownership within an existing residential building that conforms to the Official Plan and complies with the Zoning By-law. Having considered the advice of the Township's Solicitor and for the reasons outlined in this report and in the previous Report DS2015-007, Development Services Staff recommends that this application be approved subject to the conditions listed in Schedule #3. Respectfully submitted: SMT Approval / Comments: Derek Witlib, MCIP, RP Manager, Planning Services Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 4 of 17 Page l-40 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #1 Location Maps Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 5 of 17 Page 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #1 Location Maps Cont. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 6 of 17 Page 112— 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #2 Draft Plan of Condominium PART 4 If ti PLAN \\\ 51 R \\ - 28722 • l` a `PLAN ^0PART \ PART 1, PUN \\ ppm \\ PART ,31 PART i1,, PLAANN a \ \\ PIN 75053 - 0250 PART 30 PART 4 s nartr am , PART 3 51R n c � 10977 4053-0262'. -� �J Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-032 i•, PART AS W AVS\11, L r477332 iv\ 'd 4V PN 74053 - 0250 i PART 38 { o 7 1 ~1 N� 5ib \ o N«» 3• LPN \\\ y� is \ \ R PLAN 51R - C 28722 \\ i \ April 1, 2015 Page 7 of 17 Page /---F3 If ti l` a `PLAN 1�., A�♦ PIN a � \ \ \ \ nwc raiw \\ \\ PART 8 s nartr am , PART 3 51R n c � 10977 4053-0262'. -� �J Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-032 i•, PART AS W AVS\11, L r477332 iv\ 'd 4V PN 74053 - 0250 i PART 38 { o 7 1 ~1 N� 5ib \ o N«» 3• LPN \\\ y� is \ \ R PLAN 51R - C 28722 \\ i \ April 1, 2015 Page 7 of 17 Page /---F3 8.d} Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #2 Draft Plan of Condominium Cont. 1 UNT 1 , I A nce ats. meow now { 4 1 A uaxlecc.� crows i � I A .—�� +rn+�x �mau �nwa rxexlft Mv, N t soars •/� � _ _ d � � wawroai FASO I FATO ' Mlq LEVEL A — UNIT 1 LEVELS 2 TO 5 — RESIDENTIAL UNITS1 TO 8 Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 8 of 17 Page I 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #2 Draft Plan of Condominium Cont. Waal _ MMA LIMA _ Mal air UN12-1 — U.1WA _ UML3 — LEW-1- UND.1 — UN9- A __ t. If EA21 REPRESENTATIVE SECTION TO ILLUSTRATE THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEVELS UNIT 1 WR 2 WR 3 1 LWT 4 twr 5 Uwr Q UMT 7 UWT a INR 1 WIT 2 WR 3 INT 4 Uxr 5 t"T a UWT 7 IMT a UWT T UMT 2 UWT 3 GRT 4 UNT a Uw ! WR 7 UMT UIYT T WIT 2 UwT 3 GGT ♦ UlIT 5 IMT E UNT 7 IMT S Uhf 1 UNT 2 UWT 3 UMT 4 UNT 5 U r t WIT 7 Uw 6 REPRESENTATIVE SECTION TO ILLUSTRATE THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEVELS i T7 REPRESENTATIVE SECTION TO ILLUSTRATE THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEVELS Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 9 of 17 Page 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #3: Recommended Conditions of Draft Plan Approval The Township's conditions and amendments to final plan approval for registration of this condominium are as follows: No. Conditions 1. The Plan shall relate to Draft Plan of Condominium, prepared by Dino Astri Surveying Ltd., Drawing Name: 10201—CONDO—PHASE 1, dated 2. Prior to the execution of the Condominium Agreement, the Owner shall submit a pre -registered Plan of Condominium to the Township of Ora-Medonte Development Services Department. 3. The Owner shall enter into a Condominium Agreement with the Township of Oro- Medonte, agreeing to satisfy all conditions, financial and otherwise, of the Township of Oro-Medonte. 4. The Condominium Agreement contain a clause, to the satisfaction of the Township of Oro-Medonte, whereby snow removal and clearing, and garbage and recycling pick-up shall be privately administered, and shall be the responsibility of the Condominium Corporation. 5. The Condominium Agreement shall be registered on title against the lands to which it applies, at the cost of the Owner. 6. Prior to final approval, an "as constructed" building location survey signed by an Ontario Land Surveyor, showing setbacks to property lines, is required to be submitted to the Township of Oro-Medonte Development Services Department. 7. Prior to final approval, the Owner shall submit a life safety report including but not limited to: egress, exits, emergency lighting, exit signage, fire separation existing and integrity of same, structural integrity, sprinkler requirements. This report shall include a building data matrix and be provided by a qualified professional such as an Architect or Engineer. This report will be reviewed and deemed acceptable by the Chief Building Official. 8. Prior to final approval, the Owner and their Solicitor and Land Surveyor shall confirm that all required easements and rights-of-way for access, parking, utilities, drainage and construction purposes have been granted to the appropriate authorities, lands or parties. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 10 of 17 Page I�Ib 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... 9. The owner enter into a Responsibility Agreement with the Township of Oro- Medonte and the private operator (Skyline Utility Services Inc.) in regards to the ownership, financing, construction, operation, maintenance, and repair of certain sewer and waste treatment facilities. 10. That the Condominium Agreement contain the following clause to the satisfaction of the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board: "The owner shall include in all offers of purchase and sale a clause advising prospective purchasers that pupils from this development attending educational facilities operated by the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board may, be transported to/accommodated in temporary facilities out of the neighbourhood school's area." 11. That the Condominium Agreement contain the following clause to the satisfaction of the Simcoe County District School Board: "Purchasers, renters, lessees are warned that there are no schools planned within this condominium, or within walking distance of it and that pupils may be accommodated in temporary facilities and or be directed to facilities outside of the area. " 12. Prior to final approval, the Owner shall confirm that they have paid all outstanding taxes, development charges and levies, as may be required by the Township of Oro-Medonte Finance Department. 13. That prior to the final approval of this plan, the Township is advised in writing by the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic Separate School Board how condition 10 has been satisfied. 14. That prior to the final approval of this plan, the Township is advised in writing by the Simcoe County District School Board how condition 11 has been satisfied. NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL It is the applicant's responsibility to fulfil the conditions of Council's approval and to ensure that the required clearance letters are forwarded by the appropriate agencies to the Township of Oro-Medonte, Planning Department, Administration Centre, 148 Line 7 South, Oro-Medonte, ON LOL 2EO, quoting Township file number 2015 -SUB -01. 2. The Land Titles Act requires all new plans be registered in a Land Titles system if the land is situated in a land titles division and there are certain exceptions. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 11 of 17 Page 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... 3. The final plan approved by the Township must be registered within 30 days or the Township may withdraw the approval under Section 51(59) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 4. All measurements in the condominium final plan must be presented in metric units. 5. Clearances are required from the following agencies: Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, Ontario LOL 2E0 Simcoe County District School Board 1170 Highway 26 Midhurst, Ontario LOL 2X0 Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board 46 Alliance Boulevard Barrie, Ontario L4M 5K3 If the agency conditions concern conditions in the condominium agreement, a copy of the relevant section of the agreement should be sent to them. This will expedite clearance of the final plan. 6. If final approval is not given to this plan by April 1, 2018, and no extension has been granted, draft approval shall lapse under subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act, R.S.A. 1990, as amended. If the owner wishes to request an extension to draft approval, a written explanation, must be received by the Township of Oro-Medonte sixty (60) days prior to the lapsing date. Please note that an updated review of the plan, and revisions to the conditions of approval, may be necessary if an extension is to be granted. Development Services Department Report No. DS2015-032 April 1, 2015 Page 12 of 17 Page ICs 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #4: Letter from Skyline LINE February 12, 2015 Mayor Harry Hughes and Members of Council Township of Oro-Medonte 148 Line 7 South, Box 100 Ontario LOL 2X0 Dear Mayor Hughes and Members of Council On Wednesday February 4s' 2015, the Development Services Committee (*DSC') deferred approval of Draft Plan Condominium Application 2015-SU&01 for "The Lodges" (Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc.) to the March 4"' D5 meeting. The deferral of the application was the result of a concern raised by Mr. Stephen Lewis. The concern, according Mr. Lewis, stemmed from uncertainty on the part of the former timeshare owners regarding the conversion of & existing "Lodges' building to condominium ownership. Please be advised that Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc. reached a settlement on December 16„ 2013 with all timeshai applicants, pursuant to the legally binding Minutes of Settlement. In Paragraph 2 of the Minutes of Settlement tt following is stipulated: "The accommodations provided by Skyline Hotels & Resorts at Horseshoe Valley Resort / Lodges, as referred to in this Agreement, shall be in the original building as long as the Horseshoe Valley Resort ! Lodges are operational. In the event that the Horseshoe Valley Resort / Lodges cease operating and providing accommodation, Skyline shall provide reasonably comparable accommodation, at a Skyline property, to the parties at the same rate as set out at paragraph 1 and Scheduie "S" attached." Paragraph 1 of the Minutes of Settlement states that: "Effective January 1st, 2014 to December 31 st, M each of the parties whose names and week or weeks are listed on Schedule 'A' attached (`the parties' or "the party') shag be entitled to a rate of � plus HST per room night up to a maximum of 7 nights per calendar year for each week or weeks as per Schedule `A', for any combination or combinations of room nights in any combination of accommodation at any hotel or resort or vacation property that is presently or may in the future be owned and managed by Skyline Hotels & Resorts or its successors and assigns. Such properties now include Cosmopolitan Hotel, Pantages Hotel, King Edward Hotel, Deerhurst Resort, and Horseshoe Valley Resort / Lodges. Each year the rate will change by no more than the percentage change from year to year for the Consumer Price Index for 'All Items'Ontario, as reported monthly by Statistics Canada, averaged at the and of the 12 month period starting effective January 1 st. 2015. Skyline shall provide the parties with an updated list of properties that It owns and manages, annually no later than September 15th of each year' Schedule °B" of the Minutes of Settlement states that: 'With respect to paragraph 2: The parties will reasonably expect that accommodation provided to them pursuant t this agreement will be similar to the accommodation that they enjoyed as timeshare unit owners. In many cases, up to six persons were accommodated in the original timeshare units. In some cases the accommodation consisted of two queen beds that would steep four people and an additional two beds for children or friends. It is understood that although Skyline may not have sufficient two-bedroom units to accommodate applicants in the event that lodges ceases to operate "reasonably comparable accommodation" should be taken to mean sufficient space to accommodate groups of up to six persons at any Skyline facility" Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 13 of 17 Page 1-49 8.d} Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #4 Cont.: Letter from Skyline IN'S K Y L I N E The above -noted paragraphs and schedule are relevant to the concern raised by Mr. Lewis, First, they provide confirmation that the entitlements of the former timeshare owners have already been determined and agreed upon by all parties. Second, they directly address concerns about any uncertainty the former timeshare owners may have with respect to their rights to accommodation within Horseshoe Resort / Lodges. Third, the above noted information confirms that any concerns related to this application should have no bearing on the approval of the Draft Pian of Condominium application for "The Lodges" project. As noted by planning staff in the report presented at the DSC meeting, "The Lodges" application complies with the existing zoning by-law and conforms to the official Plan. Moreover, the application and the existing development on the lands are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform to the Growth Plan, both of which contain. policies that promote growth and development in settlement areas. In connection with the above, we are providing a copy of the e-mail message sent by Kevin Toth, COO of Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc., to Mr. Stephen Lewis on Thursday February 5th. We trust that this response will ensure a timely consideration of this item at the next DSC meeting on March 40, and further ensure approval of the Draft Plan of Condominium Application, Sincerely, Dan Piggott V.P. of Development Copies: Andria Leigh, Derek Wattib, Kevin Toth Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 14 of 17 r-, Page 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #5: Letter from Horseshoe Valley Timeshare Owners Association Horseshoe Valley Time Share Owners Association 88 Corporate Drive. Suite 511 Township of Oro-Medonte Mr. Derek Witlib, Manager, Planting Services 148 Line 7 South Oro-Medonte, ON LOL 2EO March 3, 2015 Dear Mr. Witlib: Re: Skyline Application 2015 -SUB -01 Draft Plan of Lodges Condominium Scarborough, Ontario. M1H 3G6 This letter is in response to the application by Skyline Horseshoe Valles Inc. to convert the tenure of the existing 40 unit building known as "The Lodges" to condominium ownership. Background The Lodges has existed as a timeshare within the Horseshoe Valley Resort since the early 1980'x. Many of the members of our Association are original owners from that time. Back in 1996 relationships between the timeshare owners and the new owners of Horseshoe Resort Corporation failed resulting in a Class Action Lawsuit being filed against the Resort Owner to protect the interest and rights of the Timeshare Owners. In and about the year 2005 Skyline Boutique Hotels and Resorts Inc. purchased Horseshoe Resort from the Resort Owners named on the Class Action. Minutes of Settlement (MOS) were secured thereafter in order to put an end to the ongoing Class Action Suit. without the involvement of the timeshare owners. Nevertheless, the MOS were approved by a judge that initiated the formation of a Time Share Cotrtmittee -TSC"' which was composed of two (2) Timeshare Owner representatives and two (2) Horseshoe Resort representatives, who collectively acted and managed the interests of The Lodges Timeshare. In 2011 relations between the time share owners and the managers, namely, Skyline Horseshoe Valley Inc., deteriorated to the point that legal action was initiated again by many of the timeshare owners and the owmers formed the Horseshoe Vallev Time Share Owners' Association (HVTSOA). Three hundred and forty five timeshare weeks, represented by over 300 individuals and couples, participated in the action. In December of 2013, MOS were agreed to by all the parties and the litigation was dropped. HVTSOA represents the overall interest of the parties as per section 21 of the MOS and we are appealing to you as the representative party in this agreement. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 15 of 17 Page )`gl 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #5 Cont.: Letter from Horseshoe Valley Timeshare Owners Association The MOS specifically state in section 2 that the "accommodations provided by Skyline. . at Horseshoe Valley ResorvLodges,... shall be in the original building as long as the Horseshoe Vallev Resort Lodges are operational. In the event that the Horseshoe Valley Resoru'I.odges cease operating and providing accommodation, Skyline shall provide reasonably comparable accommodation, at a Skyline property. to the parties..." Schedule B to the ABIOS specifically addresses the definition of what constitutes reasonable accommodation. "Such accommodation being similar to the accommodation... enjoyed as time share unit owners." It goes on to define it in more specific terms_ Issues and Concerns The concern of the timeshare owners' is that the conversion of the Lodges to a condominium effectively transfers ownership to new parties and leaves no comparable Schedule B type accommodation at the Horseshoe Resort for their use. The Copeland House development could provide Schedule B accommodation but is also a condo -type development and will not be available_ The hotel does not offer accommodation that meets the definition in Schedule B_ The Lodges is the only Schedule B accommodation available that would put Skyline in compliance with the MOS. Our interpretation of Section 2 is that the Resort and the Lodges is operational and continuing to provide accommodation currently. However, should the Lodges be converted to a condo the Resort is still operational and providing accommodation, but would no longer be in compliance with the MOS and as configured would be unable to provide Schedule B accommodation. The default mechanism prodded in the last sentence of section 2 was only placed there should the HV Resort'Lodges no longer be operational. It is most obviously operational at this time and will be into the future with their plans for the resort. Furthermore, section 6 lends further credence to this position as it states that "in the event that a party wishes to transfer their entitlement, to any Skyline Hotel and Resort other than Horseshoe Valley Resort.Lodges, Skyline shall guarantee that accommodation.. _" It is the option of the timeshare owner to exercise their week at the Lodges and to transfer to other Skyline Resorts. It is not at the option of Skyline to do so. And thus their default mechanism is at our option, not theirs. Section 19 of the MOS also states that "in the event that Skyline enters into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale or change of ownership in any form that effects or may effect this Agreement... Skyline agrees to forthwith advise any purchaser of this Agreement... this Agreement shall be binding upon it and its successors or assigns." An analysis of the number of timeshare owners by week has shown that there is one week (Week 28) when 20 of the owners are entitled to use their week. Week 29 has 17 owners entitled and weeks 51 — 53 have 13 to 14 owners entitled to their weeks. All other weeks have a lesser number of entitlements to the units. Conceivably one-half of the building could be sold as a condominium and the second half could effectively be provided to the timeshare owners and leave Skyline in compliance with the Agreement. And lastly, we would point out that the agreement expires on December 31, 2026. Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 16 of 17 Page J 8.d) Report No. DS2015-032, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Schedule #5 Cont.: Letter from Horseshoe Valley Timeshare Owners Association Recommendation: We would respectfully ask that this application be denied on the basis that Spline would ultimately be in contravention of the MOS with us when the units are sold as condominium units. We would ask that failing that, the Township add the following conditions to the approval of the application: a) That Skyline provides assurances that they will continue to abide by the MOS xNith urs until it expires. b) That Skyline continue to provide accommodation to us in the building currently known as the Lodges until the end of our agreement on December 31, 2026 and continues to grant the timeshare owners' first right of refusal to their weeks at the building currently known as the Lodges. c) That Skyline must advise any and all purchasers of the condominiums in this building of this Agreement and inform them that it is binding upon them and their successors. And fiu-thennnore that they provide proof to the Township and the HVTSOA of their compliance with these for each and every offer of purchase and sale. As we had discussed earlier, upon the direction of our Board we hope to be able to share with the Township the opinion letter from our legal counsel shortly. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss this further please feel free to contact me at my business number of 905.945.4942, by e-mail at delight davohCahotmail.com or to alternatively reach our President, Mr. Ralf Klopf at 416.347.5846 or by e-mail at ralfklopCeno.netscape.ca. Respectfully submitted, On behalf of the Board of Directors for the HORSESHOE VALLEY TIMESHARE O't NIERS' ASSOCIATION Delight Davoli, Tice-A'esident Cc. Ralf Klopf, Pr-esident Mark Arnold. Legal Counsel Development Services Department April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-032 Page 17 of 17 Page i b5 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Township Of Report Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. To: Prepared By: DS2015-033 Council D. Witlib, Manager, Planning Services Meeting Date: Subject: Motion # April 1, 2015 Zoning By-law Amendment 2013-ZBA-13 Roll #: R.M.S. File #: 4346-010-003-27596- 0000 (Modco Investments Inc.) D14 45716 Recommendation(s): Requires ActionX❑ For Information Only 11 It is recommended: 1. That Report No. DS2015-033 be received and adopted. 2. THAT a By-law be passed to rezone the subject lands shown on Schedule 'A16' to Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, to an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone as shown on Schedule `A' of proposed By-law 2015-064. 3. THAT the Clerk bring forward the appropriate By-law for Council's consideration. Background: On December 4, 2014, Council passed By-law 2013-161 which rezoned a portion of the lands in Block 88, Plan M-367 from the Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zones to the Residential One Exception 241 Holding (R1 *241(H)) Zone, to establish an area where a future single detached dwelling could be constructed. The By-law included site-specific provisions regulating the development of the lands and put in place a Holding (H) Provision which shall not be removed until a Site Plan Agreement that is satisfactory to Council has been entered into which satisfies the requirements of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. A map showing the location of the property is included as Schedule #1 to this report. Schedule #2 shows the lands that were rezoned to the Residential One Exception 241 Holding (R1 *241(H)) Zone. The purpose and intent of the application was to rezone an existing, disturbed portion of the property for residential use and to remove Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) and Private Recreation Exception 115 (PR* 115) Zones from the property, while placing all of the balance of the property in an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 1 of S Page / However, By-law 20A q�iR@�ght9 1-�IO &PEPrM6 Wjp&r.Wqi�gt,�gPipnning ... remove the Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) and Private Recreation Exception 115 (PR*115) Zones from the balance of the property. Consequently, it is necessary to pass another by-law to correct this oversight and place the balance of the lands, as shown on Schedule #3, into an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Analysis: A detailed planning analysis of all of the applicable policies that were considered for the rezoning are addressed through Report DS2013-069, a copy if which is included as Schedule #4. As required by the Planning Act, a public meeting was held on August 26, 2013 to receive comments from members of the public and relevant agencies. No verbal comments were received at the public meeting and written comments were received from the County of Simcoe and the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA). The Residential One Exception 241 Holding (R1 *241(H)) Zone that was placed on a portion of the property implements the County's requirements but does not implement all of the NVCA's requirements. The comments from the NVCA requested that the balance of the lands, outside of the Residential One Exception 241 Holding (R1 *241(H)) Zone, be placed in an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. Furthermore, the landowner has recently advised staff the continued presence of the PR*44 and PR*115 Zones on the property is creating confusion for potential buyers of the property, since these zones pertain to a household waste transfer station and a private recreation centre, neither of which exist or are considered to be the appropriate zone reflective of the uses and features of the subject lands. These zones exist on the property only because the lands were once part of a larger parcel that was historically used for the collection of household waste for the community and which was also zoned for a recreation centre. It is Staff's opinion that another public meeting under the Planning Act is not required, since the proposed By-law represents a technical correction that is consistent with both the information that was originally circulated to the public and with Council's original decision. However, if the proposed By-law is passed by Council, it will be necessary for staff to circulate a notice of its passing. Financial / Legal Implications / Risk Management: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of Council be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Policies/Legislation: For the reasons outlined in Report DS2013-069, staff remains of the opinion that the proposed By-law conforms to and is consistent with all applicable Provincial, County and Township policies. Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 2 of 8 Page I TDI� 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Corporate Strategic Goals: Quality of Life — To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Safe & Healthy Community — To ensure that Oro-Medonte policies and programs promote a safe and secure environment while encouraging healthy lifestyles Service Excellence — To provide a welcoming, courteous and professional culture of service excellence on the part of Council and Township staff Sustainability — To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. Consultations: In response to the Township's circulation of the application in 2013 to the public, to Township Departments and to agencies, the following comments were received: County of Simcoe- Letter dated August 14, 2013 requiring site specific provisions for the setback of buildings from County Road 22. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority - Letter dated August 7, 2013 indicating no objection. Property is regulated by NVCA and will require a permit prior to development that would address sediment and erosion control measures, site alteration/disturbance. Follow up November 11, 2013 email requiring Site Plan Control to limit area of development and tree clearing. Attachments: Schedule #1: Location Map Schedule #2: Lands rezoned in 2013 to R1 *241(H) Zone Schedule #3: Lands to be rezoned from PR*44, PR*115 and EP Zones to EP Zone Schedule #4: Report DS2013-069 (December 4, 2013) Conclusion: The Zoning By-law Amendment proposes to take a portion of the subject lands which are currently in a Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) Zone, a Private Recreation Exception 115 (PR*115) Zone and an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, and place the entire portion of the lands into an in Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The rezoning is necessary to correct a technical error, to implement the requirements of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and to fully implement Council's original Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 3 of 8 Page ?S(O intent when Council ip26i e� Q iQa rQ lj2clWitlli}af ft qg&jpnning ... that By-law 2015-054 be passed. Rzal; d : Derek Witlib, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services SMT Approval / Comments: Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 4 of 8 Page l 8.e) Report NAA WAS -033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Location Map Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 5 of 8 Page 12�; 8.e) Report NgcQ§39�p-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Lands Rezoned in 2013 to R1 -*241 (H) Zone :V HORSESHOE VALLEY ROAD W ® Lands Re oned from PR * 44 to R1 * 241(H) 375 Line 6 North Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 6 of 8 Page f,� ASH COURT Z 4 8.e) Report NqcQ§4j§-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Lands to be Rezoned from PR*44, PR*115 and EP Zones to EP Zone Lands to be rezoned to EP Zone HORSESH OE VALLEY ROAD W PR*44, PR*115 and EP Zones Schedule #4: Repo 14L D S ^^, r+ C<.0 lI 30zi-_,' z ._ 1 ,,,,, 3 Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 7 of 8 Page % 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Report DS2013-069 Attached Development Services April 1, 2015 Report No. DS2015-033 Page 8 of 8 Page 91 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Township o_ f REPORT uv;0�/' Proud Heritage, Exciting Future Report No. DS2013-069 To: Council Prepared By: A. Leigh, Director, Development Services Meeting Date: December 4, 2013 Subject: Motion # Zoning By-law Amendment 2013-ZBA-13 (Modco Investments Inc.) Roll #: 4346-010-003-27596- R.M.S. File #: D14 45716 0000 I RECOMMENDATION(S): Requires Actions For Information Only It is recommended that: 1. Report No. DS2018-069 be received and adopted. THAT Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2013-ZBA-13 for Township of Oro- Medonte, being on Schedule 'A16' to Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone symbol applying to the land located in Part of Block 88, Plan M-367, Concession 7, known as 3375 Line 6 North, from the Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) and Environmental Protection (EP) Zones to Residential One Exception 241 Holding (Ri*241(H)) Zone as shown on Schedule `A' attached hereto and forming part of this By-law. 3. THAT the Clerk bring forward the appropriate By-law for Council's consideration. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application submitted by Modco Investments Inc. This rezoning application has been submitted to permit the construction of one single detached dwelling on an existing lot of record. The rezoning proposes to rezone lands from a Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) Zone to a Residential One Exception 241 (R1*241) Zone. The subject lands are located east of Line 6 North in Part of Block 88, Plan M-367, Concession 7, formerly in the Township of Oro, now in the Township of Oro Medonte. The lands have frontage along Line 6 North of approximately 130 metres and a lot area of approximately 2 hectares. The rezoning proposes to amend the zoning for the front portion of the subject lands to a Residential One Exception zone that will permit construction of a single detached dwelling within the disturbed lands on the site that is located within 30 metres of the boundary of the EP zone. The exception will reflect this reduced setback DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report No. DS2013-069 December 4, 2013 Page 1 of 7 Page /9z— 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... to the EP zone boundary and will also incorporate the setback requirement to the County Road as required in the County letter. In addition, ANALYSIS: A detailed planning analysis of all of the applicable policies to be considered for the proposed rezoning are address through the Policies and legislation section below. As required by the Planning Act, a public meeting was held on August 26, 2013 to receive comments from members of the public and relevant agencies. No verbal comments were received at the public meeting and written comments were received from the County of Simcoe and the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority. The comments from the County of Simcoe regarding the setback from Horseshoe Valley Road have been incorporated into the drafted zoning amendment and exception 241. In addition the drafted by-law reflects the area supported by the NVCA for the developable area and the Holding provision has been incorporated to address their requirement for Site Plan Control prior to any zoning certificates or building permits being considered for the property. The exception zone does recognize a reduction in the 30 metre buffer from the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and a related provision found in Section 5.28 of Zoning By-law 97-95. FINANCIAL / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS I RISK MANAGEMENT: Potential financial and legal implications should the decision of Council be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. POLICIES/LEGISLATION: Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan: According to Schedule "A" of the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan, the portion of the lands proposed to be rezoned to a Residential One Exception Zone are located within the Rural Settlement Area of Sugarbush and designated "Residential" with an Environmental Protection Two Overlay". Permitted uses within the "Rural Settlement Area" designation include residential uses such as the proposed dwelling. The rezoning of the lands will continue to maintain the objectives of the "Environmental Protection Two Overlay", which is intended to protect environmentally sensitive areas as only the disturbed area is proposed to be zoned and developed. The rezoning of the lands within the "Rural Settlement Area" would conform to the Official Plan's "Rural Settlement Area" designation and would permit solely the development of the single detached dwelling and the long term protection of the environmental features on the site. Based on the above, the zoning by-law amendment application is considered by Planning Staff to conform to the policies of the Official Pian. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES December 4, 2013 Report No. DS2013-069 Page 2 of 7 Page 193 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Zoning By-law 97-95: The subject lands are currently zoned Private Recreation Exception 44 (PR*44) Zone and permit a household waste transfer station for the exclusive use of residences in the Sugarbush community. The subject lands were part of a larger parcel that was severed to the south and was historically used for the collection of household waste in bins for the community and is no longer used for that purpose. This exception is therefore not considered to be the appropriate zone reflective of the subject lands and therefore the zoning amendment is necessary to reflect the proposed residential use of the property in conformity with the Township's Official Plan. Other than the disturbed lands, the balance of the property continues to be zoned Environmental Protection (EP) to ensure the continued long term protection of the environmentally sensitive features on the rear of this property. Section 5.28 states that no building or structure, with the exception of boathouses and pumphouses, shall be located within 30 metres (98.4 feet) of the boundaries of the Environmental Protection Zone. The effect of this section would be that the 30 metre setback based on the revised zone boundary would impact development within the disturbed lands. The applicant, the NVCA, and the Township have been reviewing a site development plan (Attachment 2) that clearly identifies the disturbed area where development is permitted. The NVCA staff have supported this plan subject to the requirement for site plan approval, the required NVCA permit and therefore staff are recommending a reduction in the 30 metre setback to support the proposed plan which is reflected in the Exception 241 zone. County Official Plan In analyzing this Zoning By-law Amendment application, Township staff reviewed both the County Official Plan currently in effect as well as the Official Plan adopted by County Council in November 2008. The subject lands are in the "Greenlands" designation in the County of Simcoe's Official Plan, which also recognizes Sugarbush as a "Settlement". In Planning Staff's opinion the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conforms to the County's Official Plan. Provincial Policy Statement The intent of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is to build strong and healthy communities while at the same time promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Section 1.1.3.1 sets out that Settlement Areas shall be the focus of growth, their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted and land use patterns shall be based on a densities and a mix of land uses. At the same time, Section 2.1 of the PPS sets out that natural features, including significant wetlands, shall be protected for the long term. The proposed rezoning would allow for a single detached dwelling that would be restricted to the disturbed tablelands and based on the review of the Natural Heritage Environmental Impact Study prepared by Stantec have determined that the natural features on the site will continue to be protected for the long term. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report No. DS2013-069 December 4, 2013 Page 3 of 7 Page //,-�% 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... Planning Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Places to Grow The application has been reviewed with reference to the Place to Grow policies that have been in place since 2006. In Policy 2.2.2 directs growth to built-up areas and encourages complete communities through a mix of land uses. The proposed amendment would permit the construction of a single detached dwelling on an existing lot of record that is located within the designated Settlement Area of Sugarbush, Policy 4.2.1 encourages the protection of natural systems. While it is recognized that there are significant environmental features located on the subject lands which include a provincially significant wetland on the eastern portion of the property; the NVCA through a letter dated August 7, 2013 has confirmed that they have no objection to the approval of this application based on the Natural Heritage Impact Study dated August 2011 prepared by Stantec Consulting Limited. On this basis, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conforms to the Growth Plan. CORPORATE STRATEGIC GOALS: Quality of Life — To contribute to an enriched quality of life for residents by maintaining Oro-Medonte's natural beauty and county -like character Safe & Healthy Community —To ensure that Oro-Medonte policies and programs promote a safe and secure environment while encouraging healthy lifestyles Service Excellence — To provide a welcoming, courteous and professional culture of service excellence on the part of Council and Township staff Sustainability — To build an increasingly sustainable community with regard for and sensitivity to the needs of future generations. CONSULTATIONS: County of Simcoe- Letter dated August 14, 2013 requiring site specific provisions for the setback of buildings from County Road 22 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority- Letter dated August 7, 2013 indicating no objection. Property is regulated by NVCA and will require a permit prior to development that would address sediment and erosion control measures, site alteration/disturbance. Follow up November 11, 2013 email requiring Site Plan Control to limit area of development and tree clearing. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES December 4, 2013 Report No. DS2013-069 Page 4 of 7 Page / qs— 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Draft Zoning Schedule Attachment 2: Site Zoning Pian CC Tatham Drawing S-1 CONCLUSION: The Zoning By-law Amendment application proposes to rezone a portion of the subject lands which are currently cleared to a Residential One Exception 241 (R1"241) Zone in order to permit construction of a single detached dwelling. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Places to Grow legislation and the County and Township Official Plans. On this basis, it is recommended that Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2013-ZBA-13 be approved and adopted by Council. Respectfully submitted: Andria Leigh, M IP, RPP Director, Development Services SMT Approval / Comments: C.A.O. Approval / Comments: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report No. DS2013-069 December 4, 2013 Page 5 of 7 Page 190 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... ATTACHMENT 1: DRAFT ZONING SCHEDULE 2013-ZBA-13 (Modco Investments Inc.) HORSESHOE VALLEY ROAD W ® Lands R175 oned from PR * 44 to R1 * 241(H) Line 6 North DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report No. DS2013-069 0 December 4, 2013 Page 6 of 7 Page i q-+ 8.e) Report No. DS2015-033, Derek Witlib, Manager, Planning ... ATTACHMENT 2: SITE ZONING PLAN 2013-ZBA-13 (Modco Investments Inc.) DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report No, DS2013-069 December 4, 2013 Page 7 of 7 Page 9.a) Councillor Jermey, re: Farmland Preservation. 9a) Councillor Jermey, re: Farmland Preservation — Draft Motion: Whereas farmland in Ontario is being lost at a rate of 350 acres every day. Whereas less than 5 per cent of the province of Ontario is suitable for food production. Whereas in the Oro-Medonte Official Plan section A 2.4.1 states "It is the goal of this Plan to preserve areas demonstrating high capability for agricultural production for that purpose." Whereas the Provincial Policy Statement in section 2.3.1 states "Prime agricultural areas shall be protected for long-term use for agriculture." Whereas the township of Oro-Medonte contains large areas of both prime and non- prime agricultural land. Be it resolved that the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte cease to develop any prime agricultural land for non-agricultural municipal uses. Page NOTTAWASAGA BAY 0 5 10 mmmmff::::� Kilometers As Approved by MMAH April 1, 1M& OMB Nov 2,199D. Consolidated April, 2007 MO SKOKA DISTRICT 9.a) Councillor Jermey, re: Farmland Pre rvation. W E S COUNTY OF SIIVI�COE �S For the Gnvoter Good �� SCHEDULE 5.2.4 AGRICULTURAL LAND CLASSIFICATION CANADA LAND INVENTORY SOIL MAPPING Page 180 of 180 C.L.I. DATA Sourced from the Ontano Ministry of Agriculture and Food (Soil Survey by Agriculture Canada, 1959) po—�§L !��