04 19 2004 PAC Agenda
, .',
,
. "
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Robinson Room
Date: Monday April 19, 2004
Time: 7:15 pm
~/1.
~.
3.
's,.
~.
'\
Opening of Meeting by Chair
Adoption of Agenda
Declaration of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof - in Accordance
with the Act.
Minutes of Previous Meetings - March 8, 2004
Correspondence and Communication
(a) Jim Woodford - Buffalo Springs Environmental Impact - A Statement to the
Planning Advisory Committee on Mar 8, 2004 and Letter to Council March
17,2004
(b) Jarratt-Coulson & District Community Group Inc. - Letter re: Buffalo
Springs Revised Development Plan
Update on Existing Planning Applications - Memo from Andria Leigh, Senior
Planner dated March 31, 2004 - Status of Planning Applications
~
Planning Applications
(a) Planning Report prepared by Andria Leigh, Senior Planner Re: Mark and
Joanne Scharf - Part of Lot 8, Concession 9, 51 R-28291 , Part 1 (Oro),
Application 2004-ZBA-01
(b) Planning Report prepared by Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning Consultants
Inc. Re: Georgian North Land Ltd. - Lots 2 and 3, Concession 9 (Oro),
Application 2004-ZBA-02 and Redline Draft Plan of Subdivision (Applicant to be
afforded an opportunity to speak to the application subsequent to the review of
the report)
Other Business
Next Meeting - Monday May 10 at 7:00 p.m.
Adjournment
. .'.
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
2003-2006 TERM
Monday, March 8, 2004 @ 7:05 p.m.
Council Chambers
Present:
Mayor J. Neil Craig
Deputy Mayor Harry Hughes
Councillor Dan Buttineau
Councillor Ralph Hough
Councillor Paul Marshall
Councillor John Crawford
Councillor Ruth Fountain
Terry Allison
Robert Barlow
Mel Coutanche
Craig Drury
Staff Present:
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner; Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning
Consultants Inc.; Janette Teeter, Clerk's Assistant
Also Present:
Mark Scharf, Jim Woodford, Pat Woodford, David Bunston, Rex
Meadley, Andy Tymoszewicz, Brent Clarkson, Andy Hims, David
Charlton, Allan Baker, Joe Charles, Dennis McKee, Don Bell,
Walter Dickie, Mike Reynolds, John Hare, S. Orsi, T. Orsi, Nicola
Mitchinson, Michael Da Costa, Kris Menzies
1. Opening of Meeting by Mayor.
Mayor J. Neil Craig assumed the chair and called the meeting to order.
2. Adoption of Agenda.
Motion No. PAC-1
Moved by Buttineau, Seconded by Allison
It is recommended that the agenda for the Planning Advisory Committee meeting of
Monday, March 8, 2004, as amended, be received and adopted.
Carried.
3. Declaration of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof - in
Accordance with the Act.
None declared.
4. Minutes of Previous Meetings - February 9,2004.
Motion No. P AC-2
Moved by Barlow, Seconded by Allison
It is recommended that the minutes of the Planning Advisory Committee Meeting, held
on February 9,2004, be received.
Carried.
5. Planning Applications
Planning Report prepared by Andria Leigh, Senior Planner Re: Mark and Joanne
Scharf - South Part of Lot 8, Concession 9, 51 R-28291, Part 1 (Oro), Application
2004-ZBA-01.
Motion No. P AC-3
Moved by Coutanche, Seconded by Drury
It is recommended that Report No. PD 2004-03, Andria Leigh, Senior Planner, re:
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for Mark and Joanne Scharf - South Part of Lot 8,
Concession 9,51 R-28291 , Part 1 Township of Oro-Medonte, (formerly within the
Township of Oro), Application 2004-ZBA-01 be received and adopted; and further that
Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2004-ZBA-01 , South Part of Lot 8, Concession
9, Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly within the Township of Oro) proceed to a Public
Meeting in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act.
Carried.
Planning Advisory Committee Meeting - March 8, 2004
Page 2
. "
.'
")
Planning Report prepared by Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning Consultants Inc.
Re: Georgian North Land Ltd. - Lots 2 and 3, Concession 9 (Oro), Application
2004-ZBA-02 and Redline Draft Plan of Subdivision.
,Motion t!2:..P AC-LUAmendmentl
Moved by Barlow, Seconded by Fountain
It is recommended that the motion with respect to Report No. PD 2004-05, be amended
to add after Azimuth Environmental Consulting Inc., "and such other comments for
information required by staff and the Planning Advisory Committee and to report back to
the Planning Advisory Committee at the April meeting'.
Carried.
Motion No. P AC-5
Moved by Drury, Seconded by Coutanche
It is recommended that Report No. PD 2004-05, Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning
Consultants Inc., re: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Redline Revision for
Georgian North Lands Ltd. Concession 9, Lots 2 and 3, Township of Oro-Medonte,
(formerly within the Township of Oro) be received and adopted; that Georgian North
Lands Ltd. be requested to respond to the preliminary peer review comments prepared
by Azimuth Environmental Consulting Inc. and such other comments for information
required by staff and the Planning Advisory Committee and to report back to the
Planning Advisory Committee at the April meeting; and further that a public meeting,
under Section 34 of the Planning Act, be scheduled, with Council's approval, once the
Planning Advisory Committee is satisfied that enough information is available to present
to the public.
Carried As Amended.
Planning Advisory Committee Meeting - March 8, 2004
Page 3
.Lt,
6. Other Business
Planning Report from Meridian Planning Consultants Inc re: Horseshoe Resort
Corporation - 24 unit townhouse condominium - Concession 3, Part of Lot 1
(Medonte), Applications P-157/03 and 5-97/03.
Motion No. P AC-6
Moved by Marshall, Seconded by Coutanche
It is recommended that Report No. PD 2004-04, Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning
Consultants Inc., re: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for Horseshoe Resort
Corporation, Concession 3, Part of Lot 1, Township of Oro-Medonte, (formerly within the
Township of Medonte) be received and adopted; that Zoning By-law Amendment
Application P-157/03 be approved as set out in Appendix 1 to Report No. PD 2004-04; and
further that the subject lands be Draft Approved for a Plan of Condominium in accordance
with the conditions set out in Appendix 2 to Report No. PD 2004-04.
Carried.
1091402 Ontario Limited and John William and Helen Bower Burch - Part of Lots 34,
35, and 36, Concession 1 (Oro), Application P-156/03 and S-3/03 - Additional
Information received from MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson.
Motion No. PAC-7
Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Hughes
It is recommended that the correspondence dated Wednesday, March 3, 2004 from Brent
Clarkson, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson (MHBC) Planning Limited re:1 091402
Ontario Limited, John and Helen Burch, Part Lots 34, 35 and 36, Concession 1, Township
of Oro-Medonte (formerly Oro) be received.
Carried.
Motion No. P AC-8
Moved by Hough, Seconded by Buttineau
It is recommended that Council be requested to rescind Recommendation PAC-'6 of
February 9, 2004 re: 1091402 Ontario Limited, John and Helen Burch, Part Lots 34, 35, 36,
Concession 1 (E.P.R.) in the Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Oro); and further that
Council be requested to consider that the application for Official Plan Amendment, Zoning
By-Law Amendment and Plan of Subdivision for Part Lots 34,35,36, Con. 1 (E.P.R.) in the
Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Ora) proceed to a public meeting.
Carried.
Planning Advisory Committee Meeting - March 8, 2004
Page 4
. ,.'
5
7. Adjournment
Motion No. P AC-9
Moved by Fountain, Seconded by Crawford
It is recommended that we do now adjourn at 9:25 p.m.
Carried.
Next Meeting - Tuesday April 13 at 7:00 p.m.
Mayor, J. Neil Craig
Senior Planner, Andria Leigh
Planning Advisory Committee Meeting - March 8, 2004
Page 5
.b
BUFFALO SPRINGS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
A Statement to the Planning Advisory Committe~ on Mar. 8, 20004
Jim Woodford
A lack of information about the new Buffalo Springs Housing Development is a cause for
concern among Oro-Medonte taxpayers.
It would be in the public interest for Council to hold a public information meeting as soon
as possible.
A major area of concern is the houses that will be built among the Provincially
Significant wetlands just east of the 8th Concession.
The lots all appear to slope into the wetlands, according to diagram in the 1994 EIS.
. There is a proposed buffer of only 16 metres between the lots and the wetlands. A layer
of impermeable silt under the surface will prevent normal percolation into the soil. Thus
the effluent from septic tanks, which may contains contaminants that exceed provincial
standards, will flow into the wetlands.
This would be in violation of the Provincial Wetland Policy Statement, causing "loss of
wetland function."
A total of 46 houses may be built on three "peninsulas" that are surrounded by the
wetlands. A schematic diagram in the 1994 Environmental hnpact Statement shows
these will be a major intrusion in the wetlands.
The main road into the development off the 8th Line will divide the wetlands in two -
which is contrary to the Provincial Wetlands Policy that states, " the proposed
development will not result in loss of contiguous wetland area." It may act as a dam and
disrupt water flow.
The construction of the road and a bridge over Coulson Creek, one of the best cold-water
trout streams in the Township, will probably cause serious degradation to the stream. .
This is a serious offence under the Federal Fisheries Act.
Under the 1994 OMB Order there must be three years of water quality monitoring before
construction may begin. It appears that this monitoring is just beginning. This is vital to
monitor the effect the development will have on the environment.
Considering the above, the new owners of Buffalo Springs should explain why they want
this new proposal "Redlined" by the OMB.
1
7
A quick "look about" last December by Stantec to assess environmental conditíons at
Buffalo Springs was devoid of any scientific methodology. Their claim that "No
significant changes in ecological conditions have occurred on the site" was not supported
by any data. It must have been a very quick look - they failed to notice that 500 trees had
been cut down.
This is a wonderful opportunity for Oro- Medonte to invoke its "Environment First"
Policy. This area is classed as Environment Protection One in the Official Plan. There is
supposed to be a l20-metre buffer zone to protect the wetlands. This would eliminate
most of the houses from the wetlands,
Now would be an ideal time for Council to establish an Ecological Advisory Committee.
One naturalist suggested for the Committee helped with the MNR field survey that was. .
responsible for the Buffalo Springs wetlands being designated as Provincially Significant.
The Committee would provide Council with information and advice on the ecology and
environment of the Township. None of the present consultants, who are paid expert fees,
have any field knowledge of the ecology of the Township.
Mr. Massie should consider joining other local developers, Mr. Orsi and Mr. Capobianco,
in offering to donate the Provincially Significant Wetlands to the Couchiching
Conservancy. .
2
F,
- "
\L\'b -\
r ORO-MEDOJl\TE '8
. 1'OWN~HIP' ~
MOTION ~t .
An open letter to the Mayor and Council of Oro-Medonte
MAR 1 7 200\
Jim Woodford, Friend of the Oro Moraine and the Coulson Swamps
To be tabled at the Mar. 17,2004 Council Meeting
~ MEETING; COUNCIL ~
i ~,<_~2~:~~~,.. O..
.. '---
As part of their application for approval for.a new plan for Buffalo Springs Georgian
NorthLands Ltd. submitted a document "Buffalo Springs Revised Development Plan
Environmental Report Update" prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltdto Oro-Medonte.
Stantec did the 1994 Environmental Impact Report under the name Ecological Services
for Planning Ltd.
Stantec visited the site in December and claimed, "No significant changes in ecological
conditions have occurred on site."
Despite the fact that they prepared the 1994 Report they did not notice that about 500
trees had been removed from the site, some of them near the Provincially Significant
Wetlands. Graham Findlay, of MNR Midhurst, has documentation on the tree removal.
Mr. Stagg, then Oro Township staff, visited the site with John Hare, a local resident. Mr.
Hare can provide details of the tree removal to Council, as can Ed Hall.
In addition they failed to notice that the crown tree canopy was significantly altered.
Difficult to do if any time was spent on the site. This is in violation of Chairman Mills
1994 OMB decision.
Oro-Medonte Council asked Azimuth Consulting to evaluate the Stantec Report.
Azimuth conducted what appears to be an "in office - internet" assessment and
apparently they did no visit the site. They did not alert Council that the 500 trees had
been removed and the crown canopy was altered. They failed to tell Council that
significant ecological changes had occurred and this should be investigated.
Mike Jones, President of Azimuth, is a well-qualified hydro geologist. He does not have
expert and experienced staff to deal with the ecology of the Oro Moraine and Oro-
Medonte Township. Ecology is the study of the interrelationships between plants,
animals and natural communities. It requires years of field study. Their report, part of the
OPA#16 Amnendmentwas riddled with scientific errors. An example, the plant
taxonomy was based on books published in the 1970's. Another, they had a bird listed as
endangered on the Oro Moraine that had never been seen there.
Neither Stantec or Azimuth conducted a scientific field investigation ofthe Buffalo
Springs environment nor did they raise concerns that would not be addressed by highly
qualified naturalists, who live on or near the Moraine. There has been several offers to
Council to form an Ecological Advisory Committee. Why does Council refuse to even
listen toa proposal for this committee? Should Council continue to spend thousands of
tax dollars for advice that could be provided by volunteer residents?
, ' .
. .
'~h -~
Ct
To be fair to Azimuth, probably no consulting company would have the field knowledge
and experience of the Oro Moraine that the proposed Committee possesses. .
And to be fair to Georgian North Lands the 500 trees were removed many years before
they obtained the property.
Jarratt-Coulson & District Community Group Inc.
RR 4, Goldwater, ON, LOK 1 EO
Phone: 705326-9849 - Fax: 705329-0599
Members of Planning Advisory Committee
Township of Oro-Medonte
P.O. Box 100,
Oro, Ontario LOL 2XO
RECEf '~'=Dl
APR 0 6 2OtU
ORO-MEDONTE .'
TOWNSHIP'
April 2, 2004.
-,-
Re: Buffalo Springs Revised Development Plan.
We are writing to express our concerns regarding the revised Buffalo
Springs Development Plan, which you are presently considering. After reviewing
all of the Addendum Documents of Support, provided by Mr. Brent Clarkson,
planner for Georgian North Land Ltd., we have prepared the attached List of
Issues for your consideration. We have also forwarded a copy to Mr. Clarkson
for his response.
Following the March 8th PAC meeting we examined the Azimuth Peer
Review Report (Feb. 20/04) and concur with the many points which are stated as
requiring clarification and further evaluation to fully assess the impacts of this
planned development.
In closing we would like to express our support for your Committee and
Council's commitment, to protect the Oro Moraine and the natural environment
within our Township. We remain opposed to this or any other development
proposal, which would compromise or endanger our source of drinking water and
the quality of life of our residents.
Respectfully,
Allan Baker, Executive Member
Jarratt-Coulson & District Community Group
, .,
Jarratt-Coulson & District Ratepayers Group
March 18, 2004.
Review of the Buffalo Springs Revised Development Plan for
Oro-Medonte Planning Advisory Committee.
~ssues wi!b.1he Addendum Documents of Support:
No.1 PlanninQ Analysis- MHBC Planning Ltd.
1) Protection of PSw. (minimum 120 vs 20 metre buffer) pg. 5, par. 4.
2) Zoning Regulations. (min. rear yard to wetland bndry. 8th Line lots) pg. 4
item 5. ** Clarify EP2 overlay map error pg. 5/par.5.
3) Fisheries Act- non-compliance (conclusions pg. 5 - 2nd bullet PPS)
No.2 Environmental Report - Stantec Consulting Ltd.
1) Natural Heritage Policy. All significant wetlands should be protected -
local, provincial and Moraine designations - not partially (re: 120 metre
buffer). Also see Azimuth Report pg. 4 - bullet #5.
2) Coulson Creek/North River Headwaters. Uplands, creeks, and swamps
must be protected (coldwater fish habitat) as per Fisheries Act.
3) Site Conditions. A severely inadequate study - single site visit in
December poorly timed, unobserved cutting of 500 trees (no ref. to canopy
area photo requirement - OPA 39 OMB ruling). No inventory taken of
plant/animal species - the data in the 1994 report is 10 years old. Nature
is dynamic and changes occur - especially invasive plants and animals.
Absolutely no scientific data is presented to substantiate their conclusions.
4) Wetlands will not be enhanced through increased human access and use.
See Azimuth draft Report - additional detailed objections.
\1.
-2-
No.3. Infastructure Report - C.C. Tatham & Associates Ltd.
1) Internal Roadways. The 32% road length reduction and elimination of
(1) wetland crossing does not compensate for the addition of 1 .03 HA
area of (6) walkways directly through wetlands (surface type)? There
is no provision of catch basins to trap silt. Does road design comply
with Fire Dept. standards?
2) Water Supply. How will water be provided for fire fighting (hydrants)?
3) Sanitary Sewage Collection & Treatment. The removal of 500 trees
since the OMB approval will seriously compromise the 'uptake ability'
of the wetlands surrounding the (4) nodes on the west side of the
property. There is no vegetative uptake of nutrients (septic effluent) in
this area from September to April. In addition, since the lots in the (4)
nodes overlap or include wetland areas, there is a direct fluid
connection between their septic systems and the stream.
4) Stormwater Management. Infiltration will take water (contaminants)
into the shallow and medium aquifers, and the wetlands. Lots within
the (4) westerly nodes are completely within the flood plain (ref. pg. 4,
par. 3). Their soil is not well drained, and infiltration will not occur in
these areas. Catchbasin maintenance is critical to prevent roadside
ditches from plugging and preventing infiltration; otherwise runoff will
overflow into the stream (ref. pg. 4, par.5). Who will clean them out
and how often? Where will the storm sewers mentioned empty out?
No.4 Hvdroaeoloaical Assessment - Jagger Hims Ltd.
1) Nitrate Impact. **N.B. Nitrate concentrations in shallow groundwater
"at the property boundaries" will exceed the maximum criterion of 10
mg/L (Ontario Drinking Water Standard). Also as noted by Azimuth-
the wetland area and other ground water discharge areas should be
removed in the calculation of infiltration area for the property.
2) Potential for Contamination/Interference with Local Wells. The
report concedes that there is likely a direct hydraulic connection
between the water table and intermediate aquifers (no testing has
been done at the site on either). It cannot be concluded that there are
not similar connections between the intermediate and deep aquifers
(via windows in the aquitard layers).
, ,. .
-3-
In fact, the Henderson Paddon Report states that during the testing of
production well PW1, "there was a small amount of interference
observed in the two domestic wells (Ego and Hall) that are developed
in the intermediate aquifer" (pg. 9). It would therefore, seem
reasonable to assume that any contaminants (surface/septic system)
entering the wetlands and water table, have the potential to eventually
infiltrate the intermediate and deep aquifers. The proposed drilling of
117 individual wells versus a communal well into the deep aquifer, also
significantly increases the potential for contamination.
It is acknowledged (pg. 11 ,par. 6) that the water-taking by GMS in
1999 was approx. 50% of their PTTW capacity, and that there may be
some mutual well interference occur between the GMS well and a few
of the proposed individual wells located along the east side of the
property. If GMS increases their water-taking, the interference may
become more significant than indicated.
No.5 Road System Review - Cansult Tatham
1) County Road 22.
Operations - The Intersection Analysis for County Rd. 22 & 9th Line
does not give consideration to the GMS water-taking operations which
involve the turning of heavy and slow moving trucks well beyond the
peak hours/season. The number of trips per day/night can be
estimated by referencing the pumping volume records (MaE).
There is also no consideration given to the fact that County Rd. 22 is a
major east/west route for heavy transport trucks and part of the haul
route for the townshi~'s numerous gravel pits. The northern
continuation of the 9 h Line has also been paved since the original
traffic study by Tatham and, as the most qualitative route to/from
Moonstone, contributes unanticipated additional traffic to this
intersection.
In addition, there are (7) actively used residential and farm driveway
entrances, plus the northern continuation of the 9th Line within 300
metres of the County Rd. 22/9th Line intersection. One of these (within
30 m) is a commercial drive into Ego's Farm Market.
, .
-4-
Within the last few years several major accidents and a fatality have
occurred within this short distance. The most recent accident involved
a car and a building on the Ego property - since the reconstruction of
County Rd. 22. The sight and distance problems at this intersection
are grossly underestimated in this report.
Turn Lanes - MTO guidelines assume level intersections without si~ht
line problems. The intersections of County Rd. 22 and the 8th and 9 h
Lines are not level. Approaching traffic on County Rd. 22 is required to
brake on a downhill grade, in both directions at the 8th, and westbound
at the 9th Line. This areas frequently slippery road conditions
combined with the downgrades at both intersections greatly effect
reaction time and stopping distance. There is also no lighting at either
of these intersections.
Sight Lines - Beyond meeting the minimum sight requirement for a
County Road with an 80 km/h posted speed, consideration must be
given to the cumulative effect of factors, which are specific to these
intersections. Left and right turn lanes are warranted at both the 8th
and 9th Lines. In fact, if volumes exceed current levels on County Rd.
22, traffic lights at these intersections may also be required.
2) Concession Rd. 8.
Operations - Dust is a major problem and the Township is unable to
maintain the road surface (gravel) to reasonable levels of service for
current levels and types of traffic (daily school buses, heavy trucks).
There is also an un-noted narrow bridge over the Coldwater stream at
the McNiven property, which warrants improvement. Paving is
required for current levels of use.
SiQht Lines - In addition to the noted sight line deficiencies from the
proposed development to/from the north on Line 8, there is a major
sight distance problem (less than 50 m) for opposing traffic at the crest
of the first hill south of County Rd. 22. The stated sight distance
looking north from the intersection of the 8th at County Rd. 22 ignores
the trees obstructing this view.
Turn Lanes - Given the gravel surface, downgrade north, and the
speed of traffic exiting from County Rd. 22 onto the 8th Line, turning
lanes are essential at this intersection. We concur with the conclusion
that until the vertical curves and limited sight line problems are
corrected - and the 8th Line is paved, as a condition of the approved
development - that a reduction in the speed limit should be
considered.
-. -.Þ
15
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
I
MEMORANDUM
I
To:
Planning Advisory Committee
cc:
Jennifer Zieleniewski, C.A.O., Ron Kolbe, Director of Building/Planning, Nick
McDonald, Meridian Planning
From:
Andria Leigh, Senior Planner
R.M. File #:
Date:
March 31, 2004
Roll #:
Subject:
Status - Planning Applications for 2004
MSL Official Plan
Amendment for
Settlement Area, Re-
zoning from
AgriculturallRural to
Residential One, Plan
of Subdivision for 93
residential lots
Re-zoning from
Mineral Aggregate
Resources Two to One
to pennit aggregate
extraction
Re-zoning from
AgriculturallRural to
pennit pallet business
012 P16/89
Properties
OM-T-91009 Part of
Lot 21, Cone. 3 (Oro)
D14 P75/98 Hillway
Equipment
Part of Lots 8 and 9,
Cone. 12 and 13 (Oro)
D14 P1O5/00
Bowes/Braden
Part of Lot 8, Cone. 4
(Oro)
DO9 P115/0l Ucci
Part of Lot 27, Cone. 5
(Oro)
D14 (01) P129/01
Strimas
Part of Lot 12, Cone. 8
(Medonte)
Inactive since 1999,
Township to comment
on draft plan once
servicing issues
addressed
Letter sent to applicant to
detennine intent to
proceed.
Refused by Council, at
OMB
At OMB
Official Plan
Amendment for Adult
Lifestyle Community
Re-zoning to pennit
dwelling in the
Environmental
Protection Zone
Adopted and submitted
to County. Follow up
with Coun .
Letter sent to applicant
to obtain revised
application regarding
EP zoning by April 15,
2004.
D14 P138/02 Thatcher Re-zoning from Refused by Council, Hearing adjourned until
Part of Lot 15, Cone. 9 AgriculturallRural Appealed to OMB. July 6 & 7 to allow
(Medonte) Exception to Consent applications, subdivision application to
Residential One which had condition of be submitted for
Holding Zone rezoning, lapsed in Dee consideration. No
03. application received to
date.
D14.02. P137/02 Re-zoning from un- Township met with Follow up with staff and
Selri Investments zoned land to applicant Nov 2003. applicant
Part of Lot 27, Cone. 3 Residential One (R1) Township to follow up
(Oro) Zone with applicant
D14.02. P134/02 Re-zoning from Application circulated Letter sent to applicant
M & S Schneider AgriculturallRural internally. Planning requiring submission of
Part Lot 1, Cone. 7 (Oro) (AIRU) to exception to recommended receipt required site/concept plan
permit outdoor storage, of concept/site plan by April 15, 2004 or
repairs and sale of from applicant. application deemed to be
military jeeps and premature and file to be
e ui ment closed.
D09.02 P133/02 Official Plan Application went to Letter sent to applicant
Paul Miller Amendment from PAC where required establishing deadline for
Part Lot 20, Cone. 10 Agricultural to studies identified. submission of studies by
(Oro) Co mmerci allIn d us trial Last, correspondence April 15, 2004 or file to
for range of uses was letter dated be deemed premature and
October 24/02 from closed.
Wayne Scanlon
(Scanlon & Associates)
respecting impact of
uses on neighbouring
lands.
Re-zoning from Future Application approved Draft Plan of Condo
D12.03 P157/03 Development Exception by PAC on March 8, adopted by Council
Horseshoe Resort 67 to Residential Two 2004 for draft plan of March 17, Zoning By-law
Part of Lot 1, Cone. 3 Exception Zone and condominium and re- scheduled for Council
(Medonte) Plan of Condominium zomng. Meeting April 7, 2004.
for 24 units
D14 (03) P145/03 Re-zoning from Public meeting held Letter sent to owner to
1254554 Ontario General Commercial to March 19, 2003. No comply with Ministry of
Limited (Ken Secord) General Commercial decision to date. Letter Transportation
Part of Lot 15, Cone. 1, Exception to permit dated June 16, 2003 to requirements by April 15,
51R-2993, Part 1 and auction sales owner on status and 2004 or file to be closed.
51R-27229, Part required actions
2(Orillia)
2
, ' .
D14 (03) P-156/03 and
S-3/03
BurchIHoldeniOrsi
Part of Lot 34,35, and 36
Cone. 1 (Oro)
D12 (03) S-2/03
Bachly
Part of Lot 15, Cone. 8,
Blocks 65-69, Plan M-
679 (Medonte)
D09, D14, & D12 P-
146103 & S-lI03
1204600 Ontario Ltd
Lots 18-36, Plan 91, Part
of Lot 41 &42, Cone. 1
(Medonte)
D09 (03) P-159/03
Lester Cooke
South Part of Lot 17,
Cone. 3 (OdIlia)
D14 (04) 20O4-ZBA-Ol
693316 Ontario Ltd
Part of Lot 8, Cone. 9
(Oro)
D14 (04) 2oo4-ZBA-02
Georgian North Lands
Ltd.
Part of Lot 2 and 3,
Cone. 9 (Ora)
Official Plan
Amendment from Rural
to Rural Residential and
Open Space, Re-zoning
from Agricultural/Rural
to Rural Residential
One, Plan of
Subdivision for 54
residential lots
Part Lot Control
(Subdivision) to create
41 lots
Official Plan & Zoning
Amendments to permit
183 residential lot
subdivision
Official Plan
Amendment to expand
Shoreline designation
to permit creation of
three residential lots,
Re-zoning to Shoreline
Residential Zone
Re-zoning from Private
Recreational Exception
Holding to
A . culturallRural
Re-zoning to amend
provisions currently in
the Residential One
Exception 75 Zone
Planning Report on
application reviewed at
February & March
PAC meetings.
Planning Report to
Council in Dee 03
recommending Part Lot
Control for creation of
lots within existing
registered subdivision
a roved b Council
Premature until
completion of
Craighurst Secondary
Plan, On hold
Circulation in progress,
application requires
County decision
regarding OPA #17
which amends the
current Shoreline
olicies
Currently scheduled for
Public Meeting
Proceeded to PAC in
March 2004, additional
infonnation to be
presented at April PAC
meetin
Application refused by
Council March 17, 2004.
Letters sent to applicant
and County advising of
Council's decision.
Planning File to be
closed.
Applicant currently
revising technical reports
to proceed with part lot
control, Township to
negotiate a possible fire
hall site
Application to be
reviewed at time of
completion of Secondary
Plan to determine
conformity to the Plan
Proceed to PAC with
planning report once
decision received from
County on OPA #17
Proceed with report to
Planning Committee after
Public Meeting.
Meet with applicant's
consultant to review
infonnation requirements
prior to PAC meeting
3
\~, "
014 (04) 2004-ZBA-03
Mary Jane Sarjeant
Part of Lots 1 & 2,
Ran e 1 (Oro)
D09 & D14 (04) 2004-
OPA-02,20O4-ZBA-04
CRA Developments
West Part of Lot 26,
Conc. 9 (Oro)
D09 & D14 (04) 2004-
OPA-0l,2004-ZBA-05
Blueberry Beach (Robert
Lean)
East Part of Lot 20,
Conc. 1 (Orima)
D14 (04) 20O4-ZBA-06
Larry Horne
Part of Lot 4, Conc. 2
(Orillia)
Re-zoning to remove
holding provision for
property on unassumed
road
Official Plan
Amendment to expand
Shoreline designation
to pennit creation of 7
residentia1lots, re-
zoning to Shoreline
Residential zone
Official Plan
Amendment to expand
Shoreline designation
to pennit creation of
residential lots, re-
zoning to Shoreline
Residential zone
Re-zoning to pennit
bed and breakfast
establishment
Notification to remove
Holding provision
circulated
Circulation in progress,
application requires
County decision
regarding OPA #17
which amends the
current Shoreline
olicies
Application held in
abeyance until
applicant submits plan
of subdivision
application
Circulation of
application in process
Proceed with By-law to
remove Holding Provision
once Site Plan approved
b Council.
Proceed to PAC with
planning report once
decision received from
County on CPA #17
Proceed with circulation
once application for
plan of subdivision
Received
Proceed with Planning
Report once circulation
complete
4
D12 P13/87
J. Johnston Construction
Ltd.
Subdivision
OM-T-93003 (Part Lot
1, Concession 14 (Oro)
P21188 Kovacs
OM-T-91050 Part of Lot
11, Concession 2 (Oro
P13/89 Buffalo Springs
OM-T-91O3l Part of
Lots 2 and 3, Concession
9 (Oro)
Inactive
Inactive
Active
Active
Active
Inactive
Draft Plan conditions do
not contain a "clock"
(time limit) to satisfy the
conditions. Therefore
Draft Plan is approved
until registered.
Request status letter from
owner and recommend to
County to revise
conditions to put a time
limit "clock" into draft
Ian a roval.
Time limit (clock) issue in
draft plan approval.
Time limit (clock) issue
in draft plan approval.
Redline revision
received by Township
in Janua 2004.
Almost registered.
Moving to registration.
Time limit (clock) issue in
draft plan approval.
Time limit (clock) issue in
draft plan approval.
5
P6/93 Arbourwood
Phase III OM-T-
94004
Part of Lot 2, Range 2
(Oro)
P5/94 Horseshoe Timber
Ridge
Part of Lot 1, Concession
4 (Medonte
P77 /98 638230 Onto Ltd.
(Keyzer)
OM-T-90082 Part of Lot
5, Concession 13
(Medonte)
Homire
OM-T-9OO46 Part of Lot
5, Concession 14
(Medonte)
PlOO/OO HRC Lifestyle
43-0M-20001 Part of
Lots 3 and 4, Concession
4 (Ora)
Active
Registered in March
2004.
Inactive
Time limit (clock) issue in
draft plan approval.
Inactive
Time limit (clock) issue
in draft plan approval
Inactive
Time limit (clock) issue
in draft plan approval
Active
Parts Registered. Time
limit imposed in draft
plan approval. One
year extension granted
by the Township on
March 17,2004.
6
" .
, .
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2004-09 PlanninQ Advisorv Committee Andria Leigh
Subject: Department:
Council
Zoning By-law Amendment for Planning
C.of W. Mark and Joanne Scharf
Concession 9, South Part of
Lot 8, 51 R-28291, Part 1 (Oro)
Date:
Motion # -- .?? ?nnA
R.M. File No.
Date: D14 013236
I BACKGROUND:
.
The purpose of this report, is to consider the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment application submitted
by 693316 Ontario Ltd (Mark and Joanne Scharf). The intent of this application is to permit the
development of a single detached dwelling and a hobby farm on a 50 acre parcel of land.
The application applies to lands legally described as Concession 9, South Part of Lot 8, 51 R-28291 , Part
1 in the Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Ora). The intent of the proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment is to rezone the subject lands from the Private Recreational Exception Holding (PR*117(H»
Zone to the Agricultural/Rural Exception (AlRU*154) Zone.
ANAL YSIS:
In February 2004 a report was presented to the Planning Advisory Committee, which assessed the
application. There is currently permission on the subject property for the construction of a golf course
and a club house/restaurant in association with lands located in Concession 10, Part of Lot 8 (Oro). If
the attached Zoning By-law Amendment is considered favorably it would restrict the permitted uses to
what is currently allowed in the Agricultural/Rural zone which include: agricultural uses, bed and
breakf( ~t establishments~~ßS, custom workshops. equestrian facilities, farm produce
sales outlet, hobby farms, home occupations, market gardens, single detached dwellings. The applicant
is intending to construct a single detached dwelling and a small hobby farm on the subject property.
. '-
Exception 154 is required to do two things:
1. Ensure that any buildings or structures are constructed outside of the Core/Corridor designation
identified in OPA #16. On this basis a maximum setback of 190 metres (623 feet) from the front
lot line (Line 9 North) is recommended in the by-law.
2. Increase the required front yard setback to reduce the potential impact on buildings adjacent to
en existing haul route (Line 9 North). On this basis a minimum front yard setback of 30 metre
(98.4 feet) is recommended in the by-law.
A copy of the proposed by-law is attached to this report.
A public meeting has been scheduled for Monday April 19, 2004. Given the minor nature of the
application, it is recommended that the Zoning By-law Amendment be considered at the Planning
Advisory Committee meeting being held that same evening.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment has been circulated to staff and the appropriate agencies and
no comments have been received that do not support the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would conform with the intent and policies of the Oro-Medonte
Official Plan and the County of Simcoe Official Plan. On this basis, it is recommended that the attached
Zoning By-law Amendment be given favorable consideration by the Committee and recommended for
adoption by Council.
COMMENDATION (S):
1. THAT this report be received and adopted; and
2. That the Planning Advisory Committee recommend to Council that the Zoning By-law
Amendment for Mark and Joanne Scharf, that would rezone the lands described as South Part
of Lot 8, Concession 9, 51 R-28291 , Part 1 (Oro), on Schedule A13 of Zoning By-law 97-95, as
amended from the Private Recreational Exception 117 Holding (PR*117(H» Zone to the
Agricultural/Rural Exception 154 (AlRU*154) Zone.be adopted.
Respectfully submitted,
~~ -td
Andria Leigh, MCI~ RPP
Senior Planner
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
C.A.O.
Dept. Head
2
.' ..
THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF ORO-MEDONTE
BY-LAW NO. 2004-
Being a By-law to change the zoning on lands within Concession 9, South
Part Lot 8, RP 51R-28291 Part 1 (Oro) now in the Township of Oro-Medonte
(Scharf). '
WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte is empowered to pass
By-laws to regulate the use of land pursuant to Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990,
c.P.13.
AND WHEREAS Council deems it appropriate to re-zone the 'lands to permit the development of
rural uses, in accordance with Section 03 of the Official Plan
AND WHEREAS Council deems it appropriate to place the subject land in a zone with yard
requirements which are better suited for the subject lot; .
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte enacts as
follows:
1.
Schedule 'A13'to Zoning By-law No. 97-95 as amended, is hereby further amended by
changing the zone symbol applying to the lands located in Concession 9, South Part Lot
8, RP 51R-28291 Part 1, in the former geographic Township of Oro, now in the Township
of Oro-Medonte, from the Private Recreation Exception One Hundred Seventeen with
Holding Provision (PR*117(H» Zone to. the Agricultural/Rural Exception One Hundred
Fifty-four (AlRU*154) Zone as shown on Schedule 'A-1' attached hereto and forming part
ofthis By-law.
2.
Section 7.0 to Zoning By-law 97-95, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding
the following new section:
"7.154 *154 - Concession 9, South Part Lot 8, RP 51 R-28291 Part 1 (Oro)
Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, the following provisions apply to the
lands denoted by the Symbol *154 on Schedule A 13 to this By-law:
a)
Maximum setback from the front lot line
for all buildings and structures
Minimum required front yard
190 metres (623 feet)
30 metres (98.4 feet)"
b)
2.
This By-law shall come into effect upon the date of passage hereof,subject to the
provisions of the Planning Act, as amended.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME on the
day of May 2004.
READ A THIRD TIME and finally passed this
day of May 2004.
J. Neil Craig, Mayor
Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk.
2 ky"
Schedule lA-II to By-Law
This is Schedule lA-II to By-Law
passed the
day of
Mayor
J. Neil Craig
Clerk
Marilyn Pennycook
6
~
7
8
.
Z
;O.p.
">
9CX)
t::r:I
Z
~
-----------
1 0 ~LANDS SUBJECT
~TO THE REZO
()
~
N
--,,-.,-..-,,-.-.---.-.--".----
'--
0)
t::r:I
Z
~
Township of Oro-Medonle
2S
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2004-11 Planning Advisory Committee Nick McDonald, RPP
Subject: Department:
Council Planning
Georgian North Lands
C. of W. Limited Property Date:
April 14, 2004
Motion # R.M. File #:
D12 013409
Date: Roll #:
010-004-04000-0000
I BACKGROUND:
I
On March 8th 2004, Planning Advisory Committee adopted a resolution that required Georgian North lands Limited to
provide such additional information as requested by staff, and for Meridian and staff to report back to Planning Advisory
Committee on April 13th 2004. This report serves as a summary of the discussions held since March 8th 2004 with the
proponent.
ISSUES
The proponent, through its consultants, has indicated that they have strong concerns about the draft Peer Review Report
prepared by Azimuth Environmental. It is the proponent's opinion that the peer review comments should have reflected the
historical permissions on the property and should not have treated or otherwise considered the application as a new
application.
In response, and as I indicated at the March 8th Planning Advisory Committee meeting, it is not the role of the peer
reviewer to consider historical planning approvals when providing the municipality with comments on the work that has
been completed in support of a planning application. That is more properly the role of Township planning staff and its
consultants, and inevitably, the role of Planning Advisory Committee and Council.
On March 18th 2004, Township staff and consultants met with the proponents and their consultants at the Township office.
At this meeting, the proponents agreed that they would address some of the peer review comments. However, I was
informed on March 29th, 2004 that a response will not be provided and the proponent would not attend a meeting
scheduled for March 31st, 2004 with Township staff. This was then followed up with a letter dated April 8, 2004 in which it
is indicated that "Georgian does not believe that it is reasonable that the Township ask for the additional environmental
"
At the March 18, 2004 meeting, I requested that the proponents give some more consideration to the current
environmental policies in effect at the Provincial, County and local levels, with particular regard to Official Plan Amendment
16. I indicated that, while there are development approvals on the property, it is appropriate and good planning to assess
current environmental policies and determine how the proposal complies with those policies.
On the basis of my understanding of the proponent's position with respect to the processing of the application, the
proponent is of the view that:
.
Current and commonly accepted practices regarding the protection of wetlands and their function and the
identification and protection of significant woodland areas should not be applied or considered with respect to the
development;
Th.e planning approvals in place were obtained in 1994 after a significant amount of information and evidence was
provided to the OMB on the environmental impact of the proposed development; and,
The development fully conforms to OPA16, since OPA16, in its adopted form, continues to designate the property
for residential development.
.
.
Given that development on the west half of the property will remove most of the upland forest adjacent to the wetland area,
it is our opinion that the function of the wetland will be negatively impacted. In addition, the road crossings themselves will
result in the direct loss of wetland. On this basis, it continues to be my opinion that some regard should be given to
reducing the amount of development on the west half of the property or eliminating some of those components altogether,
to ensure that as much of the wetland function is maintained. Although the proponent is of the view that current policies
and standards should not apply to the property, it is my opinion that it is in the public interest and entirely responsible for a
municipality to consider current and evolving policy framework when reviewing any application for development.
Given that the proponent has indicated that no further environmental analysis will be completed, Council has two options,
as set out below:
1.
Council could direct staff to hold a public meeting on the application in accordance with Section 34 of the Planning
Act. The intent of the meeting would be to obtain public input on the application.
2.
Council could defer holding a public meeting until further environmental analysis has been completed.
It is recommended that Option 2 be selected. It is my opinion that sufficient information has not been made available to
enable the public to generally understand the nature of the proposal, which is a requirement of the Planning Act.
OMMENDATION S :
On the basis of the above, it is recommended:
.
THAT Report No. PD2004-11 be received and adopted.
-.-
2
25
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2004-11 Planning Advisory Committee Nick McDonald, RPP
Subject: Department:
Council Planning
Georgian North Lands
C. of W. Limited Property Date:
April 14, 2004
Motion # R.M. File #:
D12013409
Date: Roll #:
010-004-04000-0000
GROUND:
On March Sth 2004, Planning Advisory Committee adopted a resolution that required Georgian North lands Limited to
provide such additional information as requested by staff, and for Meridian and staff to report back to Planning Advisory
Committee on April 13th 2004. This report serves as a summary of the discussions held since March Sth 2004 with the
proponent.
ISSUES
The proponent, through its consultants, has indicated that they have strong concerns about the draft Peer Review Report
prepared by Azimuth Environmental. It is the proponent's opinion that the peer review comments should have reflected the
historical permissions on the property and should not have treated or otherwise considered the application as a new
application.
In response, and as I indicated at the March Sth Planning Advisory Committee meeting, it is not the role of the peer
reviewer to consider historical planning approvals when providing the municipality with comments on the work that has
been completed in support of a planning application. That is more properly the role of Township planning staff and its
consultants, and inevitably, the role of Planning Advisory Committee and Council.
On March 1Sth 2004, Township staff and consultants met with the proponents and their consultants at the Township office.
At this meeting, the proponents agreed that they would address some of the peer review comments. However, I was
informed on March 29th, 2004 that a response will not be provided and the proponent would not attend a meeting
scheduled for March 31st, 2004 with Township staff. This was then followed up with a letter dated AprilS, 2004 in which it
is indicated that "Georgian does not believe that it is reasonable that the Township ask for the additional environmental
analysis..."
--~---~--_.~.~ -
2(;;
At the March 18, 2004 meeting, I requested that the proponents give some more consideration to the current
environmental policies in effect at the Provincial, County and local levels, with particular regard to Official Plan Amendment
16. I indicated that, while there are development approvals on the property, it is appropriate and good planning to assess
current environmental policies and determine how the proposal complies with those policies.
On the basis of my understanding of the proponent's position with respect to the processing of the application, the
proponent is of the view that:
.
Current and commonly accepted practices regarding the protection of wetlands and their function and the
identification and protection of significant woodland areas should not be applied or considered with respect to the
development;
The planning approvals in place were obtained in 1994 after a significant amount of information and evidence was
provided to the OMB on the environmental impact of the proposed development; and,
The development fully conforms to OPA16, since OPA16, in its adopted form, continues to designate the property
for residential development.
.
.
Given that development on the west half of the property will remove most of the upland forest adjacent to the wetland area,
it is our opinion that the function of the wetland will be negatively impacted. In addition, the road crossings themselves will
result in the direct loss of wetland. On this basis, it continues to be my opinion that some regard should be given to
reducing the amount of development on the west half of the property or eliminating some of those components altogether,
to ensure that as much of the wetland function is maintained. Although the proponent is of the view that current policies
and standards should not apply to the property, it is my opinion that it is in the public interest and entirely responsible fo~ a
municipality to consider current and evolving policy framework when reviewing any application for development. '
Given that the proponent has indicated that no further environmental analysis will be completed,. Planning Advisory
Committee has two options, as set out below:
1.
Planning Advisory Committee could recommend to Council to hold a public meeting on the application in
accordance with Section 34 of the Planning Act. The intent of the meeting would be to obtain public input on the
application.
2.
Planning Advisory Committee could recommend to Council not to hold a public meeting until further environmental
analysis has been completed.
It is recommended that Option 2 be selected. It is my opinion that sufficient information has not been made available to
enable the public to generally understand the nature of the proposal, which is a requirement of the Planning Act.
II RECOMMENDATION<!>:
I
On the basis of the above, it is recommended:
.
THAT Report No. PO 2004-11 be received and adopted.
ick McDonald, MC I RP
.. Ptanning..Cons uItanL
.n~nnm-
2