AGENDA - COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT €€THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 - Committee … · Resolution Number: CA-01-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that the Committee

A Meeting of the Committee of Adjustment will be held on Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Municipal Offices, Port Carling, Ontario.

AGENDA - COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015

Page

1. Call to Order

2. Adoption of Agenda

a. Resolution to Adopt the Agenda.

3. Declaration of Conflict of Interest

a.

4. Adoption of Minutes

a. Resolution to Adopt the Minutes.

5. Delegations

a. None.

6. Hearing of Consent Applications (In Conjunction with ZoningAmendment Applications)

a. B/34/15/ML, Halcurt Holdings Inc. and 402208 Ontario Ltd., Part of Lot 14, Concession B, (Bala), 7-11-001-02, 7-11-001-03.

7. Hearing of Concurrent Consent Applications and MinorVariance Applications

a. None.

8. Hearing of Consent Applications

a. B/35/36/15/ML, Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc., Part of Lot 15, Concession 1, Parts 1 to 4, Plan 35R-12749, (Wood), 8-2-002.

4-18

19-34

35-46

Page 1 of 120

Page


b. B/37/15/ML, Wallace, Part of Island M, Skeleton Lake, Lot 12, Plan 12, (Watt), 2-19-062.

c. B/38/15/ML, Kenney, Part of Lot 4, Concession 14, Parts 2, 3 and 5, Plan BR-107, Part 1, Plan 35R-18435, (Medora), 4-8-030.

9. Hearing of Minor Variance Applications

a. A-39/15, Stills Bay Landing Corporation, Part of Lot 8, Concession 8, Parts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, Plan 35R-10754, (Medora), 4-5-067.

b. A-40/15, Butler, Part of Lot 30, Concession D, Lot 1, Plan M-535, (Medora), 4-22-046-01.

c. A-41/15, Verity, Part of Lot 31, Concession 13, Parts 1-3, Plan 35R-24333, Parts 12, 13 and 14, Plan 35R-24700, (Monck), 9-14-019, 9-14-020.

d. A-43/15, Langschmidt, Part of Lot 52, Concession A, (Cardwell), 4194 Highway 141, 1-1-005.

10. Correspondence

a. None.

11. Unfinished Business

a. None.

12. Information Items

a. None.

13. New Business

a. None.

14. Statistics

a. None.

15. Committee in Closed Session

a. None.

47-59

60-67

68-78

79-90

91-106

107-120

Page 2 of 120

Page

16. Adjournment

a. Resolution to Adjourn the Meeting.

Page 3 of 120

0O_<

__<

__._

.._._

mm O_u

>_u

.._C

m._

._<

_mz.

_.

_u_N

>_u

._.

_s_z

cam

m._

C_:

<B

3

Resolution to Adopt the Minutes.

Page 4 of 120

DRAFT

Committee of Adjustment Minutes – July 16, 2015 - Page 1 of 14

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES MINUTES OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

Thursday, July 16, 2015 A Meeting of Committee of Adjustment was held on Thursday, July 16, 2015, at 9:00 AM in the Council Chambers, Municipal Offices, Port Carling, Ontario. Members Present: Officials Present: Susan Benson B. Noble - Planner Jean-Ann Baranik D. Pink - Director of Planning Allen Edwards – Chair A. Glazier - Committee of Adjustment Mary Grady Coordinator/ Secretary-

Treasurer L. Forbes - Planning Assistant

1. Call to Order

a. Chair Edwards called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

2. Adoption of Agenda

a. Resolution to Adopt the Agenda. Resolution Number: CA-01-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that the Committee of Adjustment Meeting Agenda dated July 16, 2015, be adopted. Carried.

3. Declaration of Conflict of Interest

a. None.

4. Adoption of Minutes

a. Resolution to Adopt the Minutes. Resolution Number: CA-02-16/07/2015 Member Grady – Member Benson: Be it resolved that the minutes dated June 11, 2015, be adopted and approved as circulated. Carried.


Page 5 of 120

DRAFT


5. Delegations

a. None.

6. Hearing of Consent Applications (In Conjunction with Zoning Amendment Applications)

a. B/21/15/ML, Goltz, Part of Lot 14, Concession 11, (Monck), 9-7-025.

Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached. Notice of the Hearing was circulated 24 days prior. Submissions were received as follows: i) Letter from the District Municipality of Muskoka, Planning and Economic

Development Department. Mr. Noble reviewed the letter, a copy of which is attached.

ii) Report from Building Inspector, Sandy Bos. Mr. Noble reviewed the report, a copy of which is attached.

iii) Photographs from Don & Carol Goltz. Mr. Noble circulated the photographs, copies of which are attached.

Mr. Don & Mrs. Carol Goltz, Applicants, RR#6, Bracebridge, ON, attended the meeting. Mr. Goltz indicated they were available to answer questions. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. Committee had no questions. Resolution Number: CA-03-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/21/15/ML, (Goltz), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot be submitted to the

Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan. 2. That a Zoning By-Law Amendment be passed that recognizes the lot

frontages and areas on the severed and retained lots. 3. That the severed lot meet a minimum lot frontage of 445 feet. 4. That cash-in-lieu of parkland be dedicated to the Township in the amount

of 5% of the assessed value of the newly created vacant lot, or the entire lands, whichever is less.

5. That a replacement sewage system wholly contained on the severed parcel to serve the existing dwelling be installed.

6. That the applicant enter into a Consent Agreement with the District of Muskoka under Section 51(26) of the Planning Act regarding the location of any proposed well on the severed and retained lots.


Page 6 of 120

DRAFT


Carried. Mr. Goltz indicated they had paid cash-in-lieu of parkland when they had severed the original 300 acre lot and questioned if they had to pay it again. In response to Mr. Goltz’s question, Mr. Pink indicated staff would investigate the matter further with the applicant and amended conditions could be brought back to Committee in the future if it was deemed necessary.

b. B/22/23/15/ML, Minnaar and Lake Joseph Community Church, Part of Lot 17, Concession 8, Part 1, Plan 35R-19562, (Medora), 4-11-065, 4-11-066.




Ms. Margaret Walton, Agent, Planscape, 104 Kimberley Avenue, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1Z8, attended the meeting. Ms. Walton explained the intent of the application was to eliminate existing encroachments. Regarding the comments from The District Municipality of Muskoka, Ms. Walton indicated it was a technicality since both properties contain existing entrances. Ms. Walton indicated she was available to answer questions. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. In response to Committee’s question, Mr. Pink indicated the comments from the District are addressed in the prepared resolution. Resolution Number: CA-04-16/07/2015 Member Grady – Member Benson: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/22/15/ML, (Minnaar), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot be submitted to the

Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan. 2. That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed

lot will merge in title to the lot it is being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.


Page 7 of 120

DRAFT


3. That a Zoning By-Law Amendment be passed that rezones the severed lot from Waterfront Residential (WR1 and WR4) to Institutional (I).

4. That Schedule A of By-Law 2003-94 be amended to reflect the Lake Joseph Community Church resultant lot.

5. That the applicant enter into a Consent Agreement with the District of Muskoka under Section 51(26) of the Planning Act regarding the location of any proposed well, the prohibition of any new entrances and road widening on the resultant lot.

Carried. Resolution Number: CA-05-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/23/15/ML, (Lake Joseph Community Church) provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot be submitted to the

Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan. 2. That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed

lot will merge in title to the lot it is being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.

3. That a Zoning By-Law Amendment be passed that repeals By-Law 94-120 on the severed lot and rezones the severed lot from Institutional (I) to Waterfront Residential (WR4).

4. That Schedule A of By-Law 2003-94 be amended to reflect the Lake Joseph Community Church resultant lot.

5. That the applicant enter into a Consent Agreement with the District of Muskoka under Section 51(26) of the Planning Act regarding the location of any proposed well and road widening on the resultant lot.

Carried.

c. B/24/15/ML, Nairn and Coker, Part of Lot 34, Concession 2, (Watt), 2-8-001.




iii) Letter of support from Brian and Linda Mathers. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.


Page 8 of 120

DRAFT


iv) Letter of support from George and Marilyn Rodgers. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached

v) Letter of support from Sara Allard, Bruce French and Lorraine Norenberg. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.

vi) Letter of support from Mark Cooper. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.

vii) Letter of support from Lynne Ellis. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.

viii) Letter of support from Harold and Barbara Simkin. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.

Mr. Stephen Fahner, Agent, Northern Vision Planning Ltd., 109 Meadow Heights Drive, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1A4, attended the meeting. Mr. Fahner submitted and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is attached. Mr. Fahner indicated he was available to answer questions. Mr. Paul Donaldson, Agent, 3687 Hwy 118 W, Port Carling, ON, P0B 1J0, attended the meeting. Mr. Donaldson indicated he lives in the area and felt the application was suitable. Mr. Donaldson felt the property was more appropriately zoned as Rural (Ru1) not Waterfront Backlot (WR2) which would permit a home based office space. No one attended in opposition to the application. Mr. Fahner clarified for Committee the retained lot is proposed to be rezoned to Waterfront Residential Backlot (WR2), the severed lot would remain Rural (Ru1). In response to Committee’s questions, Mr. Pink reviewed Official Plan policies. Resolution Number: CA-06-16/07/2015 Member Grady – Member Benson: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/24/15/ML, (Nairn and Coker), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot is submitted to the

Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan. 2. Confirmation that the Township is satisfied that the severed and retained

lots are satisfactory for on-site sewage disposal and that any problems identified with any existing sewage system be corrected to the satisfaction of the Township.

3. That cash-in-lieu of parkland be dedicated to the Township in the amount of 5% of the assessed value of the newly created vacant lot, or the entire lands, whichever is less.

4. That a Zoning By-Law Amendment be passed that rezones the retained lot from Rural (RU1) to Waterfront Residential Backlot (WR2) and provides an exemption to lot area on the severed lot.

Carried.


Page 9 of 120

DRAFT


7. Hearing of Concurrent Consent Applications and Minor Variance

Applications

a. None.


a. B/25/26/15/ML, Kenwright, Part of Lot 22, Concessions 8 and 9, Lot 47A, Plan 7, Lot 47, Plan M-33, Lot 48, Plan M-33, (Wood), 6-8-017, 6-8-018.




Mr. Doug Jemmett, Agent, Coote Hiley Jemmett Limited, Ontario Land Surveyors, 127 Keith Road, Bracebridge, ON P1L 0A1 attended the meeting. Mr. Jemmett indicated he was available to answer questions and noted an application to close the Original Shore Road Allowance would be made. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. In response to Committee’s question, Ms. Margaret Kenwright, Applicant, Ridge Road, Bala, ON, P0C 1A0, indicated it was her intent to close the Original Shore Road Allowance. Resolution Number: CA-07-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/25/15/ML, (Kenwright), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot along with any required

right-of-way be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan.

2. That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed lot will merge in title to the lot it is being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.

3. That a Deeming By-law be approved to deem Lot 48, Plan M-33 not to be a lot on a plan of subdivision so that the severed lot can merge with the benefitting property.


Page 10 of 120

DRAFT


4. That the Original Shore Road Allowance in front of lot 47, Plan M-33 be closed and conveyed.

Carried. Resolution Number: CA-08-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/26/15/ML, (Kenwright), provided the following condition is fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot (right of way) be

submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan.

Carried.

b. B/27-31/15/ML, Judd, Part of Lot 32, Concession 13 and Part of the Road

Allowance between Concessions 12 and 13, Part 2, Plan 35R-23872, Parts 2, 3 and 4, Plan 35R-10142, (Medora), 4-16-005.




Ms. Jan Morrow, Agent, Lee, Roche and Kerr, attended the meeting. Ms. Morrow indicated the intent of the application is to clear up an encroachment of the roadway and grant a right-of-way to four benefitting properties. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. Committee had no questions. Resolution Number: CA-09-16/07/2015 Member Grady – Member Benson: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/27/15/ML, (Judd), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot be submitted to the

Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan.


Page 11 of 120

DRAFT


2. That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed lot will merge in title to the lot it is being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.

Carried. Resolution Number: CA-10-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Applications B/28-31/15/ML, (Judd), provided the following condition is fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot (right of way) be


Carried.

c. B/32/15/ML, Bowman, Part of Lot 10, Concession D, Parts 1-5, Plan 35R-19989, (Medora), 7-8-008.




No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. Committee had no questions. Resolution Number: CA-11-16/07/2015 Member Grady – Member Benson: Be it resolved that Consent be granted for Application B/32/15/ML, (Bowman), provided the following condition is fulfilled: 1. A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot (right of way) be


Carried.


Page 12 of 120

DRAFT


9. Hearing of Minor Variance Applications

a. A-34/15, O'Malley, Part of Lot 26, Concession 5, Parts 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Plan 35R-24384, (Wood), 6-2-081-10. Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached. Notice of the Hearing was circulated 16 days prior. Submissions were received as follows: i) Letter of support from Gordon Baker. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of

which is attached. Ms. Kelly Hodder, Agent, Planscape, 104 Kimberley Avenue, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1Z8, attended the meeting. Ms. Hodder reviewed the proposed development and the four tests of a minor variance. Ms. Hodder indicated she was available to answer questions. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. Committee had no questions. Resolution Number CA-12-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Application A-34/15, (O’Malley), to permit the construction of a one storey garage which is exempt from the requirement of maximum coverage of buildings on the lot area within 200 feet from the high water mark, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision, is hereby approved. Carried. REASONS FOR DECISION: It is the opinion of the Committee that this application is minor in nature, is suitable development for the enjoyment of the property, maintains the intent of Comprehensive Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended, and maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The Committee noted the location of the garage provides minimal visual impact, the proposed coverage on the entire lot is less than 10% and the neighbour indicated their support.

b. A-35/15, Steele, Part of Lot 32, Concession G, Parts 8-12, Plan 35R-3221, (Medora), 4-21-032-03. Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached.


Page 13 of 120

DRAFT


Notice of the Hearing was circulated 16 days prior. Submissions were received as follows: i) Letter of objection from Chris & Laura Hughes. Mr. Noble read the letter,

a copy of which is attached. ii) Letter of objection from Luciano and Janice Barbuto. Mr. Noble read the

letter, a copy of which is attached. iii) Letter of objection and photographs from John & Janet MacDonald. Mr.

Noble read the letter and circulated photographs, copies of which are attached.

iv) Letter of objection from Pat Ellis. Mr. Noble read the letter, a copy of which is attached.

Mr. Paul Donaldson, Agent, 3687 Hwy 118 W, Port Carling, ON, P0B 1J0, attended the meeting. Mr. Donaldson reviewed the current location of the boathouse and setbacks and explained that the proposed boathouse would be tucked into the shoreline, which would create more privacy for the neighbours. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. In response to Committee’s question, Mr. Noble indicated no tree cutting was evident at the time of the site visit. Mr. Adam Bain, 61 Roslin Ave., Toronto, ON, M4N 1Z1, attended the meeting. Mr. Bain showed where trees had been removed and noted that a Building Permit for demolition had been obtained. He explained the trees removed were to accommodate the future dwelling location. Mr. Bain indicated the trees that were to remain had been clearly marked to ensure privacy and had reviewed this with the neighbour. In response to Committee’s questions, Mr. Pink reviewed the proposed variances. Resolution Number CA-13-16/07/2015 Member Baranik – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Application A-35/15, (Steele), to permit the reconstruction and enlargement of a two storey boathouse on a lot that has 250 feet of lot frontage and to allow a boathouse to be 25 feet in height, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision, is hereby approved. Carried. REASONS FOR DECISION: It is the opinion of the Committee that this application is minor in nature, is suitable development for the enjoyment of the property, maintains the intent of Comprehensive Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended, and maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The Committee noted there is an existing two storey boathouse on the subject property, the proposed boathouse will be “tucked” into the shoreline, there will be no additional impact, the reconstruction of the first floor complies, the property is well vegetated and any vegetation in front of the existing dwelling is to remain.


Page 14 of 120

DRAFT


c. A-36/15, Chisholm, Part of Stepping Stone Island, Lake Rosseau, Part 2,

Plan 35R-13019, Part 1, Plan 35R-18395, Part 1, Plan 35R-21364, (Medora), 4-26-063. Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached. Notice of the Hearing was circulated 16 days prior. No submissions were received. Ms. Kelly Hodder, Agent, Planscape, 104 Kimberley Avenue, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1Z8, attended the meeting. Ms. Hodder reviewed the existing and proposed structures and the four tests of a minor variance. Ms. Hodder indicated she was available to answer questions. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. In response to Committee’s question, Ms. Hodder reviewed the locations of the existing (to be removed), proposed and pre-existing sleeping cabins. Resolution Number CA-14-16/07/2015 Member Baranik – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Application A-36/15, (Chisholm), to permit the reconstruction and enlargement of a sleeping cabin on a lot where two dwellings exist, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision, is hereby approved. Carried. REASONS FOR DECISION: It is the opinion of the Committee that this application is minor in nature, is suitable development for the enjoyment of the property, maintains the intent of Comprehensive Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended, and maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The Committee noted the property is well vegetated, has extensive lot frontage, the impact from the water is minimal, there will be no impact on the water and the neighbours did not indicate any concerns.

d. A-37/15, O'Malley, Part of Lot 26, Concession 5, Parts 1 and 2, Plan 35R-24384, (Wood), 6-2-081. Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached. Notice of the Hearing was circulated 16 days prior. Submissions were received as follows:


Page 15 of 120

DRAFT


i) Letter of support from Gordon R. Baker. Mr. Noble reviewed the letter, a copy of which is attached.

ii) Photographs from the Agent were submitted. Mr. Noble circulated the photographs, copies of which are attached.

Ms. Margaret Walton, Agent, Planscape, 104 Kimberley Avenue, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1Z8, attended the meeting. Ms. Walton provided a brief review of the history of the property. Ms. Walton indicated the applicant owns an antique boat and the variance for increased height is to accommodate that boat. Ms. Walton reviewed the four tests of a minor variance and indicated she was available to answer questions. No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. In response to Committee’s question, Ms. Walton reviewed the size of the previous boathouse and noted the property is a point of land with extensive water frontage. Resolution Number CA-15-16/07/2015 Member Baranik – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Application A-37/15, (O’Malley), to permit the reconstruction and enlargement of a two storey boathouse which will result in a lot coverage of 10.8% or 8,600 square feet and to permit a boathouse to be 27 feet in height, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision, is hereby approved. Carried. REASONS FOR DECISION: It is the opinion of the Committee that this application is minor in nature, is suitable development for the enjoyment of the property, maintains the intent of Comprehensive Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended, and maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The Committee noted there is significant frontage, there is mature vegetation along the shoreline, there will be relatively minimal impact and the neighbours did not indicate any concerns.

e. A-38/15, 2364831 Ontario Inc., Part of North Bohemia Island, Lake Rosseau, Part 1, Plan 35R-3775, (Medora), 4-26-081. Mr. Noble explained the history, nature and location of the application/property and displayed a graphic summary of the application, a copy of which is attached. Notice of the Hearing was circulated 16 days prior. No submissions were received. Mr. Tony Robinson, Agent, P.O. Box 111, Windermere, ON, P0B 1P0, attended the meeting. Mr. Robinson indicated he was available to answer questions.


Page 16 of 120

DRAFT


No one attended in support of or in opposition to the application. Committee had no questions. Resolution Number CA-16-16/07/2015 Member Baranik – Member Grady: Be it resolved that Application A-38/15, (2364831 Ontario Inc.), to permit the replacement of a roof which will result in a height increase to 20’9”, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision, is hereby approved. Carried. REASONS FOR DECISION: It is the opinion of the Committee that this application is minor in nature, is suitable development for the enjoyment of the property, maintains the intent of Comprehensive Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended, and maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The Committee noted the footprint of the dwelling is not changing, the change in roofline is minimal, drainage will be improved and the neighbours did not indicate any concerns.

10. Correspondence

a. None.

11. Unfinished Business

a. None.

12. Information Items

a. Ontario Municipal Board Decision, A-54/14, Curry, Part of Lots 15 and 16, Concession 8, Part Lot 1 and Lot 2, Plan M-177, (Wood), Parts 4 and 5, Plan BR-42, 6-7-106. Mr. Pink reviewed the Decision of the Ontario Municipal Board.

b. Appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board, B/19/15/ML, Estate of Margorie Smith, Part of Lot 33, Concession 13, Parts 4 and 5, Plan 35R-8064, (Monck), 9-14-049. Mr. Pink reviewed the nature of the application and appeals.

c. Appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, A-06/15, Keshen, Part of Lot 26, Concession 8, Part 16, RCP 549, Parts 1-3, Plan 35R-24077, (Monck), 9-9-051. Mr. Pink reviewed the nature of the application and appeal.


Page 17 of 120

DRAFT


d. Discussion re: Staff Recommendations and Resolutions. Committee held a brief discussion regarding recommendations, provided by planning staff, within staff reports presented to Committee. Committee expressed concerns regarding public perception, and the possibility of having to hire a professional planner if an application is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Committee requested staff consider future reports regarding applications that are without specific recommendations.

13. New Business

a. None.

14. Statistics

a. None.

15. Committee in Closed Session

a. None.

16. Adjournment

a. Resolution to Adjourn the Meeting. Resolution Number: CA-17-16/07/2015 Member Baranik – Member Grady: Be it resolved that the meeting adjourn at 11:48 a.m. Carried.

Allen Edwards, Chair Andrea Glazier, Secretary-Treasurer


Page 18 of 120

B/34/15/ML, Halcurt Holdings Inc. and 402208

Page 19 of 120

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES

EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF PROPOSED

CONSENT AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT

B/34/15/ML, ZBA-31/15, BY-LAW 2015-86 HALCURT HOLDINGS INC. AND 402208 ONTARIO LTD.

ROLL # 7-11-001-02, 7-11-011-03

The lands affected are described as Part of Lot 14, Concession B, (in the former Town of Bala), now in the Township of Muskoka Lakes. The lands are presently in the ownership of Halcurt Holdings Inc. and 402208 Ontario Ltd. A severance application and zoning amendment application have been received to sever a portion of land and add to an abutting lot. The zoning amendment will address permitted uses on the resultant lot. In severance application, (B/34/15/ML), the applicant (Halcurt Holdings Inc.) wishes to sever a portion of their property and add it to an abutting lot. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of 402208 Ontario Ltd. (Bala Court Storage). The proposed severed lot is vacant and a driving range is proposed. The proposed retained lot is vacant and no changes are proposed. The zoning amendment application (ZBA-31/15, By-law 2015-86) proposes an exemption to Section 4.3.1 of By-law 87-87 as amended, and Section 5.3.1 of By-law 2014-14 as amended, being the permitted uses in an Industrial (M1 and M1-H (holding)) zone. The applicant proposes a driving range and mini putt facility on the subject lands. Please note that those lands zoned C4 permit a recreational establishment defined to include a miniature golf facility and similar uses. This severance and zoning by-law amendment application will have the effect of creating a new lot configuration and permitting a driving range and mini putt facility on the subject lands. Please note By-law 2014-14 was passed by Council to replace By-law 87-87. By-law 2014-14 has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. In this case, both by-laws currently apply to the subject lands. Key Plan – next page


Page 20 of 120

SutherlandBay

Spiers

Lake

KIT

CHENER

STREET

MacDONALD

RD

CU

RR

IEST

CNR

BURNS

ST

Bala Falls

PORTAGE ST

ABERDEEN

ST

N. B

UR

GESS

AVE.

CP

RA

IL

BU

RG

ES

SA

VE

MR

169

PA

RK

RO

AD

CEN

TER

AVE

MOONRIVER

BELLE I. (M9) orSTEWARTS I.

BEATTYLITTLE STEW

BALA PARK I. (M8)

JUNIPER I. (MR2)

CRAG I. (M3R)

CON C

CON C CON C

CON B

CON C

CON B

CON C

CON C

CON C

CON A

CON B

CON B

CON A

CON B

CON B

CON B

CON B

CON B

CON A

CON C

CON B

CON B

LOT 11

LOT 12

ISLAND

LOT 13

LOT 13

LOT 13

LOT 35

LOT 14

LOT 14

LOT 15

LOT 16

LOT 14

LOT 15

LOT 16

LOT 15

LOT 15

LOT 16

LOT 16

LOT 17

LOT 18

LOT 17

ISLAND

LOT 18

ISLANDISLAND

LOT 19

KEY PLAN


Page 21 of 120

Page 1 of 9

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA REPORT

TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: B/34/15/ML (HALCURT HOLDINGS INC.), Part of Lot 14, Concession B

(Bala), Roll #: 7-11-001-02, 7-11-011-03

RECOMMENDATION: If Committee wishes to approve consent application B/34/15/ML (HALCURT HOLDINGS INC.) that the following conditions be required:

A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot along with any required right-of-way be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan; and

That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed lot

will merge in title to the lot it is being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.

APPROVALS: Date Signature

Submitted By: B. Noble, Development Planner Aug 7/15 Original Signed By B. Noble

Approved By: D. Pink, Director of Planning Aug 7/15 Original Signed By D. Pink

ORIGIN A severance application and zoning amendment application have been received to sever a portion of land and add to an abutting lot. The zoning amendment will address permitted uses on the resultant lot. In severance application, (B/34/15/ML), the applicant (Halcurt Holdings Inc.) wishes to sever a portion of their property and add it to an abutting lot. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of 402208 Ontario Ltd. (Bala Court Storage). The proposed severed lot is vacant and a driving range is proposed. The proposed retained lot is vacant and no changes are proposed. The zoning amendment application (ZBA-31/15, By-law 2015-86) proposes an exemption to Section 4.3.1 of By-law 87-87 as amended, and Section 5.3.1 of By-law 2014-14 as amended, being the permitted uses in an Industrial (M1 and M1-H (holding)) zone. The applicant proposes a driving range and mini putt facility on the subject lands. Please note that those lands zoned C4 permit a recreational establishment defined to include a miniature golf facility and similar uses. This severance and zoning by-law amendment application will have the effect of creating a new lot configuration and permitting a driving range and mini putt facility on the subject lands.


Page 22 of 120

Page 2 of 9

Please note By-law 2014-14 was passed by Council to replace By-law 87-87. By-law 2014-14 has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. In this case, both by-laws currently apply to the subject lands. The following is a summary of the proposed changes to the property:

Consent Lot Property Characteristic Existing Change Resultant By-law

Requirement

Severed Lot Frontage - - - --

Lot Area - +7.87ac 7.87ac --

Retained Lot Frontage 218ft - 218ft 150ft

Lot Area 51.87 -7.87ac 44ac 1ac

Benefitting Lot Frontage 650ft - 650ft 150ft

Lot Area 5.49ac +7.87ac 13.36ac 1ac BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Urban Centre – Highway Commercial and Industrial By-law 87-87 Zoning: Community Commercial (C4) & Community Industrial (M1-H & M1) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Community Commercial (C4) & Community Industrial (M1-H & M1) Schedule No.: 56 Access: Muskoka Road 169 (Year Round Maintained) Neighbouring Uses: Residential, Institutional, Storage Units Fisheries Resource: Not Applicable Original Shore Road Allowance: Not Applicable Civic Address: Not Assigned & 3234 District Highway 169 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

1. Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Centre in the Official Plan. A major goal in this designation is to provide a nucleus for community facilities and services at a more intensive level and at higher densities than expected in a Community. The following Policies and objectives have relevance to this application:


Page 23 of 120

Page 3 of 9

Section C.3.1.1 to direct and accommodate development in a way that will result in a compact, efficient community that complements and sustains the natural environment and the character of the community.

Section C.3.1.2 to ensure that the majority of growth is focused in the Urban Centres.

Section C.3.1.3 to ensure that new growth in the Urban Centres is on full municipal services, except in limited circumstances.

Section C.3.1.4 to identify opportunities for intensification, infill, and redevelopment within the existing boundaries.

Section C.3.1.9 to promote economic growth in Urban Centres, particularly in the Downtown core areas.

Section C.3.2.3 to have all development eventually serviced by piped municipal sewer and water facilities and all new development on full municipal services, except in limited circumstances. Section C.3.2.11 to protect environmentally sensitive areas. Section C.3.2.12 to foster recreational opportunities for both permanent and seasonal residents in the Urban Centres. Section C.3.2.13 to encourage light industrial and commercial development in order to provide economic and employment opportunities in the Township.

Section C.3.2.14 to promote development that will complement the existing community character, as well as adjacent and/or neighbouring character.

Section C.3.2.15 to encourage development which will enhance the tourism economy. The growth of existing tourist establishments will be fostered.

Section C.3.2.17 to encourage redevelopment of existing, underutilized properties, and the productive use of infill sites in order to promote intensification. Section C.4.2.4 site plan control will be required for all major development and redevelopment projects, including all commercial, industrial and institutional uses, to ensure the character of the Urban Centres is protected. Section C.5.2.6 municipal sewage and water services are the preferred form of servicing for settlement areas. Intensification and redevelopment within settlement areas on existing municipal services shall be promoted, where feasible.

Section C.5.2.7 commercial, industrial or institutional development shall generally not be permitted unless on full municipal services. Section C.5.2.10 development shall proceed on the basis of full municipal water and sewer services within Area 1 identified for full municipal services on Schedules G1A and G2A.

Section C.5.2.11 existing development within Area 1 designated for municipal water and sewer services on Schedules G1A and G2A shall be required to connect to the municipal water and sewer services.


Page 24 of 120

Page 4 of 9

A portion of the property fronting on District Road 169 is located in the Highway Commercial land use designation in Bala. The following Highway Commercial development policies are stated in the Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan and have relevance to this application:

Section C.12.3.1 lands designated Highway Commercial are intended to provide commercial services and facilities to the travelling public or to accommodate commercial activities which may not be conveniently located in the core, which require extensive land areas for buildings, parking and storage areas. Section C.12.3.2 uses will include such uses as automotive and marine sales and services establishments, gas stations, motels, building supply centres, garden centres, and contractor’s yards.

Section C.12.3.4 highway commercial uses should, in general, be limited to lots of large size having generous frontage on a major street.

Section C.12.3.5 the zoning by-law shall establish appropriate minimum lot requirements, including setbacks and landscaped buffers.

Section C.12.3.6 adequate buffering between commercial uses and residential, open space, institutional or recreational uses shall be provided where necessary.

Section C.12.3.8 the design of highway commercial development should be integrated with the balance of the community, to reflect the character of the local area.

Section C.12.3.9 open storage shall be encouraged to be located to the rear of the buildings or uses. If it cannot be located to the rear of the building, an appropriate buffer will be required. Section C.12.3.10 landscaping, to blend the building into the natural setting, shall be encouraged.

A portion of the property is located in the Industrial land use designation in Bala. The following Industrial development policies are stated in the Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan and have relevance to this application:

Section C.13.1 the primary use of land in areas designated Industrial shall be for light industrial uses generally related to serving the surrounding community. Such uses may include processing, manufacturing, assembly of materials, contractor's yards, and warehousing.

Section C.13.2 commercial uses may be located, provided they are secondary and incidental to a permitted industrial use.

Section C.13.3 industrial uses shall be located where direct access and frontage to a public, open and maintained road is available.

Section C.13.4 adequate buffering between industrial uses and residential, open space or recreational uses shall be provided.

Section C.13.6 buildings shall be so designed, and lighting and signs so arranged, as to conform with the desired character of adjacent uses.

Section C.13.7 when such uses front onto a public road, an element of landscaping between the road and the building shall be required.


Page 25 of 120

Page 5 of 9

Section C.13.8 open storage shall be encouraged to be located to the rear of the buildings or uses. If it cannot be located to the rear of the building, a landscaped buffer will be required.

Section C.13.10 all lands designated Industrial shall be referred to as the Employment Areas of the Township.

Section C.13.12 all industrial development is subject to Site Plan Control.

Section C.13.14 all industrial development shall be designed with the needs of the accessibly challenged in mind. This may include the requirement for ramps and accessible parking spaces.

Specific policies for Bala include:

Section C.18.12 states that continued commercial and industrial growth north along the north side of Highway 169 is envisaged in the foreseeable future. It is anticipated that the users will not reduce the focus of the Urban Centre from the commercial core.

Section C.18.13 Lots 14 and 15, Concessions B and C (Medora) have been designated industrial due to their locational and terrain characteristics, availability of municipal water and sewer services, and proximity to a Provincial Highway. Industrial development on these lands would service the western and central areas of the Township.

2. Zoning By-Law

Existing zoning on the proposed severed lot is Community Industrial (M1-H) with a holding provision. The holding provision (-H) was imposed as part of Zoning By-law amendment 2007-59. By-law 2007-59 specifically states that no buildings or structures shall be permitted in any Zone followed by the symbol (H) or “Holding” until such time as a further By-law is passed to remove the (H) or “Holding” provision in accordance with Section 36 of the Planning Act R.S.O 1990, as amended. The (H) or “Holding” shall only be lifted for portions of the property that are subject to a development application which includes a site plan. The area of the property outside of the site plan shall remain subject to a “Holding” until development is proposed for that area. In this case, the holding provision exists on the severed and retained lots, a driving range is proposed on the severed lot and buildings and structures are not proposed. The existing holding provision can therefore remain on the severed and retained lots. A structure is proposed on the benefitting lands, however these lands are not subject to a holding provision. The M1 zone has a minimum frontage and area requirement of 150 feet and 1 acre respectively in both zoning By-law 87-87 and 2014-14. The proposed severed lot is to be added to the benefitting lot resulting in a lot frontage of 650 feet and 13.36 acres. The proposed retained lot is to have 218 feet of frontage and 44 acres of area. Both resulting lots meet the requirements of the Zoning By-laws in terms of frontage and area. 3. Site Characteristics

A site visit was conducted on July 29, 2015. The property is located on Muskoka Road 169 in Bala. During the site visit the proposed severed lot was observed to be gently sloping and wooded. No structures were observed on the proposed severed lot at the time of the site visit. A narrow drainage ditch was also observed on the southern extent of the proposed severed lot at the time of the site visit. During the site visit the proposed retained lot was observed to be wooded. No structures were observed on the proposed retained lot.


Page 26 of 120

Page 6 of 9

The benefitting lands were observed to be flat with 4 large storage buildings, as well as recreational vehicles, trailers, and tractors in the southern side yard. The southern side yard is the proposed location for the mini putt, storage building with pro shop, washrooms and snack bar and the driving range, which extend to the northeast onto the proposed severed lot. It should be noted that extensive tree removal will be needed on the proposed severed lot for the proposed driving range.

Air Photo showing approximate location of severed lot to be added to benefitting lands to the southwest


Page 27 of 120

Page 7 of 9

Northeast facing view of benefitting land showing storage buildings

Southeast facing view of approximate location for driving tees, mini putt, and storage building/pro shop/snack bar


Page 28 of 120

Page 8 of 9

Southeast facing view of proposed severed lot (left) and benefitting lands (Right)

4. Land Use Compatibility

The applicant proposes a lot addition and no newly created lots. The proposed severed lot (to be added) is vacant and a driving range is proposed. The proposed retained lot is to remain vacant, and the benefitting lot is to maintain storage uses, and add a driving range, mini putt and storage building/pro shop/snack bar. Neighbouring land uses to the proposed severed, retained, and benefitting lands include vacant and mixed use lands to the west, and to the south include a municipal sports park, post office, construction company, and residential lands. To the east the retained lands abut the Canadian Pacific Railway. Staff does consider the proposed driving range, mini putt and storage/snack bar/pro shop as compatible with neighbouring uses in an area of Bala considered to be employment lands. 5. Servicing Municipal Sewer services are not currently available at the entrance to the property on Muskoka Road 169. These services are required to permit further development as the subject lands are within Area 1 of Schedule G1A of the Official Plan. Section C.5.2.10 of the Official Plan states that development shall proceed on the basis of full municipal water and sewer services within Area 1 identified for full municipal services on Schedules G1A and G2A. In addition, Section C.5.2.11 of the Official Plan states that existing development within Area 1 designated for municipal water and sewer services on Schedules G1A and G2A shall be required to connect to the municipal water and sewer services. In this case the proposed lot addition and zoning by-law amendment to permit a driving range on the proposed severed lot are not considered to require any specific conditions with regard to servicing. No


Page 29 of 120

Page 9 of 9

structures are proposed as a part of the concurrent planning applications. The storage building/snack bar/pro shop (with washrooms) is proposed on the benefitting lands. This structure is permitted on the benefitting lot as of right without specific approval in the proposed planning applications. It should be noted however that sewer service hook-up, may be required for the construction of this building,which will be reviewed by the District of Muskoka. 6. Development Potential The proposed consent application does result in a unique retained lot which may not be ideal for future development. Staff recognizes that the subject lands are considered employment lands and when future development is to occur, access would be needed from 169 along the northern strip of the retained lot. Due to the nature of this access, development may be costly to install an entrance and water and sewer servicing along this strip to get to the backlands and may limit development potential due to a narrow width for a significant distance. Regardless of lot configuration, the uses proposed appear reasonable in the Town of Bala and may benefit the community, both in terms of recreational activities, as well as employment. Given the driving range use, with no structures, future reconfiguration may also be possible, if needed. 7. Site Plan Control Section C.4.2.4 of the Official Plan states that site plan control will be required for all major development and redevelopment projects, including all commercial, industrial and institutional uses, to ensure the character of the Urban Centres is protected. In this case site plan control will be automatically initiated on the property prior to the issuance of a building permit or as a result of parking requirements. It is recommended by Staff that Site Plan Control also address landscape buffering, and drainage on the property as an existing drainage ditch crosses the middle of the resultant lot from south to north 8. Summary In general the proposed lot addition and concurrent Zoning By-law amendment is reasonable on the subject property. The proposed attractions appear to introduce new activities and create jobs in an area designated as employment lands. In addition, the site plan control measures will create an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the property along Highway 169 for those entering and exiting Bala. Staff have not included a condition of the zoning by-law amendment for the consent, as the new lot configuration is not contingent on a potential future additional use.


Page 30 of 120

SMDPWD5"-"5“"'°‘9' Sn?-3'ozscnwnw; ‘V

.,.Nx

N3

s 2§«.1 E; _gsa ;2&5 M

..i£*5:§. '

ggsggéésa"

run? Lumu; m;ao~uss..,..z [5?S~»AsrdPor IMDDRAMm) N nu: m.Nssm=H?Inus\<ak‘.Awas

2:,ii‘3-3‘g

§§§§2

35$; ,,>3Z<§5§


Page 31 of 120

INFORMATIONALSKETCH


Page 32 of 120


Page 33 of 120

V

Kv, .

m§.

.|_.n

IQ..

323.

H‘

Sam

.:>

zuG

.no

znm

mns

zu

8<zu

..au

onE

9):2

-.=

n

Tosz

mz? on

:cm

xox>

r>xm

m_x

m.a

n_.:§

t?$>

E4<

R5~

?AX

>.

§b:a

....:E

!to

129.

mi.»

wor

canu

?..o.

_._J

_\§2

as$3

Sm§\

oo...

n$.m

.aL9

..\.w

:&¢1

:vO

wB

acon

»20

5.7

.in

.‘as

zvz?

Eu

35.9

.9ta

wm

‘II.

n?uu

dnh

u....

u.u.

..u...

..h..

moz

mac

rm_ 40m

<.r

><

< N9. 9

8


Page 34 of 120

B/35/36/15/ML, Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc., Part of

Page 35 of 120

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE #: B/35/36/15/ML

ROLL #: 8-2-002

NOTICE OF HEARING OF AN APPLICATION FOR CONSENT

To consider an application for consent for a proposed land severance pursuant to Section 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, Chapter P.13, as amended.

APPLICATION MADE BY: Peter Follows,1314 Lakeshore Road East, Oakville, ON, L6J 1L6

2146373 Ontario Inc., 22 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 2001, Toronto, ON, M4T 2S7

LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 15, Concession 1, Parts 1 to 4, Plan 35R-12749, (Wood), Civic

Address: 1030 Broadley Road, Zoning Schedule: 37 EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Two severance applications have been made to sever a vacant lot and add those lands to two abutting lots. In the first application, (B/35/15/ML), Peter Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc. propose to sever a portion of property and add it to the abutting lot to the west. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of Joan Macleod-Follows. The severed lot is vacant and no changes are proposed.The abutting lot contains a dwelling, boathouse, and shed. In the second application, (B/36/15/ML), Peter Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc. wish to sever the remaining portion of their property and add it to the abutting lot to the east. The severed lot is vacant and no changes are proposed. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of 2146373 Ontario Inc. The abutting lot contains a dwelling, boathouse, tennis court, and shed. Please note no new additional lots are being created and in fact there is a reduction of one lot through the proposed lot additions. NOTICE: A Notice of this Hearing has been circulated to all property owners within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject property and to the appropriate official and agencies according to Ontario Regulation 197/96 at least 14 days prior to this Hearing. This Notice has been sent to you for your information and does not require any response unless you wish to make one. The above noted application will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph Street and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755.


Page 36 of 120

Notice of Hearing B/35/36/15/ML, Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc. PUBLIC HEARING: ANY PERSON may attend this Hearing and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of or in opposition to the proposed consent application. Please see address below. If a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of Committee in respect of the proposed consent does not make written submissions to Committee before it gives or refuses to give a provisional consent, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss the appeal. You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: There may be additional information relating to the proposed consent application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on weekdays between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, P.O. Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number(s) noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING: If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION: If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. A copy of the decision of the Committee will be sent to the applicant and to each person who appeared in person or by counsel at the hearing and who has filed with the Secretary-Treasurer a written request for notice of decision. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier

Secretary-Treasurer


Page 37 of 120


Page 38 of 120

Page 1 of 7


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: B/35/36/15/ML (FOLLOWS / 2146373 ONTARIO INC.) Part of Lot 15,

Concession 1, Parts 1 to 4, Plan 35R-12749, (Wood), Civic Address: 1030 Broadley Road, Roll #: 8-2-002

RECOMMENDATION: If Committee wishes to approve consent applications B/35/36/15/ML (FOLLOWS / 2146373 ONTARIO INC.) that the following conditions be required:

A registerable description (deed) of the severed lots along with any required right-of-way be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan;

That a legal undertaking be submitted in order to confirm that the severed

lots will merge in title to the lots they are being added to upon registration of the transfer/deed.




ORIGIN Two severance applications have been made to sever a vacant lot and add those lands to two abutting lots. In the first application, (B/35/15/ML), Peter Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc. propose to sever a portion of property and add it to the abutting lot to the west. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of Joan Macleod-Follows. The severed lot is vacant and no changes are proposed.The abutting lot contains a dwelling, boathouse, and shed. In the second application, (B/36/15/ML), Peter Follows and 2146373 Ontario Inc. wish to sever the remaining portion of their property and add it to the abutting lot to the east. The severed lot is vacant and no changes are proposed. The abutting lot is currently in the ownership of 2146373 Ontario Inc. The abutting lot contains a dwelling, boathouse, tennis court, and shed.


Page 39 of 120

Page 2 of 7

Please note no new additional lots are being created and in fact there is a reduction of one lot through the proposed lot additions. The following is a summary of the proposed changes to the property:


Requirement

Severed #1 Lot Frontage - +101.7 ft 101.7 ft -

Lot Area - +1.12ac 1.12ac -

Severed #2 Lot Frontage - +101.7 ft 101.7 ft -

Lot Area - +1.12ac 1.12ac -

Benefitting Lands #1 Lot Frontage 526ft 72 ft 598ft 400ft

Lot Area 5.43ac +1.12ac 6.55ac 2ac

Benefitting Lands #2 Lot Frontage 444ft 78ft 522ft 300ft

Lot Area 4.26ac +1.12ac 5.38 1.5ac

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR6-7) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR6-7) Schedule No.: 37 Access: Broadley Road (Year Round Maintained) Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Fisheries Resource: Type 2 General Fish Habitat Original Shore Road Allowance: Not Applicable Civic Address: 1030 Broadley Road PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan

The subject property is designated Waterfront in the Official Plan. Waterfront policies encourage the protection of waterfront character, and the environment. One of the main objectives of the Waterfront designation is to ensure built form does not dominate the natural shoreline.


Page 40 of 120

Page 3 of 7

The following Waterfront policies are stated in the Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan and have relevance to these applications:

Section B.2.4 (Principles): Limiting density of buildings and structures in the Waterfront area is important in protecting the character of the Waterfront area. Many factors affect Waterfront character such as number of structures, setbacks, shoreline vegetative buffers, height, built size, built form, shoreline structures and the historical lake development. Strict adherence to policies limiting density related to these factors is paramount. Section B.5.2 (Character): Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs.

Section B.5.8 (General Development Standards): Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront.

Section B.5.10 (General Development Standards): The following shall constitute minimum lot requirements, unless otherwise specified:

a) a lot area of 0.4 hectares (1 acre); and, b) a water frontage of 60 metres (200 feet).

2. Zoning By-Law

The applicants propose two lot additions which will eliminate one lot and add 101.7 feet of frontage and 1.12 acres to each of the benefitting lots. Benefitting Lands #1 is proposed to have 598 feet of frontage and 6.55 acres. Benefitting Lands #2 is proposed to have 522 feet of frontage and 5.38 acres. Benefitting Lands #1 is zoned WR6-7 in By-Law 2014-14 which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres and minimum frontage of 400 feet. Benefitting Lands #2 is zoned WR5-7 and WR5-7R and requires a minimum lot area of 1.5 acres and a minimum frontage of 300 feet. Both benefitting lots meet the lots size and frontage requirements of the by-law and are increasing in size. It is also important to note that three lots are proposed to become two through the consent application. 3. Site Characteristics

A site visit was conducted on July 29, 2015. The property was accessed via Broadley Road. During the site visit, the severed lots were observed to be well treed and gently sloping to Lake Muskoka. No structures were observed on the severed lots. Benefitting Lot #1 was observed to have sparse mature coniferous vegetation and steep slopes on the northern side of the property. Existing structures on Benefitting Lands #1 included a dwelling, shed, privy, and 1.5 storey boathouse. Benefitting Lands #2 was observed to be partly treed with flat to moderate slopes. Existing structures on Benefitting Lands #2 included a dwelling, two storey boathouse, tennis court and shed.


Page 41 of 120

Page 4 of 7

Air Photo of subject lands


Page 42 of 120

Page 5 of 7

Northwest facing view of dwelling on proposed Benefitting Lands #1

Northwest facing view of dwelling on Benefitting Lands #2


Page 43 of 120

Page 6 of 7

East facing view along shoreline of Severed Lot#1 and Severed Lot #2

West facing view of Severed Lots


Page 44 of 120

Page 7 of 7

4. Rights-Of-Way The consent application proposes a right-of-way across Benefitting Lot #2 and Severed Lot #2 in favour of the other resulting lot (Severed Lot #1 and Benefitting Lot #1). Rights-of-way are generally considered a private matter between landowners and Staff does not have any objection to the right-of-way as proposed. 5. Summary Staff feels that the proposed application for consent is reasonable on the property as there is a reduction of one lot and both benefitting lots are increasing in size, resulting in large resulting lots. Staff has no objection to the proposed consent applications however, if Committee is considering approval, Planning Staff recommend the above noted standard conditions.


Page 45 of 120

asuznwm uwns 1. mm ..=. . an lungsivsnm uuns n navnm M54 . 1.11 ms

Ibwssmm was n swwmr UNE rxmmx . ammm mm]: Nu<Iu><Emo<n.4z . mvuwaucouwans vdwirlxuurui . sin

ummnnc uuns pa nnvmo ma . us .;..=svtwenv-ms nmmmmn ...m.=¢

mm cuuns smumtuuimmrux . “.1am mm n umruwsrwmruz . mumy unwwsn smumvuis Mums . 521:

LAKE

Tum m mamu.A.,=

,.asusrmns uwus aw

°0~w _

Mg:L£ar>- Foum}r"smaway;_6-4-rnem mg,

on an or

LOT 15, CONCESSION 1

GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF WOOD

TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES

DISTRICT MUNICIPALITYOF MUSKOKA

smug - 1INc|4 = wnuser


Page 46 of 120

B/37/15/ML, Wallace, Part of Island M, Skeleton Lake, Lot

Page 47 of 120

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE #: B/37/15/ML

ROLL #: 2-19-062



APPLICATION MADE BY: David Patrick Wallace, Box 1362, Bracebridge, ON, P1L 1V5 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Island M, Skeleton Lake, Lot 12, Plan 12, (Watt), Civic Address: SL10-

20, Is “M”, Zoning Schedule: 12 EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: A severance application (B/37/15/ML) has been made to create one additional lot. The proposed severed lot is vacant. Residential development is planned for the future. The proposed retained lot will contain a dwelling, garage, gazebo, shed and dock. No changes are proposed at this time. Please be advised that a previous application (B/28/11/ML) was approved, however, it was allowed to lapse/expire. This new application is the same as the previous application. NOTICE: A Notice of this Hearing has been circulated to all property owners within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject property and to the appropriate official and agencies according to Ontario Regulation 197/96 at least 14 days prior to this Hearing. This Notice has been sent to you for your information and does not require any response unless you wish to make one. The above noted application will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph Street and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. PUBLIC HEARING: ANY PERSON may attend this Hearing and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of or in opposition to the proposed consent application. Please see address below. If a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of Committee in respect of the proposed consent does not make written submissions to Committee before it gives or refuses to give a provisional consent, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss the appeal. You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose.


Page 48 of 120

Notice of Hearing B/37/15/ML, Wallace ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: There may be additional information relating to the proposed consent application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on weekdays between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, P.O. Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number(s) noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING: If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION: If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. A copy of the decision of the Committee will be sent to the applicant and to each person who appeared in person or by counsel at the hearing and who has filed with the Secretary-Treasurer a written request for notice of decision. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier

Secretary-Treasurer


Page 49 of 120


Page 50 of 120

Page 1 of 8


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: B/37/15/ML, (WALLACE), Part of Island M, Skeleton Lake, Lot 12, Plan 12,

(Watt), Civic Address: SL10-20, Is “M”. Roll #: 2-19-062.

RECOMMENDATION: If Committee wishes to approve consent application B/37/15/ML (WALLACE) that the following conditions be required:

A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot be submitted to the Secretary

–Treasurer, along with a registered copy of the reference plan.

Confirmation that the Township is satisfied that the severed and retained lots are satisfactory for on-site sewage disposal and that any problems identified with any existing sewage system be corrected to the satisfaction of the Township;

That cash-in-lieu of parkland be dedicated to the Township in the amount of 5% of the assessed value of the newly created vacant lot, or the entire lands, whichever is less.

The applicant enters into a Consent Agreement with the Township under Section 51(26) of the Planning Act wherein the applicants agree not to utilize public parking and docking facilities as the principal means of access to the subject property. This agreement is to be registered on title.

That a satisfactory Environmental Impact Study be completed to assess the suitability of locations for future structures and sewage disposal systems on the proposed severed lot, and that any findings be implemented to the satisfaction of the Township.




ORIGIN A severance application (B/37/15/ML) has been made to create one additional lot. The proposed severed lot is vacant. Residential development is planned for the future. The proposed retained lot will contain a dwelling, garage, gazebo, shed and dock. No changes are proposed at this time.


Page 51 of 120

Page 2 of 8

Please be advised that a previous application (B/28/11/ML) was approved, however, it was allowed to lapse/expire. This new application is the same as the previous application. The following is a summary of the proposed changes to the property:


Requirement

Severed Lot Frontage - +651ft 651ft 400ft

Lot Area - +3.23ac 3.23ac 2ac

Retained Lot Frontage 1,040ft -651ft 500ft 400ft

Lot Area 5.91ac -3.23ac 2.68ac 2ac

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR3-7) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR6-7) Schedule No.: 12 Access: Water Access Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Fisheries Resource: Not Assessed Original Shore Road Allowance: Not Applicable Civic Address: 20 SL10, Skeleton Lake PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan

The subject property is designated Waterfront in the Official Plan. Waterfront policies encourage the protection of waterfront character, and the environment. One of the main objectives of the Waterfront designation is to ensure built form does not dominate the natural shoreline.


Page 52 of 120

Page 3 of 8

The following Waterfront policies are stated in the Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan and have relevance to these applications:

Section B.2.2 (Principles): The Waterfront is a unique resource and land asset. As such, development, including lot creation, should occur only after careful consideration of those recreational, environmental, socio-economic, and aesthetic qualities which contribute to the attraction of the waterfront and shared enjoyment of its lakes and rivers. Section B.2.4 (Principles): Limiting density of buildings and structures in the Waterfront area is important in protecting the character of the Waterfront area. Many factors affect Waterfront character such as number of structures, setbacks, shoreline vegetative buffers, height, built size, built form, shoreline structures and the historical lake development. Strict adherence to policies limiting density related to these factors is paramount. Section B.5.1 (Character): The Waterfront character differentiates the waterfront area from an urban or rural setting. Waterfront character is linked to the natural and built form which is oriented toward the lakes and rivers in the Township. Natural form includes predominantly vegetated shorelines with thin soils over the granite bedrock of the Precambrian shield. Built form includes mostly residential development interspersed with some commercial development, primarily resorts and marinas. The Waterfront is the focus for recreation, spiritual relaxation, water supply, and support for fisheries and wildlife habitat, among others. Where development occurs in the Waterfront, it should enhance and protect, where possible, those qualities that contribute to character.

Section B.5.2 (Character): Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs.

Section B.5.8 (General Development Standards): Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront.

Section B.5.21 (Water Access Development): The following shall generally constitute minimum lot sizes for new lots with water access only, unless otherwise stated:

a) a lot area of 0.8 hectares (2 acres); and,

b) a water frontage of 90 metres (300 feet).

Section B.5.46 (Visual, Scenic and Aesthetic Qualities): The preservation and protection of the appearance of the shoreline in a natural vegetated state shall be encouraged.

Section B.5.51 (Visual, Scenic and Aesthetic Qualities): The retention of trees and native vegetation shall be encouraged through site plan control to uphold the visual and environmental integrity of the Waterfront. Where development is proposed, a natural undisturbed buffer is required at the water’s edge to generally meet a target of 15 metres (50 feet) in depth from the high water mark. Where little or no natural buffer exists, renaturalizing will be required, where possible. Minor accessory structures and an access pathway to the shoreline are permitted.

Section B.5.52 (Land Use Compatibility): New uses or interests in land shall be compatible with other legally existing land uses in the vicinity so as to ensure the continued operation


Page 53 of 120

Page 4 of 8

of such uses and to allow expansions where feasible and appropriate. The category and character of the lake in which the new use is proposed, and the historical use of the area, shall also be considered to ensure land use compatibility.

Section B.8.6. (Lands Prone to Flooding): The following shall constitute minimum water frontage requirements for lot creation:

c) a water frontage of 120 metres (400 feet) on lands with slopes >60%.

Section B.8.8 (Lands Prone to Flooding): For steep slopes >40%, an Environmental Impact Study for development that addresses specific mitigation measures shall be required to address the visual and environmental integrity of such lands, among other matters. Notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing, an Environmental Impact Study shall not be required for undertakings that satisfy the Environmental Assessment Act, such as public road construction.

Section B.5.54 (Land Use Compatibility): Development shall have regard to compatibility of uses in the area and, where necessary, shall have provisions for buffering, screening, limiting built size, increasing setbacks, and lot dimensions, among others.

Section B.6.9 (Lake System Health): Construction mitigation measures, storm water management, or other techniques must minimize negative impacts on water quality.

Section B.10.1 Development on the waterfront must be carefully controlled and monitored to maintain the character of the Waterfront area. Character of the Waterfront is not only a result of built size and form but also the number of habitable buildings, setbacks, shoreline vegetative cover, height, shoreline structures, and historical lake development.

Section B.10.5 In recognition of the built character of a waterbody, the density of development on lots shall be limited based on a lot frontage and lot area criteria, as detailed in an implementing comprehensive zoning by-law.

2. Zoning By-Law

The property falls within the Waterfront Residential Zone (WR3-7) in Zoning By-law 87-87 and Waterfront Residential (WR6-7) in Zoning By-law 2014-14. Section 4.1.2 of Zoning By-law 2014-14 requires new lots zoned WR6 to have at least 400 feet of frontage and 2 acres of area. The proposed severed lot has a frontage and area of 651 feet and 3.23 acres respectively. The retained lot has a frontage and area of 500 feet and 2.68 acres respectively. 3. Site Characteristics

A site inspection was conducted on July 31, 2015. The property was accessed via Skeleton Lake Marina. At the time of the site visit the property was observed to be well treed and steep with numerous rock outcrops and cliffs. The severed lot was observed from the water and land at the time of the site visit. On land, the lot was not easily accessible, although a path did exist along the shoreline. The severed lot was observed to be vacant and very steep although it appeared that a couple level areas may exist for future development. However, these areas were treed and difficult to view. At the time of the site visit, the proposed retained lot was observed to be treed and steep but to a lesser degree than the proposed severed lot. The proposed retained lot was observed to contain a dwelling, a workshop, a detached screened room a shed and a dock.


Page 54 of 120

Page 5 of 8

Air Photo of subject lands


Page 55 of 120

Page 6 of 8

Northeast facing view of southern portion of proposed severed lot

East facing view of northern portion of proposed severed lot


Page 56 of 120

Page 7 of 8

Southeast facing view of proposed retained lot

North facing view of existing dwelling on proposed retained lot


Page 57 of 120

Page 8 of 8

4. Steep Slopes According to District of Muskoka mapping, the subject property contains very steep slopes. It should be noted that the majority of the proposed severed lot has slopes in excess of 40%. These slopes do factor into the proposed severance as the Township anticipates future residential development of the severed lot and would not support the creation of a lot which is not suitable for development. In this case the District mapping is accurate however, it may not provide the level of detail needed to determine if building is possible on the severed lot. Planning Staff would recommend that if Committee is considering approval, in accordance of Official Plan Policies, that an Environmental Impact Study be conducted by a qualified consultant, which would determine if suitable building, sewage disposal; and shoreline structure locations are possible on the proposed severed lot.

Slope map of subject property illustrating 20-40% slopes (grey) and over 40% slopes (green)

5. Site Plan Control Both the proposed severed and retained lots are subject to Site Plan Control as the present zoning has a -7 suffix. The -7 suffix indicates that the Ministry of Natural Resources has identified the area as being significant habitat which automatically makes the lands subject to site plan control. The site plan control process also has the ability to address any steep slope mitigation measures recommended by an engineer or qualified consultant. 6. Summary Staff feels that the proposed application for consent is reasonable on the property provided that suitable building and sewage disposal sites do exist. Both the proposed severed and retained lots are large lots which exceed frontage and area requirements in the Official Plan and By-law. The exact same consent application was approved by the Committee of Adjustment in 2011, however the condition for an Environmental Impact Study was not completed and the consent lapsed. In the proposed application Staff feels that all conditions should be maintained. Any findings should be implemented to the satisfaction of the Township.


Page 58 of 120

??EE

xsausvsnznmu Na 12saomumucwwusmr OF wanmwusu-IIP or Musxom umssmsmcr wmc\Pn.rrvuF uusmox


Page 59 of 120

B/38/15/ML, Kenney, Part of Lot 4, Concession 14, Parts

Page 60 of 120

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE #: B/38/15/ML

ROLL #: 4-8-030



APPLICATION MADE BY: Richard Edward Kenney and Carol Louise Kenney, 7 Alm Court, Aurora, ON,

L4G 6W7 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 4, Concession 14, Parts 2, 3, and 5, Plan BR-107, Part 1, Plan

35R-18435, (Medora), Civic Address: 1047 Chown Road, Zoning Schedule: 19

EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: A severance application (B/38/15/ML) has been made to grant a right-of-way. The right-of-way is in favour of one property. The property (benefitting lot) receiving the right-of-way is currently in the ownership of David Lummack, (4-8-031). Generally, this application will provide a right-of-way on title at the Muskoka Land Registry Office. Please be advised the Kenney property is currently subject to a registered right-of-way, however, the existing private laneway is not located within the boundaries of the right-of-way. This application will recognize the actual location of the private laneway. NOTICE: A Notice of this Hearing has been circulated to all property owners within 120 metres (400 feet) of the subject property and to the appropriate official and agencies according to Ontario Regulation 197/96 at least 14 days prior to this Hearing. This Notice has been sent to you for your information and does not require any response unless you wish to make one. The above noted application will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph Street and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755.


Page 61 of 120

Notice of Hearing B/38/15/ML, Kenney PUBLIC HEARING: ANY PERSON may attend this Hearing and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of or in opposition to the proposed consent application. Please see address below. If a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of Committee in respect of the proposed consent does not make written submissions to Committee before it gives or refuses to give a provisional consent, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss the appeal. You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: There may be additional information relating to the proposed consent application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on weekdays between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, P.O. Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number(s) noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING: If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION: If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. A copy of the decision of the Committee will be sent to the applicant and to each person who appeared in person or by counsel at the hearing and who has filed with the Secretary-Treasurer a written request for notice of decision. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier

Secretary-Treasurer


Page 62 of 120


Page 63 of 120

Page 1 of 3


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: B/38/15/ML, (KENNEY), Part of Lot 4, Concession 14, Parts 2, 3, and 5, Plan

BR-107, Part 1, Plan 35R-18435, (Medora), Civic Address: 1047 Chown Road, Roll# 4-8-030.

RECOMMENDATION: If Committee wishes to approve consent application B/38/15/ML (KENNEY) that the following conditions be required:

A registerable description (deed) of the severed lot (right-of-way) be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer along with a registered copy of the reference plan.

Confirmation that the Township is satisfied that the retained lot is satisfactory for on-site sewage disposal and that any problems identified with any existing sewage system be corrected to the satisfaction of the Township.


Submitted By: B. Noble, Development Planer Aug 4/15 Original Signed By B. Noble


ORIGIN A severance application (B/38/15/ML) has been made to grant a right-of-way. The right-of-way is in favour of one property. The property (benefitting lot) receiving the right-of-way is currently in the ownership of David Lummack (4-8-031). Generally, this application will provide a right-of-way on title at the Muskoka Land Registry Office. Please be advised the Kenney property is currently subject to a registered right-of-way, however, the existing private laneway is not located within the boundaries of the right-of-way. This application will recognize the actual location of the private laneway. BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR5) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR4)


Page 64 of 120

Page 2 of 3

Schedule No.: 19 Access: Chown Road (Year Round Maintained) Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Fisheries Resource: Type 2 General Fish Habitat Original Shore Road Allowance: Not Applicable Civic Address: 1047 Chown Road PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

1. Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan The Official Plan is silent where a right-of-way is located within the Waterfront Designation. Within the Waterfront designation it is assumed that access can be provided from waterways if not by roadways. This assumption of water access is a key feature distinguishing the Waterfront from Rural Areas. It is because of this assumption of water access that access over land by private means can be viewed as appropriate for this lot. 2. Site Characteristics A site visit was conducted on July 29, 2015. On the Kenney property a dwelling was observed with a garage in the rear yard. On the Lummack property a dwelling was observed with a three car garage in the rear yard. The location of the proposed right-of-way is proposed over an existing laneway to the Lummack property. The initial portion of this laneway is over the Kenney property which is the reason for the proposed right-of-way.


Page 65 of 120

Page 3 of 3

Northwest facing view of proposed right-of-way (left laneway)

3. Summary From a planning perspective the application conforms with the requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law as well as the Township Official Plan. Rights-of-way applications are generally private matters and are granted between private property owners and the proposed application is no different. Staff supports the application and recommends approval subject to the conditions noted.


Page 66 of 120

?m+La 4 Rmmm

A Qlds3,55 /ham,BK\oW

A8144

‘g m

imam w" /3‘->omm


Page 67 of 120

A-39/15, Stills Bay Landing Corporation, Part of Lot 8,

Page 68 of 120


COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE # A-39/15 ROLL # 4-5-067

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.P.13,45(5), R.R.O., 1980, Reg. 787 APPLICATION MADE BY: Stills Bay Landing Corporation, 250 Yonge Street, 28th Floor, Box 20, Toronto,

ON, M5B 2L7 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 8, Concession 8, Parts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, Plan 35R-10754, (Medora),

Civic Address: 1045 Hamill’s Point Road, Zoning Schedule: 27 EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Relief is requested from Section 3.2.2.a of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.2.3 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the minimum exterior side yard setback requirement of 66 feet. The subject property is zoned Waterfront Commercial (WC2). The applicant has constructed a sundeck with a ramp and an addition to an existing dwelling. The sundeck is 14 feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 52 feet. The ramp is nine feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 57 feet. The addition to the dwelling is 40 feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 26 feet. Relief is also requested from Section 3.23.1 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the minimum setback from a street to be 25 feet. The sundeck is 14 feet from Hamill’s Point Road. The variance requested is 11 feet. The ramp is nine feet from Hamill’s Point Road. The variance requested is 16 feet. NOTICE that an application under the above file number will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. PUBLIC HEARING - You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you wish to make written comments on this application they may be forwarded to the Secretary - Treasurer at the address shown below.


Page 69 of 120

Notice of Hearing A-39/15, Stills Bay Landing Corporation ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: - There may be additional information relating to the proposed variance application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on week days between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION - If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier, Secretary-Treasurer


Page 70 of 120


Page 71 of 120

Page 1 of 6


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: A-39/15, (STILLS BAY LANDING CORPORATION), Part of Lot 8, Concession

8, Parts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, Plan 35R-10754, (Medora), Civic Address: 1045 Hamill’s Point Road, Roll # 4-5-067

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff have no objection to Minor Variance A-39/15, (STILLS BAY LANDING CORPORATION). APPROVALS: Date Signature



ORIGIN Particulars of Property: Lot Frontage 351 ft (106.9m)

Lot Area Total 3.35ac (13,557sqm)

Section Description Required Proposed Variance

Proposed Proposal

87-87 3.2.2.a 2014-14 4.2.3

Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setback for Ramp and Deck

66 ft (20.1m)

57 ft (17.4m)

9 ft (2.7m)

Construct Ramp and Deck

87-87 3.2.2.a 2014-14 4.2.3

Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setback for Dwelling Addition

66 ft (20.1m)

26 ft (7.9m)

40 ft (12.2m)

Construct Dwelling Addition

2014-14 3.23.1

Minimum Setback from a Street for Ramp and Deck

25 ft (7.6m)

16 ft (4.9m)

9 ft (2.7m)

Construct Ramp and Deck

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront


Page 72 of 120

Page 2 of 6

By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Commercial (WC2) By-Law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Commercial (WC2) Schedule No.: 27 Access: Hamill’s Point Road (Year Round Maintained) Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Civic Address: 1045 Hamill’s Point Road PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

1. Township of Muskoka Lakes Official Plan The subject property is designated Waterfront in the Official Plan. Generally the policies of this Section encourage the protection of waterfront character, and the environment. One of the main objectives of the Waterfront designation is to ensure built form does not dominate the natural shoreline. The following policy excerpts from the Township of Muskoka Lakes are especially relevant to this application.

Section B.5.2 (Character): Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs. Section B.5.5 (Character): The Township recognizes that different lakes have different character. The three (3) large lakes, Muskoka, Rosseau, and Joseph, generally exhibit larger built forms and building types which are generally not in character with the smaller lakes. Section B.5.8 (General Development Standards): Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront. Section B.5.14 (General Development Standards): Sideyard setbacks shall be established in an implementing comprehensive zoning by-law in recognition of the following:

a) in the case of land structures, to maintain a natural area between buildings so as to reduce the dominance of the built form on the natural environment, maintain privacy, attenuate noise, connect habitat, ensure compatibility, and contribute to the aesthetic qualities of the waterfront;

Section B.5.18 (General Development Standards): Redevelopment of existing properties shall be encouraged to follow current development standards, as closely as possible, to be compatible with and consistent with sound planning principles including environmental considerations. In addition, encouragement shall be given to restoring and preserving natural shorelines. Section B.11.1 (Commercial Development Policies): All development and redevelopment shall be subject to site plan control as defined in an implementing site plan control by-law.


Page 73 of 120

Page 3 of 6

Section B.11.3(c) (Commercial Development Policies): marina commercial development consisting of a building, structure, or place located on a waterway which provides facilities such as docking, storage for boats and boat accessories, services, and repairs, and may include accessory uses that are complementary to the primary marina use.

Section F.1.6.4 of the Official Plan states: In considering applications, the potential impact of similar approvals will be considered. The cumulative impact of amendments on this and other lands will be considered to have greater weight than site specific considerations.

2. Zoning By-Law Relief is requested from Section 3.2.2.a of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.2.3 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the minimum exterior side yard setback requirement of 66 feet. The subject property is zoned Waterfront Commercial (WC2). The applicant has constructed a sundeck with a ramp and an addition to an existing dwelling. The sundeck is 14 feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 52 feet. The ramp is nine feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 57 feet. The addition to the dwelling is 40 feet from the exterior side lot line. The variance requested is 26 feet. Relief is also requested from Section 3.23.1 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the minimum setback from a street to be 25 feet. The sundeck is 14 feet from Hamill’s Point Road. The variance requested is 11 feet. The ramp is nine feet from Hamill’s Point Road. The variance requested is 16 feet. 3. Site Characteristics A site visit was conducted on July 29, 2015. The property was accessed from Hamill’s Point Road. At the time of the site visit, the property was observed across the road from the marina located on Stills Bay (Lake Joseph). The proposed dwelling addition, deck and ramp were observed on the southern corner of the lot at the intersection of Hamill’s Point Road and Roberts Bay Road. This corner of the lot was located at a higher elevation as the remainder of the lot, which was observed to be used for parking at the time of the site visit. The exterior side yard along Hamill’s Point Road was observed at the time of the site visit. The area had two large mature trees and a bush which partially screened the dwelling, deck and ramp from the Hamill’s Point Road.


Page 74 of 120

Page 4 of 6

North facing view of dwelling at corner of Hamill’s Point Road (left) and Roberts Bay Road (right)

East facing view of dwelling, deck and ramp on subject property


Page 75 of 120

Page 5 of 6

Southeast facing view of dwelling and exterior side yard setback along Hamill’s Point Road

Northeast facing view of parking lot on subject property


Page 76 of 120

Page 6 of 6

4. Side Yard The Official Plan states that side yard setbacks shall be established in an implementing comprehensive zoning by-law to maintain a natural area between buildings so as to reduce the dominance of the built form on the natural environment, maintain privacy, attenuate noise, connect habitat, ensure compatibility, and contribute to the aesthetic qualities of the waterfront. In this case, the proposed ramp is nine feet from the exterior side lot line, the proposed sundeck is 14 feet from the exterior side lot line, and the proposed dwelling addition is 40 feet from the exterior side lot line. The exterior side lot line requirement for each of these structures is 66 feet in the Waterfront Commercial (WC2) Zone. Although the dwelling addition is proposed to be closer to the exterior side lot line than permitted, it should be noted that the addition is to the rear of the existing dwelling and has limited visibility from Hamill’s Point Road. The deck and ramp do have some impacts from the road but existing vegetation mitigates some of these impacts. No development is proposed closer to the road than existing legal non-complying development (2.9m, 9.4ft.). 5. Minor In this application, minor variance relief is requested for exterior side yard setbacks for the ramp, deck and dwelling addition, as well as relief from the setback requirement from a road. Staff believe that collectively the variances are minor in nature. 6. Appropriate In Staff’s opinion, the proposed minor variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as minimal impacts are anticipated on built form, privacy, noise, natural habitat, land use compatibility, and aesthetics. Staff recommends approval of the application.


Page 77 of 120

_<__

zox

<>

x_>

znm

mx?

n:

_.O

._. P

nozn

mm

uoz m

3.):

mm

»H

32.

_.>

a.m

H.N

.u.

moz

zmz8<

<z.

..:__

.om

2.32

.»«o

<<

zm:_

_.on

_sS_

6_$

czau

5.:

:>z_

_:.u

3.2.

.»o

>c

3....

.._.

>zo

_zm

A-39/15, S

tills Bay Landing

Corporation, P

art of Lot 8, P

age 78 of 120

A-40/15, Butler, Part of Lot 30, Concession D, Lot 1,

Page 79 of 120


COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE # A-40/15 ROLL # 4-22-046-01


Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.P.13,45(5), R.R.O., 1980, Reg. 787 APPLICATION MADE BY: John Butler, 817 Edistel Crescent, Mississauga, ON, L5H 1T5 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 30, Concession D, Lot 1, Plan M-535, (Medora), Civic Address:

1096 Pleasant View Point Road, Zoning Schedule: 36 and 42 EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.e. of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.7 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum cumulative width of docks and boathouses permitted. The property is zoned Waterfront Residential (WR1 and WR1-7) and is located on a Category 1 Lake, (Lake Muskoka). The applicant wishes to reconstruct a dock and single storey boathouse. The maximum cumulative width of docks permitted is 25% of the lot frontage. In this case, the property has a lot frontage of 155 feet, and therefore, the maximum dock width permitted is 38 feet. The proposed cumulative width of existing and proposed docks is to be 43 feet in width. The variance requested is five feet. The maximum cumulative width of a boathouse permitted is 16% of the by-law frontage. Again, in this case, the by-law frontage is 155 feet, and therefore, the maximum width permitted is 24 feet. The proposed boathouse is to be 29 feet in width. The variance requested is five feet. NOTICE that an application under the above file number will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. PUBLIC HEARING - You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you wish to make written comments on this application they may be forwarded to the Secretary - Treasurer at the address shown below.


Page 80 of 120

Notice of Hearing A-40/15, Butler ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: - There may be additional information relating to the proposed variance application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on week days between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION - If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier, Secretary-Treasurer


Page 81 of 120


Page 82 of 120

Page 1 of 6


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: A-40/15, (BUTLER), Part of Lot 30, Concession D, Lot 1, Plan M-535,

(Medora), Civic Address: 1096 Pleasant View Point Road, Roll# 4-22-046-01

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff have no objections to Minor Variance A-40/15 (BUTLER). APPROVALS: Date Signature

Submitted By: B. Noble, Development Planer Aug 6/15 Original Signed By B. Noble


ORIGIN Particulars of Property: Lot Frontage 155ft (47.2m)

Lot Area Total 155,509sqft (3.57ac)


Proposed Proposal

87-87 3.1.2.e 2014-14 4.1.7

Maximum Cumulative Width of Single Storey

Boathouse

16% (24 feet)

2.7% (5 feet)

18.7% (29 feet)

Reconstruct Single Storey Boathouse

87-87 3.1.2.e 2014-14 4.1.7

Maximum Cumulative Width of Dock

25% (38 feet)

2.7% (5 feet)

27.7% (43 feet)

Reconstruct Docks

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR1) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR1-7) Schedule No.: 36 & 42


Page 83 of 120

Page 2 of 6

Access: Pleasant View Point Road (Year Round Maintained) Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Original Shore Road Allowance: Not Applicable Fisheries Resource: Type 2 General Fish Habitat Civic Address: 1096 Pleasant View Point Road Lake: Lake Muskoka (Category 1) PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS


Section B.5.2 of the Official Plan states: Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs. Section B.5.4 of the Official Plan states: Where development occurs in the Waterfront, it should complement the natural and built form and should enhance and protect those qualities that contribute to character. Section B.5.5 of the Official Plan states: The Township recognizes that different lakes have different character. The three (3) large lakes, Muskoka, Rosseau, and Joseph, generally exhibit larger built forms and building types which are generally not in character with the smaller lakes. Section B.5.8 of the Official Plan states: Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront. Section B.5.18 of the Official Plan states: Redevelopment of existing properties shall be encouraged to follow current development standards, as closely as possible, to be compatible with and consistent with sound planning principles including environmental considerations. In addition, encouragement shall be given to restoring and preserving natural shorelines. Section B.5.51 of the Official Plan states: The retention of trees and native vegetation shall be encouraged through site plan control to uphold the visual and environmental integrity of the Waterfront. Where development is proposed, a natural undisturbed buffer is required at the water’s edge to generally meet a target of 15 metres (50 feet) in depth from the high water mark. Where little or no natural buffer exists, renaturalizing will be required, where possible. Minor accessory structures and an access pathway to the shoreline are permitted.


Page 84 of 120

Page 3 of 6

Section B.9.2 of the Official Plan states, in part: The following special policies apply to Category 1 (Large) lakes:

c) the maximum width of docks shall be 25% of the lot frontage up to a maximum of 23

metres (75 feet). Boathouses are subject to further restrictions.

Section B.10.1 of the Official Plan states: Development on the waterfront must be carefully controlled and monitored to maintain the character of the Waterfront area. Character of the Waterfront is not only a result of built size and form but also the number of habitable buildings, setbacks, shoreline vegetative cover, height, shoreline structures, and historical lake development.

Section B.10.9 of the Official Plan states: The policies and implementing zoning by-law provisions regarding density shall be strictly adhered to in accordance with Section F.1.6 of the Official Plan. Section B.13.2 of the Official Plan states: Standards regulating shoreline structures shall be detailed in the implementing comprehensive zoning by-law. Section B.13.3 of the Official Plan states: Buildings, structures, or works extending beyond the normal or controlled high water mark or located at the shoreline shall be designed and located in a suitable manner so as to have regard for the following matters:

a) critical fish and wildlife habitat; b) the natural flow of water; c) potential damage from flood and ice heaving; d) privacy; and, e) other shoreline, resource development, and environmental policies.

Section B.13.4 of the Official Plan states, in part: To maintain a balance of natural and built form, the maximum cumulative width of shoreline structures, including all docks, shall be the lesser of 25 percent or 23 metres (75 feet) of the lot’s water frontage... Section B.13.6 of the Official Plan states: The primary use of docks is for the docking and berthing of boats as well as access to the lake for swimming. Large docks, used as decks over the water, shall be discouraged. Section F.1.6.4 states that in considering applications, the potential impact of similar approvals will be considered. The cumulative impact of amendments on this and other lands will be considered to have greater weight than site specific considerations. Section F.1.6.8 of the Official Plan states: Due to carefully planned origins of certain provisions of the zoning by-law, exemptions may not be granted for lot coverage, oversized sleeping cabins, additions to second dwellings/sleeping cabins, front yard setbacks for noncomplying structures, reduced side yard setbacks for two storey boathouses or sundecks on a boathouse, and shoreline structure widths. These origins must be considered in relation to any such application.

2. Township of Muskoka Lakes Zoning By-law Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.e. of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.7 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum cumulative width of docks and boathouses permitted. The


Page 85 of 120

Page 4 of 6

property is zoned Waterfront Residential (WR1 and WR1-7) and is located on a Category 1 Lake, (Lake Muskoka). The applicant wishes to reconstruct a dock and single storey boathouse. The maximum cumulative width of docks permitted is 25% of the lot frontage. In this case, the property has a lot frontage of 155 feet, and therefore, the maximum dock width permitted is 38 feet. The proposed cumulative width of existing and proposed docks is to be 43 feet in width. The variance requested is five feet. The maximum cumulative width of a boathouse permitted is 16% of the by-law frontage. Again, in this case, the by-law frontage is 155 feet, and therefore, the maximum width permitted is 24 feet. The proposed boathouse is to be 29 feet in width. The variance requested is five feet. 3. Site Characteristics A site visit was conducted on July 29, 2015. The site was observed to be moderately sloping to the water and well treed with a mix of coniferous and deciduous trees. At the time of the site visit, existing structures on the property included a dwelling, a boatport, and docking. The shoreline of the property was observed to be reasonably well treed and rocky. On the neighbouring property to the east, a boatport was observed. No shoreline structures were observed to the west as a point of land screened the immediate neighbouring shoreline.

South facing view of existing boatport and docking


Page 86 of 120

Page 5 of 6

East facing view of neighbouring shoreline structures to the east

Northwest facing view of neighbouring shoreline to the west


Page 87 of 120

Page 6 of 6

4. Shoreline Structure Width The Official Plan contains policies outlining that on Large Lakes (Category 1) the maximum dock width permitted is 25% for docks and boathouses are subject to further restrictions. Although Official Plan policies speak strongly to limiting density and ensuring the natural form dominates, does not specifically provide a numerical guideline for boathouse width. In Zoning By-law 87-87, as amended and Zoning By-law 2014-14, the maximum width of shoreline structures for a WR1 property with a frontage between 100-200 feet on a Category 1 lake is 25% of the straight line frontage. Specifically for boathouses, the maximum cumulative width of a single storey boathouse is 16% of the by-law frontage. The intent and purpose of the cumulative width restrictions in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are, in part, to ensure built form does not dominate the shoreline. On 155 feet of by-law frontage the applicant proposes to remove the existing boatport with a width of 26 feet and existing dock with a width of 55ft, which also encroaches onto the neighbouring property to the west. The applicants propose a new boathouse and docking at a more central portion of the property which meets by-law requirements with the exception of maximum cumulative width for the dock and boathouse. The proposed dock is to have a width of 43 feet and the boathouse a width of 29 feet. The overall dock width is to be reduced by 12 feet and a dock encroachment removed. The boathouse is to be larger than the existing boatport by approximately 3 feet. In terms of overall impacts, Staff feels that additional impacts of built form will be introduced from the water and to neighbours to the east, however these impacts are mainly a result of dock length and boathouse length, both of which comply with By-law requirements. 5. Minor The variance for maximum cumulative width of docks is 5 feet (2.7%) and for boathouse width is 5 feet (2.7%). In Staff’s opinion, the relief requested is minor in nature and meets the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Although Staff recognizes additional impacts of built form at the water, the additional cumulative width in itself will have minimal impacts from the water and for neighbouring properties. Staff has no objection to the proposed variances.

6. Appropriate Staff feel that although the proposed shoreline structures do not meet requirements of the zoning by-law; it still maintains the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law which is to ensure built form does not dominate the shoreline. The proposal proposes to reduce the overall width of docking on the property as well as correct dock encroachments. It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposed minor variance is appropriate for the property.


Page 88 of 120

=3

.3«E

:

sm

X_.

m>

m>

zqsm

s.6

884

...ox

mz>

z »o>

8

\«.

Q5.

aw,/n

\,wR

:A

vm?

mm

o_m

.:mm

mo .u

_u>

Zzn

mum

M\D

3,3

4.3

WN

.Nu

m:

8?.

0A

W4\

Om

{x

\

......

../

pL\.w

wm

?fa?

MO

O. m

IO>

WO

m%

u.Z

m\\\

\\N

“.&k

,9/w

\\\\

\llm

mum

xxx

®.\%

®—

y\\

C&am

30/

R?

.7\

m/

/J

,.

\/

.

Mr

an0

\9

moo

</M

ax.

m%

¢,.m

9E

m»

>_=

_.<

m_m

962%

ma

am»

338

m mw 2

3:=

E9

53::

us2

ea.2

8mm

_ 8>

9

222»

8:5

3983

$.E

oam

sB

?acm

m2.

93»

.m

m35

S85

.582

mm

wm

xnm

?8<

ma6

m22

::N

8.om

mxo

mm

VN

£32.

._.

o._. 8

.8z

omm

m_o

zo

omoo

_~>

§_o

82zm

:__u

on:m

oom

>as

zmza

.o_.

. zcm

_8§

Sxm

mo_

m£_

2..a

z_o_

§::

o_.. .

.am

xo§

mo>

_.m

1.n

.5.

AA

mS.

.m_~

_u_8

_um

a4

Em

a_u

_..m

>m

>z.

_<_m

£no

.5m

esm

oitm

uuos

now

nuos

o.

mu/

¢oo/

E4,

«w/

00am

3/

wt

E.

Wm

.\D

/

v\

Fm.

.V\\.

M/..

0/.

Ar

.m

4 x/«A

14

A-40/15, B

utler, Part of Lot

30, Concession D

, Lot 1, P

age 89 of 120

mzw

ajm

g.q


Page 90 of 120

A-41/15, Verity, Part of Lot 31, Concession 13, Parts 1-

Page 91 of 120


COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE # A-41/15 ROLL # 9-14-019, 9-14-020


Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.P.13,45(5), R.R.O., 1980, Reg. 787 APPLICATION MADE BY: Catharine Verity, 19 Inwood Drive, Brantford, ON, N3T 5J5 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 31, Concession 13, Parts 1-3, Plan 35R-24333, Parts 12, 13 and

14, Plan 35R-24700, (Monck), Civic Address: 2867 Muskoka Road 118 West, Units 11 and 13, Zoning Schedule: 37

EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.e. of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.7 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum cumulative width of docks permitted. The property is zoned Waterfront Residential (WR1) and WR5) and is located on a Category 1 Lake, (Lake Muskoka). The applicant wishes to reconstruct a dock and construct a single storey boathouse. The maximum cumulative width of docks permitted is 25% of the lot frontage. In this case, the property has a lot frontage of 215 feet, and therefore, the maximum dock width permitted is 53 feet. The proposed cumulative width of existing and proposed docks is to be 64 feet in width. The variance requested is 11 feet. NOTICE that an application under the above file number will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. PUBLIC HEARING - You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you wish to make written comments on this application they may be forwarded to the Secretary - Treasurer at the address shown below.


Page 92 of 120

Notice of Hearing A-41/15, Verity ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: - There may be additional information relating to the proposed variance application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on week days between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number noted above. FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION - If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier, Secretary-Treasurer


Page 93 of 120

L|OT31EON 1

Brandy Lk


Page 94 of 120

Page 1 of 6


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: A-41/15, (VERITY), Part of Lot 31, Concession 13, Parts 1-3, Plan 35R-24333,

Parts 12, 13 and 14, Plan 35R-24700, (Monck), Civic Address: 2867 Muskoka Road 118 West, Units 11 and 13, Roll#: 9-14-019, 9-14-020

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff have no objections to Minor Variance A-41/15 (VERITY). APPROVALS: Date Signature



ORIGIN Particulars of Property: Lot Frontage 215ft (65.5m)

Lot Area Total 1.43ac (5,797 sqm)


Proposed Proposal

87-87 3.1.2.e 2014-14 4.1.7

Maximum Cumulative Width of

Dock

25% (53 feet)

5% (11 feet)

30% (64feet)

Reconstruct Docks

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR1) By-law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR5) Schedule No.: 37 Access: Muskoka Road 118 West (Year Round Maintained)


Page 95 of 120

Page 2 of 6

Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Original Shore Road Allowance: Open on 9-14-019, Closed on 9-14-020 Fisheries Resource: Type 2 General Fish Habitat Civic Address: 2867 Muskoka Road 118W, Unit #11 & 13 Lake: Lake Muskoka (Category 1) PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS


Section B.5.2 of the Official Plan states: Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs. Section B.5.4 of the Official Plan states: Where development occurs in the Waterfront, it should complement the natural and built form and should enhance and protect those qualities that contribute to character. Section B.5.5 of the Official Plan states: The Township recognizes that different lakes have different character. The three (3) large lakes, Muskoka, Rosseau, and Joseph, generally exhibit larger built forms and building types which are generally not in character with the smaller lakes. Section B.5.8 of the Official Plan states: Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront.

Section B.5.18 of the Official Plan states: Redevelopment of existing properties shall be encouraged to follow current development standards, as closely as possible, to be compatible with and consistent with sound planning principles including environmental considerations. In addition, encouragement shall be given to restoring and preserving natural shorelines. Section B.5.51 of the Official Plan states: The retention of trees and native vegetation shall be encouraged through site plan control to uphold the visual and environmental integrity of the Waterfront. Where development is proposed, a natural undisturbed buffer is required at the water’s edge to generally meet a target of 15 metres (50 feet) in depth from the high water mark. Where little or no natural buffer exists, renaturalizing will be


Page 96 of 120

Page 3 of 6

required, where possible. Minor accessory structures and an access pathway to the shoreline are permitted. Section B.9.1 of the Official Plan states, in part: The following special policies apply to Category 1 (Large) lakes:

c) the maximum width of docks shall be 25% of the lot frontage up to a maximum of 23 metres (75 feet). Boathouses are subject to further restrictions.

Section B.10.1 of the Official Plan states: Development on the waterfront must be carefully controlled and monitored to maintain the character of the Waterfront area. Character of the waterfront is not only a result of built size and form but also the number of habitable buildings, setbacks, shoreline vegetative cover, height, shoreline structures, and historical lake development. Section B10.8 of the states: The maximum permitted development on the lakes depends on the category of lake and must comply with Sections B.9.2 to B.9.5.

Section B.13.2 of the Official Plan states: Standards regulating shoreline structures shall be detailed in the implementing comprehensive zoning by-law. Section B.13.3 of the Official Plan states: Buildings, structures, or works extending beyond the normal or controlled high water mark or located at the shoreline shall be designed and located in a suitable manner so as to have regard for the following matters:

a) critical fish and wildlife habitat; b) the natural flow of water; c) potential damage from flood and ice heaving; d) privacy; and, e) other shoreline, resource development, and environmental policies.

Section B.13.4 of the Official Plan states, in part: To maintain a balance of natural and built form, the maximum cumulative width of shoreline structures, including all docks, shall be the lesser of 25 percent or 23 metres (75 feet) of the lot’s water frontage... Section B.13.6 of the Official Plan states: The primary use of docks is for the docking and berthing of boats as well as access to the lake for swimming. Large docks, used as decks over the water, shall be discouraged. Section F.1.6.4 states that in considering applications, the potential impact of similar approvals will be considered. The cumulative impact of amendments on this and other lands will be considered to have greater weight than site specific considerations. Section F.1.6.8 of the Official Plan states: Due to carefully planned origins of certain provisions of the zoning by-law, exemptions may not be granted for lot coverage, oversized sleeping cabins, additions to second dwellings/sleeping cabins, front yard setbacks for non-complying structures, reduced side yard setbacks for two storey boathouses or sundecks on a boathouse, and shoreline structure widths. These origins must be considered in relation to any such application.


Page 97 of 120

Page 4 of 6

2. Township of Muskoka Lakes Zoning By-Law Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.e. of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.7 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum cumulative width of docks permitted. The property is zoned Waterfront Residential (WR1 and WR5) and is located on a Category 1 Lake, (Lake Muskoka). The applicant wishes to reconstruct a dock and construct a single storey boathouse. The maximum cumulative width of docks permitted is 25% of the lot frontage. In this case, the property has a lot frontage of 215 feet, and therefore, the maximum dock width permitted is 53 feet. The proposed cumulative width of existing and proposed docks is to be 64 feet in width. The variance requested is 11 feet. 3. Site Characteristics A site visit was conducted on July 30, 2015. The site was accessed via Oak Ridge Road. Existing structures on the property at the time of the site visit included a dwelling, the remains of a concrete foundation, a wood shed, a dock with boatport and dock with gazebo. The front yard of the property was observed to be mostly steep bare rock although some vegetation was present. At the shoreline, one storey boathouses were observed on neighbouring properties to the east and to the west.

East facing view of existing southern dock and location for proposed boathouse/docking


Page 98 of 120

Page 5 of 6

North facing view of northern dock and neighbouring property to the north along the shoreline

South facing view of boathouse on neighbouring property to the south


Page 99 of 120

Page 6 of 6

4. Dock Width The Official Plan contains policy outlining that on Large Lakes (Category 1) the maximum dock width permitted is 25% of the by-law frontage. The application proposes a dock width of 64 feet which is a cumulative dock width of 30% of By-law frontage. The relief requested is 11 feet or 5%. The intent and purpose of the cumulative width restrictions in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are, in part, to ensure built form does not dominate the shoreline. The Official Plan reinforces that “The primary use of docks is for the docking and berthing of boats as well as access to the lake for swimming”. In this case, the overall dock width on the property is proposed to be reduced from 75 feet (35%) to 64 feet (30%). The proposed reduction equates to 11.7ft (3.56m) or 5%. Although a boathouse is being introduced along the shoreline, a boathouse is permitted and is being built in compliance with the Zoning By-laws. Due to the fact that overall dock width is being brought into closer compliance with By-law requirements, Staff feels the proposal meets the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The Official Plan also discourages large docks used as decks over water. The applicant proposes to have docking surrounding the proposed boathouse as well as maintain the existing northern swim dock. Although it could be argued that the northern swim dock is a large deck over water (with an area of approximately 600 sqft) this structure has existed for some time and is not being proposed. 5. Minor Variance A-30/13 On July 31, 2013, minor variance A-30/13 was approved to recognize the eastern portion of the subject property as an Existing Lot of Record with 9,450 square feet of lot area, to permit an existing dock to be one foot from the side lot line and to permit a dock to be 43 feet in width, as shown on the plan attached to the Notice of Decision. It should be noted that the subject property has since become larger through a property merge which eliminates the need for any future relief as an Existing Lot of Record. It should also be noted that the other approved variances for docking in A-30/13 are no longer needed with the newly proposed docking configuration in application A-41/15. 6. Minor Staff feels that the reconstruction of shoreline structures will result in some visual impacts for neighbours and from the water and the slip angled parallel to shore is now proposed to face the lesser setback. However the proposed boathouse is to be built in compliance to Zoning By-law requirements and the overall dock width is decreasing by 5% on the property. The proposed docks are to meet all side yard setback and length requirements and appear to be in character with shoreline structures in the surrounding area. Staff encourages property owners to work towards closer compliance with the Zoning By-law as the applicants are doing in this case. Staff feels that the proposal is minor in nature. 7. Appropriate In Staff’s opinion the proposed minor variance is appropriate on the subject property. It is thought that the proposed docking does satisfy the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and is generally in-keeping with the character of the waterfront in this area. Staff recommends approval for the application.


Page 100 of 120

iW3S

II.I

..l0N

\

_.u

.\,

_u_u

>2

Ocm

<m

<\

x/4

»s

._..

xxan

2

x0..o

Szm

:.vm

:cm

xox>

_.>

xm\

u.m

._.m

_o._

.:c

z_n=

u>_.

:<

\as

on:c

mxo

x>\

s_

..\._

.m

u.4

\e

...

\v\c

\\%

llll

IIB

m?m

\\

:o>

xm

anm

7T

"IN

O>

Um

.wno

%,..

m.»

\

?

+\

\\\

w..

,,., \

0x0

\uN

.&.\

..w.. u

.K

va?w

_ \aw

. W,

\\\\

\\u\\\

\\Lu?

\%1:

1.3

.4%

\\\\\.

l\

\

\

_mM

\\

_\\v

1u\\\

V§

\

\

15.

C_

W

\\. \\\

Jul.

u...2

§p

\\\

I..

\\u_

_\_

,$0

\\\5.

1%.

.0/

\\uw

s \—

:1\\_

w__ /.u

0\\E

!»\\

1‘\

\\3

we

xx_

rue u I

II

IIn

\_\..

a\

—w

\

__ Aer

gag:

\\\_u

:.

r%lll

lII

I

INU

__0.

.. 1

:.L

I

w.

.1.“

_u.

..o\n

.\.$»

\.f

oA

m2:

u\o

.:..u

2.n.

.L.

\_j

%r

411.

».Ih

ll.

/‘n

u\/.

o\4I

u

w._

wm

o..h

/.\

...\.

wu.

n.m

eon.

\... 1

man

44up

In\

1$5

?t11

.3»

\$\

.\oo

¢o.I

v21»

.0%

u.

$w

¢..\

u\\

as. $5

...

\.:1

\\\

LI“

\L.\

....

\\\H

\\\‘

Ia

a\\

\

..\...

....

_..

.\7

.\zw

aa«

«nah

_.. \.

\o

A:

can?

a3

\W.s

\as.o

,.\m

.$»

.\o

w\\\

‘.0

\.\M

..\.

\.\\.\

o\\

\3!

_\

\\\?V

A:

\\\.5

.x

1.56

...

.\.

3|!-

‘.1-

EV

‘.I:

-Ivs

aslh

.-43

.3..

§.r

.-qi

ulgg

igil

§I'“

?l.I

g.n?

||||||

|||||

*||—

um

a..

MIt

lu

\K

l-.

_ kl

\

\\

\

n. 1\\ m 0

.m

m.~

.2:

13’!

.35

55.3

3.!

3:!

-Inn

.-I-

5::-

§.l?

=.

3539

1513

’;:.8

3D.lO

13Il

.o<

UE

ra-B

iBu5

.l§:.

II‘:

-|.Il

D.!

l:.=

..u‘.

l§ix

I!§.

x

?sl-

8:5

lI:8

.In

1-3.

.:..

ul!.

n3lI

:6.I

-IE

9.

53.»

3!.

IE:

53:

3!.

pl»!

:5: .3 EB _ o .5 S: H:

EH

:2 .W_¢

BI

:.I it 53 n:

S i

nun

#6..

5

IE.

it! ‘.3 3..

5..

23$

9..

:5.I

A._

.3....

35..

If5.

3.3

:93

Bnl

aasi

lini?

lll

A-41/15, V

erity, Part of Lot

31, Concession 13, P

arts 1-P

age 101 of 120

E_.3

3:

A-41/15, V

erity, Part of Lot


arts 1-P

age 102 of 120

=3.

._.e «

.5;

do32

2.6

:

[ll

sman

mcz

m.

8..

on88

.3.

.M

8'-0

'R

0

16'-O

“[4.8

8]

$y_.

...r.m

.m...

....m

:l:..?

....m

......

......

......

......

......

......

....

-u_.

,_

_ E-§

xn£6

l.5»o

u..a

.!u.

Io..x

<Fm

oz.Q

§rE

.tH

Ecr

uU

mag

mnm

_h.u

s»...

mm

.»am

m»m

-L.m

..mp.

_m...

?m.a

....

......

......

......

......

......

-+

>uu

mm

mm

”o>

xx_o

omSz

m

O_~

_z_.

...m

>._

.O_.

.2_

m.u

omm

mm._

.m

m<

>._

.

m>

m_.

mm

o>_.

m”

23.2

5.


Page 103 of 120

=3.

.3«E

:

1.2

0.2.

:0C

.;m

oz_.

<

_L__

_.

8'-0

?‘

?-09

02

S3)l

V1

V)l

O)l

S?W

dM.l.

3A.L

|

E;

U

.D-L

=.9

lI€

awns

SNV

1B

SOR

DIV

OSS

SBC

IOV

ll0|.l

.VA

313

ll.lI

l0ll

ml_

.13

3 5/0

!Sl|0

Il.lV

08A

.l.ll3

As.

1au:

|.rec

I sxo

rq

%

J00}

!N

MII0

.L

0.».

_... W

>._

._z>

_.%

vmtn

-nnz

nzns

rsun

rraa

uuvé

annr

uusn

muv

n'uo

a1-u

wnu

wau

\s‘1

mm

nu1s

:m:v

c

¥3D

¢?N

133l

-IS

ms

aans

snSt

‘L

E‘!

-20

awn

Nol

svea

9NI'

l

320-

no 9-0‘

‘0'll

K1I

l¥J?

.l

154)

[me

$BV

1N

A-41/15, V

erity, Part of Lot


arts 1-P

age 104 of 120

=3.

322

.;

3NV

'IB

SCII

IDIV

O SSB

UG

CIV

'

uouw

ma n

mos

asno

auvo

a mm

s.Ia

u:].

Ied

S)[O

II[

%nz

mu

3 1: 4: B

%3

2E

S°

§9'

-0"

9

16'-0

"[4.8

8

.n22

oz.9

02>

_uO

txoa

aars

s5l

'L€'

£O

-uam

nu13

3245

awn

Not

smau

l??’

mrw

n

A-41/15, V

erity, Part of Lot


arts 1-P

age 105 of 120


Page 106 of 120

_.>

zmm

n_._

_<__

3

A-43/15, Langschmidt, Part of Lot 52, Concession A,

Page 107 of 120


COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE # A-43/15 ROLL # 1-1-005


Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.P.13,45(5), R.R.O., 1980, Reg. 787 APPLICATION MADE BY: Edward Langschmidt, Rosedale Moore Park Veterinary, 402 Summerhill

Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4W 2E4 LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Part of Lot 52, Concession A, (Cardwell), Civic Address: 4194 Highway 141,

Zoning Schedule: 10 EXPLANATION OF THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.a of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.3.8 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum height of a dwelling. The subject property is zoned Waterfront (WR and WR8) and is located on a Category 3 Lake, (Wier Lake). The applicant is currently constructing a dwelling. The maximum height requirement for a dwelling on a Category 3 Lake is 30 feet. A portion of the proposed dwelling is 38.5 feet in height. The variance requested is 8.5 feet. NOTICE that an application under the above file number will be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on the date and at the time shown below. DATE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE AND ADDRESS: Township of Muskoka Lakes, Municipal Offices, (corner of Joseph and Bailey Street), Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. PUBLIC HEARING - You are entitled to attend this public hearing in person to express your view about this application or you may be represented by counsel for that purpose. If you wish to make written comments on this application they may be forwarded to the Secretary - Treasurer at the address shown below. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: - There may be additional information relating to the proposed variance application available from staff located in the Planning Department, Municipal Office, (corner of Bailey and Joseph Street), Port Carling, Ontario on week days between 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. or by mail at The Corporation of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, Box 129, Port Carling, Ontario, P0B 1J0. Telephone: (705)765-3156 or FAX (705)765-6755. Please quote the Committee’s file number noted above.


Page 108 of 120

Notice of Hearing A-42/15, Langschmidt FAILURE TO ATTEND HEARING - If you do not attend the hearing it may proceed in your absence and, except as otherwise provided in the Planning Act, you will not be entitled to any further notice in the proceedings. NOTICE OF DECISION - If you wish to be notified of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment in respect of this application, you must submit a written request to the Committee of Adjustment. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. Even if you are the successful party, you should request a copy of the decision since the Committee of Adjustment decision may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the applicant or another member of the public. PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT IS A JUDICIAL BODY WHICH MAKES DECISIONS SOLELY ON INFORMATION GATHERED AS A COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE NOT TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO THE HEARING DATE TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Dated this 30th day Original Signed by A. Glazier of July, 2015. Andrea Glazier, Secretary-Treasurer


Page 109 of 120

LUI Z6

C°”2iNFORM.\A_TFORPLAl:|N\lN(.3


Page 110 of 120

Page 1 of 7


TO: Chair Edwards and Members of Committee of Adjustment MEETING DATE: August 13th 2015 SUBJECT: A-43/15, (LANGSCHMIDT), Part of Lot 52, Concession A, (Cardwell), Civic

Address: 4194 Highway 141, Roll # 1-1-005

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff are not opposed to Minor Variance A-43/15, (LANGSCHMIDT). APPROVALS: Date Signature



ORIGIN Particulars of Property: Lot Frontage 502ft (153m)

Lot Area Total 1.26ac (5,099sqm)


Proposed Proposal

87-87 3.1.2.a 2014-14 4.1.3.8

Maximum Dwelling Height 30 feet 8.5 feet 38.5 feet Construct New

Dwelling

BACKGROUND PLANNING DATA Official Plan Designation: Waterfront By-law 87-87 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR) By-Law 2014-14 Zoning: Waterfront Residential (WR8) Schedule No.: 10 Access: Highway 141 (Year Round Maintained)


Page 111 of 120

Page 2 of 7

Neighbouring Uses: Waterfront Residential Original Shore Road Allowance: Open Fisheries Resource: Not Assessed Civic Address: 4194 Highway 141 Lake: Wier Lake (Category 3) PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS


Section B.5.2 (Character): Natural form should dominate the character of the Waterfront. Natural shorelines may visually screen development viewed from the water and buffer uses. Shorelines shall be encouraged to be maintained in a predominantly natural state with tree cover and ground vegetation retained as development occurs. Section B.5.5 (Character): The Township recognizes that different lakes have different character. The three (3) large lakes, Muskoka, Rosseau, and Joseph, generally exhibit larger built forms and building types which are generally not in character with the smaller lakes. Section B.5.8 (General Development Standards): Waterfront lots should be of sufficient dimension and size to accommodate the use proposed, related structures, and services within acceptable standards. As such, a variety of lot sizes, water frontages, setbacks, and structural limitations are expected in recognition of the natural and built influences in the Waterfront.

Section B.5.47 (Visual, Scenic and Aesthetic Qualities): Structurally, high profile development shall generally not be permitted. The height of any structure should be appropriate to its setting and terrain, including slope, tree cover, setbacks, and architecture and generally not exceed the height of the tree canopy. Section B.5.48 (Visual, Scenic and Aesthetic Qualities): Architectural designs which soften the appearance of two storey structures will be required in a Site Plan Control by-law to minimize the prominence of structural development along the shoreline. Walkout lower levels will be permitted but will be encouraged to be generally less than one half of the width of the structure (dwelling).

Section B.5.51 (Visual, Scenic and Aesthetic Qualities): The retention of trees and native vegetation shall be encouraged through site plan control to uphold the visual and environmental integrity of the Waterfront. Where development is proposed, a natural undisturbed buffer is required at the water’s edge to generally meet a target of 15 metres (50 feet) in depth from the high water mark. Where little or no natural buffer exists, renaturalizing


Page 112 of 120

Page 3 of 7

will be required, where possible. Minor accessory structures and an access pathway to the shoreline are permitted. Section B.9.4 (Lake Character): The following special provisions apply to Category 3 (Small/Remote) lakes: d) the maximum height of all main structures shall be 9 metres (30 feet). Section B.10.1 (Residential Development Policies): Development on the waterfront must be carefully controlled and monitored to maintain the character of the Waterfront area. Character of the Waterfront is not only a result of built size and form but also the number of habitable buildings, setbacks, shoreline vegetative cover, height, shoreline structures, and historical lake development. Section B.10.8 (Residential Development): The maximum permitted development on the lakes depends on the category of lake and must comply with Sections B.9.2 to B.9.5.

Section B.17.2 (Development of Undeveloped Lakes): Development on undeveloped lakes introduces a dramatic change in the character and natural habitat of flora and fauna. Remote development is typically on a small lake or an area with substantial acreage and may be adjacent to crown land. As such, limited shoreline structures will be permitted. Section B.17.3 (Development of Undeveloped Lakes): Development potential shall be reduced to maintain a traditional remote cottaging experience. Section B.17.4 (Development of Undeveloped Lakes): Detailed development standards referring to, but not limited to, such requirements as minimum lot size, frontage, setbacks, etc., will be determined in an implementing zoning by-law.

Section F.1.6.4 of the Official Plan states: In considering applications, the potential impact of similar approvals will be considered. The cumulative impact of amendments on this and other lands will be considered to have greater weight than site specific considerations.

2. Zoning By-Law Relief is requested from Section 3.1.2.a of By-law 87-87, as amended, and Section 4.1.3.8 of By-law 2014-14, as amended, being the maximum height of a dwelling. The subject property is zoned Waterfront (WR and WR8) and is located on a Category 3 Lake, (Wier Lake). The applicant is currently constructing a dwelling. The maximum height requirement for a dwelling on a Category 3 Lake is 30 feet. A portion of the proposed dwelling is 38.5 feet in height. The variance requested is 8.5 feet. 3. Site Characteristics A site visit was conducted on July 30, 2015. The property was accessed via Highway 141 using the entrance of the Wier Lake Trail. At the time of the site visit, the property was observed to be generally wooded and gently sloping to Wier Lake. Structures on the property at the time of the site visit included a dwelling under construction, and a recreational vehicle (trailer). No structures could be observed on neighbouring properties and the lot was observed to be very private. From Wier Lake the dwelling was observed to be well screened as a result of existing front yard vegetation. At the shoreline, no other residential development could be observed on Wier Lake with the exception of a dock across the lake.


Page 113 of 120

Page 4 of 7

West facing view of proposed dwelling on subject property


Page 114 of 120

Page 5 of 7

Northwest facing view of proposed dwelling and front yard vegetation

Southwest facing view of proposed dwelling from the shoreline


Page 115 of 120

Page 6 of 7

4. Dwelling Height A building permit was issued for the proposed dwelling under building permit 2013-0792 with clear remarks on the Permit not to exceed 30 feet in height, however the structure was constructed to a greater height than the permitted 30 feet. The Official Plan limits the height of structures in the Waterfront to ensure that natural form dominates the shoreline. The Official Plan specifically identifies that on Category 3 lakes, the maximum height shall be 30 feet, and also encourages walkout basements to be less than half the width of the structure. The Official Plan and Zoning By-law also limit height with the intent and purpose of ensuring that the height of a structure is appropriate to its terrain and setting. Where there is sufficient tree cover and appropriate locations are selected, the impact of height can be mitigated. Generally, the further back a building is from the high water mark, the less impact the structure has on the character of the shoreline. Accordingly, distance from the high water mark can be a mitigating factor.

The proposed dwelling is located on a Category 3 Lake (Wier Lake) with a front yard setback of 66 feet from the high water mark at the closest point. Staff does acknowledge that the 66 foot front yard setback, privacy of the lot, lack of neighbours and the screening from front yard vegetation all act to mitigate the impacts of 38.5 feet of dwelling height. The walkout basement level consists maily of a garage door, less than half the width of the structure, and it does not give the appearance of a 3 stroey building. Further, the added height is concentrated in one central peak at the middle of the building only. Conversely, grade drops to the left of the structure, and is not uniformly at 38 feet only the south-easterly end, so that no individual portion of the structure substantially exceeds 30 feet. From these perspectives Staff believes that the impacts of the dwelling are minimal. However, Staff maintains concern over the precedence that may be set with the approval of a dwelling with this scale of height relief. 5. Minor One minor variance is requested in this application for the maximum height of a dwelling. The applicant requires 8.5 feet of relief from the maximum height of a dwelling. Due to limited impacts from the water and for neighbours, and the fact that relief is only required for the central roof peak, Staff considers the application as minor in nature. 6. Appropriate This is a difficult application. In Staff’s opinion the proposed minor variance application meets the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The character of the area will not change significantly and Wier Lake will continue to be a remote and private lake. The dwelling complies with all other requirements of the Zoning By-law. As mentioned previously, Staff does have concerns with regard to precedence and the implications on future height variances. Section F.1.6.4 of the Official Plan clearly states that:

In considering applications, the potential impact of similar approvals will be considered. The cumulative impact of amendments on this and other lands will be considered to have greater weight than site specific considerations.

It should be noted that the subject property can be clearly differentiated from others in the Township of Muskoka Lakes. Wier Lake is a Category 3 Lake and is extremely private. If one was to review the future development potential of Wier Lake, it could be argued that development is limited to 3 future dwellings although these three lots are large and can most likely be subdivided. Due to this unique situation on a low density/remote lake, Staff take comfort in the fact that the proposed variance does


Page 116 of 120

Page 7 of 7

not set a new precedence across the entire Township. It should also be noted that of the 4 “tests” of a minor variance, whether the building was constructed in accordance with the building permit issued and whether it could have been built in compliance with the zoning by-law, are not one of them. Although there is some concern that the height does not meet the Official Plan policy requirement of 30 feet, when the document is read as a whole, although debatable, staff finds the development generally in conformity.


Page 117 of 120

:3.

3«E

:

v3ow

n... ....

..3E

u:5

%2s

§o_.

n

5.1

onFO

Hm

u.noaa

auac

s >.n

.=.9

<o_

_.—

.es:

.m_.

__.

._.o

8_5

us»

2.9.

:8.

.R

3or

?a}

3%m

amm

nam

m?mop

omE

.:6

3.m

: .—..c

¢<=

m—

_m—

.cu

._S=

m—

3_3

F53

mas

:un

ion

_on m

ayS3

2:So

33cm

Su?}

awnu

Hm

»m

n_.m

m

zms3

».._

2.oo

o.

u8...

_zn

Shun

:gm

:3: . I223!

_51

:335

..

zmsu

n..._

._n um

u5n>

+_o

z

mx?

zza

<m

nm:=

._oz

W0

am:>

_z

.039

.2.

5:35

0..

n_m

zanm

an__:

_....

.:n *2<

.mi_

_..m2

aum

:=2m

<m

.m w

_.o.

_. 3no

snm

u .2.H

.nu:_

<<

m__

$8..

G}

4~—

S.):

|3.|.

VN

\TV

NIS

IHOGN

VE

d


Page 118 of 120

=3.

.33.

...

mao

zm_.

.><

mz

umna

n

‘_u

wii I5

-£1

A-43/15, Langschm

idt, Part

of Lot 52, Concession A

, P

age 119 of 120

TIV

II?"1

"(I

N

3.gz

j?

:Q

B?

Ew

e.

3gm

A-43/15, Langschm

idt, Part

of Lot 52, Concession A

, P

age 120 of 120

Documents

AGENDA - COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT €€THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2015 - Committee … · Resolution Number: CA-01-16/07/2015 Member Benson – Member Grady: Be it resolved that the Committee