the corporation of the township of severn committee … committee of adjustment agendas... · •...

A. CALL TO ORDER

B.

C. Page #

1 3-20

D.

E. NEW APPLICATIONS Page #

1 21-40

2 41-46

3 47-53

4 54-74

5 75-90

F. REPORTS FROM OFFICIALS

G. CORRESPONDENCE Page #

1 91-95Change of Conditions - B-12-16 - 2242 Oakley Sideroad

Committee of Adjustment - September 19, 2017

"NIL"

A-44-17 & B-14-17 (1007801 Ontario Inc.) - 15 Sturgeon Bay Road

"NIL"

A-39-17 (Mahood) - 1931 Big Chief Road *deferred from September meetingA-42-17 (Campbell) – 1691 Quarry Road

A-43-17 (Frappier) – 4411 Canal Road

B-11-12-13-17 (Mariposa Homes Inc.) - 2090 Birkeshire Woods Lane

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

ADJOURNED APPLICATIONS

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

October 17, 2017Council Chambers - Municipal Office

AGENDA7:00 P.M.

DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST & THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

I. OTHER BUSINESS

J. ADJOURNMENT

"NIL"

of 18

COA Minutes September 19th, 2017

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT HELD IN THE ADMINISTRATION OFFICE, 1024 HURLWOOD LANE, TUESDAY, September 19th, 2017 AT 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Mark Vandergeest Members Allen Vivian Douglas Hamilton Emily Silk With Regrets: Bill Hill Staff: Secretary-Treasurer , Planner Katie Mandeville Planning Technician Bradley Oster A. CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at. 7:00 p.m. and explained the meeting process and the time frame for appeals to those persons present. B. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST NONE C. ADOPTION OF MINUTES The following motion was adopted: Motion # 17-27 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Douglas Hamilton THAT the Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment meeting held in the Council Chambers on August 15th, 2017 be adopted as printed and distributed. CARRIED D. ADJOURNED APPLICATIONS 1. Variance Application No.: A-30-17

Owner: Jonathan Periard Agent/Applicant: NONE Roll Number: 4351 050 003 81600 0000 Municipal Address: 1875 Ellis Road

The Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment outlined the application(s) and outlined the correspondence received, as follows:

of 18


Proposal: • The subject property lot area is approximately 1700 square metres (0.42 Acres) and

the property has approximately 29 metres (95 feet) of frontage on Maclean Lake. The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling, a detached garage, a carport, and a boathouse.

• The following Minor Variance was circulated for the August 2015 Committee of Adjustment meeting: 1. A maximum lot coverage of 20.5% to permit the addition to an existing dwelling;

whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a maximum lot coverage of 15% for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

• The Committee passed the following motion at the August 2015 meeting: Motion #17-23 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Douglas Hamilton THAT Application No. A-30-17 be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending further information regarding the proposed sewage disposal system. CARRIED

• The applicant provided further information regarding the proposed sewage disposal system to the Planning and Development Department for review. The applicant is requesting the same Minor Variance as the original application in August 2017: 1. A maximum lot coverage of 20.5% to permit the addition to an existing dwelling;

whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a maximum lot coverage of 15% for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None Staff Report D17-053: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report and indicated that staff was in support of a deferral for the application. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The applicant was not present. The Chair asked if anyone in the audience had any comments on this application, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows: None.

of 18


The following motion was adopted:

Motion #17-28 MOVED by Alan Vivian and SECONDED by Emily Silk THAT Application No. A-30-17 be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending further information. CARRIED

2. Variance Application No.: A-33-17

Owners: Jeanette & Paul Abernethy Roll Number: 4351 010 011 29800 0000 Municipal Address: 1925 Big Chief Road

The Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment outlined the application(s) and outlined the correspondence received, as follows: Proposal:

• The approximately 1416 square metres (0.35 acres) property is occupied by a Bunkie or sleeping cabin and shed. The property also currently contains a fifth wheel trailer and various other items associated with the trailer as was evident during the site visit of the property. The applicants have requested permission to construct a new dwelling utilizing the majority of the previously demolished dwelling footprint.

• The applicant has requested the following Minor Variances at the August Committee of Adjustment meeting: 1. A rear yard setback of 6.0 metres (19.69 feet) to the main dwelling wall; whereas

Zoning By-law 2010-65, establishes a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

2. An interior yard setback of 1.5 metres (4.92 feet) for the easterly lot line to the main dwelling wall; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, establishes a minimum interior yard setback of 3 metres (9.84 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

• The Planning and Development Department recommended that due to the comments received from the Chief Building Official and Building/Septic Inspector, lack of information pertaining to the proposed dwelling, (i.e. elevation plan or concept drawings and information on the sewage disposal system), Planning and Development staff were of the opinion that a full review of the applied for Minor Variance application is premature.

• The Committee of Adjustment passed motion No. 17-25: Motion #17-28 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Douglas Hamilton THAT Application No. A-30-17 be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending further information regarding the well and septic servicing of the property and staff the opportunity to review this information.

of 18


CARRIED

• Based on the comments received at the previous Committee of Adjustment meeting and the Township’s Building/Septic Inspector’s comment the applicant is still seeking permission for the original Minor Variances: 1. A rear yard setback of 6.0 metres (19.69 feet) to the main dwelling wall; whereas


2. An interior yard setback of 1.5 metres (4.92 feet) for the westerly lot line to the main dwelling wall; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, establishes a minimum interior yard setback of 3 metres (9.84 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None Staff Report D17-054: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The owner was present and had nothing to add. The Chair asked if there were any comments from anyone in the audience, the comments are as follows: None. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows:

• Chair Vandergeest thanked the applicant for their patience with the application and working with staff to bring the application back.

The Chair asked the Secretary Treasurer to review the proposed conditions of the decision. The applicant was asked if he was aware of the proposed conditions and was in agreement with them. The applicant confirmed this. The Chair then called for a vote on the application.

DECISION – APPROVE Variance Application A-33-17 (Abernethy)

THE PURPOSE and EFFECT of the application is: The following Minor Variance to the provisions of Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended: 1. A rear yard setback of 6.0 metres (19.69 feet) to the main dwelling wall; whereas


of 18


2. An interior yard setback of 1.5 metres (4.92 feet) for the westerly lot line to the main dwelling wall; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, establishes a minimum interior yard setback of 3 metres (9.84 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

The Committee has considered the Application and, based upon the evidence provided, issues the following Decision on the 19th day of September, 2017: DECISION: APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Municipal Taxes to be paid to date. 2. That the existing vegetation on the property shall be preserved and enhanced as

much as possible. 3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted with the

Application. EFFECT of written and oral submissions on the decision: None THE REASONS for the Committee’s Decision are that the request is minor in nature, conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan and is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land. AND the Secretary Treasurer is hereby authorized to sign any documents required to give effect to this Decision. CARRIED E. NEW APPLICATIONS 3. Variance Application No.: A-10-17

Owner: Rick Robinson & Kelly Erickson Agent/Applicant: NONE Roll Number: 4351 010 008 87527 0000 Municipal Address: 3193 Shoreview Drive


• The approximately 1,456.9 square metres (0.36 acres) property is occupied by a recently constructed dwelling with an attached garage.

• The following Minor Variance was circulated for the May 2017 Committee of Adjustment meeting:

1. To permit a front yard setback of 13.25 metres (43.6 feet) to construct a deck at the front of their dwelling; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a minimum front yard setback of 20 metres (66 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

of 18


• Staff recommended the application be deferred to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting as the sketch provided by the applicants did not show the recently constructed dwelling as meeting the front yard setback provision within Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended.

• The Committee of Adjustment passed Motion No. 17-13 which stated: THAT Application No. A-10-17 be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending the closure of Building Permit Application 160123.

• The applicants revised their proposal based on further information provided by their surveyor which showed the dwelling located 20 metres back from the water at the closest point. The applicants amended their application for a Minor Variance to permit:

• A front yard setback of 14.5 metres (47.6 feet) for a deck at the front of their dwelling; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a minimum front yard setback of 20 metres (66 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

• On July 18, 2017 the Committee of Adjustment passed Motion No. 17-18 which stated:

THAT Application No. A-10-17 be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending the closure of Building Permit Application 160123. Additionally, the Committee would propose a re-design of the proposed structure, bringing it more into compliance with the Township of Severn Zoning By-law.

• The applicants submitted a revised proposal on August 10, 2017 and are now requesting a Minor Variance to permit:

1. A front yard setback of 15.2 metres (49.9 feet) for a deck at the front of their dwelling; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a minimum front yard setback of 20 metres (66 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None Staff Report D17-055: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The applicants were present and submitted pictures of their property to the committee. Kelly Erickson stated that they have no plans to develop anything else in the front yard of their property, since any development would obstruct their view. She indicated that since they are only requesting an addition 4.2 feet the application is minor in nature. Ms. Erickson stated that they want to keep the shoreline looking pristine and that their neighbours are happy that their home has brought up the value of the neighbourhood. She also stated that she believes that there is plenty of vegetation on the property, and that there is more on their property than neighbours. Ms. Erickson indicated that they are trying to enjoy their lakefront property and currently have nowhere to sit and have had to use sections of their dock as a temporary deck. Ms. Erickson also described previous Minor

of 18


Variance Applications for similar structures that were approved. The Chair asked if anyone in the audience had any comments on this application, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows:

• Member Hamilton stated that he was in support of approving the application. He stated that he believes that crowding the shoreline has been done by other property owners and that build addition structures, a building permit would need to be applied for before approval was given.

• Member Vivian stated that he agrees with Member Hamilton. • Chair Vandergeest indicated that he supported the Planning Department and

explained to the applicant that all the other Minor Variance applications that were approved, dealt with existing non-complying structures, properties that were developed many years ago.

• Member Silk stated that she was in favour of a lesser minor variance given that the home was a new build.

• The applicant stated that her parents live across the street and come over to visit with walkers and wheelchairs.

The following motion was adopted: Motion #17-29 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Douglas Hamilton THAT Application No. A-10-17 (Erickson & Robinson) be altered for a front yard setback of 16 metres for a deck attached to the front of the dwelling. CARRIED The Chair asked the Secretary Treasurer to review the proposed conditions of the decision. The applicant was asked if he was aware of the proposed conditions and was in agreement with them. The applicant confirmed this. The Chair then called for a vote on the application.

DECISION – APPROVE Variance Application A-10-17 (Erickson & Robinson)

THE PURPOSE and EFFECT of the application is: The following Minor Variance to the provisions of Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended: 1. A front yard setback of 16 metres (52.49 feet) for a deck attached to the front of the

dwelling; whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended, establishes a minimum front yard setback of 20 metres (66 feet) for the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

of 18



much as possible. EFFECT of written and oral submissions on the decision: None THE REASONS for the Committee’s Decision are that the request is minor in nature, conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan and is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land. AND the Secretary Treasurer is hereby authorized to sign any documents required to give effect to this Decision. CARRIED 4. Variance Application No.: A-37-17

Applicant / Owner: Ryan Hobbs Roll Number: 4351 050 002 48300 0000 Municipal Address: 4506 Riverview Drive


• The subject property lot area is approximately 4,411square metres (1.09 Acres) and the property has approximately 27.2 metres (90 feet) of frontage on the Severn River.

• The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling, a sleeping cabin and docking.

• The property owners wish to build an accessory structure, being a detached garage, the subject of this Minor Variance.

• The owners applied for the following Minor Variance: 1. A maximum accessory structure size of 67.6 square metres (728 square feet);

whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a maximum size of 75% gross floor area of the principal building or 110.0 square metres for accessory structures, whichever is less.

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None

of 18


Staff Report D17-056: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The applicant was present and had nothing to add. The Chair asked if there were any comments from anyone in the audience, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. None The Chair asked the Secretary Treasurer to review the proposed conditions of the decision. The applicant was asked if he was aware of the proposed conditions and was in agreement with them. The applicant confirmed this. The Chair then called for a vote on the application.

DECISION – APPROVE Variance Application A-37-17 (Hobbs)

THE PURPOSE and EFFECT of the application is: The following Minor Variance to the provisions of Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended: 1. A maximum accessory structure size of 67.6 square metres (728 square feet);

whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a maximum size of 75% gross floor area of the principal building or 110.0 square metres for accessory structures, whichever is less.


much as possible. 3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted with the

Application. EFFECT of written and oral submissions on the decision: None THE REASONS for the Committee’s Decision are that the request is minor in nature, conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan and is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land.

of 18


AND the Secretary Treasurer is hereby authorized to sign any documents required to give effect to this Decision. CARRIED 5. Variance Application No.: A-38-17

Applicant / Owner: Toby Follows & Jaquelin Stewart Roll Number: 4351 050 003 77510 0000 Municipal Address: 3211 Maclean Lake N Shore Road


• The subject property lot area is approximately 1.09 hectares (2.71 Acres) and the property has approximately 29.9 metres (98 feet) of frontage on Maclean Lake.

• The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling, and a detached garage.

• The property owners wish to obtain approval to enlarge the existing detached garage.

• The owners applied for the following Minor Variance: 1. A maximum accessory building size of 131 square metres (1410 square feet);

whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended states that any accessory building within a residential zone shall not exceed the lesser of 75% of the gross floor area of the principal building or 110.0 square metres (1184 square feet).

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: A letter was received from Margaret and Mike Boyd, 3107 Pioneer Road, in support of the application. Staff Report D17-057: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The applicant was present and stated he did not agree with any of the said in the review of the staff report. Mr. Follows stated that he has plans to retire to the property and would require the storage space for when he plans to renovate the existing cottage, which when completed would bring the property into compliance with the Zoning By-law. For now, he stated that he restores Formula One race cars and other things in the existing garage. Mr. Follows stated that the structures are not visible from the shoreline. Mr. Follows stated that he plans on adding a new septic system in the future and has already began the process of having plans designed. The Chair asked if there were any additional comments from anyone in the audience, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed.

of 18


The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows:

• Chair Vandergeest asked the applicant when he purchased the property. • The Applicant responded that he purchased the property in May 2015. • Chair Vandergeest inquired if what was being proposed was already built and

commented that he visited the property. • The Applicant stated that yes, it was already built and that he had done it himself.

However, he indicated that he has been diligent in taking pictures of everything, and that he worked as a contractor in the past and researched construction techniques to ensure it was properly built.

• Chair Vandergeest asked the Planner if by approving the application, would the Building Code Orders would be rescinded?

• The Planner responded by explaining that no, the Building Code Orders would not be rescinded until the Applicant obtained a building permit.

• Member Hamilton questions the Applicant as to why if he had experience building and knew about the restrictions yet violated the Building Code.

• The Applicant stated that he did not consider the increased storage addition to the existing garage to be very dramatic when they were thinking about the addition to the house.

• Member Hamilton stated that he cannot support the application since there is no septic system, and if the applicant is going to enlarge the house, then he would like to review the case a whole.

• The Applicant stated that they only did the addition to the east end of the garage. • Member Vivian asked if the Applicant has filled in the carport previously. • The Applicant responded by stating that he had only replaced the overhead garage

door. • Member Vivian ensured that the Applicant was aware that he was responsible for

the Building Code Orders. • Member Silk stated that she was not in support of the application as it was currently

presented. • Member Vandergeest suggested that a deadline be established for a proposal of the

future development of the property. The following Motion was adopted: Motion #17-30 MOVED by Douglas Hamilton and SECONDED by Alan Vivian. THAT Application No. A-38-17 (Follows & Stewart) be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending further information regarding the redevelopment of the property including the septic and house addition. The Application must be submitted prior to October 1, 2018. CARRIED 6. Variance Application No.: A-39-17

Owners: Joan Mahood

of 18


Applicant / Agent: Joshua Morgan Roll Number: 4351 010 011 30000 0000 Municipal Address: 1925 Big Chief Road


• The subject property lot area is approximately 954 square metres (0.23 Acres) and the property has approximately 24 metres (78 feet) of frontage on Lake Couchiching.

• The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling and an accessory building.

• The following Minor Variance are requested:

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None Staff Report D17-058: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report and requested that Josh Morgan provide a more detailed review. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The agent, Joshua Morgan was present and stated that he would be seeking a deferral in order to allow for the inclusion of an additional Minor Variance on the application, as he felt it would be best to consider all the requests together. The Chair asked if there were any comments from anyone in the audience, the comments are as follows:

• Warren Howes – 1935 Big Chief Road: declared that he believed there to be a Zoning of Environmental Protection on the property and that there is a ten (10) metre setback from the bank of the stream.

• Joshua Morgan stated that the ten (10) metre setback variance was not included in the original Minor Variance application, notwithstanding location of creek mostly on neighbouring property. Mr. Morgan stated that it would be very difficult to develop this property without a Minor Variance to the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. He stated that he intends on returning to the October Committee of Adjustment meeting with a proposal pertaining to the Environmental Protections setback.

of 18


The Chair asked if there were any additional comments from anyone in the audience, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows:

• Member Vivian stated that he was interested in waiting on further information regarding the application.

The following Motion was adopted: Motion #17-31 MOVED by Alan Vivian and SECONDED by Emily Silk THAT Application No. A-39-17 (Mahood) be adjourned to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting pending further information. Notice of the application show be given in accordance with Planning Act requirements for a new application. CARRIED 7. Variance Application No.: A-41-17

Owner: Thomas Shoniker Agent/Applicant: Dennis McIntaggart Roll Number: 4351 010 006 23900 0000 Municipal Address: 2179 Thomson Crescent


• The approximately 0.18 hectare (0.44 acre) property is occupied by a single detached dwelling with an attached garage and a small shed.

• The owners are proposing to add decking to the front (water side) of the dwelling which will meet the applicable setbacks.

• The following Minor Variance is requested in order to permit the construction of the new, two-tier deck:

1. A variance to permit a maximum lot coverage of 16.8% whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65 states the maximum lot coverage for the Shoreline Residential Zone is 15%.

Agency Comments: None Public Correspondence: None Staff Report D17-059: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report.

of 18


The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The applicant was present and had nothing to add. The Chair asked if there were any comments from anyone in the audience, the comments are as follows:

• Applicant’s son stated that his father said everyone was pleasant in doing the application and said that he had been trying to get his dad to build this deck for thirty years.

The Chair asked if there were any additional comments from anyone in the audience, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows: None. The Chair asked the Secretary Treasurer to review the proposed conditions of the decision. The applicant was asked if he was aware of the proposed conditions and was in agreement with them. The applicant confirmed this. The Chair then called for a vote on the application.

DECISION – APPROVE Variance Application A-41-17 (Shoniker)

THE PURPOSE and EFFECT of the application is: The following Minor Variances to the provisions of Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended: 1. A variance to permit a maximum lot coverage of 16.8% whereas Zoning By-law

2010-65 states the maximum lot coverage for the Shoreline Residential Zone is 15%.

The Committee has considered the Application and, based upon the evidence provided, issues the following Decision on the 19th day of September, 2017: DECISION: APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Municipal Taxes to be paid to date. 2. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans and drawings

submitted with the Application. 3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted with the

Application. EFFECT of written and oral submissions on the decision: None THE REASONS for the Committee’s Decision are that the minor variance did not meet one or more of the four tests under Section 45 of the Planning Act.

of 18


AND the Secretary Treasurer is hereby authorized to sign any documents required to give effect to this Decision. CARRIED 8. Consent Application No.: B-10-17

Owner: 2564150 Ontario Inc. Agent: Joshua Morgan, Morgan Planning Roll Number: 4351 010 010 00100 0000 Municipal Address: 2088 Division Road West

The Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment outlined the application(s) and the correspondence received, as follows: Proposal:

• The lands have frontage of approximately 665 metres (2181.8 feet) on Division Road West and frontage of approximately 196 metres (643 feet) on Highway 12 and an area of approximately 17.8 hectares (44 acres).

• The applicant is requesting consent to sever the lands designated as Settlement Employment Area (i.e. non-residential lands) from the lands designated Country Residential (i.e. residential lands).

• The proposed severed lands containing an existing commercial use (Johnston Fence) would have approximately 200 metres (656 feet) of frontage on Division Road West and an area of approximately 5.3 hectares (13 acres). The proposed retained lands are vacant and would have approximately 465 metres (1,526 feet) of frontage on Division Road West and an area of approximately 12.3 hectares (30 acres acres).

Agency Comments: A letter from Hydro One Networks Inc., was received and read aloud concerning the hydro easement that crossed the property and the restrictions imposed from that. Public Correspondence: None. Staff Report D17-060: The Planner provided a brief summary of the staff report. The Chair asked if the applicant or agent were present and had anything to add to what was presented. The agent was present. Joshua Morgan spoke to the severance and the Official Plan designation for the rationale behind the proposed severance. He explained the rezoning and the conditions that would be required. The Chair asked if there were any comments from anyone in the audience, the comments are as follows:

of 18


• Helen Bunker – 9015 Highway 12: expressed concerns about water runoff, stated that they were filling in the drainage ditches and concerned the possibility of flooding.

• Joshua Morgan spoke to the requirement for Site Plan Approval, which will require a lot grading plan. He stated that the lot grading plan would make certain that the water from the property was dealt with properly.

• Helen Bunker inquired about the fill being placed on the property and how it was previously a pond that has now been filled.

• Joshua Morgan to provide Helen Bunker with his contact information to keep her updated on the progress on the site.

• Debbie Hawkins – 3797 Dunford Drive: asked if the applicant would be extending Dunford Drive into the subject lands?

• Joshua Morgan replied that the lands are positioned in the Township’s Planning Documents for future development, so at some point at least one road would go into the property, given his background he would assume a road would be there in the future but not a part of the current plans. Mr. Morgan stated that there would need to be many more studies and other public processes before those developments would begin.

• Lisa Beers – 2037 Division Road West: stated that when the lands were being cleared, the Township told her the lands were zoned Agricultural.

• The Planner clarified that the Rural Zoning currently imposed on the lands permits agricultural uses, not that the lands are zoned Agricultural, there was likely a miscommunication there.

• Nyla Strong – 2019 Division Road West: inquired if in the future when the Countyside Residential Lands would have lots similar in size to the surrounding lots?

• The Planner stated that the County of Simcoe and Province is pressuring for an increase of density in residential areas and that the Township and Developer would in the future likely be encouraged to create smaller lots in that development.

• Helen Bunker inquired about the setback from hydro lines. • The Planner stated that in the Ontario Building Code has provisions depending on

the voltage of the transmission lines. The Chair asked if there were any additional comments from anyone in the audience, since none were forthcoming, the Chair declared the public portion of the meeting closed. The Chair asked if the Committee had any comments on this application. Committee comments were as follows:

• Chair Vandergeest thanked the agent for bringing this forward. The Chair then called for a vote on the application.

DECISION – PROVISIONALLY APPROVED Consent Application B-10-17

THE PURPOSE and EFFECT of the application is: Consent to sever the lands containing an existing commercial use (Johnston Fence) would have approximately 200 metres (656 feet) of frontage on Division Road West and an area

of 18


of approximately 5.3 hectares (13 acres). The proposed retained lands are vacant and would have approximately 465 metres (1,526 feet) of frontage on Division Road West and an area of approximately 12.3 hectares (30 acres acres). The Committee has considered the Application and, based upon the evidence provided, issues the following Decision on the 19th day of September, 2017: DECISION: PROVISIONALLY APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Passage of a Zoning By-law Amendment to rezone the subject lands as follows: a. the severed lands shall be rezoned to a site-specific Commercial Zone (CX-X)

that includes recognition of the existing commercial use of the lands; b. the retained lands shall be rezoned to a Rural Holding (RU(H)) Zone to

prohibit development until such time as a residential development agreement is executed.

2. The owner shall be responsible for making application for said rezoning and paying the applicable fee.

3. A 0.3 metre reserve along Highway 12 in favour of the Ministry of Transportation. 4. A reference plan of the severed parcel shall be prepared and duly registered by an

Ontario Land Surveyor and one copy filed with the Secretary/Treasurer of the Committee. A draft copy of the reference plan shall be provided to the Secretary-Treasurer for review and approval prior to registration on title. The reference plan should show the existing easement in favour of Hydro One.

5. A copy of the electronic registration “in preparation” draft deed for the severed lot shall be provided to the Secretary/Treasurer of the Committee together with a signed Acknowledgement and Direction so that the consent certificate may be issued.

6. Municipal taxes shall be paid in full up to the date of request of issuance of the consent certificate.

7. That all fees and disbursements (legal, engineering, planning), if any, incurred by the Township with respect to this application shall be paid for by the owner.

EFFECT of written and oral submissions on the decision: None THE REASONS for the Committee’s Decision are that: the proposed consent is in keeping with the Township’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law, is consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, will provide for the orderly development of the Township and does not fall under the exclusive consideration of Section 51 of the Act. AND the Secretary Treasurer is hereby authorized to sign any documents required to give effect to this Decision. CARRIED I. OTHER BUSINESS

of 18


1. OACA Fall Seminar The following motion was adopted: Motion # 17-32 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Douglas Hamilton THAT Member Vivian be authorized to attend the fall OACA seminar with applicable expenses. CARRIED J. ADJOURNMENT The following motion was adopted: Motion # 17-33 MOVED by Emily Silk and SECONDED by Allen Vivian THAT the Committee of Adjustment meeting be adjourned at 8:39 p.m. on September 19th, 2017. The Committee will reconvene at 7:00 p.m. on October 17th, 2017 unless the Secretary-Treasurer has not received a complete application for the Committee’s consideration. CARRIED ______________________________________________ Katie Mandeville, Secretary Treasurer

REPORT D17-061 TO: Chair and Members

Committee of Adjustment FROM: Katie Mandeville Planner DATE: October 12, 2017 RE: Application for Minor Variance A-39-17 Applicant: Joshua Morgan

Owner: Joan Mahood Address: 1931 Big Chief Road

Background: County Official Plan: Rural Township Official Plan: Shoreline Residential Township Zoning: Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) & Environmental Protection

(EP) The subject property is Lot 1, Concession 7, in the former Township of North Orillia, known municipally as 1931 Big Chief Road (Appendix 1). The subject property lot area is approximately 954 square metres (0.23 Acres) and the property has approximately 24 metres (78 feet) of frontage on Lake Couchiching. The property currently contains an existing single detached dwelling and an accessory building. The owners applied for the following Minor Variances: Minor Variance Requested Zoning By-law 2010-65,

as amended Proposed

Maximum Lot Coverage 15% 21% Front Yard Setback 20 metres 15 metres (49.2 feet) to the

main dwelling wall and 12 metres (39.4 feet) to the attached deck

Rear Yard Setback 7.5 metres 4 metres for a detached accessory building

Setback from EP Zone 10 metres 3.1 metres (10.2 feet) to the detached garage 3.6 metres (11.8 feet) to the main dwelling wall

A site inspection of the property was conducted by Planning and Development staff prior to the writing of this report. Discussion: The property owners retained Joshua Morgan, Morgan Planning and Development to prepare a Planning Justification report in which Mr. Morgan discusses the four tests for a Minor Variance as set out in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. The Planning and Development Department generally agrees with Mr. Morgan’s report which is attached as Appendix 2 that the proposed Minor Variances meet the four tests. Other Considerations: The Building Department has provided the following comment: “There is no objection to the proposed Minor Variance. A sewage system proposal has been submitted.” Recommendation: The Planning and Development Department has no objections to the approval of this application, subject to the recommended conditions set out in Appendix 3, because it is the opinion of staff that the variance is minor in nature, is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. Respectfully submitted, With concurrence, Katie Mandeville, BA, BURPl. Andrea Woodrow, MCIP, RPP Planner Director of Planning & Development

Appendix 1 – Key Map Appendix 2 – Joshua Morgan’s Planning Justification Report Appendix 3 – Recommended Conditions

Appendix 1

Subject Property

1

September 25, 2017 * Sent By Email

Township of Severn Municipal Office Andrea Woodrow, Director of Development Services

Re: 1931 Big Chief Road, Township of Severn Minor Variance Application Planning Justification Report

MORGAN Planning & Development Inc. (herein, MP&D) was retained by the owner of 1931 Big Chief Road to undertake a zoning review pertaining to a proposed redevelopment. The primary purpose of the zoning review was to determine if the proposed redevelopment met each of the performance standards of the Shoreline Residential Two (SR2) Zone.

Upon review it was determined that the proposed redevelopment would require the approval of four minor variances. MP&D was further retained by the owner to prepare this Planning Justification Report and to facilitate the minor variance approval process.

Purpose of Planning Justification Report

The purpose of this Planning Justification Report (PJR) is to describe the subject property, describe the proposed redevelopment, summarize the direction provided by the Township’s Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and to illustrate how the four minor variances meet the applicable tests of the Planning Act.

Location and Description of Subject Property

The subject property is a waterfront lot which is located on the west shore of Lake Couchiching. The property has 24 metres of frontage onto Big Chief Road, 24 metres of frontage onto Lake Couchiching and a depth of 39.6 metres. The total area of the property is 954 m² (0.09 ha / 0.23 ac).

The site is pre-developed with a very old cottage that is in poor condition. The existing cottage is/was serviced by a holding tank for the effluent and a drilled well. In addition to the existing cottage there is 1 portable shed and 1 non-portable shed on the property. The owner intends to remove all existing structures and replace them with a new house, new garage, new septic disposal system and a new well.

Appendix 2

2

There is a creek which abuts the property to the south. The creek veers onto the subject property near the roadside. The exactly location of the creek is identified on the Site Plan which is submitted in support of this application. The creek is protected by an Environmental Protection Zone. An updated topographic survey was prepared by Dearden and Stanton in September 2017. The topographic survey and forms the basis for the Site Plan which is submitted herein as Appendix A in support of this application. Aerial Image of 1931 Big Chief Road (County of Simcoe GIS Mapping System)

Overview of Surrounding Area North: the property is bound to the north by a residential lot that is developed with a single detached dwelling. East: the property is bound to the east by Lake Couchiching. South: the property is bound to the south by a residential lot. The owner of the adjacent lot to the south is in the process of obtaining the required planning approvals and building permit approvals to redevelop the property with a single detached dwelling. West: the property is bound to the west by Big Chief Road. On the west side of Big Chief Road is an active agricultural field. Overview of Proposed Redevelopment It is proposed that the existing dwelling and the two existing sheds be removed from the subject property in the fall of 2017. It is further proposed that the existing septic holding tank be removed and that the existing drilled well be decommissioned.

3

Once the planned demolition, removal and decommissioning is complete the owner proposes to erect a new 155.3 sq.m. (1,672 sq.ft) dwelling and a 37.2 sq.m. (400 sq.ft.) garage. It is proposed that a 3.0 metre wide deck extend across the entire width of the front of the dwelling to overlook Lake Couchiching. In support of the proposed redevelopment it is proposed that a new septic disposal system be installed on the north side of the new dwelling. The septic system has been designed by Dave Shellswell of Forest Home Developments Ltd., and is illustrated on the enclosed site plan (Appendix A). The septic system design drawings prepared by Forest Home Developments are enclosed herein as Appendix B. In an effort to adequately illustrate the extent of the proposed redevelopment the following appendices are attached at the end of this report: Appendix A – Site Plan Appendix B – Septic System Design Appendix C – Building Elevations and Floor Plans Township of Severn Zoning By-law The northern two-thirds of the subject property is zoned Shoreline Residential Two (SR2), whereas the southern one-third is zoned Environmental Protection (EP).

The SR2 Zone is the predominant zone category of the residential waterfront lots on Big Chief Road. The EP Zone has been applied to the property in recognition of the adjacent creek. It was confirmed by municipal planning staff that in situations where an EP Zone has been established to protect a creek, the Township’s historic approach is to consider the top of bank to be the limit of the EP Zone. The enclosed Site Plan prepared by Dearden and Stanton illustrates the top of bank of the creek.

4

ZONE MATRIX – 1931 BIG CHIEF ROAD SR2 ZONE PROPOSED Min. Lot Area 4,000 m² 957 m² (existing) Min. Lot Frontage 60 m 24 m (existing) Max. Lot Coverage 15% 21% (192.5 m²)

*MV submitted Min. Front Yard (shoreline) 20 m 15 m

*MV submitted Min. Rear Yard (dwelling) 7.5 m 13 m Min. Rear Yard (garage) 7.5 m 4.0 m

*MV submitted Min. Int. Side Yard (dwelling) 3 m 3.0 m Min. Int. Side Yard (garage) 1.5 m 1.5 m Min. EP Zone setback 10.0 m 3.1 m (garage)

3.6 m (dwelling) *MV submitted

Township of Severn Official Plan The subject property is designed ‘Shoreline Residential’ by Land Use Schedule ‘A’ (south) of the Township of Severn Official Plan. Low-density residential development such as the proposed single detached dwelling is permitted in the Shoreline Residential designation.

1931 Big Chief Road / Shoreline Residential designation

5

Overview of Minor Variances The subject property is an existing lot of record, and as a result any proposed redevelopment must balance the performance standards of the zoning by-law with the configuration of the existing lot fabric. The challenge of redeveloping the subject property is the relatively limited lot depth of only 39.6 metres (130 feet) and the presence of an EP Zone which protects a creek across the south property boundary. This lot depth and the required setbacks from the creek poses challenges as the lot owners must propose a dwelling and any accessory building that meets their needs, while also providing sufficient area for the private septic disposal system and private water service. Resulting from the relatively restricted lot dimensions, the following four minor variances are required to facilitate the proposed development:

1) MV to permit a 15 metre front yard (shoreline) setback to the dwelling and a 12 metre front yard (shoreline) setback to the attached deck, whereas ZBL Table 6.2 establishes a 20 metre minimum front yard (shoreline) setback.

2) MV to permit a 4.0 metre garage setback to the road allowance, whereas ZBL Sec. 3.2.11 requires 7.5 metres.

3) MV to permit a lot coverage of 21%, whereas ZBL Table 6.2 establishes a 15% maximum. This calculation does not include the proposed deck which will be constructed no more than 1.0 metre above finished grade.

4) MV to permit a 3.1 metre setback from the garage to the EP Zone (top of creek bank) and a 3.6 metre setback from the dwelling to the EP Zone (top of creek bank), whereas ZBL Sec. 3.33.2(b) requires 10 metres.

Four Tests pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act.

A minor variance is a relaxation of the strict application of a zoning by-law. Minor variances are authorized pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act.

There is a four-fold test for a minor variance which must be adhered to. An overview of the four tests as they apply to the proposed minor variances is provided below:

1) The variances are minor

Whether the proposed variances are considered collectively or individually it is the opinion of the undersigned that the proposed variances are minor. This opinion has been reached as the variances will not have any negative impact on adjacent properties, rather the proposed redevelopment will significantly improve the aesthetics of the property, and enable the development of a single detached dwelling that is similar in scale to most other dwellings in the neighbourhood.

6

It should be noted that the proposed redevelopment will bring the property into closer compliance with the EP setback provisions as the existing garage is located only 1.0 metre from the EP Zone.

2) The variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land

Whether the proposed variances are considered collectively or individually it is the opinion of the undersigned that the proposed variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land. They will enable the development of a new dwelling that is aesthetically compatible with the neighbourhood and serviced by a modern septic disposal system. It is important to note that the proposed 15 metre front yard (shoreline) setback is comparable to the front yard setback on the adjacent property to the north and other properties in the area with similar lot depths.

As noted above proposed redevelopment is also desirable as it will bring the property into closer compliance with the EP setback provisions of the Zoning By-law.

3) The variances meet the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law

The general intent and purpose of the zone provisions are to ensure that the character of the neighbourhood is maintained and that lots are not over-developed. The reality is that the performance standards of the applicable SR2 Zone do not distinguish between lots with 200 metres of depth and lots with 39.6 metres of depth. The result of this type of zoning approach, which is very common, is that the smallest lots frequently require relief from the zoning by-law when they are being redeveloped.

It is the opinion of the undersigned that the scale of the proposed redevelopment is appropriate, is compatible with the neighbourhood and that the four minor variances meet the general intent and purpose of the zoning by-law.

4) The variance meets the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan

The objectives of the ‘Shoreline Residential Area’ are as follows:

a) To maintain the existing character of this predominantly low-density residential area.

b) To protect the natural features and ecological functions of the shoreline area and the immediate shoreline.

c) To ensure that existing development is appropriately serviced with water and sanitary services.

It is the opinion of the undersigned that the proposed redevelopment meets each of the above noted objectives of the Shoreline Residential Area and that the proposed variances, considered collectively or individually, meet the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.

7

Concluding Remarks

With this submission we respectfully request that the minor variances be considered and approved by the Committee of Adjustment when it meets in October 2017.

Respectfully submitted, MORGAN Planning & Development Inc.

Joshua Morgan, MCIP, RPP

MP

Typewritten Text

Appendix 'A' - Site Plan

MP

Typewritten Text

Appendix 'B' Sewage System Submission Design by Dave Shellswell

MP

Typewritten Text

Appendix C - Elevations and Floor Plans

Appendix 3

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS

1. Municipal Taxes to be paid to date. 2. That the existing vegetation on the property shall be preserved and enhanced

as much as possible. 3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted

with the Application.

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

REPORT D17-062

Chair and MembersCommittee of Adjustment

Katie MandevillePlanner

October 13, 2017

Application for Minor Variance A-42-17Agent: Kevin WoodOwner: Margaret CampbellAddress: 1691 Quarry Road

Back round:

County Official Plan:Township Official Plan:Township Zoning:

RuralRuralRural Residential (RR)

The subject property is Part Lot 6, Concession 1, Registered Plan 51R24132, in theformer Township of Matchedash, known municipally as 1691 Quarry Road (Appendix1). The subject property lot area is approximately 5,301.6 square metres (1.31 Acres)and the property has approximately 75 metres (246 feet) of frontage on Quarry Roadand approximately 125 metres (410 feet) of frontage on Upper Big Chute Road. Theproperty is currently vacant with the exception of some construction related items. Theproperty owners wish to build a single family detached dwelling and associated septicsystem.

The owners applied for the following Minor Variance:

1. A front yard setback of 5.0 metres (1 6.4 feet); whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65as amended establishes a minimum front yard setback of 15 metres (49. 2 feet)for the Rural Residential (RR) Zone.

It should also be noted that although Quarry Road is identified as a haul route, it is not ahaul route adjacent to this property therefore the Haul Route (HR) overlay zoning is notapplicable.

A site inspection of the property was conducted by Planning and Development staffprior to the writing of this report.

Discussion:

A discussion of the four tests for a Minor Variance as set out in Section 45(1) of thePlanning Act follows.

/s the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan maintained?The subject property is designated Rural under the Township of Severn Official Plan.The intent of this designation, according to section C6. 1 of the Official Plan is to:"protect the rural character of the Township and maintain those elements whichcontribute to the open space character of the countryside". The proposed MinorVariance will maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.

/s the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law maintained?The proposal appears to comply with all Zoning By-law requirements with the exceptionof the requested Minor Variance. The intent of the front yard setback provision is toensure adequate space between any buildings and structures and the road allowancefor minimal disruption from the travelling public and for road maintenance operations. Inconsideration of the Director of Public Works comment (below) the proposed MinorVariance complies with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

Is it minor?In the opinion of staff, the proposed Minor Variance is minor in nature due to theconsideration of the existing road widening and comment from the Director of PublicWorks.

/s it desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land?The proposed front yard setback will still be appropriate and desirable development ofthe land as the neighbouring dwelling, a former school, has a front yard setback of lessthan one metre from the original road allowance meaning it is located almost 10 metrescloser to the travelled portion of the roadway than the proposed dwelling. The propertyhas frontage on the County Road and in an effort to set the dwelling back the required15 metres from the County Road which is more heavily travelled and has somevegetative buffering the appropriate location for the dwelling is closer to Quarry Road.

Other Considerations:

The Director of Public Works provided the following comment: "The Public WorksDepartment has reviewed the proposed minor variance for 1691 Quarry Road to reducethe front yard set back by 10m. We do not have any concerns as the right of way in frontof this property was already widened 5m to a total width of 25m and further widening atthis frontage are not anticipated."

The Building Division provided the following comment: "There is no objection to theapplication for minor variance. Prior to issuing a building permit to construct anybuildings a sewage system application must be submitted and approved."

Recommendation:

The Planning and Development Department has no objections to the approval of thisapplication, subject to the Recommended Conditions set out in Appendix 3, because itis the opinion of staff that the variance is minor in nature, is in keeping with the generalintent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriatedevelopment and use of the land.

Respectfully submitted, With concurrence,

^^/pA--

Katie Mandeville, BA, BURPI.Planner

Andrea Woodrow, MCIP, RPPDirector of Planning & Development

Appendix 1 - Key MapAppendix 2 - Site PlanAppendix 3 - Recommended Conditions

SUBJECTPROPERTY

2> .

Wl

I».*2

Appendix 1

^«.

Appendix 2

^..^/>. ^byo

a- '

semeSy$i^4

'^.

6%

-t

-<

-<

^

. s^m.TAA>K.

f^ifa^.pwSww^

FIKT CF JkpUALT

^4nt6tw»

aicI-aaawBfis

TFl TUS"

QUARRY ROAD

PART t

.?a. Wlrl^LfWK TO

BE UStilUB EBtai IpCFWWK

LOT .l>tfllKU*T)i»LOT *REA - astF-gmTRKF JUEXwr <me«* .

(nn

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONSAppendix 3

1. Municipal Taxes to be paid to date.2. That the existing vegetation on the property shall be preserved and enhanced

as much as possible.3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted


TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

REPORT D17-063



October 12, 2017

Application for Minor Variance A-43-1 7Applicant: Laurent FrappierAddress: 4411 Canal Road


RuralRuralResidential One (R1)

The subject property is Part Lot 12, Concession 15, Part 2, Plan 51R32840, in theformer Township of Orillia, known municipally as 4411 Canal Road (Appendix 1). Thesubject property lot area is approximately 8,377.3 square metres (2.07 acres) and theproperi:y has approximately 133 metres (436 feet) of frontage on Canal Road andapproximately 118 metres (387. 1 feet) of frontage on Harrison Road. The propertycurrently contains an existing single detached dwelling, and a shed. A site plan isattached as Appendix 2. The property owners wish to build an accessory structure,being a detached garage. A drawing of the proposed garage is attached as Appendix3.

The owners applied for the following Minor Variance:

1. A maximum accessory structure size of 67.6 square metres (728 square feet);whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amended establishes a maximum size of75% gross floor area of the principal building or 110.0 square metres foraccessory structures, whichever is less.


Discussion:

A discussion of the four tests for a Minor Variance as set out in Section 45(1) of thePlanning Act follows.

/s the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan maintained?The subject property is designated Rural under the Township of Severn Official Plan.The intent of this designation, according to section C6. 1 of the Official Plan is to:"protect the rural character of the Township and maintain those elements whichcontribute to the open space character of the countryside". The proposed accessorybuilding will maintain the general intent and purpose Official Plan as the property iswithin a developed rural residential area and the proposed garage location is on analready cleared portion of the property.

/s the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law maintained?The proposal appears to comply with all Zoning By-law requirements with the exceptionof the requested Minor Variance. The intent of the provision for the maximum size foraccessory structures is to ensure that accessory buildings and uses remain secondaryto the main principal use of the property, which in this case is a residential dwelling. Thedwelling on the subject property is 882 square feet (81 .9 square metres) meaning thatan accessory building is restricted in size to 661 square feet (61.4 square metres) whichis 75% of the main dwelling. Despite exceeding the 75% size restriction, staff is of theopinion that the general intent and purpose of the By-law will be maintained as the mainuse of the property will continue to be the residential dwelling and the proposedaccessory building is still smaller than the existing dwelling.

/s it minor?

In the opinion of staff, the proposed Minor Variance is minor in nature as the total size ofthe garage is modest, smaller than the existing residence and will not deter from theprincipal use of the property.

Is it desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land?The proposal for an increase in size is considered desirable and appropriatedevelopment of the land. The property is over two acres, larger than many of the ruralresidential "severance" type properties within the Township and is surrounded bymature vegetation. Construction of the new accessory structure will not affect thecharacter of this rural residential area as the property is very well treed and the buildingwill be located within an area already cleared in close proximity to the existing dwelling.


The Building Division has provided the following comment: "There is no objection to theapplication for minor variance. The owner must ensure proper clearances to the sewagesystem and any overhead hydro lines."

Recommendation:

The Planning and Development Department has no objections to the approval of thisapplication, subject to the Recommended Conditions set out in Appendix 4, because itis the opinion of staff that the variance is minor in nature, is in keeping with the general

intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriatedevelopment and use of the land.


/<J/^AA^



Appendix 1 - Key MapAppendix 2 - Site PlanAppendix 3 - Proposed GarageAppendix 4 - Recommended Conditions

i.^

II II

^ '.3^a

»»,^

.^

^^'

-^̂

.^

^

v v̂'s-

Pin

woiw

Tt

^Y

n N?_̂I \

\'^

XSRR

&i

.

^^^ \

"

i 1 I x

Appendix 2

/ \

^

-K41

^

T...

\^

^

'..Jt

'-^.f .c

cox.ocI9

VE

NT

RO

OT l/S

OO

SQ

.nI-'IS

UIA

TCD

RO

OF

AR

fA TYF'

T/0

RO

OF

PE

AK

.--^

T6

^4

-<.

25VR

AS

PH

ALT

5H

ING

ICS

.'

S- FR

E-FIN

.A

-UM

. FAS

CIA

.V

i^M. TR

IM

,..' ! S

'-O-xS

'-O-

CA

RA

GE

DO

OR

e"CO

NC

.S

LOC

It

GRADE-

VINYl TRIM -/

9'-cn<8--o" '..^ GARAGE DO

OR ~'

l'-0"

VIN

Yl S

IDIN

G

VIN

YL CO

RN

ER

CAP

T/0

WA

LL/

--9--6

-:°Ot

e-CO

NC

.B

LOC

K/

T/0

EX

. H.O

OR

SL

AB

_

^ -''-

w-e

r v - .

FR

ON

T E

LEV

AT

ION

SC

AL

E: %

i°° 1'-0"

-5L

OF

FE

X.G

RA

DE

TOFN

TRY

. MA

X S

% 510P

E

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONSAppendix 4

1. Municipal Taxes to be paid to date.2. That the existing vegetation on the property shall be preserved and enhanced

as much as possible.3. That the construction is in substantial compliance with the plans submitted


TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

REPORT D17.064



October 13, 2017

Applications for Minor Variance A-44-17 & Consent B-14-17Agent: Jamie Robinson, MHBC PlanningOwner: 1007801 Ontario Inc.Address: 15 Sturgeon Bay Road

Back round:


SettlementsSettlement Living Area (Coldwater)Residential One Exception Twenty Eight Holding TwentyTwo (R1-28-H22), Residential One Exception Twenty Seven(R1-27), Residential Multiple One Exception Four HoldingTwenty Two (RM1-4-H22), and General Commercial (C1).

The subject property is Medonte Concession 12 West Half Part Lot; 22 South-WestQuarter Part Lot 23, Registered Plan 51R38181 Part 3, in the former Township ofColdwater, known municipally as 15 Sturgeon Bay Road (Appendix 1). The subjectproperty lot area is approximately 1. 35 Hectare (3. 35 acres) and the property hasapproximately 38 metres (124.7 feet) of frontage on Sturgeon Bay Road andapproximately 132. 6 metres (435. 03 feet) of frontage on Sheridan Drive. The propertycurrently contains the buildings and structures associated with the former lumber yard.

The applicants have requested the following Consent (Appendix 2):

To sever a vacant portion of the property with approximately 132. 6 metres (435. 03 feet)of frontage on Sheridan Drive and an area of approximately 10,400 square metres (2. 56acres). The retained lands would have frontage of approximately 44. 5 metres (145.9feet) on Sturgeon Bay Road and an area of approximately 3,200 square metres (0. 79acres).

The applicants applied for the following Minor Variance for the retained lands fromapplication B-14-17:

1. A rear yard setback of 4 metres (13. 12 feet) for the southern lot line (of theretained lands from application B-14-17); whereas Zoning By-law 2010-65,establishes a minimum rear yard setback of 6 metres (19.68 feet) for theCommercial One (C1) Zone.


Discussion:

The property owners retained MHBC Planning for their applications. MHBC Planningprepared a Planning Justification Report in which Mr. Robinson and Mr. Pauk discussthe applicable Provincial, County and Township policies for the Consent application aswell as the four tests for a Minor Variance as set out in Section 45(1 ) of the PlanningAct. The Planning and Development Department generally agrees with the PlanningJustification Report prepared by MHBC Planning which is attached as Appendix 3.


The Building Division has provided the following comment: "There is no objection to theapplication for Consent and Minor Variance."

Recommendation:

The Planning and Development Department has no objections to the approval of theConsent and Minor Variance application, subject to the Recommended Conditions setout in Appendix 4, because staff generally concur with the Planning Justification Reportsubmitted by MHBC Planning.




Appendix 1 - Key MapAppendix 2 - Proposed Severance SketchAppendix 3 - Planning Justification Report by MhlBC PlanningAppendix 4 - Recommended Conditions

,ftd.^^^

SUBJECTPROPERTf

^

'Efi

>sv

'\^

s?11

<s

t

Appendix 1

^

\> ^

^'^satn%\^

.^...'£-"^'i'$

^^ ^'

^̂ '^®..

s^sv- '^^°

^i

, 0.

Com"11"?^.<

ts It c

^\>

s%

^'^

Appendix 2

-§WR.. - . ^.'^.'nffS?-*-

""'---

^Jlj"

%

^

ProposedRetained

Lands

o?

rt:V.

ProposedSeveredLands

PLANNING JUSTIFICATION REPORT

15 Sturgeon Bay Road Township of Severn

Date:

September 29, 2017

Prepared for:

Heather Mallard

Prepared by: MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited (MHBC) 113 Collier Street Barrie ON L4M 1H2 T: 705 728 0045 Ext. 222 F: 705 728 2010

Our File 12152A

Appendix 3

15 Sturgeon Bay Road

Planning Justification Report

September 29, 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES...................................................................................................................................... 3

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4

4.0 PLANNING ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6

4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (2014) ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6

4.2 Places to Grow- Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017) ................................................................................... 7

4.3 Simcoe County Official Plan ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.4 Township of Severn Official Plan (2010)............................................................................................................................................................. 9

4.5 Township of Severn Zoning By-Law (2010-65) .......................................................................................................................................... 10

5.0 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14

FIGURES Figure 1: Site Location Figure 2: Proposed Consent Figure 3: Official Plan Designation of the Subject Lands Figure 4: Zoning of the Subject Lands



September 29, 2017 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited (“MHBC”) has been retained by Heather Mallard (hereinafter “the Owner”) to seek approval for a consent application and a minor variance application for the subject lands located at 15 Sturgeon Bay Road legally known as Part of Lots 22 and 23, Concession 12, geographic Township of Medonte, now in the Township of Severn. The property is currently designated “Settlement Living Area” in the Township of Severn’s Official Plan. A Zoning By-law Amendment was passed in 2011 that rezoned a portion of the subject lands General Commercial, Residential One Exception 28 and Residential Multiple One Exception 4 Hold (See Figure 4). The Owner is seeking approval of a severance to separate the existing commercial business from the remainder of the lot. It is anticipated that the severed lands will be developed in the future for residential uses. The proposed retained lot requires a minor variance to address a reduced rear yard setback from the required 6 metres to 4 metres for the existing commercial building on the retained lands. The severed lands are zoned to permit a wide variety of commercial uses and the existing business will remain in compliance from a use perspective. The proposed severed lands are currently designated and zoned to permit varying forms of residential units. Access for the retained lot will utilize an existing driveway connecting to Sturgeon Bay Road that currently supports the existing commercial business. The severed lands will gain access from Sheridan Drive. It should be noted that the Site was subject to a consent application that was approved on May 17, 2011. Figure 1 identifies the location of the subject site in the context of the Village of Coldwater.




Figure 1: Site Location

SITE




2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES

The site is located on the south side of Sturgeon Bay Road and is 1.42 hectares in size and is currently used as a retail store known as Home and Cottage Interiors by Severn Timber Mart. The subject property has a street frontage of 44.5 metres (146 feet) on Sturgeon Bay Road and 132.6 meters (435 feet) on Sheridan Drive. There is some vegetation along the southern boundary of the site. However, the majority of the site is cleared and used as a lumber yard. The Site is currently developed and the Owner is seeking approval of a consent application and minor variance request to facilitate residential development on the severed parcel to the south. The surrounding uses in the general area are described as follows: NORTH: Existing commercial buildings (beer store, funeral home, dentist office), a stretch of an

employment area along Sturgeon Bay Road and single detached dwellings; EAST: Existing single detached dwellings; SOUTH: The Coldwater Seniors’ Apartment; WEST: Existing single detached dwellings and agricultural use (tree farm).




3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The site and surrounding area has been designated and zoned for commercial and residential land uses within the Village of Coldwater. The Owner is seeking approval of a severance to separate the existing commercial business from the remainder of the lot. It is anticipated that the severed lands will be developed in the future for residential purposes. The severance proposal is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2: Proposed Consent

The severed lot would have a lot area of 1.04 hectares (2.56 acres) direct vehicular access and frontage of approximately 132.6 metres onto Sheridan Drive as outlined in ‘green’ in Figure 2. The lands that were previously subject to a severance outlined in ‘yellow’ in Figure 2 would continue to have frontage on Sturgeon Bay Road. The retained lot would have a frontage of 44.5 metres on Sturgeon Bay Road and a lot area of 0.32 hectares (0.8 acres). The variance requested in conjunction with the retained lot is to permit a 4-metre rear yard setback whereas 6 metres is required. The reduced rear yard setback will still provide an adequate amount of space behind the existing building to access the eastern portion of the lot, maneuver a vehicle and allow for snow

Retained Lands

Severed Lands

Previously Severed Lands




storage during the winter months. The severed lands, as outlined in ‘green’ in Figure 2, currently have three structures on the property. However they are proposed to be removed.




4.0 PLANNING ANALYSIS The following is a review of the land use policy framework related to the Subject Lands.

4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (2014)

The Provincial Policy Statement 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the “PPS”) was approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing on April 30, 2014, and is applicable to the Site. The following is a summary of policies within the PPS which have been reviewed in detail as it relates to the proposal. Policy 1.1.3 in the PPS identifies that settlement areas shall be the focus of growth. The Village of Coldwater is identified as a Settlement Area within the County of Simcoe Official Plan. Settlements include urban areas and rural settlement areas within municipalities. Growth through applications such as lot severances are supportable by the PPS when located within a settlement but must also occur through the use of efficient development patterns such as the proposed consent application. Policy 1.1.3.1 states that settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development, and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. The applications would allow for a more efficient use of the site through development of future residential development and the potential for intensification to occur on the severed lands. Policy 1.1.3.2 offers direction on land use patterns within settlements, which are to efficiently use land and resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, support active transportation and are transit supportive. Also, a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment are to be considered and promoted where appropriate. The applications will support the residential housing stock adjacent to a developed area of the Village of Coldwater. Policy 1.1.3.4 identifies that development standards should be promoted which facilitate intensification, redevelopment, and compact form, while avoiding or mitigating risks to public health and safety. The proposed applications allow for the future development of underutilized lands in a recognized settlement area. The applications do not propose to change the use of the site but would enable the separation of the existing commercial uses from the vacant residential portion of the site that is designated and zoned for future residential development.




The proposal will facilitate the future residential intensification of the site that will be accessed safely by existing road infrastructure. The proposed lot configuration is not anticipated to negatively impact traffic movements in the area of the site. Section 2.0 of the PPS contains policies that promote the wise use of management of resources. The subject site contains no natural heritage features. Section 3 of the PPS states the importance of Protecting Public Health and Safety in order to reduce the potential for risk to residents from natural or human-made hazards. In accordance with Section 3.1 the proposed consent is outside of hazardous lands and hazardous land areas. The proposed development is consistent with the Building Strong Communities policies contained in the PPS. The consent application is located within a settlement area where growth and development is to be focused and simply separates the existing land uses on the property. Both the severed and retained lots are an appropriate size and configuration to support the current uses on the property and to support the future redevelopment of the each lot. Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed consent and supporting minor variance applications are consistent with the policies of the PPS.

4.2 Places to Grow- Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017)

The Places to Grow - Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017) (the Growth Plan) was prepared by the Province to guide the building of stronger, more prosperous communities through the management of growth. Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan was approved in January 2012 and is specifically applicable to the Simcoe County sub-area. Generally, the Growth Plan seeks to ensure Ontario’s long-term prosperity by promoting efficient land use and development patterns. The Growth Plan was reviewed in its entirety and the following section outlines relevant details determined to be applicable to the property. The intent of the Growth Plan is to plan for growth and development in a way that supports economic prosperity, protects the environment and helps communities achieve a high quality of life. The Growth Plan contains various policies that guide decisions on how land is developed. These include but are not limited to building compact, vibrant and complete communities, managing growth, protecting natural resources, optimizing the use of infrastructure, and providing for different approaches to managing growth that recognizes the diversity of communities. The general growth management policies contained within Section 2 of the Growth Plan include policies to direct development to settlement areas, direct major growth to settlement areas with municipal water and sewage systems, build compact communities, encourage the development of complete communities that contain a diverse mix of land uses, including a range and mix of




housing types and high quality public open space. The Site is situated within the delineated built-up area of the Township, is recognized as a settlement area and accordingly is a location where intensification shall occur. Intensification is defined by the Growth Plan as follows: The development of a property, site or area at a higher density than currently exists through:

a) redevelopment, including the reuse of brownfield sites; b the development of vacant and/or underutilized lots within previously developed areas: c) infill development; and d) the expansion or conversion of existing buildings.

The consent application conforms to the policies of the Growth Plan.

4.3 Simcoe County Official Plan

The recently approved County of Simcoe Official Plan (County OP) designates the Site as being “Settlements.” Table 5.1 of the County Official Plan presently identifies that Coldwater is one of the recognized settlement areas of the County of Simcoe. The County Official Plan through Policy 3.1.1 identifies that most growth will be directed to the settlements throughout the County. Accordingly, since Coldwater is currently recognized as a settlement in the County OP, the policy context is considered supportive of the proposed applications. The County OP permits land division by consent in accordance with Policy 3.3.2 for uses that are permitted by the designation or that maintain the intent of the OP. The lands are designated by the Township to permit residential uses; as such, the use of the lots, if proposed, would maintain the intent of the County OP. Section 3.5 of the County Official Plan contains policies that pertain to Settlement Areas in Simcoe County. The goals of the Settlement Area Designation are as follows:

3.5.1 To focus population and employment growth and development within settlements,

with particular emphasis on primary settlement areas, in accordance with the policies of this Plan.

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. 3.5.3 To develop mixed use settlements as strong and vibrant central places and to create

healthy settlements and communities that are sustainable. 3.5.4 To promote development forms and patterns which minimize land consumption and

servicing costs.




Section 3.5.7 states that Settlement Areas shall be the focus of population and employment growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. The Simcoe County Official Plan supports development in Settlement Areas and the proposed consent would conform to the County of Simcoe Official Plan.

4.4 Township of Severn Official Plan (2010) The Site is designated “Settlement Living Area” in the Township of Severn Official Plan (Township OP) as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3: Official Plan Designation of the Subject Lands (Settlement Living Area)

The objectives of the Settlement Living Area designation are to encourage new growth and development in settlement areas, maintain the character of existing residential areas, encourage the provision of a range of housing types, promote the efficient use of existing infrastructure through various forms of residential intensification and ensure that residential areas permit a variety of complementary and compatible land uses.

Subject Lands




The permitted uses in the Settlement Living Area include:

• single detached dwellings; • semi-detached dwellings; • duplex dwellings. • triplex dwellings; • quattroplex dwellings; • multiple dwellings; • street Townhouse dwellings; • block Townhouse dwellings; and, • low-rise apartment dwelling.

Section B8.2 of the Official Plan contains general consent criteria. These criteria have been reviewed and the proposed consent application would conform to each of these criteria. Based on a review of the Township Official Plan, the proposed consent application would conform to the Township of Severn Official Plan.

4.5 Township of Severn Zoning By-Law (2010-65) The subject lands were subject to a Zoning By-law Amendment. The Township of Severn Zoning By-law identifies that the subject lands are zoned General Commercial, Residential One Exception 28 and Residential Multiple One Exception 4 Hold in accordance with the Township’s Zoning By-law as shown in Figure 6. This zoning is reflective of the current, long-standing use of the property as a commercial lumberyard. The Holding Provisions that is associated with the subject lands is to be lifted by the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Township of Severn.




Figure 4: Zoning of Subject Site (General Commercial, Residential One Exception 28 and Residential Multiple One Exception 4 Hold)

The uses permitted within the Residential One (R1) Zone are listed as follows:

• Single detached dwelling • Group home • Home occupation • Public park • Public use

The R1-27 Lot requirements are listed as follows:

i. Minimum Lot Area on full services - 490 m2 ii. Minimum Side Yard for a Garage - 0.9m

The R1-28 Lot requirements are listed as follows:

i. Minimum Lot Area on full services - 520 m2 ii. Minimum Lot Frontage on full services - 13 m

The uses permitted in the Residential Multiple (RM1) Zone are listed as follows:

• Dwelling, Multiple • Dwelling, Townhouse • Public Park • Public Use

General Commercial

(C1)

Residential One Exception 28 Hold 22 (R1-28-H22)

Residential Multiple One Exception 4 Hold 22 (RM-4)

Portion of lands that were subject to a past consent application. (R1-27)




The Residential Multiple Exception Four (RM1-4) Zone is subject to the execution of a subdivision agreement that with allow the holding provision to be lifted. This is expected to be executed in the future at the time of development of the retained lands. A retail store is recognized as a permitted use in the General Commercial (C1) Zone in accordance with Table 7.1 in the Township’s Zoning By-law. The retained lands will remain in compliance from a use perspective and will continue to serve the Village of Coldwater. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the proposed severed and retained lots. Table 1: Lot Characteristics

Lot Lot Area Frontage Retained 0.32 ha +/- 44.5 m +/- (Sturgeon Bay Road) Severed 1.04 ha +/- 132.6 m +/- (Sheridan Drive)

The retained lot will remain as a General Commercial (C1) Zone and has the potential to be serviced from existing infrastructure on Sturgeon Bay Road. The intent of the severance application would facilitate the residential development on the subject lands. The Requested Minor Variance The purpose of this Section of the Report is to analyze the applicant’s request for the minor variance to permit a reduction to the minimum required rear yard setback for the existing building on the retained lands. In considering this application, the Committee needs to be satisfied that the proposal is in-keeping with the “Four Tests” of a minor variance as is set out in the Planning Act. Information pertaining to the four tests of a minor variance follows: Test # 1 - Is the variance in-keeping with the intent of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated as Settlement Area Living in accordance with the Township’s Official Plan, which permits residential development in accordance with Section C2.3.1 as well as local commercial uses as stated in Section C2.3.2 (h). Section C2.3.8 states that local commercial uses are limited to convenience retail uses and personal service uses. However, the business on the retained lands is an existing use on the subject lands that will continue to support the Village of Coldwater. It is our opinion that the propose of the variance meets the intent of the Official Plan by maintaining the general policies and objectives of the Settlement Living Area designation. The application accomplishes this through the pursuit of a use that is permitted by this designation and doing so on a lot that will be appropriately sized to maintain the settlement area character of the area. The proposed minor variance application maintains the intent of the Township’s Official Plan.




Test # 2 - Is the variance in keeping with the intent of the Zoning By-law? The subject lands are zoned General Commercial, Residential One Exception 28 and Residential Multiple One Exception 4 Hold in the Township of Severn’s By-law as shown in Figure 4. The proposal appears to comply with all Zoning By-law requirements with the exception of the minimum required rear yard setback for the existing building on the retained portion of the lands. Table 2 provides a summary of the requested variance to facilitate the development on the subject lands. Table 2: Summary of Variance

By-law Section

Minimum Requirement Variance Required Intent of Provision

Section 7.4 Table 7.2 (m)

Rear Yard 6 m Reduced Minimum Rear Yard Setback from 6 m to 4 m. Thus, a variance of 2 m is required.

The intent of the provision is to ensure that commercial uses are adequately separated from surrounding land uses. In addition, the rear yard setback is to provide adequate amenity space around buildings for accessory uses and access.

Test # 3 - Will the variance provide for the desirable development of the land? The subject site is designated and zoned to permit commercial and residential uses. The proposed development will provide an opportunity to continue to use the retained lands as the existing retail business. In addition, it will allow the severed lands to be used for residential purposes in the future. The proposed variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed residential use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. The size of the proposed lot and triggered reduced rear yard setback and will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. It is our opinion that the requested reduced rear yard setback of 4 meters would allow for the desirable use of the lands. Test # 4 - Is the variance minor in nature? The proposed minor variance would enable continued commercial development within the Village of Coldwater at a location, scale and density that is consistent with the vision for this community over the long term. The reduction of 2 metres from the required 6 metres is minor and will continue to provide sufficient separation from adjacent land uses and a sufficient area for access to the eastern portion of the property. It is our opinion that the proposed variance can be considered to be minor.




5.0 CONCLUSION Based on a detailed review of all applicable Provincial, County and Township policies, as well as considering the site location, conditions, context and surrounding uses, the proposed consent application will facilitate an appropriate lot configuration that will enable the future use and redevelopment of the lots in an appropriate manner. It has also been confirmed that the proposed variance satisfies for four tests of a minor variance as provided in Section 45 of the Planning Act. In conclusion, it is our opinion that both the proposed consent application and minor variance application represent good planning and should be approved. Respectfully submitted, MHBC PLANNING Jonathan Pauk HBASc., MSc. Jamie Robinson, BES, MCIP, RPP Planner Partner

Appendix 4

3.

4.


A reference plan of the severed parcel shall be prepared and duly registered byan Ontario Land Surveyor and one copy filed with the Secretary/Treasurer of theCommittee. A draft copy of the reference plan shall be provided to the Secretary-Treasurer for review and approval prior to registration on title. The referenceplan should show the existing easement in favour of Hydro One.A copy of the electronic registration "in preparation" draft deed for the severed lotshall be provided to the Secretary/Treasurer of the Committee together with asigned Acknowledgement and Direction so that the consent certificate may beissued.Municipal taxes shall be paid in full up to the date of request of issuance of theconsent certificate.That all fees and disbursements (legal, engineering, planning), if any, incurred bythe Township with respect to this application shall be paid for by the owner.

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

REPORT D17-065

Chair and Members

Committee of Adjustment

Andrea Wood row

Director of Planning and Development

October 13, 2017

Applications for Consent B-11/12/13-17Applicant/Agent: Nicola Mitchinson, Mitchinson Planning &Development Consultants Inc.Owner: Mariposa Homes Inc.Address: 2090 Birkeshire Woods Lane

Back round:


SettlementsSettlement Living Area (Bass Lake and Marchmont)Residential One Holding Twenty-Eight (R1-H28)

The subject lands are vacant and located within the Marchmont settlement area at theend of the Birkeshire Woods Lane cul-de-sac, just east of Highway 12/Digby Drive(Appendix 1). The lands are legally described as Parts 1-4 and 6-7 on 51R-38931,Part 1 on 51R-40512, and are known municipally as 2090 Birkeshire Woods Lane(Appendix 2).

The lands have been subject to previous Committee of Adjustment applications.Consent applications B-06/07/08, which proposed the creation of four (4) new lots and 1retained house/lot (4089 Digby Drive), were provisionally approved in 2012 (Appendix3); however, because the servicing could not be confirmed for the proposed lots, theapproval lapsed. More recently, application B-03-16 was provisionally approved by theCommittee of Adjustment to permit the subject lands to be severed in their entirety fromthe property located at 4089 Digby Drive. This application has since been finalizedresulting in the subject lands being bound by a Consent Agreement to address matterssuch as cash-in-lieu of parkland and cost sharing including the lands that will constitutethe future municipal road. As of May 2017, the subject lands are now owned byMariposa Homes (formerly owned by BRAMCO), the same developer as the adjacentLocke Subdivision, making cost sharing matters between two separate parties no longerapplicable; however, cash-in-lieu of parkland will be addressed as part of the subjectapplications.

The current proposals are for lands with an overall land area of approximately 1. 22hectares (3 acres), which are proposed for a total of four (4) lots (3 severed lots and oneretained lot) on a future municipal road extension as shown in Appendix 4 and detailedas follows:

Parton51R-38931Lot 1 Part 2Lot 2 (Part3Lot 3 Part 4Lot 4 Part 1 / Retained ParcelProperty for Road (Parts 6 & 7

Approximate Area0. 201 hectares 0. 5 acres0. 205 hectares 0. 51 acres

0.24 hectares 0.59 acres0.315 hectares 0. 78 acres0.269 hectares 0.66 acres

Approximate Frontage59.48 metres30. 46 metres30. 00 metres

59. 55 metresn/a

The subject applications for the creation of multiple lots can be considered by theCommittee of Adjustment as a result of the motion passed by Planning andDevelopment Committee on May 21 , 2009 which was subsequently ratified by Council:

MOTION PD052109-01: Moved by Member Cox and seconded by Member Crichtonthat a presentation of Rudy & Associates Ltd. with respect tothe proposed development of 4089 Digby Drive be received;AND FURTHER THAT the creation of 4 new lots and a roadallowance be supported, in principle, subject to Committee ofAdjustment approvals for consent and minor variances;AND FURTHER THAT should the development proceed withthe approval of the Committee of Adjustment, aDevelopment Agreement will be required for the application.

CARRIED

Planning and Development staff inspected the property prior to the writing of this report.

Discussion:

Planning staff'have reviewed and concur with the Planning Justification Report preparedby Nicola Mitchinson of Mitchinson Planning & Development Consultants Inc. datedJune 26, 2017 (Appendix 5) as it relates to:

. consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2014;

. conformity with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017); and,

. conformity with the County of Simcoe and Township of Severn Official Plan,including the Consent Policies contained in Section B8.2. 1.

The applications also have regard for the applicable sections of 51(24) of the PlanningAct.

Zoning By-law 2010-65, as amendedThe subject lands are currently zoned Residential One Holding Twenty-Eight (R1-H28).A proposed Condition is that the severed and retained lands be rezoned to ResidentialOne Exception Twenty-Two (R1-22) to permit the lots with a minimum of 30 metres of

lot frontage and a minimum lot size of 0.2 hectares (2, 000 sq. m. or 0. 5 acres). Therequired Condition for a Zoning By-law Amendment is to ensure the proposal complieswith the general intent and purpose of the Township's Zoning By-law.

Hydrogeological Report

In order to support the total number of lots proposed, a Hydrogeological Analysisprepared by Wilson Associates (April 2017) has been submitted as part of theapplication in support of the use of individual wells and individual sewage treatmentsystems on the proposed lots. This information was further supplemented by anillustrative map by Wilson Associates showing the proposed lots in an attempt todemonstrate that they can accommodate both a well and a septic, while at the sametime meet required setbacks. More specifically, the illustrative map depicts the potentiallocations of 200 sq. m. house envelopes, 15 metre radius drilled well setbacks and 312sq. m. sewage system envelopes (with 3 metre setbacks from property lines and 5metre setbacks from buildings) (Appendix 6).

As set out in the proposed Conditions, all of this information will be subject to a PeerReview undertaken by a qualified consultant acting on behalf of the Township, to thesatisfaction of the Township.


The Building/Septic Inspector provided the following comment: "Prior to final commentsa sewage system site plan and design must be provided."

The Director of Public Works verbally advised that there was no objection regarding theproposed dedication of the lands to the Township for the municipal road extension (i. e.Birkeshire Woods Lane cul-de-sac currently on private property).

All of the severed and retained lands will be subject to a cash-in-lieu of parklandrequirement as this has not been previously collected on the subject lands. This is alsoa requirement of Section 1. 1 c) iii. of the Consent Agreement.

Recommendation:

The Planning and Development Department has no objection to the approval of thisapplication, subject to the recommended Conditions set out in Appendix 7.

Respectfully submitted,


Appendix 1 - Key MapAppendix 2 -Air Imagery (Simcoe County GIS 2016)Appendix 3 - R-PlansAppendix 4 - Proposed Severance SketchAppendix 5 - Planning Justification Report by Mitchinson Planning & Development

Consultants Inc. (June 26, 2017)Appendix 6 - Illustrative MapAppendix 7 - Recommended Conditions

Appendix 1 – Key Map

SUBJECT PROPERTY

Appendix 2 – Air Imagery

2090 Birkeshire Woods Lane (subject lands for current applications)

4089 Digby Drive (portion of lands subject to former Consents B-06/07/08-09 and B-03-16)

Appendix 3 – R-Plans

Appendix 4 – Proposed Severance Sketch

Appendix 5 - Planning Justification Report by Mitchinson Planning & Development Consultants Inc. (June 26, 2017)

Appendix 6 – Illustrative Map

Appendix 7 – Recommended Conditions


1. Confirmation that the severed and retained lands can be adequately serviced with private wells and private sewage treatment systems to the satisfaction of the Township of Severn.

2. Passage of a Zoning By-law Amendment to rezone the severed and the retained lands to a Residential Type One Exception Twenty Two (R1-22) Zone (a minimum lot area of 2,000 sq. m. and minimum lot frontage of 30 metres), at the applicant’s expense.

3. That Parts 6 and 7 on 51R-38931 shall be transferred to the Township of Severn for the purpose of a municipal road, free and clear of all encumbrances, at the applicant’s expense.

4. A payment of 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland shall be paid for the severed and retained lands in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, acceptable to the Township of Severn, in cash or certified cheque. The Township shall retain an appraiser, at the applicant’s expense, to prepare the appraisal in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act if the value of the lands cannot be agreed upon.

5. A copy of the electronic registration “in preparation” draft deeds for the severed lots shall be provided to the Secretary/Treasurer of the Committee together with a signed Acknowledgement and Direction so that the consent certificates may be issued.

6. Municipal taxes shall be paid in full up to the date of request of issuance of the consent certificate.

7. That the applicant agrees that all fees and disbursements (peer reviews, legal, engineering, planning), if any, incurred by the Township with respect to this application shall be paid for by the applicant.

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

REPORT



October 13, 2017

Application for Consent B-12-16Request to Change ConditionsApplicant: Dale & Lenore McKeanAddress: 2242 Oakley Sideroad

D17-066

Back round:

The Committee of Adjustment approved Consent Application B-12-16 (2242 OakleySideroad) on October 18, 2017 to create a legal right-of-way over a portion of theproperty for vehicular access measuring 6 metres (19. 7 feet) in width and approximately700 metres (2, 296 feet) in length. The proposed right-of-way would provide access tothe following properties: 2622 Oakley Sideroad and 2472, 2482, 2508 and 2530Maclean Lake.

Discussion:

Section 53(23) of the Planning Act permits a change to the Conditions of a provisionallyapproved Consent before final Consent approval is given. A change to Conditionsunder 53(24) provides the applicant with an additional year (from the date of Notice ofthe new Decision) to fulfil the Conditions per 53(41) of the Planning Act.

The applicants called the Township to request the change in conditions a couple ofweeks ago to allow for extra time to fulfil the Conditions. It was discussed with staff thatthe applicants were having difficulty satisfying some of the Conditions related to theinsurance and that the applicants had purchased an additional property at 2436Maclean Lake which they would like added to the right-of-way.

As the original Notice of application included the addresses of 2622 Oakley Sideroadand 2472, 2482, 2508 and 2530 Maclean Lake it could be viewed as changing theoriginal application by adding an additional property to the Conditions when theaddresses are specifically stated within the Decision and were advertised in the Notice.Staff do not believe a proposed Change of Conditions can alter the original applicationdespite the repetition of the benefitting properties within the Conditions.

Furthermore, Township Council must approve a License Agreement to allow accessover the unopened road allowance as part of Condition 4. The Clerk, Sharon Goerkehas verbally commented that the applicants have never approached her or Council witha request for this agreement despite working towards securing insurance for the Right-of-Way.


The Township's Clerk originally provided the following comment: "In response to thenotice for the application for 2442 Oakley Sideroad, if any portion of a right-of-wayrequires access over an unopened road allowance within the municipality, the propertyowner is required to enter into a License Agreement for that portion of access as well asannually providing a Certificate of Liability Insurance in the amount of $2 million namingthe Township of Severn as an additional insured. I would appreciate your considerationof this matter while reviewing all similar applications."

Recommendation:

The Planning and Development Department believes a portion of the request, to add anadditional benefitting property represents a change to the original application rather thana change to the conditions. Furthermore, staff are of the opinion that the applicants hadample time to ask for an Agreement with Township Council prior to trying to work outthe insurance issues as Council must still consider the request for the Agreement. Staffrecommends that the applicants re-apply for a consent application with all of thebenefiting lands and request the Agreement, in principle, from Council prior to applyingfor the Right-of-Way Consent application to ensure adequate time to fulfil the Conditionson the new application.

Respectfully submitted, With the concurrence of,



Appendix 1 - Key MapAppendix 2 - Decision from October 18, 2017

Appendix 1

s

r%^

^^G^T- ^ h

/^^x^'" <7

.^ >~ ^1'.^'-^^A ~^

',5

,

/"

?:/ \^ '^. '^'i'yfov^^ 'y

f\^:h \. /."""<^,^>:^^teS^^""" '"%'^p'i.

\p& cgo^

^r-rl-&^ Jan^

^. ^ "3^v^^

:^::^"" v

9

".^.^

<?s^--^

.

-^

^^?--

^

SubjectProperty

.^'"^̂

\\

\ ^ --\. y'"'

\t..\

'-^

<&f!,.-- '-....^

IX,.'-''

,A \

Y "\

-,-' t?^.-^

v'y^-- ,.^s^-'̂ -: \"

/

^,-'

\

Appendix 2