Body: Committee of Adjustment Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee Date: November 10, 2022 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of Adjustment/2022/Committee Of Adjustment - 10 Nov 2022 - Agenda.pdf)


Document Text

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC Committee Of Adjustment Meeting Agenda TIME: DATE: PLACE:

7:00 PM, Thursday, November 10, 2022 Council Chambers.

1 .

Call to Order

a )

Resolution

2 .

Adoption of Agenda

a )

Resolution

3 .

Electronic Meeting Information

a )

The meeting will be live streamed at the following link: http://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontenacTwp/ Please visit the Virtual Committee of Adjustment Meetings page on the Township website for the link to register to be a participant in this meeting: https://www.southfrontenac.net/en/open-for-business/virtual-committee-ofadjustment-meetings.aspx Instructions about participating via Computer, Laptop, Smartphone, Tablet and Telephone can be found at the above noted link as well.

b )

PowerPoint Presentation Staff has prepared a PowerPoint Presentation that will be displayed on the screen of the meeting, you can also follow along with the PDF version that is in the attachment of this agenda item.

4 .

Declaration of pecuniary interest

a )

None Declared

5 .

Approval of Minutes – October 13, 2022

a )

Resolution

6 .

New Consent Applications:

a )

PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) Property Address: Vacant Land on Murton Road - District of Portland Purpose and Effect of the Application: Consent for the creation of one new rural residential lot consisting of 2 acres with 76 metres of frontage on Murton Road.

411 1

11 214 1

Page 1 of 368

b )

PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) Property Address: Vacant Land on Murton Road - District of Portland Purpose and Effect of Application: This application is a consent application for the creation of two new rural residential lots on Murton Road consisting of 2 acres with 76 metres of frontage on Murton Road.

14 217 2

7 .

New Minor Variance Applications:

a )

PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (Bercier) Property Address: 340 Devil Lake Road - District of Bedford Purpose and Effect of the Application: The applicant is requesting relief to locate a single detached dwelling (50’ x 28’) within 30 metres of the high water mark of a waterbody (wetland) on the property. The proposed single detached dwelling will be 27 metres to the highwater mark, whereas the Zoning Bylaw requires a minimum 30 metres setback from the highwater mark. The applicant is also requesting to place a carport (12’ x 16’) in the front yard of the property. The carport will be 22 metres to Devil Lake Road.

17 320 6

b )

PL-ZNA-2022-0134 (Gurr) Property Address: 2006 Charlie Green Road - District of Loughborough Purpose and Effect of the Proposed Variance: The applicant is requesting permission as per section 5.24.2 of the Township Zoning Bylaw to permit a detached garage (40’ x 60’) to be located in the front yard whereas the Zoning Bylaw requires an accessory building which is not part of the main building to be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the dwelling. The property is zoned Waterfront Residential Zone (RW).

20 722 5

c )

PL-ZNA-2022-0137 (Bobs Lake Coop) (Fretts) Property Address: 27 and 38 Co-Op Lane - District of Bedford Purpose and Effect of the Proposed Variance: 27 and 38 Co-op Lane are part of the Bob’s Lake Co-operative.The Co-op’s properties are zoned RLSW-3.The RLSW-3 zone requires that the replacement of any existing trailers on thepropertiesbesubjecttoaminorvarianceapplicationtodeterminetheappropriat enessof the size and location of the replacement trailer. Theapplicationistoreplacetheexistingtrailersat27and38Co-opLane.At27CoopLane, the existing 18.5 foot by 8 foot trailer would be replaced with a new 18.5 foot by 8 foot trailer. The new trailer would be placed in the same location as the existing trailer, beside theexisting sunroom.At 38 Co-op Lane, the existing 18 foot by 8 foot trailer would be replaced with a new 39 foot by 8.5 foot trailer. This new trailer would be placed in the same location astheexistingtrailer.Bothtrailerswouldbesetbackmorethan30metresfromthehig hwater mark of Bob’s Lake, and are far removed from any property lines.

22 626 3

d )

PL-ZNA-2022-0139 (Mitro) Property Address: Vacant Land Sperling Lane - District of Bedford Purpose and Effect of the Proposed Variance: TheOwnerproposedtoconstructa1350squarefootdwelling,includinganattache ddeck,on the property.The dwelling would be setback 21m from the highwater mark of Thirty Island Lake and 6m from the top of bank.A minor variance is being requested to allow the dwelling to be setback less than the 30m from the highwater mark of the lake and less than the 15m from the top of bank required by the Zoning By-law.

26 428 4

Page 2 of 368

e )

PL-ZNA-2022-0140 (Murphy) (Sands) Property Address: 1003 Island View Lane - District of Loughborough Purpose and Effect of the Application: To request permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge a legal non- conforming dwelling within 30m of the highwater mark of Knowlton Lake. The existing 1056 squarefootdwellingwith295squarefootattacheddeckissetback9.7mfromthehig hwater mark. A 720 square foot second storey addition would be added to a portion of the dwelling that is setback 14m from the highwater mark.

28 529 6

f)

PL-ZNA-2022-0141 (Smallman-Tew) Property Address: 179 Beatrice Lane - District of Bedford Purpose and Effect of Variance: The applicant is seeking permission to enlarge a legal non-conforming dwelling and increasing living space within 30 metres of the highwater mark of Bobs Lake (Green Bay). The dwelling is setback 16 metres from the high water mark. An addition would be constructed to the rear of the dwelling, 22 metres to the high water mark. The height of the dwelling will also be increasing from 20 feet to approximately 25 feet. The property is zoned Limited Service Residential Waterfront (RLSW).

29 732 0

g )

PL-ZNA-2022-0142 (Kobus) (Kimmett) Property Address: 6154 McMullen Drive - District of Portland Purpose and Effect of the Application: The subject property is developed with a dwelling and a small shed. The dwelling is setback 6.31 metres from the highwater mark of Verona Lake. The applicant is seeking permission to add a deck to the dwelling. The deck (3m x 6.5m & 3m x 2m) would be setback 3.9 metres from the highwater mark and would extend over the top of bank. The applicant is also seeking a variance for a new shed (7.3 m x 3.7m) to be setback 16.8 metres from the high water mark and 9.5 metres from the top of bank.

32 134 8

h )

PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) Property Address: 81 Maple Drive Lane - District of Bedford Purpose and Effect of the Application: The applicant is requesting relief to place a shed (12’ x 30’) in the front yard of the property on the existing driveway on the property, whereas, Section 5.24.2 of the Township Zoning Bylaw states any accessory building which is not part of the main building shall be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building. The property is zoned LIMITED SERVICE RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RLS) in the Township Zoning Bylaw.

34 936 8

8 .

Other Business

a )

Appointment of Deputy Secretary-Treasurer, Sarah Cadue Resolution

b )

Delegated Consent - Report

9 .

Adjournment

a )

Resolution

Page 3 of 368

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Thursday, November 10, 2022

7:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting from Council Chambers 4432 George Street, Sydenham, ON Page 4 of 368

Welcome to the Virtual Meeting for the Committee of Adjustment This is a hearing of the Committee of Adjustment for the Township of South Frontenac. All members of the public are muted on our end and your cameras will not be turned on. Committee Members

Township Staff

• Randy Ruttan (Chair)

• Christine Woods (Senior Planner)

• Alan Revill

• Sarah Cadue (Planner)

• Norm Roberts

• Michelle Hannah (Secretary Treasurer & Planning Assistant)

• Mike Nolan • Doug Morey • Mike Howe • Tom Bruce Page 5 of 368

• Ken Gee

Call to Order Adoption of Agenda

Page 6 of 368

• Call to Order • Adoption of Agenda • Electronic Meeting Information • Declaration of Pecuniary Interests • Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting • Hearings for Applications • Consent Granting Authority Report • Other Business • Adjournment

Electronic Meeting Information Format for Each Hearing

  1. The Chair will introduce the file
  2. The Planner will provide an overview of the application
  3. The Planner will make a recommendation on the application
  4. Questions or comments from the Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
  5. Committee deliberation and vote
  6. The Chair will state whether the vote was carried Page 7 of 368

Appeal Rights • Township staff will be in contact with the applicant following the meeting. Where a decision has been made, it will be forwarded to the applicant and anyone who has requested to be notified within 15 days. • If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at the hearing or make written submissions to the Township before a decision is made, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision. • Anyone may appeal the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal. The appeal must be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment within 20 days of the notice of decision. The notice of appeal must set out the reasons for the appeal and be accompanied by the fee required by the Tribunal. Page 8 of 368

• If you have any questions after the meeting, please reach out to staff.

How to Speak to an Application • The Chair of the meeting will open the floor to public comments • Click “Raise Hand” button to request to speak or dial *9 (star nine) when participating by telephone • The Chair will recognize a member of the public, and the Meeting Host will unmute the member of the public • Once the member of the public is done speaking or the Committee has no further questions, the Meeting Host will mute their microphone

Page 9 of 368

In Case of Technical Difficulties • If a Committee member joining virtually disconnects from the meeting, the meeting will proceed if there is still quorum. The Committee member will attempt to reconnect. • If quorum cannot be met within 15 minutes, the meeting will be postponed. • Staff will be in touch with applicants. • A notice will also be posted on the Township’s social media if the meeting is postponed.

Page 10 of 368

Declaration of Pecuniary Interests Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting Consent Applications Page 11 of 368

Applications PL-BDJ-2022-0070 & PL-BDJ-2022-0071 Consent to Sever Applicant: Gina Anghelescu

Location: Vacant Land, Murton Road

Page 12 of 368

Property Location • Vacant Land, Murton Road, District of Portland • Rural designation • Rural zone (RU)

Subject property

Page 13 of 368

Page 14 of 368

Subject Property West

Subject Property East

Proposal • Create two new residential lots • Lot #1 (Blue) • Lot #2 (Green) • Each Severed Parcel • 2 acres (0.8 ha) • 76 metres (250 feet) on Murton Road

Page 15 of 368

• Retained Parcel • 67 acres (27.1 ha) • 201 metres (659.4 feet) on Murton Road

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Public Services – No objection • Building Services (Sewage Review) – No objection, flexible site conditions for sewage system

• Public Comment – To date, written comments have been received from the owners of two properties • Concerns relate to minimum distance separation between livestock facilities and the lots Page 16 of 368

Analysis

Page 17 of 368

• The Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and the County of Frontenac Official Plan (Section 3.3) permit residential development, that is locally appropriate, in rural areas. • Section 5.7 of Township Official Plan states that limited nonagricultural residential development may also be permitted within the Rural area. • Section 5.7.4(ii) (a) of the Official Plan. The proposed severances are 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in size with 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on a Murton Road, therefore they meet the minimum lot size and frontage requirements.

Analysis • The retained parcel would also meet the Rural Residential policies as outlined in section 5.7.4 (ii) of the Official Plan. • Sections 6.23 and 7.1 (l) of the Official Plan state that “all division of land for new farm and non-farm uses shall comply with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae I or II as amended.” • MDS I calculations were completed for all livestock facilities and manure storage on neighbouring properties. Page 18 of 368

Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I ) East Property West Property

• East Property - A minimum MDS I setback of 166 metres (545 feet) is required from the closest barn • West Property - A minimum MDS I setback of 260 metres (853 feet) is required from the expanded barn & minimum MDS I setback of 279 metres (915 feet) is required from the existing manure storage on this property.

Page 19 of 368

Analysis • The severed parcels meet or exceed the required MDS I setbacks and therefore, comply with the Provincial Policy Statement, Township Official Plan & Zoning Bylaw. • The retained parcel has an area greater than 0.5ha for a building envelope that would comply with MDS I setbacks. • MDS I calculations must be completed or verified at the time of a building permit application. Page 20 of 368

• A disputed consent - Unresolved issues or concerns from the public related to minimum distance separation.

Recommendation • Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions in Planning Report

Page 21 of 368

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 22 of 368

PL-BDJ-2022-0070 & PL-BDJ-2022-0071 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 23 of 368

Applications for Minor Variance and Permission to Enlarge Legal NonConforming Uses

Page 24 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0129 Minor Variance

Applicant: Louise Bercier Property: 340 Devil Lake Road

Page 25 of 368

Property Location • The subject property is 2.02 acres, with 76 metres of frontage on Devil Lake Road. • Rural Designation • Rural zone (RU) and ‘Environmentally Sensitive’ overlay Page 26 of 368

Property Description • The property is grassed with scattered trees and vegetation. • Two watercourse features: One man-made channel from the northwest corner that connects with a watercourse/wetland in the southeast portion. • Existing sewage system, well storage shed, and tool shed. Page 27 of 368

Wetland (Southeast)

Proposal • Locate a one-storey single detached dwelling, 50 feet by 28 feet (130 square metres), setback a minimum of 27 metres from the highwater mark of a waterbody (wetland). • Place a carport 12 feet by 16 feet (17.84 square metres) in the front yard of the property, 22 metres to Devil Lake Road. Page 28 of 368

Page 29 of 368

Proposed Location for Dwelling

Proposed Location for Carport

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Building Services (Sewage System Review) – No objections • Cataraqui Conservation – No objections • Recommendations of environmental mitigation measures

• A permit will be required from under O. Reg. 148/06

• Public – none received

Page 30 of 368

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor Page 31 of 368

Recommendation • Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted drawings • Owner is required to enter into a Development Agreement • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property Page 32 of 368

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 33 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0129 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 34 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134 Minor Variance

Applicant: Ethan Gurr Property: 2006 Charlie Green Road

Page 35 of 368

Property Description • Lot area: 7 acres. Waterfront on the north side of the property. • Glass Lane runs through the lot from the east lot line. • Developed with a 2-storey single detached dwelling and attached garage. Page 36 of 368

Proposal • Construct a 222.97 square metres (40’x60’), accessory building in the front yard of the property. • Located off the existing driveway approximately 21.33 metres (70 feet) to Charlie Green Road and 20.1 metres (66 feet) to the front lot line. Page 37 of 368

View from the Road

Proposed Location

Page 38 of 368

Department, Agency and Public Comments • The application did not meet the criteria for circulation to any departments or agencies. • No comments received from the public

Page 39 of 368

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor Page 40 of 368

Recommendation

Page 41 of 368

• Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • Minor Variance is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 42 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0134 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 43 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0137 Minor Variance

Applicant: Shaun Biro, Leonard Bonnet and Joan Kinnie Agent: Lee Fretts (Bob’s Lake Co-operative) Property: 27 and 38 Co-op Lane

Page 44 of 368

Property Description • Bob’s Lake • Badour Road • Rural designation • RLSW-3 zone • 40 acres • Campsites in Bob’s Lake Co-op Page 45 of 368

Proposal 27 Co-op Lane • Remove 18.5ft by 8ft trailer • Add 18.5ft by 8ft trailer • Same location

Page 46 of 368

Page 47 of 368

27 Co-op Lane

Proposal 38 Co-op Lane • Remove 18ft by 8ft trailer • Add 39ft by 8.5ft trailer • Same location but different orientation

Page 48 of 368

Page 49 of 368

38 Co-op Lane

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Building Services • 27 Co-op Lane – clarified the replacement trailer would need to be connected to a new sewage system, or have its toilet removed • 38 Co-op Lane – encouraged to install a new sewage system

• Public Comments – none received

Page 50 of 368

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor Page 51 of 368

Recommendation

Page 52 of 368

• Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • For 27 Co-op Lane, applicant shall apply for and obtain a permit for a sewage system under Ontario Building Code or remove toilet to satisfaction of Township

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 53 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0137 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 54 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0139 Minor Variance

Applicant: Stephen Mitro Property: 102902004009304, Sperling Lane

Page 55 of 368

Property Description • Thirty Island Lake • Sperling Lane/Murray Lane • Rural designation • RLSW zone • 1.5 ha (3.7 acre) • Vacant Page 56 of 368

Proposal

Lake Cottage

• Seasonal dwelling • 1,350 sq. ft. • One storey • Northeast corner of property • 21m front yard • 21m from highwater mark • 6m from top of bank

Sewage System Top of Bank

Sperling Lane

Page 57 of 368

Shoreline and top of bank

Proposed building location

Page 58 of 368

Page 59 of 368

Proposed building location viewed from property to the east

Page 60 of 368

Typical topography of property

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Quinte Conservation – satisfied with Slope and Erosion Assessment, no objection • Public Comments – none received

Page 61 of 368

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor Page 62 of 368

Recommendation • Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • Development agreement Page 63 of 368

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 64 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0139 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 65 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0140 Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use

Applicant: Nicole and Gordon Murphy Agent: Benjamin Sands Property:1003 Island View Lane

Page 66 of 368

Property Description

Page 67 of 368

• Knowlton Lake • Island View Lane • Rural designation • RLSW zone • 0.4 ha (1 acre) • Existing 1,056 sq. ft. dwelling with 295 sq. ft. deck • Two accessory sheds

Proposal • Add 750 sq. ft. second storey addition • 14m from highwater mark

Page 68 of 368

Page 69 of 368

Dwelling viewed from lane

Shoreline slope and top of bank

Area of second storey addition

Page 70 of 368

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Cataraqui Conservation – geotechnical investigation and slope/erosion assessment required to demonstrate slope is stable and house will be safe • Building Services (Sewage Review) – comments forthcoming • Public Comments – none received

Page 71 of 368

Preliminary Planning Analysis • Dwelling is in erosion hazard • Township policies direct development away from shoreline erosion hazards • Cataraqui Conservation cannot issue a permit under O. Reg. 148/06 for proposed addition in erosion hazard • Appropriate to require geotechnical investigation and slope/erosion assessment needed to demonstrate slope is stable and enlarged house will be safe • Require confirmation that sewage system is adequate Page 72 of 368

Recommendation • Deferral

Page 73 of 368

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 74 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0140 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 75 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0141 Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use

Applicant: Peter Smallman-Tew Property:179 Beatrice Lane

Page 76 of 368

Property Description

Page 77 of 368

• Lot area of 6.21 acres (2.51 hectares) - lot addition approved in 2022 (file S-22-21-B). • Existing dwelling (Cottage) with attached deck, a detached garage, and two small utility sheds & septic system. • Rural designation • RLSW Zone

Proposal

Page 78 of 368

• Permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property within 30 metres of the highwater mark • Addition (7.5 m x 7.5 m): increased living space & covered porch – 22 metres to highwater mark • Height of dwelling will be increased • Dwelling will increase in gross floor area

South Side of Cottage

Proposed Location of the Addition

Page 79 of 368

Page 80 of 368

Existing Cottage – Location of Proposed Addition

Proposed Building Plans

View from Waterfront Page 81 of 368

Department, Agency and Public Comments Building Services (Sewage System Review) – No objection • Existing sewage system is sized adequately to serve the proposed rebuild of the cottage & addition Rideau Valley Conservation Authority – no objection

• Not going any closer to the water than existing dwelling • Recommendations were provided for best practices • Written permission is not required (Ontario Regulation 174/06).

Public Comments – none Page 82 of 368

Planning Analysis • Dwelling is legal non-conforming, setback 14.5 metres (47 feet) from the highwater mark of Bob’s Lake (Green Bay). • Section 5.10.2 of the Zoning By-law, 45 (2) of Planning Act increase gross floor area, living space & height of dwelling. • No adverse visual impact on the properties to the north and south over the existing condition. • View from the lake is also not anticipated to be noticeably different than the impact of the existing dwelling. Page 83 of 368

Planning Analysis • Lot coverage - will increase from approximately 1.1% to 1.4%, which is less than the 5% permitted in the RLSW zone. • RVCA provided various recommendations and best practices. These recommendations will be included in a development agreement that is a proposed condition of approval. Page 84 of 368

Recommendation – Approval • Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • Development Agreement Page 85 of 368

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 86 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0141 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 87 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0142 Minor Variance and Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use

Applicant: Susan Kobus Agent: Daniel Kimmett Property: 6154 McMullen Lane

Page 88 of 368

Property Description • Verona Lake • McMullen Lane (aka McMullen Drive • Settlement Area designation • UR1 zone • 1,065 sq. m. (0.26 acre) • 635 sq. ft. dwelling Page 89 of 368

• 6.3m from highwater mark • 3m from top of bank

• Small accessory shed

Proposal • New garage • 291 sq. ft. • One storey • 16.8m from highwater mark • 9.5m from top of bank

• Addition to dwelling • 275 sq. ft. attached deck • 3.9m from highwater mark • 0m from top of bank Page 90 of 368

Page 91 of 368

Garage location viewed from lane

Top of bank near garage

Page 92 of 368

House viewed from garage location

Sewage system

Page 93 of 368

Deck location

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Quinte Conservation – satisfied with Slope and Erosion Assessment, no objection • Public Comments – none received

Page 94 of 368

Planning Analysis – Garage Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor Page 95 of 368

Planning Analysis – Attached Deck • Seasonal dwelling is a legal non-conforming use • Not permitted use in UR1 zone • Less than 30m from highwater mark (i.e. 6.3m)

• Deck would be closer to highwater mark (i.e. 3.9m) • Deck would extend over top of bank • May impact ability to safely maintain and repair dwelling and slope if needed • Not consistent with development and redevelopment of waterfront properties on Verona Lake

Page 96 of 368

• Setbacks from highwater mark and top of bank are maintained or increased • Shoreline buffers provided to help maintain lake water quality • Safe access ensured around buildings, slopes and shorelines

• Lands north of dwelling are more appropriate for deck or patio that can maintain existing setback

Recommendation – Garage – Approval • Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • Development agreement Page 97 of 368

Recommendation – Deck – Denial

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 98 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0142 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 99 of 368

Application PL-ZNA-2022-0143 Minor Variance

Applicant: Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea Property: 81 Maple Grove Lane

Page 100 of 368

Property Description

Page 101 of 368

• 7.9 acres (3.2 hectares). • Forest and rocky outcrops. The developed portion of the property slopes gently south towards Maple Grove Lane. • Seasonal dwelling (cottage) with a front deck and a rear deck, a barrel sauna and septic tank and field • Rural designation • Limited Service Residential Zone (RLS)

Subject Property

Proposal • Permit an accessory building (Shed “A”) to be located in the front yard. • Permit an accessory building (Shed “B” to be located a minimum of 16 metres from the highwater mark of a watercourse. Page 102 of 368

Page 103 of 368

View from Lane

Slope of Property (East of Dwelling)

Watercourse (East)

Shed “B” view from lane

Watercourse (East)

Slope & Shed “B”

Page 104 of 368

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Rideau Valley Conservation Authority – No objection and provided recommendations for best practices • Public Comments – none

Page 105 of 368

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

Page 106 of 368

  1. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
  2. Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75
  3. Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
  4. Is minor

Recommendation

Page 107 of 368

• Approval • Pending any comments received • Subject to conditions • The application is approved in accordance with submitted plans • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • Minor Variance is applicable only to Zoning Bylaw No. 2003-75

Public Questions and Comments If you would like to speak:

• Use “Raise Hand” feature at the bottom of your screen. • Dial*9 (star nine) for phone. • Please wait to speak until you hear your name and your microphone has been unmuted.

Page 108 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0143 Committee Deliberation and Vote

Page 109 of 368

Other Business • Appointment of Deputy Secretary-Treasurer, Sarah Cadue • Consent Granting Authority Report • PL-BDJ-2022-0107 (Benedikt) – lot addition. • PL-BDJ-2022-0114 (Hyndman) (Richmond) – lot addition

• Thank you to Committee members for the last 4 years Page 110 of 368

Adjournment

Page 111 of 368

Page 112 of 368

Ina,

,

Number:

d?s CL/L

File

Communications are to be sent to:

Signature(s) of Owner(s)

El

Owner(s)

El Agent

Agent as named above is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of processing this application (please fill out the last page).

Email Address of Authorized Applicant/Agent:

Phone number of Authorized Applicant/Agent:

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Applicant/Agent:

Name of Authorized Applicant/Agent:

applicant is authorized to make the application, be provided below.

. Ifthe applicant is NOT the owner of the subject land, the written authorization of the owner that the

Email Address of Owner(s):

Phone number of Owner(s): _

Full Mailing Address of Owner(s):

. Name of Owner(s):

Date Received:

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION For Office Use Only

Page 113 of 368

g ;b£.’§‘"jg g

El No

n

Date of Meeting:

Date Fee Paid:

IOQQ DBO OIO O\

“P-I’ L_o’l’ 3

500

Part Number(s):

Lot Number:

O3

El Storrington

H

I O I O. ofQ m

ClOther:

|:lCorrectionof Title L__| Lease

Area(acres/ha):

Name of Road/Lane:

S_

Rd

,3 5 3 m

#1 QC’«"€

j‘_’Igin

Frontage on road/lane (m):

  1. Please provide a brief description of your application. Indicate the reason why you are applying for a consent

|:|Charge/Discharge of Mortgage

MCreation of a New Lot ElEasement (right of way) ClLot Addition

/

  1. Select the type of consent being applied for:

Depth(m):

Name of Waterbody:

Frontage on water (m):

  1. Indicate the frontage(s), depth and area of the subject land. The subject land is the whole property prior to any changes. Please indicate the name of the road/lane and waterbody (if applicable).

'

‘Rd

lj/F’ortlandEl Loughborough

jglggds

Property Identification Number (PIN):

Roll Number:

I

[I Bedford

Reference Plan Number:

Concession Number:

Civic Address:

District:

  1. The description of the subject land:

Name of Planner:

E/Yes

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION 4. Have you consulted with Township Planning Staff regarding this application?

PL- B13: -Q0aSl- 00%

Complete this section ONLY if you are applying to create a new lot.

‘;°’°‘”°5

\a 5 m

Ix/\u(-(OnRd

on

Lot (Proposed

new lot):

Proposed

Existing Buildings/Structures:

Existing Use of Lot:

Severed

CY-OP5

Lot (Proposed

new lot):

Please list the existing and proposed USES and STRUCTURES.

Acres (acres or ha):

Depth (m):

Name of Waterbody:

Frontage on Water (m):

Name of Road/Lane:

Frontage on Road/Lane (m):

Severed

w.._‘1Zé,m~»a:r7:;

Crops

Retained Lot:

‘H-&=loqqcres

\O lO -q 3 m

§/\ur-(on

.

Retained Lot:

The following information is regarding the land intended to be severed (created) and the land to be retained.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

  1. Create a NEW LOT

ProposedLo+*l

Page 114 of 368

Page 115 of 368

Lot Addition (Severed

I

Retained Lot:

Name of Waterbody:

Frontage on Water (m):

Name of Road/Lane:

Frontage on Road/Lane (rn):

‘1

Existing Benefitting Lot: (Before Lot Addition)

I-

Enlarged Lot with added Land: (After Lot Addition)

The following information is regarding the Benefitting Lands also known as the land being enlarged which are receiving the lot addition.

Acres (acres or ha):

Depth (m):

Name of Waterbody:

Frontage on Water (m):

Name of Road/Lane:

Frontage on Road/Lane (m):

Proposed parcel):

LOT ADDITION Complete this section ONLY if you are applying for a lot addition. The following information is regarding the land intended to be severed (created) and the land to be retained.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

Buildings/Structures:‘

Proposed

Proposed Use of Lot:

Existing Buildings/Structures:

Existing Use of Lot:

Lot Addition:

Depth:

or a right-of-way

Width: Area:

Complete this section if you ONLY are applying for an

Benefitting Lands:

Municipal water system

I:I

Municipal water system

EI

WATER (Indicate the method by which water will be provided):

Retained Parcel

(NEW LOT) Severed Parcel

12.Type of Servicing Proposed

Describe the purpose and effect of the easement and the property that will benefit:

Roll Number of Benefitting Lands:

Civic address of Benefitting lands:

Length:

easement

Retained Lands:

Please list the‘ existing and proposed USES and STRUCTURES.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

  1. EASEMENTS & RIGHT OF WAY

Page 116 of 368

Retained Parcel

be provided?):

Holding Tank (Class 5) Greywater Pit (Class 2) Privy/Outhouse (Class 1)

Holding Tank (Class 5)

Greywater Pit (Class 2)

Privy/Outhouse (Class 1)

El El El

Leaching bed (Class 4)

Leaching Bed (Class 4)

septic system:

El Privately owned and operated

lg

Privately owned and operated individual septic system:

septic system

individual

[I Yes

Please indicate whether access to the land will be by:

The retained lot:

No

/

|:|Unknown

.

D Yes ‘3 No

“/\u(+Or
l‘/\uF+On Rd . —

16.Are you aware of any abandoned wells on the subject property?

The new lot (lot addition or Right of Way):

/

or covenant and its effect:

or restrictive covenants?

If Yes, please provide a description of each easement

15.Are there any existing easements

14.P|ease

list the name of the person(s) to whom the land or an interest in the land is to be transferred, charged or leased (ifknown):

8/

septic system

D Publicly owned and operated communal D Publicly owned and operated communal

(NEW LOT) Severed Parcel

13.Type of Sewage.-Disposal System Proposed (How will sewage disposalsystem

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

  1. Name of road or lane which accesses:

Page 117 of 368

wnsurg

  1. What is the current Official Plan Designation of the subject lands?

18.What is the zoning of the subject lands? (Check www.frontenacmags.ca)

The Retained Lot:

The New Lot:

If access is by water,o,n|y, describe the parking and docking facilities to be used and the approximate distance of these facilities from the subject land and the nearest public road. Parking and Docking for water access only properties MUST be legally deeded access. Please provide confirmation.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

D No

Please explain:

D Yes

E/Uriknown

21.ls the application consistent with the 2020 Provincial Policy Statement?

_u

20.Please describe how the application conforms with the Township Official Plan & County Official Plan by citing specific applicable sections and sub sections. Please make sure to look at Sections 5 and 7 in the Township Official Plan and Section 3 in the County Official Plan. Ifyou are unsure, please indicate that you do not know.

Page 118 of 368

El Minister’s Zoning Order

El Zoning By—|awAmendment

El Official Plan Amendment

El Site Plan Approval

III Minor Variance

El Consent

El Plan ofSubdivision

Application Type

‘T

El Yes Application Number

[3 Unknown

Date of Application

ENO Decision

22.Has the subject land ever been, or is currently, the subject of an application for approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act, for a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act, for a minor variance, for approval of a site plan, or for an amendment to an official plan, an amendment to the zoning by-law or a Minister’s zoning order? Complete all applicable

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

/

No

EI

  1. A SKETCH must be submitted. For more information on what the sketch needs to show, please see

I:IYes

M No

  1. Did the current owner acquire the subject land as a result of a consent?

I] Yes

23.Has land been previously severed from the subject property, since September 5, 2000? If yes, please provide date of transfer; name of transferee and uses of the land.

Page 119 of 368

onthe

Existing Buildings, wells and septic systems, bridges, railways, roads, hydro lines

Waterbodies, watercourses, drainage ditches, river or stream banks, wetlands, wooded areas

Landfills, propane facility, quarry’s and pits

Barns

a.

b.

c.

cl.

subject property and on land beside the subject property. Please label and show the approximate location of:

D All natural and artificial features that are located

current owner of the subject land.

U The location of all land previously severed from the parcel (if applicable) originally acquired by the

El The distance between the subject land and the nearest road, bridge or railway crossing

El Indicate if the owner of the subject property also owns other lands near the proposal.

the part that is to be retained, including the total area (acres or hectares), road frontages on all roads/lanes for each and waterbodies.

El The boundaries and dimensions of the whole property. LABELthe part that is to be severed and

[I A directional arrow with North at the top of the page.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

it is an unopened road allowance, a public travelled road, a private road or a right of way.

[I The location, width and name of any roads within or abutting the subject land, indicating whether

agricultural and commercial uses (if agricultural, please indicate the approximate distance of any barn structure from the proposed new lot).

[I Please indicate the current uses of land that is surrounding the property, such as residential,

applicant’s opinion may affect the application

El Please include any information on natural and artificial features (as listed above) that in the

Note: The existence of a nearby barn will require you to complete a Minimum Distance Separation Calculation in order to consider compatibility issues. Please check with the Planning Department regarding the implications of any farm structure, on your application.

Page 120 of 368

Page 121 of 368

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

_

The Owner/Applicant further agrees to provide the Municipality, upon request and in cases where an application has been appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal, with a deposit (over and above the normal application fee), from which the Municipality may, from time to time charge any fees and expenses incurred by the Municipality to prepare for and participate in the hearing. If such appeal expenses exceed the deposit, the Owner/Applicant shall pay the difference forthwith upon being billed by the

Without limiting the foregoing, such costs will include all legal, engineering, planning, and consulting fees and charges incurred or payable by the Municipality to process the application together with all costs and expenses arising from or incurred in connection with the Municipality being required, or requested by the applicant, to appear at the hearing of any appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal from any decision of the Council, Delegated Decision of Council, or Committee of Adjustments, of their designated approval authority, as the case may be, hearing the app|icant’s application.

The applicant hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless The Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac (“the Municipality”)from all costs and expenses that the Municipality may incur in connection with the processing of the app|icant’s application for approval under the Planning Act.

AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY

Attached to this application is payment to the Township of South Frontenac in the correct amount representing payment of the application fee, and additional payment (or proof of payment) for any required commenting agency review fees.

II We, the undersigned, being the registered property owner(s) and/or agent acting on behalf of the owner, acknowledge that additional studies and/or peer review and/or legal review may be required by the Township as a part of the review of my/our application. Should the_need arise, I/we are responsible for completing the studies as requested in order for the application to be deemed complete.

|/ We,

the undersigned, being the registered property owner(s) and/or agent acting on behalf of the owner agree that the information recorded in this Consent Application Form is accurate and agrees that representatives of the Township and relevant commenting agencies may enter onto the subject property for the purpose of determining the appropriateness of the site for the proposed development.

PERMISSION, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT,AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF APPLICATION

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

I

Page 122 of 368

O70 .

(Municipality, Town, City name)

I

(Name of Owner / Agent)

G/‘rm. .

,

/9

(Day)

On this

dayof (Month)

?gy

Sworn (or declared) before me in the

/-\UInOl”|ZeCI

3Q.

Year)

,2o

Agent

(Municipality name)

7lEI’76LC. FFDN 50!»!-"/’/’l

do solemnly declare that the information contained in this application is true and that the information contained in the documents that accompany this application is true, and acknowledge that personal information and all other material collected on this form and provided to the municipality as part of this application, including all names, addresses, opinions and comments, is collected underthe authority of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended, will be used to assist in making a decision on this matter and will be made available for public disclosure. l/\Ne are aware the information collected in this Application will be provided in the applicable Agenda and posted on the Township’s website.

of

l/\Ne,

Note: Do not sign until in the presence of the Commissioner of Oaths. You will be required to provide photo identification (i.e. driver’s license).

DECLARATION FOR THE PRESCRIBED INFORMATION

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT APPLICATION

Page 123 of 368

‘H a,<ares__

AW: xoaq oaogxoowk 5.00 ;

Page 124 of 368

CON 2 PT LOT 3 PT

GO

MURVALE ROAD

4 PL AN 11 LOT Inset Map InsetLOT Map Peters 3 PETERS LAKE Millhaven Lake Creek

Peters Lake RR ROAD Millhaven Creek

CON 1 PT LOT 4 PLAN 260402 PART 3

RO AD

ON RT

3375 SCANLAN RD

CON 2 PT LOT 3

CON 2 PT LOT 3 & 4

¥

BEDFORD CON 1 PT LOTS 26 AND 27 CON 2 PT LOTS 27 TO 30 CON 3 PT LOTS 30 TO 33 340 3358 0 MURTON RD MURTON RD

AD RO

MU 38

PL-BDJ-2022-0070/71 (ANGHELESCU)

Millhaven Creek

MURTON ROAD 3358 MURTON RD

Legend Subject Property Proposed Right of Way Proposed Severance

3400 MURTON RD

Proposed Severance

MURTON RD

Assessment Parcel Provincially Significant Wetland

Retained Lands

MURTON RD

3384 MURTON RD

Proposed Lot #1 PL-BDJ2022-0070

Proposed Lot #2 PL-BDJ2022-0071

M

N TO UR

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

AD RO

Waterbody Township Boundary Road

3403 MURTON RD

Railway

3423 MURTON RD

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. 3387 MURTON RD

3482 MURTON RD

Wetland Wooded Area

3377 MURTON RD

3386 MURTON RD

3385 MURTON RD 3415 MURTON RD

3364 MURTON RD

Page 125 of 368

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

MURTON RD

Scale: 1:7,000 0

3502 MURTON RD

50

100

200 m

MURTON RD

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83 Date: 5/19/2022

Page 126 of 368 “A2/v\peoJ

fiunsgxe aw, ;o eug|Je1ueo

9/xeguoe uJoJ; LUOL

ueuse|qeo!|dde eJeuM ‘s?uguepg/v\peoa g,1ueLueJgnbeJoggoeds Auv

Jo/(9/uns puej

0!JB1UQ ue Aq peuguuenep eq OJ_

0N

sa;\

(’,|D3.l!I1b6E|5U!U6p!N\ PBOH

01 ue>|e1 eq p|noo 1eq1 semseew

segoenbepeug eqn,1091100 Rule9112 aJeq1;g emogpugpue ‘uge|dxe esea|d ‘ou ;|

paseemug e/ues (’,0!J._L€JJ,/1U9UJd0|9A9p

seA ON on,enanbepe uompuoo peo.I “219/\o em s| ‘z

g,e>|eJ, 01 p9J[nb9.l

g,(s)1o| Meu ;o uoneem 01 pe1e|eJ

meonddesq), sg uop,3e1eq/v\

‘se/K;|

2] ON sek sweouoo Buguoup/e6eugeJp |egoeds /?ue mew, GJV “L

PBOH

:suog1!puo3

g,seug|1q6gs6/\OJdu.I! ‘ou 4| on,peugnbeueq p|no/v\ se?ueuoIBLJM ON

SSA

enenbepe 8J9l.|19JV 3L|1JOJ.S9U!| J,l.{6!S LQOUBJIUB |BUOS€3S

I|.l|5!S PBOE

uounw =P9°El

L :uogssaouo3

9 :1o’|

:1omsgc|

IS6U!'|

I93l.|BU9I|.U!Bw

pUnOJ-JBGA

(oo9Lo-oLo-090-6zoL # uou) peoa puemod

n:)se|eL|6u-/ Bugs)

LLOO’ZZOZ’I‘Cl8-‘Id ‘2 0LO0’ZZOZ-(‘G8-‘Id

sea!/ues

:aLueN S‘2|UB3!|ddV

1~|9qUJnN U°!19°!|ddV

uJoJ; uodea

ouqnd

Page 127 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Meeting Date: November 10, 2022 Subject:

Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Summary This application is for the creation of one new residential lot. This report recommends approval of the application PL-BDJ-2022-0070. The Committee of Adjustment is being asked to make a decision on this application, as it is a disputed consent per By-law 2020-27 because there are unresolved issues or concerns from the public regarding minimum distance separation.

Background Proposal: The creation of one new rural residential lot – PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Lot #1). The subject lands are also subject to Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Lot #2) for consent to create a second rural residential lot. Location: Vacant Land, Murton Road, District of Portland with Assessment Roll Number 102908001001500. Designation and Zoning: The subject property is designated Rural and zoned Rural (RU).

Application Table Severed Parcel (Lot #1)

Retained Parcel (after Lot #1 and 2)

Area

Minimum 2 acres (0.8 hectares)

+/- 67 acres (27.11 hectares)

Frontage on Road

Minimum 76 metres (250 feet) on Murton Road

+/- 201 metres (659.45 feet) on Murton Road

Frontage on Water

N/A

N/A

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 128 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Review This application: ✓ Conforms to section 51(24) of the Planning Act; ✓ Does not require a plan of subdivision for the proper and orderly development of the municipality (s. 53(1) Planning Act); ✓ Is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (s. 3(5) Planning Act); ✓ Conforms to the County of Frontenac Official Plan (s. 3.3 & 7.1); ✓ Conforms to the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (s. 5.7.4 & 7.1); ✓ Complies with Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 (or will comply subject to a standard condition of rezoning or minor variance); and X Has unresolved objections/concerns raised from the public.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property is a large rural property located east of Murton Road. The subject property is vacant land and not developed. The total lot area is 71 acres (28.7 hectares) and the existing frontage of the property is 353 metres (1158.14 feet). The subject property consists of open grassland that is flat and bordered by treeline. There is a wooded area on the north side of the property. There are no other natural features on the property. There are hydro lines across the front of the lot. There are various residential properties and farmland surrounding the subject property along Murton Road.

Summary of Proposal The purpose of this consent application is to create one rural residential parcel. The severed parcel (Lot #1) consists of a minimum of 2 acres (0.8 hectares) with a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Murton Road. The severed parcel consists of a vacant open field. The severed parcel is located on the eastern most portion of the subject property. The proposed use for the severed lot is residential. Lot #2 would be located immediately west of Lot #1. The retained parcel will be approximately 67 acres (27.11 hectares) in area with approximately 201 metres (659.45 feet) of frontage on Murton Road if both severances are granted. The retained lands proposed use will be for agricultural use (crops). www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 129 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Department and Agency Comments Public Services Public Services provided comments on June 16, 2022. Both applications PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071 were supported by Public Services. The comments received noted that there are adequate sight lines for the entrances for both lots. There were no special drainage/ditching concerns related to the creation of the new lots and the overall road condition was adequate to serve increased development and/or traffic. Any road widening would need to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor. It was noted that road widenings where applicable shall achieve 10 metres from the centerline of the existing roadway. Building Services (Sewage System Review) Building Services provided comments on October 27th, 2022, indicating that the proposed lot PL-BDJ-2022-0070 is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage disposal system, dependent on the proposal submitted through an application to construct a sewage system. The approval of any new lot is based on its suitability to provide an area for a Class 4 sewage system for an average 3-bedroom home. The proposed severance is open grassland that is nominally flat and bordered by treeline, Overhead wires run through the property approximately 15 metres inward from the road. No water supply was present at the time of inspection. The test holes were located in the southern portion of the proposed lot with approximately 16-20 inches of soil depth. It appears there is sufficient space to accommodate a dwelling and sewage system bearing in mind that the required setbacks are maintained from the overhead wires and the water supply once constructed.

Public Comments To date, written comments have been received from the owners of two adjacent properties. On July 9th, 2022, the owners of 3400 Murton Road to the east of the subject property expressed concerns via letter that the severance could impact their property now and, in the future, and felt that the proposed severance is too close to the barns which are on the west side of their property. While the barns are currently being used as lumber storage, they continue to make repairs to the barns for future use. When they purchased the property in 2013 their intention was to eventually have a working farm or hobby farm and they are concerned that this proposed severance will negate that possibility and affect any other potential and future use of their property.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 130 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Township Staff visited the site at 3400 Murton Road on November 2 nd, 2022, to inspect the barns and determined that they were Unoccupied Livestock Barns. Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I) setbacks were calculated for the two barns (see discussion below). The owners of 3482 Murton Road to the west of the property expressed concerns on July 14th, 2022, that the application showed no consideration for their building application approved by the Township in September 2021 and MDS calculations for that new dairy barn. The applicant also commented that the application notice only showed the minimum distance to the existing structures of when the property was purchased in March 2021. The neighbours expressed that it was important to establish the minimum distance separation for the existing approved plan as well as to ensure a buffer to allow for future growth up to the maximum livestock capacity of the new barn and the future manure pit required to meet the Nutrient Management guidelines set out in Ontario. They also wanted to ensure that an additional buffer to the minimum distances that was approved as part of their building permit would be recognized to allow for future expansion. Since the new building is not on the sketch/map accompanying the application, the applicant felt it was not. The neighbour also provided Minimum Distance Separation II Calculations for that planned expansion as part of their letter to the Township. The neighbour expressed that they are not against another residence on the road but are concerned that a non-agricultural use is being considered which has the potential to limit agricultural businesses in South Frontenac. The neighbour asked that the Township recalculate the minimum distances to the agricultural buildings of the adjoining properties and report back to those property owners. From their own assessments at least one of the lots applications has a conflict. Township staff calculated Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I) setbacks for the approved barn and the existing manure storage (see discussion below).

Planning Analysis Rural Residential Development The Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and the County of Frontenac Official Plan (Section 3.3) permit residential development, that is locally appropriate, in rural areas. The subject lands are designated Rural in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan. Section 5.7 of the Official Plan states “it is the general intent of the Official Plan that the majority of permanent non-agricultural residential development be encouraged to locate in the Township’s Settlement Areas. However, limited non-agricultural residential development may also be permitted within the Rural area so as to provide a variety of living accommodation for the residents of the Township. Development within the Rural designation shall be serviced in accordance with Section 6.10 of the Official Plan. Section 5.7.4(ii) (a) of the Township Official Plan requires consideration for the dimension and shapes of the proposed lots. The proposed severance is 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in size with 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on a Murton Road, therefore it meets the minimum lot

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 131 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

size and frontage requirements. It is the opinion of staff that the consent generally provides for a satisfactory geometric design of the parcel (as per Section 7.1(d)) of the Official Plan. The retained parcel would also meet the Rural Residential policies as outlined in section 5.7.4 (ii), as it has a frontage, size and public road access which conforms with the Official Plan. Section 5.7.4(ii) (b) states that “rural residential development shall be serviced by private water and sanitary sewage disposal systems approved by the appropriate authority”. Building Services confirmed that the proposed Lot #1 is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage system dependent on the proposal submitted through an application to construct a sewage system. They also noted that there appears to be sufficient space to accommodate a dwelling and sewage system bearing in mind that required setbacks are maintained from the overhead wires and the water supply once constructed. A recommended condition of approval for consent applications does include the drilling of a well. The condition is as follows: “the Owner shall submit a well driller’s report demonstrating a potable water pumping capacity of 3.5 gallons per minute sustained by over a 6-hour pump test for the parcel severed through this Consent Application”. Section 5.7.4(ii) (a) states that all new rural residential lots shall have public road frontage. The proposed severance has road frontage on a public road that is maintained year-round and as indicated by the Public Services Department and the overall road condition adequate to serve increased development/traffic. Sections 6.23 and 7.1 (l) of the Official Plan state that “all division of land for new farm and non-farm uses shall comply with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae I or II as amended”. This is consistent with Section 1.1.5.8 of the Provincial Policy Statement 2022, which states that new lands use including the creation of lots, and new or expanding livestock facilities, shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae”. MDS I calculations were completed for 3482 Murton Road and 3400 Murton Road, which will be outlined in the section below. Minimum Distance Separation The MDS Document (OMAFRA Publication 853) represents the provincial standard with respect to the calculation of MDS setbacks. The objective of MDS formulae is to minimize nuisance complaints due to odour and reduce land use incompatibility. Minimum Distance Separation I provide minimum distance separation for new or expanding development from existing livestock facilities and must be applied to new lot creation. The MDS Document requires MDS I setbacks to be calculated from existing livestock facilities, being one which has already been constructed or for which a building permit has been issued. The information used to carry out an MDS I calculation must reflect the circumstances at the time that the municipality deems the planning application to be complete. Calculations are not required for potential future new or expansions of barns and manure storage when considering lot creation.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 132 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Township staff completed MDS I calculations for the two barns at 3400 Murton Road. The livestock barns are unoccupied and currently used for lumber storage. Since the owner is unsure what type of livestock would be housed in the barns, assumptions were made based on the structure and historical use of the barns. Based on the combined design capacity of the two barns, a minimum MDS I setback of 166 metres (545 feet) is required from the closest barn on this property. A small portion of the northeast corner of Lot #1 is within the MDS I setback. However, the majority of Lot #1 would exceed the MDS I setback, and so the lot is viable. The majority of the retained parcel also exceeds the MDS I setback (i.e., there is a potential building envelope greater than 0.5 hectares in area). Refer to Attachment 1 (Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071). Township staff also completed MDS I calculations for the barn and manure storage at 3482 Murton Road. A building permit was recently issued for a proposed expansion of the existing barn. Therefore, the calculations were based on information in the OMAFRA-approved Nutrient Management Strategy that was submitted with the building permit application and included the expansion. A minimum MDS I setback of 260 metres (853 feet) is required from the expanded barn, and a minimum MDS I setback of 279 metres (915 feet) is required from the existing manure storage on this property. Lot #1 exceeds the MDS I setback. The majority of the retained parcel also exceeds the MDS I setback (i.e., there is a potential building envelope greater than 0.5 hectares in area). Refer to Attachment 1 (Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-20220070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071). Any future new or expansions of any of the existing barns and manure storages would be subject to MDS II calculations. Similarly, MDS I calculations must be completed or verified at the time of a building permit application for a dwelling on the severed parcel or retained parcel. There could be a need for a proposed barn or manure storage or dwelling to shift on their respective parcels as a result of future expansions.

Summary The proposed severance (for Lot #1) complies with all Rural Residential policies and land division policies of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan related to area, frontage, access, and sewage system servicing. The MDS I calculations confirmed that the severed parcel meets the minimum distance setbacks and therefore, complies with the Provincial Policy Statement, the Township Official Plan and the Township Zoning Bylaws in relation to minimum distance separation. The application is a disputed consent per By-law 2020-27 because there are unresolved issues or concerns from the public related to minimum distance separation. Therefore, it is being brought to the Committee of Adjustment for a decision.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 133 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Notice/Consultation A Notice of a Consent Application was circulated to the public on June 27th, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act. A Notice of Public Meeting was circulated on October 27th, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 14 days before the public meeting. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 be approved subject to the following conditions.

Expiry Period

  1. Conditions imposed must be met within two years of the date of Notice of Decision, as required by Section 53(41) of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, as amended. If conditions are not fulfilled as prescribed within two years, the application shall be deemed to be refused. Provided the conditions are fulfilled within two years, the application is valid for two years from the date of Certificate of Official issuance.

Severed Lands 2. The land to be severed by Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 shall be for the creation of one new residential lot a minimum of 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in area and with a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) frontage on Murton Road. Survey/Reference Plan or Registerable Description 3. An acceptable reference plan or legal description of the severed lands, in duplicate [Registry Act, s.81, Land Titles Act, s. 150], and the Certificate of Official shall be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer for review and consent endorsement within a period of two years [Planning Act, s. 53(41)] after the date that “Notice of Decision” is given [Planning Act, ss. 53(17) and 53(24)].

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 134 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

  1. The surveyor or applicant shall submit the draft Reference Plan including an area calculation and noting frontage along the road electronically or in paper form for review and approval by planning staff prior to depositing the Reference Plan with the Land Registry Office. Road Widening
  2. The surveyor who prepares the reference plan referred to in Conditions #3 and #4 shall also determine by survey the width of Murton Road to be 20 metres (66 feet). If such width is less than 20 metres (66 feet), the owner shall dedicate to the Township land along the frontage of the severed lands as the case may be in the following manner: a. The land to be dedicated shall be the width required to provide 10 metres (33 feet) from the centre of the existing travelled road for Murton Road; b. The land to be dedicated shall be described as a separate part on a Reference Plan of Survey to be prepared and deposited at the Owner’s expense and filed with the Secretary-Treasurer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official; c. The Transfer/Deed from the Owner for the land to be dedicated shall be engrossed in the name of “The Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac”, and shall include the following attached to the Transfer/Deed as a Schedule: The Transferor hereby transfers the lands to the municipality for the purpose of widening the adjacent highway pursuant to Section 31(6) of the Municipal Act, 2001, Chapter 25, as amended. d. The Transfer/Deed for the land to be dedicated shall be registered by the Owner at the Owner’s expense; e. The duplicate registered Transfer/Deed for the land to be dedicated together with a letter of opinion of a solicitor qualified to practice law in the Province of Ontario addressed to the Secretary-Treasurer confirming that the municipality acquired good and marketable title to the land free and clear of all liens and encumbrances shall be delivered to the Secretary-Treasurer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official. Municipal Requirements
  3. Payment of the balance of any outstanding taxes and local improvement charges shall be made to the Township Treasurer. This includes all taxes levied as of the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Official.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 135 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

  1. The Township of South Frontenac shall receive 5% of the value of the parcel to be severed through Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070, in lieu of parkland [Planning Act, s. 51(1)].
  2. The Owner shall submit a well driller’s report demonstrating a potable water pumping capacity of 3.5 gallons per minute sustained over a 6-hour pump test for the parcel severed through Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070.
  3. In the event that there are abandoned wells located on the severed parcel or the retained property, they shall be sealed in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks and that this work shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official. Zoning
  4. Where a violation of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 is evident, the appropriate minor variance or rezoning be obtained to the satisfaction of the Township.

Attachment

  1. Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071

Report Prepared By: Sarah Cadue, MCIP RPP, Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 136 of 368

MDSI Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071

Legend Assessment Parcels

Page 137 of 368

0.5

1: 9,028 0

0.23

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Includes Material © 2019 of the Queen’s Printer for Ontario. All Rights Reserved.

0.5 Kilometers

This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

Notes

Page 138 of 368

July 14, 2022 Atm: South Frontenac Planning Department

Re: Notice of Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 & PL—BDJ-2022-0071

GinaAnghelescu

We are writing this response to this application with some concerns. First and foremost is that the application shows no consideration for the building application approved September 2021 #21-S62 and the Minimum Distance seperation calculations for that new dairy barn accepted by both the South Frontenac Planning Department and Building Department (see Appendix #1) Instead, the application notice only shows the minimum distancesto the existing structures of when we purchasedthe property in March 2021. In the discussions with the Planning Department staff at the time, we were very clear that it was important to establish the minimum distance separation for the existing approved plan, as well as to ensure a buffer to allow for future growth up to the rnaxirnum livestock capacity of the new barn we were investing in and the future manure pit required to meet the Nutrient Management guidelines set out in Ontario. It was verbally responded to us that an additional buffer to the minimum distances approved as part of our building permit would be recognized to allow for future expansion. Since the new building is not even on the map accompanying the application; clearly it was not. We have included the minimum distancerequirements for that planned expansion as Appendix #2. In the end, we are not against anotherhouse on the road, BUT, we are very concerned when a nonagricultural use is being considered which has the potential to limit agn‘cu.lturalbusinessin South Frontenac and its realistic, foreseeable growth. We would ask that the South Frontenac Development Services recalculate the minimum distances to the agricultural buildings on the adjoining properties and report back to those property owners in writing ahead of an in person meeting to discuss the proposed application. Our quick measurements using Google Earth demonstrate a conflict with at least one of the lot applications,but we wish you to confinn this by providing your own independent review.

Thank-you for accepting our response letter to the Notice of Application and we look forward to discussing your updated minimum distance map to the surrounding agricultural buildings with South Frontenac staff and the applicant/neighbour/fellow agriculture producer, Gina, to ensure that there are no con?icts for any lot severances which can be approved. Respectf

y Submitted,

Neil 8: Melanie Hunter lg

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH

Page 139 of 368

'

_

APpenJix#/

Minimum Distance Separation ll

Ontario

ms-wm

Preparsd By: Karen Davis, NIAS Consultant, Glvp Quest Inc.

Descrlmlonz Application Date:

Monday. November22, 2021

File Number: Municiaal COMIL1 Inlorrrllllon Appliurvl

calculation Name:

Future PI!/Barn

Deacrlp?un: The

Location Of Suhh? LIVEOIODK Facilities Coumyof Frontenac, Tcwmshipof South Frontena¢ Concession: 1, Lot:4 PORTLAND. Roll Number: 102908D01001700

is an estimale only and is intendedto provide users wilh an Indicationof whermerthenumber of Iivesmckentered is bagii?area 6.

7335071

““"“”

E”"‘“9

5."§“"“ “”“"’”"‘

TYPE

Type orLIvanacwrra mm

Liquid

Small Frame (30 125 kg) (eg. ‘[])sarlsr)é,yg)aNes

Liquid

F”""°

?ummm ;

Tatai

7°“

Maxim

““?”’”””’

Numbeurm

,

Emlrnalbd uvmnck Barn Area

v

17

2'0

34

40

952 M

‘V’(99

67

294

134

462

7,102 tie

small Frame milldnl?)

:34

34.0

168

1ss.o

‘15,12on2

“25

3“

Dairy, Milking-ageCows [dryor (364 _ 455 kg) [99 Jersem Free 3,3

“quid

Manure Storage: M1. Liquld.outside.no cover, amighk-walled storage aiming design capacity (NU): 109.1 Design capacity after alteration (NU): 218,2 FamorA (OdaurPe12n?a|)

0.7

FacnorB

Facmr C

(Size)

(orzuny Elpamlm)

X 414.9

X 0.3737

Factor D

X

mum»:

BuildingBB3 Distance F’

Type)

0.8

nvasuuxbarn)

(rrllrllmuma|s1ama1rurvI

203 m (555 n) SmomgeBase Distance ’S‘ (rrinlmum di?anue irammamlb wage)

283 In (927 it) MDS ll Selbnck Distance Summary

mm

Mlnlmurn

Distance Type A Land Uses

206 m 6% N

Aglual Dmanes ‘ran

Minimum

‘Gum “Mme

:.:::’;:s°°’-9°w-mm Distance

m”’"°°

283 m

TBD

92., “

Type E Land Uses

406 TED 1332”;

15,235”;TBD

lot ilne (side or ’h(l;i::)resi

207?:TED

:63 r’rlr TED

Nearest road auowance

33",; TBD

‘:75’;

Agrisuiee 3.4.0.13

'

_

Page 1 of 3

ran

Dab Fmpmd: NW 22’ 2°21 7:43 Page 140AM of 368 724198

A1DP€v 5“Q. <1;)/’

«

_

?gontario Mggiiiaein

u

Distance Separa?cn

Prepa.-9:: By‘ Karen D<.“.’§s, HMS Consu?ant, Crop Quest Ina. Descliptian: Appiieation

Monday, November 22. 2021

Date:

Municipal File Number:

.

Appiicam Contact Infurmalion

was H

Location 0'1‘Subject Livestock Facilities

v

County/of Frontenac.Tcwnship cvfsoulh Frontenac PORTLAND, Concession: 1, Lot: 4

RoHNu’rnben 1o29osoo1cm7uo

Future Pit/Bam

Calculation Name: Daecrip?an:

The barn area is an estimate only and is intended to provide users With an indicanon of whether the number :71livestock emered is reasonabie. K

.

Existing

razai

’‘5’‘‘"“‘"’ ;|rI!E::i|rnum Elxa.zfi‘xI::|-.?m “""‘”’"’“

’““"“"’ Type

Type nf Uwslocklmanure

So?a

Small Frame (30 125 la,‘ (sg. 5)ear(;,;.yg;a71/es

W

Solid

W’ kg) (“‘9’ ?§,;’§,:f;;?:aSsT§1‘Fmme(“25

57

Liquid

5”” F’°"‘e g2’f,V: 34 §’£§‘Qg§§§_§‘§::§§§’$;‘‘‘S?’§,?’

.

'

'

giugberNumber

Number

m‘J)‘b°’ Barn Anaa

a

'

.

20

53

62

“B4 R,

23.1

211

72.3

11,133 112

254

264.0

23,760 16

54,0

Manure Storage: M1. Liquid, uulside.no cover.straight-walled storage Existing design capacity (Nu): 109.1 Design capacity after aneration (NU): 343.0 FaclorA

Facior Es

(OGDUI FMEMIZI)

0.7

Factor c

Factor D

Buiiding Base Distance F’

(Oroeny Expansion) (Manure Type)

X 435.06 X 1.0049

X

0.73

{minimum disranm from livesmci; DWI?)

=

265 m (371 ft) Smrags Base Distance -9 (minirnml disvanca imm menurc siarage)

339 m (1112 ft) MD5 II Setback DWSQEHCG Summary I

' H

wgsnimum nissance

Adm

mseanoe

Durance

Type E Land U595

15%;?‘TBD

2524’"?!

Nearest iot nne(side or

man

27 m

30 m

Nearest road allowance

E34’; ran

‘3

Agn’Su1te3.4.0.13

3, ft

f?z?l

TBD

R ‘

:3; .7

M“

»“‘5“’"°°

Type A Land Uses V

:

‘minimum

Actual

TBD

TBD

1131:

98 3

TED

f§7",;

TBD

'

6’

Page 1 of 3

D815 P “W red:J " 19, 2022399 PM 453219

Page 141 of 368

Page 142 of 368

Page 143 of 368

to

the

of

on

of

a

Please

/

arr:

provide

a/’/we

a

op

area the

of

your

applied

Mortgage

description

of

way)

Lot

(PIN): and

O\O

61

/074

Loughborough

oooo

road/lane

the

of

on

¢a5/-

i

why

I

(m):

Pa/. /‘4u//7127/*2

s4/2e.

reason

Title

Road/Lane:

on

P-I»

subject land and waterbody

Number(s):

co;/7senL£_K

lndicate

I:|Correction |:lLease l:|other:

ox

application.

of

Area(acres/ha):

Name

Paid:

3

the (if

I I ,

a r e

7/ 04:

‘#76

you

g acre

is

Lo-F

APPLICATION application?

Meeting:

Number:

El

of

Fee

land. The road/lane

Part

Lot

Date

Date

Frontage

-)5;-—on79‘rgon

new

.

subject of the

o\50o

‘Pxd

the name

for:

of

g4r;l—_ur.

IE/Po rtland

‘alga :15

0#o,p/v-117% vpor

brief

of

/Jro/De/$47

creavébrz

Consent.

New

(right

ljcharge/Discharge

l:lEasement I: Lot Addition

rd

indicate

being

depth

Number

1

3

(Ne.

SOUTH FRONTENAC CONSENT Planning Staff regarding this

land:

?l

O80

Bedfo

subject

Please (rn):

consent

[Q 2|§2.qé1 type

[3

IOQQ frontage(s), changes. water

No

OOODQ

the

D

njj?i?ii

Number:

Vvaterbodyz

any

the

ljcreatiori of

Select

Depth(m):

Name

Frontage

prior

Indicate

Plan

Identification

Number:

Property

Roll

Reference

of

§

TOVVNSHIP OF with Township

Number:

Planner:

consulted

Address:

Concession

Civic

of

Yes

you

description

/

District:

The

Name

E

Have

9.

Name

Lot:

Proposed Buildings/Structures:

U5e°“-°‘5

Proposed

ting Ex Buildings/Structures:

Existing Use of

the

(acres

Acres

list

(m):

Depth

Please

on

LOT

ha):

existing

or

rbody:

VVater

information

NEVV

Vvate

of

of

Name

(NW)?

Frontage

Road/Lane:

a —

is

(Proposed

‘,_es{éCr..~9

bu:\din3

Crops

Lot

CkC.V"e§

Y‘l”\

and

land

\

new

lot):

STRUCTURES.

new

to

lot):

ONLY

intended

section

FRONTENAC

(Proposed

USES

Q‘

[95

[/\u/kc,‘

this the

SOUTH

Lot

regarding

proposed

Severed

and

OF

Complete

Severed

TOVVNSHIP

L_cs+“o’~’.

following retained.

The

Create

‘>(DposecJ«

Page 144 of 368

be

if

are

(Qq

severed

you

CONSENT

cr ea andte

(p? — aC "é, Retained 5 =-

CTDPS

Cr-OPS

Q

l©|‘D.q9v‘n

‘x/\A(+°r\

to

Retained

(created)

applying

APPLICATION

Page 145 of 368

LOT

VVater

(rn):

(acres

Acres or ha):

(m):

(acres

Depth

Acres

on

on

Water

(m):

or ha):

Vvaterbodyz

of

Name

Frontage (Fri):

Narne of RoadlLane:

Road/Lane

Frontage

following i formation are receiving the

(rn):

Depth

The which

on

on

information

ADDITION

Vvaterbodyz

of

Narne

(m):

Frontage

Road/Lane:

Name

Road/Lane

Frontage

of

following

retained.

The

is

(Before

Lot

Lot

FRONTENAC

Addition)

the ng

Lot:

Benefitting

Addition

Lands

to

ONLY

(Severed

this section the land intended

SOUTH

Benefi

is regarding addition.

Existing

lot

OF

Complete regarding

Proposed parcel):

TOVVNSHIP are

Enlarged (After

known

severed

you

a lso

if be

CONSENT

Lot

the

Lot Add

as

h

add ed

and

for

land

Retained

applying (created)

APPLICATION

Page 146 of 368

Lot:

the

Other:

Lake

Privately water

owned

and

lands:

Depth:

OF

operated

WATER

of

the

Complete

(Indicate

well

and

Privately

Other:

water

owned

and

be

are

p r o v i d e d ):

Benefi tting

operated

will

benefit:

system

water

will

Area:

ONLY

APPLICATION

you

that

if

which

water

Municipal

Parcel

by

property

section

Lake

method

the

Retained

the

and

VVidth:

this

Retained Lands:

CONSENT

STRUCTURES.

FRONTENAC

easement

USES

SOUTH

VVAY

Addition:

Lands:

system

Parcel

Proposed

water

Severed

Municipal

LOT)

Servicing

and

Benefitting

Benefitting

OF proposed

effect

Lot

and

& RIGHT right-of—way

res:

existing

purpose

of

a

of

DEED

/

(NEVV

of

the

address

Number

Describe

Roll

Civic

Length:

or

ildings/Structu

Lot:

EASEIVIENTS

Bu

Proposed

Proposed Use of

easement

12.Type

1 1 .

of

list

Existing Buildings/Structures:

Use

Existing

Please

TOVVNSHIP

Page 147 of 368

Please

Name

Please

16.Are

Privately tic owned

El

El

lot:

(lot

Muni ipal

Road

highway Road ~

~

seasonally

the

I‘/\g4r+Or
to

to

whom

land

by:

,

l/lutr-Fovx

Yes

2

No

the

.

‘3

right Water

A

land

Pit

effect:

Lane

T<o|

its

/

Yes

El El 2

and

E

in

Privy/Outhouse

Tank

bed

and

and

system

APPLICATION

Greywater

Holding

Leaching

interest

covenant

an

property?

or

or

CI I3 I: I:

owned system:

system

owned

disposal

Parcel

El

Privately

I: septic

Publicly septic

F?d’ be

sewage

CONSENT

I:

subject

round

will

way):

the

will

Retained

covenants?

the

easement

maintained

year

land

of

on

each

restrictive

Right

accesses: or

of

wells

maintained

access

addition

which

abandoned

description

Municipal

whether

lot

lane

any

a

easements

individual

(How

FRONTENAC

communal

Proposed

SOUTH

or

(Class

(Class

(Class

(Class

operated

operated

person(s)

Pit

the known):

of

Provincial

indicate

retained

The

or

new

road

of

provide

existing

The

of

aware

please

any

or

name the leased (if

Privy/Outhouse

list

Greywater

CI

OF

System

Bed

and

Tank

Holding

CI

I:|

system:

and

Parcel

Leaching

se

system

owned

Severed

Disposal

IQ)’

you

If Yes,

LOT)

Sewage

Publicly septic

of

there

charged

15.Are

Ij

5

(NEVV

13.Type

TOVVNSHIP

No

(see

of

/

to

n e x t

way

Elu nk no wn

is

(Class

(Class

(Class

(Class

operated

operated

be

Page 148 of 368

21

is

the

Please

I:lYes

. Is

LATX

the

the

explain:

application

$L.L,rc_

E

Township that you

current

zoning

describe speci

?¢¢n.SI——’~V”€

What

is

Retained

Lot:

for

The

20.PIease by citing 7 in the indicate

18.VVhat

water

the

the

not

No

Plan

subject

only

lands?

a

zlhe

Unknown

wit

2020

facilities

the

subject lands?

Policy

Statement?

make Plan.

If

sure

are

u n s u r e.

County

look

8:

used an public d Please

to you

Plan

access.

to be nearest

APPLICATION

Official

and the deeded

www.frontenacrnaQs.cal

docking land be legally

CONSENT

Township with the sections. Please County Official in the

of

Provincial

3

sub

(Check

MUST

and subject

FRONTENAC

parking the

es from properties

the

SOUTH

Designation

facil

describe

OF

conforrns application sections and Plan and Section know.

applicable Official

consistent

do

c

how

only, these of access

Official

of

Lot:

water

distance

by

New

is

The

confirmation.

If access approximate and Docking

TOVVNSHIP

Page 149 of 368

The

and

sketch

owner

must

feet

that sketch be

include

the will

including

the

of

Yes

a

subject

the

land

as

subject

a

uses

the

include

the unless

both

same

EIIJEIEIDDEI

following:

must acceptable

for or

as metric shown. are

of

a

consent?

5,

El

Yes

I2/No

September

Application

Unknown

le

on

the

application.

a

? al c i a l

switchi ng

sh o w, n e w

2000 ?

what the sketch needs to if your is application approved location than was a submitted, and fees." on

result

since land.

of

:3

for

p section pr to an oo vf all applicab

APPLICATION

of an application under consent for an amendment order? Complete

a

Date

subject

CONSENT

property, the of

Number

EA)

and

Act.

the plan, zoning

FRONTENAC

currently, Planning site of a lVlinister’s

Application

or

from transferee

by—law

for

is

the of approval

or

SOUTH

more For information consent your form". application frontages, different area and submission of a new application

acquire

OF

been, 51

severed name

Order

submitted.

not

transfer;

previously

Zoning

Amendment

be must completing to shows survey

note

SKETCH A guide “A required be required

current

the

Did

Yes

been date of

H

23.Has land provide

Minister’s

By—|aw

Zoning

Amendment

Approval Plan

Plan

Variance

Subdivision

Type

:1

land ever under section minor variance, to the zoning

subject

Official

Site

l/linor

Consent

Plan

of

amendment

Application

Please meters

the

subdivision of for a Act,

22.Has

TOVVNSHIP

Page 150 of 368

Note:

distance

the

and

d. a

the

the subject

subject

If access docking

l:l

may

The

The

l:l

l:I

location

location

facilities

of

and

and road

any

affect

wells

facility,

name

of

used,

land

land

are

from

drainage

septic

of

any

(if

land that

wells

easement

the

on

title

is

please

the

El

property

affecting

or

or

the private

EDD

subject

E]

land.

of legal

road

to

on

w etl an ds ,

l

such

the parki ng deeded

a

land. or

as

indi cati right ng

above)

applicatio n.

Distance with the

banks,

roads,

and

approximate

subject

the

is

road

fr o nt a the proposal g . e railway cr s os originally si ng

that

your

listed

property,

(as

on

Minimum check

show the location to demonstrate

a

the indicate

features

a

stream

railways,

of:

property

or

near

applicable)

bridge

lands

Please structure,

abutting road,

the

please

surrounding

ial

farm

river

part

APPLICATION

hectares),

the

location bridges,

complete

issues.

to

pits

(if

subject

road,

other

LABEL (acres or

CONSENT

parcel

ditches,

artif

any

you

and

documents

only,

roads public

water

a

the

nearest

owns

systems,

within travelled

and

agricultural, new lot).

of

natural

application

also the

page. property. area

total

the

located on the the approximate

and

quarry’s

and

show

of

whole the

property

severed

any

on

the

is by and

allowance,

abandoned

nature

top

FRONTENAC

barn will require consider compatibility the implications of

information

nearby to

propane

subject to be

width

to the facilities

unopened

location,

an

The it is

III

Please

the

that and

watercourses,

Buildings,

label

features

indicate the current uses agricultural and commercial uses barn structure from the proposed

applicant’s

include any opinion

regarding

Department

Please

of

Please

order

in

Calculation

of

Landfills, Barns

c.

BTBES

at

SOUTH

of the including retained, and waterbodies.

North

dimensions

with

OF

land previously the subject land.

arfficial

Existing

existence

all of

Waterbodies,

of

between

b.

property.

and be each

to

owner

for

is

arrow

a.

natural All subject

The location owner current

The

Indicate if

boundaries that

directional

part roads/lanes

The the

A

The

El

TOVVNSHIP

Page 151 of 368

ACKNOVVLEDGEMENT,

OF

SOUTH

AGREEMENT

FRONTENAC

AND

CONSENT

DECLARATION

OF

the

(“the

hereby

30

such payable or

appear Delegated the as

from

to

or

acknowledges applicant/owner the app ication is not when paid Tribunal connection with the in in

of

The

than

municipality,

application incurred exceed

been

review

payment application

AGREEMENT

fees.

the

fee,

to

TO

additional

Township

and

South payment

INDEMNIFY

of

Frontenac (or

the

acting

proof

in

nt)

the corr ect of payme

include all legal, will engineering, planning, by the to process the Municipality application incurred connection with the Municipality b in e the hearing the at of to Ontario La appeal any i nd Decision of or Committee Council, of Adjust n ments, case the may hearing applicant’s application. be. g

costs

o

n review m the need arise, ay be to application

agent legal

and that agrees the Municipality due, until the application

if

will invoice

any

owing appear has been amount not

paid

to before

in

the

full.

ario

Municip ality Ont the

the further to provide upon and agrees Municipality, request i the to Ontario Land a deposit appealed with (over and n Tribunal, fee), which the from time time charge Municipality may, from to fee any s by the Municipality to prepare and the hearing. for participate in If such the the shall deposit, the Owner/Applicant be pay difference forthwith upon with interest the at rate of per month per annum) 1 .25% (15% on accountsin g days.

Owner/Applicant has application

The

fees costs

is

for

and/or and/or Should

REQUIREMENTS

to indemnify and harmless agrees save The of Corporation the Municipality”) all from costs and expenses that the Municipality processing the of applicant’s application under the for approval

VVithout limiting the foregoing, and incurred charges and arising expenses by the requested applicant. decision of the any Council, authority, designated approval

with

this

application the of payment commenting agency

to

applicant Frontenac

connection

South

The

Attached representing required

complete.

review

owner(s) application. order in

peer

ADDITIONAL

the undersigned, being the II We, registered property owner, acknowledge that additional studies and/or the the review by Township as a of part of my/our for responsible the studies completing as requested

ACKNOVVLEDGEMENT

OF acting accurate enter proposed

APPLICATION

the undersigned, being the II We, owner(s) andlor registered property agent that owner the information recorded agree Consent in this Form is Application the representatives of and Township relevant commenting agencies may the determining for of purpose the the site property of for appropriateness the

PERMISSION,

TOVVNSHIP

Page 152 of 368

Page 153 of 368

‘H a,<ares__

AW: xoaq oaogxoowk 5.00 ;

Page 154 of 368 J

%

+01 00910

o\o

psuswe=a%

086560

;

II .\‘x3V

CON 2 PT LOT 3 PT

MURVALE ROAD

4 PLAN 11 LOT Inset Map InsetLOT Map Peters 3 PETERS LAKE Millhaven Lake Creek

Peters Lake RR ROAD

3375 SCANLAN RD

CON 2 PT LOT 3

CON 2 PT LOT 3 & 4

¥

BEDFORD CON 1 PT LOTS 26 AND 27 CON 2 PT LOTS 27 TO 30 CON 3 PT LOTS 30 TO 33 3400 3358 MURTON RD MURTON RD

GO

Millhaven Creek

CON 1 PT LOT 4 PLAN 260402 PART 3

RO AD

ON RT MU

AD RO

38

PL-BDJ-2022-0070/71 (ANGHELESCU)

Millhaven Creek

MURTON ROAD 3358 MURTON RD

Legend Subject Property Proposed Right of Way Proposed Severance

3400 MURTON RD

Proposed Severance MURTON RD

Assessment Parcel Provincially Significant Wetland

Retained Lands

MURTON RD

3384 MURTON RD

Proposed Lot #2 PL-BDJ2022-0071

Proposed Lot #1 PL-BDJ2022-0070

M

N TO UR

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

AD RO

Waterbody Township Boundary Road

3403 MURTON RD

Railway

3423 MURTON RD

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. 3387 MURTON RD

3482 MURTON RD

Wetland Wooded Area

3377 MURTON RD

3386 MURTON RD

3385 MURTON RD 3415 MURTON RD

3364 MURTON RD

Page 155 of 368

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

MURTON RD

Scale: 1:7,000 0

3502 MURTON RD

50

100

200 m

MURTON RD

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83 Date: 5/19/2022

Page 156 of 368 “A2/v\peoJ

fiunsgxe aw, ;o eug|Je1ueo

9/xeguoe uJoJ; LUOL

ueuse|qeo!|dde eJeuM ‘s?uguepg/v\peoa g,1ueLueJgnbeJoggoeds Auv

Jo/(9/uns puej

0!JB1UQ ue Aq peuguuenep eq OJ_

0N

sa;\

(’,|D3.l!I1b6E|5U!U6p!N\ PBOH

01 ue>|e1 eq p|noo 1eq1 semseew

segoenbepeug eqn,1091100 Rule9112 aJeq1;g emogpugpue ‘uge|dxe esea|d ‘ou ;|

paseemug e/ues (’,0!J._L€JJ,/1U9UJd0|9A9p

seA ON on,enanbepe uompuoo peo.I “219/\o em s| ‘z

g,e>|eJ, 01 p9J[nb9.l

g,(s)1o| Meu ;o uoneem 01 pe1e|eJ

meonddesq), sg uop,3e1eq/v\

‘se/K;|

2] ON sek sweouoo Buguoup/e6eugeJp |egoeds /?ue mew, GJV “L

PBOH

:suog1!puo3

g,seug|1q6gs6/\OJdu.I! ‘ou 4| on,peugnbeueq p|no/v\ se?ueuoIBLJM ON

SSA

enenbepe 8J9l.|19JV 3L|1JOJ.S9U!| J,l.{6!S LQOUBJIUB |BUOS€3S

I|.l|5!S PBOE

uounw =P9°El

L :uogssaouo3

9 :1o’|

:1omsgc|

IS6U!'|

I93l.|BU9I|.U!Bw

pUnOJ-JBGA

(oo9Lo-oLo-090-6zoL # uou) peoa puemod

n:)se|eL|6u-/ Bugs)

LLOO’ZZOZ’I‘Cl8-‘Id ‘2 0LO0’ZZOZ-(‘G8-‘Id

sea!/ues

:aLueN S‘2|UB3!|ddV

1~|9qUJnN U°!19°!|ddV

uJoJ; uodea

ouqnd

Page 157 of 368

Page 158 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Meeting Date: November 10, 2022 Subject:

Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Summary This application is for the creation of one new residential lot. This report recommends approval of the application PL-BDJ-2022-0071. The Committee of Adjustment is being asked to make a decision on this application, as it is a disputed consent per By-law 2020-27 because there are unresolved issues or concerns from the public regarding minimum distance separation.

Background Proposal: The creation of one new rural residential lot – PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Lot #2). The subject lands are also subject to Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 (Lot #1) for consent to create a second rural residential lot. Location: Vacant Land, Murton Road, District of Portland with Assessment Roll Number 102908001001500. Designation and Zoning: The subject property is designated Rural and zoned Rural (RU).

Application Table Severed Parcel (Lot #2)

Retained Parcel (after Lot #1 and 2)

Area

Minimum 2 acres (0.8 hectares)

+/- 67 acres (27.11 hectares)

Frontage on Road

Minimum 76 metres (250 feet) on Murton Road

+/- 201 metres (659.45 feet) on Murton Road

Frontage on Water

N/A

N/A

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 159 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Review This application: ✓ Conforms to section 51(24) of the Planning Act; ✓ Does not require a plan of subdivision for the proper and orderly development of the municipality (s. 53(1) Planning Act); ✓ Is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (s. 3(5) Planning Act); ✓ Conforms to the County of Frontenac Official Plan (s. 3.3 & 7.1); ✓ Conforms to the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (s. 5.7.4 & 7.1); ✓ Complies with Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 (or will comply subject to a standard condition of rezoning or minor variance); and X Has unresolved objections/concerns raised from the public.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property is a large rural property located east of Murton Road. The subject property is vacant land and not developed. The total lot area is 71 acres (28.7 hectares), and the existing frontage of the property is 353 metres (1158.14 feet). The subject property consists of open grassland that is flat and bordered by treeline. There is a wooded area on the north side of the property. There are no other natural features on the property. There are hydro lines across the front of the lot. There are various residential properties and farmland surrounding the subject property along Murton Road.

Summary of Proposal The purpose of this consent application is to create one rural residential parcel. The severed parcel (Lot #2) consists of a minimum of 2 acres (0.8 hectares) with a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Murton Road. The severed parcel consists of a vacant open field. The severed parcel is located on the east half of the subject property. The proposed use for the severed lot is residential. Lot #1 would be located immediately east of Lot #2.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 160 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

The retained parcel will be approximately 67 acres (27.11 hectares) in area with approximately 201 metres (659.45 feet) of frontage on Murton Road if both severances are granted. The retained lands proposed use will be for agricultural use (crops).

Department and Agency Comments Public Services Public Services provided comments on June 16, 2022. Both applications PL-BDJ-2022-0071 and PL-BDJ-2022-0070 were supported by Public Services. The comments received noted that there are adequate sight lines for the entrances for both lots. There were no special drainage/ditching concerns related to the creation of the new lots and the overall road condition was adequate to serve increased development and/or traffic. Any road widening would need to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor. It was noted that road widenings where applicable shall achieve 10 metres from the centerline of the existing roadway. Building Services (Sewage System Review) Building Services provided comments on October 27th, 2022, indicating that PL-BDJ-20220071 the proposed lot (Lot #2) is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage disposal system, dependent on the proposal submitted through an application to construct a sewage system. The approval of any new lot is based on its suitability to provide an area for a Class 4 sewage system for an average 3-bedroom home. Building Services noted that the proposed severance is open grassland that is nominally flat and bordered by treeline. Overhead wires run through the property approximately 15 meters inward from the road. No water supply was present at the time of inspection. The test holes were located in the southern portion of the proposed lot with approximately 10-12 inches of soil depth. It appears that there is sufficient space to accommodate a dwelling and sewage system bearing in mind that required setbacks are maintained from the overhead wires and the water supply once constructed.

Public Comments To date, written comments have been received from the owners of two adjacent properties. On July 9th, 2022, the owners of 3400 Murton Road to the east of the subject property expressed concerns via letter that the severance could impact their property now and, in the future, and felt that the proposed severance is too close to the barns which are on the west side of their property. While the barns are currently being used as lumber storage, they continue to make repairs to the barns for future use. When they purchased the property in www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 161 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

2013 their intention was to eventually have a working farm or hobby farm and they are concerned that this proposed severance will negate that possibility and affect any other potential and future use of their property. Township Staff visited the site at 3400 Murton Road on November 2 nd, 2022, to inspect the barns and determined that they were Unoccupied Livestock Barns. Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I) setbacks were calculated for the two barns (see discussion below). The owners of 3482 Murton Road to the west of the property expressed concerns on July 14th, 2022, that the application showed no consideration for their building application approved by the Township in September 2021 and MDS calculations for that new dairy barn. The applicant also commented that the application notice only showed the minimum distance to the existing structures of when the property was purchased in March 2021. The neighbours expressed that it was important to establish the minimum distance separation for the existing approved plan as well as to ensure a buffer to allow for future growth up to the maximum livestock capacity of the new barn and the future manure pit required to meet the Nutrient Management guidelines set out in Ontario. They also wanted to ensure that an additional buffer to the minimum distances that was approved as part of their building permit would be recognized to allow for future expansion. Since the new building is not on the sketch/map accompanying the application, the applicant felt it was not. The neighbour also provided Minimum Distance Separation II Calculations for that planned expansion as part of their letter to the Township. The neighbour expressed that they are not against another residence on the road but are concerned that a non-agricultural use is being considered which has the potential to limit agricultural businesses in South Frontenac. The neighbour asked that the Township recalculate the minimum distances to the agricultural buildings of the adjoining properties and report back to those property owners. From their own assessments at least one of the lots applications has a conflict. Township staff calculated Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I) setbacks for the approved barn and the existing manure storage (see discussion below).

Planning Analysis Rural Residential Development The Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and the County of Frontenac Official Plan (Section 3.3) permit residential development, that is locally appropriate, in rural areas. The subject lands are designated Rural in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan. Section 5.7 of the Official Plan states “it is the general intent of the Official Plan that the majority of permanent non-agricultural residential development be encouraged to locate in the Township’s Settlement Areas. However, limited non-agricultural residential development may also be permitted within the Rural area so as to provide a variety of living accommodation for the residents of the Township. Development within the Rural designation shall be serviced in accordance with Section 6.10 of the Official Plan.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 162 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Section 5.7.4(ii) (a) of the Township Official Plan requires consideration for the dimension and shapes of the proposed lots. The proposed severance is 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in size with 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on a Murton Road, therefore it meets the minimum lot size and frontage requirements. It is the opinion of staff that the consent generally provides for a satisfactory geometric design of the parcel (as per Section 7.1(d)) of the Official Plan. The retained parcel would also meet the Rural Residential policies as outlined in section 5.7.4 (ii), as it has a frontage, size and public road access which conforms with the Official Plan. Section 5.7.4(ii) (b) states that “rural residential development shall be serviced by private water and sanitary sewage disposal systems approved by the appropriate authority”. Building Services confirmed that the proposed Lot #2 is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage system dependent on the proposal submitted through an application to construct a sewage system. They also noted that there appears to be sufficient space to accommodate a dwelling and sewage system bearing in mind that required setbacks are maintained from the overhead wires and the water supply once constructed. A recommended condition of approval for consent applications does include the drilling of a well. The condition is as follows: “the Owner shall submit a well driller’s report demonstrating a potable water pumping capacity of 3.5 gallons per minute sustained by over a 6-hour pump test for the parcel severed through this Consent Application”. Section 5.7.4(ii) (a) states that all new rural residential lots shall have public road frontage. The proposed severance has road frontage on a public road that is maintained year-round and as indicated by the Public Services Department and the overall road condition adequate to serve increased development/traffic. Sections 6.23 and 7.1 (l) of the Official Plan state that “all division of land for new farm and non-farm uses shall comply with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae I or II as amended”. This is consistent with Section 1.1.5.8 of the Provincial Policy Statement 2022, which states that new lands use including the creation of lots, and new or expanding livestock facilities, shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae”. MDS I calculations were completed for 3482 Murton Road and 3400 Murton Road, which will be outlined in the section below. Minimum Distance Separation The MDS Document (OMAFRA Publication 853) represents the provincial standard with respect to the calculation of MDS setbacks. The objective of MDS formulae is to minimize nuisance complaints due to odour and reduce land use incompatibility. Minimum Distance Separation I provide minimum distance separation for new or expanding development from existing livestock facilities and must be applied to new lot creation. The MDS Document requires MDS I setbacks to be calculated from existing livestock facilities, being one which has already been constructed or for which a building permit has been issued. The information used to carry out an MDS I calculation must reflect the circumstances at the time that the municipality deems the planning application to be complete. Calculations are www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 163 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

not required for potential future new or expansions of barns and manure storage when considering lot creation. Township staff completed MDS I calculations for the two barns at 3400 Murton Road. The livestock barns are unoccupied and currently used for lumber storage. Since the owner is unsure what type of livestock would be housed in the barns, assumptions were made based on the structure and historical use of the barns. Based on the combined design capacity of the two barns, a minimum MDS I setback of 166 metres (545 feet) is required from the closest barn on this property. Lot #2 would exceed the MDS I setback. The majority of the retained parcel also exceeds the MDS I setback (i.e., there is a potential building envelope greater than 0.5 hectares in area). Refer to Attachment 1 (Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-20220070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071). Township staff also completed MDS I calculations for the barn and manure storage at 3482 Murton Road. A building permit was recently issued for a proposed expansion of the existing barn. Therefore, the calculations were based on information in the OMAFRA-approved Nutrient Management Strategy that was submitted with the building permit application and included the expansion. A minimum MDS I setback of 260 metres (853 feet) is required from the expanded barn, and a minimum MDS I setback of 279 metres (915 feet) is required from the existing manure storage on this property. Lot #2 exceeds the MDS I setback. The retained parcel also exceeds the MDS I setback (i.e., there is a potential building envelope greater than 0.5 hectares in area). Refer to Attachment 1 (Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071). Any future new or expansions of any of the existing barns and manure storages would be subject to MDS II calculations. Similarly, MDS I calculations must be completed or verified at the time of a building permit application for a dwelling on the severed parcel or retained parcel. There could be a need for a proposed barn or manure storage or dwelling to shift on their respective parcels as a result of future expansions.

Summary The proposed severance (for Lot #2) complies with all Rural Residential policies and land division policies of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan related to area, frontage, access, and sewage system servicing. The MDS I calculations confirmed that the severed parcel meets the minimum distance setbacks and therefore, complies with the Provincial Policy Statement, the Township Official Plan, and the Township Zoning Bylaws in relation to minimum distance separation. The application is a disputed consent per By-law 2020-27 because there are unresolved issues or concerns from the public related to minimum distance separation. Therefore, it is being brought to the Committee of Adjustment for a decision. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 164 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Notice/Consultation A Notice of a Consent Application was circulated to the public on June 27 th, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act. A Notice of Public Meeting was circulated on October 27th, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 14 days before the public meeting.

This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 be approved subject to the following conditions.

Expiry Period

  1. Conditions imposed must be met within two years of the date of Notice of Decision, as required by Section 53(41) of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, as amended. If conditions are not fulfilled as prescribed within two years, the application shall be deemed to be refused. Provided the conditions are fulfilled within two years, the application is valid for two years from the date of Certificate of Official issuance.

Severed Lands 2. The land to be severed by Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 shall be for the creation of one new residential lot a minimum of 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in area and with a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) frontage on Murton Road. Survey/Reference Plan or Registerable Description 3. An acceptable reference plan or legal description of the severed lands, in duplicate [Registry Act, s.81, Land Titles Act, s. 150], and the Certificate of Official shall be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer for review and consent endorsement within a

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 165 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

period of two years [Planning Act, s. 53(41)] after the date that “Notice of Decision” is given [Planning Act, ss. 53(17) and 53(24)]. 4. The surveyor or applicant shall submit the draft Reference Plan including an area calculation and noting frontage along the road electronically or in paper form for review and approval by planning staff prior to depositing the Reference Plan with the Land Registry Office. Road Widening 5. The surveyor who prepares the reference plan referred to in Conditions #3 and #4 shall also determine by survey the width of Murton Road to be 20 metres (66 feet). If such width is less than 20 metres (66 feet), the owner shall dedicate to the Township land along the frontage of the severed lands as the case may be in the following manner: a. The land to be dedicated shall be the width required to provide 10 metres (33 feet) from the centre of the existing travelled road for Murton Road; b. The land to be dedicated shall be described as a separate part on a Reference Plan of Survey to be prepared and deposited at the Owner’s expense and filed with the Secretary-Treasurer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official; c. The Transfer/Deed from the Owner for the land to be dedicated shall be engrossed in the name of “The Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac”, and shall include the following attached to the Transfer/Deed as a Schedule: The Transferor hereby transfers the lands to the municipality for the purpose of widening the adjacent highway pursuant to Section 31(6) of the Municipal Act, 2001, Chapter 25, as amended. d. The Transfer/Deed for the land to be dedicated shall be registered by the Owner at the Owner’s expense; e. The duplicate registered Transfer/Deed for the land to be dedicated together with a letter of opinion of a solicitor qualified to practice law in the Province of Ontario addressed to the Secretary-Treasurer confirming that the municipality acquired good and marketable title to the land free and clear of all liens and encumbrances shall be delivered to the Secretary-Treasurer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 166 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071 (Anghelescu) – Vacant Land, Murton Road, Portland District

Municipal Requirements 6. Payment of the balance of any outstanding taxes and local improvement charges shall be made to the Township Treasurer. This includes all taxes levied as of the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Official. 7. The Township of South Frontenac shall receive 5% of the value of the parcel to be severed through Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071, in lieu of parkland [Planning Act, s. 51(1)]. 8. The Owner shall submit a well driller’s report demonstrating a potable water pumping capacity of 3.5 gallons per minute sustained over a 6-hour pump test for the parcel severed through Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0071. 9. In the event that there are abandoned wells located on the severed parcel or the retained property, they shall be sealed in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks and that this work shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Official. Zoning 10. Where a violation of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 is evident, the appropriate minor variance or rezoning be obtained to the satisfaction of the Township.

Attachment

  1. Map of MDS I Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071 Report Prepared By: Sarah Cadue, MCIP RPP, Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 167 of 368

MDSI Setbacks for PL-BDJ-2022-0070 and PL-BDJ-2022-0071

Legend Assessment Parcels

Page 168 of 368

0.5

1: 9,028 0

0.23

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Includes Material © 2019 of the Queen’s Printer for Ontario. All Rights Reserved.

0.5 Kilometers

This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

Notes

Page 169 of 368

July 14, 2022 Atm: South Frontenac Planning Department

Re: Notice of Consent Application PL-BDJ-2022-0070 & PL—BDJ-2022-0071

GinaAnghelescu

We are writing this response to this application with some concerns. First and foremost is that the application shows no consideration for the building application approved September 2021 #21-S62 and the Minimum Distance seperation calculations for that new dairy barn accepted by both the South Frontenac Planning Department and Building Department (see Appendix #1) Instead, the application notice only shows the minimum distancesto the existing structures of when we purchasedthe property in March 2021. In the discussions with the Planning Department staff at the time, we were very clear that it was important to establish the minimum distance separation for the existing approved plan, as well as to ensure a buffer to allow for future growth up to the rnaxirnum livestock capacity of the new barn we were investing in and the future manure pit required to meet the Nutrient Management guidelines set out in Ontario. It was verbally responded to us that an additional buffer to the minimum distances approved as part of our building permit would be recognized to allow for future expansion. Since the new building is not even on the map accompanying the application; clearly it was not. We have included the minimum distancerequirements for that planned expansion as Appendix #2. In the end, we are not against anotherhouse on the road, BUT, we are very concerned when a nonagricultural use is being considered which has the potential to limit agn‘cu.lturalbusinessin South Frontenac and its realistic, foreseeable growth. We would ask that the South Frontenac Development Services recalculate the minimum distances to the agricultural buildings on the adjoining properties and report back to those property owners in writing ahead of an in person meeting to discuss the proposed application. Our quick measurements using Google Earth demonstrate a conflict with at least one of the lot applications,but we wish you to confinn this by providing your own independent review.

Thank-you for accepting our response letter to the Notice of Application and we look forward to discussing your updated minimum distance map to the surrounding agricultural buildings with South Frontenac staff and the applicant/neighbour/fellow agriculture producer, Gina, to ensure that there are no con?icts for any lot severances which can be approved. Respectf

y Submitted,

Neil 8: Melanie Hunter lg

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH

Page 170 of 368

'

_

APpenJix#/

Minimum Distance Separation ll

Ontario

ms-wm

Preparsd By: Karen Davis, NIAS Consultant, Glvp Quest Inc.

Descrlmlonz Application Date:

Monday. November22, 2021

File Number: Municiaal COMIL1 Inlorrrllllon Appliurvl

calculation Name:

Future PI!/Barn

Deacrlp?un: The

Location Of Suhh? LIVEOIODK Facilities Coumyof Frontenac, Tcwmshipof South Frontena¢ Concession: 1, Lot:4 PORTLAND. Roll Number: 102908D01001700

is an estimale only and is intendedto provide users wilh an Indicationof whermerthenumber of Iivesmckentered is bagii?area 6.

7335071

““"“”

E”"‘“9

5."§“"“ “”“"’”"‘

TYPE

Type orLIvanacwrra mm

Liquid

Small Frame (30 125 kg) (eg. ‘[])sarlsr)é,yg)aNes

Liquid

F”""°

?ummm ;

Tatai

7°“

Maxim

““?”’”””’

Numbeurm

,

Emlrnalbd uvmnck Barn Area

v

17

2'0

34

40

952 M

‘V’(99

67

294

134

462

7,102 tie

small Frame milldnl?)

:34

34.0

168

1ss.o

‘15,12on2

“25

3“

Dairy, Milking-ageCows [dryor (364 _ 455 kg) [99 Jersem Free 3,3

“quid

Manure Storage: M1. Liquld.outside.no cover, amighk-walled storage aiming design capacity (NU): 109.1 Design capacity after alteration (NU): 218,2 FamorA (OdaurPe12n?a|)

0.7

FacnorB

Facmr C

(Size)

(orzuny Elpamlm)

X 414.9

X 0.3737

Factor D

X

mum»:

BuildingBB3 Distance F’

Type)

0.8

nvasuuxbarn)

(rrllrllmuma|s1ama1rurvI

203 m (555 n) SmomgeBase Distance ’S‘ (rrinlmum di?anue irammamlb wage)

283 In (927 it) MDS ll Selbnck Distance Summary

mm

Mlnlmurn

Distance Type A Land Uses

206 m 6% N

Aglual Dmanes ‘ran

Minimum

‘Gum “Mme

:.:::’;:s°°’-9°w-mm Distance

m”’"°°

283 m

TBD

92., “

Type E Land Uses

406 TED 1332”;

15,235”;TBD

lot ilne (side or ’h(l;i::)resi

207?:TED

:63 r’rlr TED

Nearest road auowance

33",; TBD

‘:75’;

Agrisuiee 3.4.0.13

'

_

Page 1 of 3

ran

Dab Fmpmd: NW 22’ 2°21 7:43 Page 171AM of 368 724198

A1DP€v 5“Q. <1;)/’

«

_

?gontario Mggiiiaein

u

Distance Separa?cn

Prepa.-9:: By‘ Karen D<.“.’§s, HMS Consu?ant, Crop Quest Ina. Descliptian: Appiieation

Monday, November 22. 2021

Date:

Municipal File Number:

.

Appiicam Contact Infurmalion

was H

Location 0'1‘Subject Livestock Facilities

v

County/of Frontenac.Tcwnship cvfsoulh Frontenac PORTLAND, Concession: 1, Lot: 4

RoHNu’rnben 1o29osoo1cm7uo

Future Pit/Bam

Calculation Name: Daecrip?an:

The barn area is an estimate only and is intended to provide users With an indicanon of whether the number :71livestock emered is reasonabie. K

.

Existing

razai

’‘5’‘‘"“‘"’ ;|rI!E::i|rnum Elxa.zfi‘xI::|-.?m “""‘”’"’“

’““"“"’ Type

Type nf Uwslocklmanure

So?a

Small Frame (30 125 la,‘ (sg. 5)ear(;,;.yg;a71/es

W

Solid

W’ kg) (“‘9’ ?§,;’§,:f;;?:aSsT§1‘Fmme(“25

57

Liquid

5”” F’°"‘e g2’f,V: 34 §’£§‘Qg§§§_§‘§::§§§’$;‘‘‘S?’§,?’

.

'

'

giugberNumber

Number

m‘J)‘b°’ Barn Anaa

a

'

.

20

53

62

“B4 R,

23.1

211

72.3

11,133 112

254

264.0

23,760 16

54,0

Manure Storage: M1. Liquid, uulside.no cover.straight-walled storage Existing design capacity (Nu): 109.1 Design capacity after aneration (NU): 343.0 FaclorA

Facior Es

(OGDUI FMEMIZI)

0.7

Factor c

Factor D

Buiiding Base Distance F’

(Oroeny Expansion) (Manure Type)

X 435.06 X 1.0049

X

0.73

{minimum disranm from livesmci; DWI?)

=

265 m (371 ft) Smrags Base Distance -9 (minirnml disvanca imm menurc siarage)

339 m (1112 ft) MD5 II Setback DWSQEHCG Summary I

' H

wgsnimum nissance

Adm

mseanoe

Durance

Type E Land U595

15%;?‘TBD

2524’"?!

Nearest iot nne(side or

man

27 m

30 m

Nearest road allowance

E34’; ran

‘3

Agn’Su1te3.4.0.13

3, ft

f?z?l

TBD

R ‘

:3; .7

M“

»“‘5“’"°°

Type A Land Uses V

:

‘minimum

Actual

TBD

TBD

1131:

98 3

TED

f§7",;

TBD

'

6’

Page 1 of 3

D815 P “W red:J " 19, 2022399 PM 453219

Page 172 of 368

Page 173 of 368

Page 174 of 368

PL-ZNA-2022-0129

Page 175 of 368

Page 176 of 368

Page 177 of 368

Page 178 of 368

Page 179 of 368

Page 180 of 368

Page 181 of 368

Page 182 of 368

Page 183 of 368

K

I

‘/

.u[_69'98

Page 184 of 368

Page 185 of 368

Photo 2

‘.3.

.

.-mi

Frotge on Devi}L ak_eRoad at Township Culvert f Lookin Wst

Minor Variance Request 3'90Devil Lake Road Bedford

Page 186 of 368

Several largeOak trees along Large rocky ‘hump’ front of pie.

— —

north side of It 5 Looking vget

lieon the right. inid—poperty

Phot3 rontae on Devil Lake Road

Page 187 of 368

"

'

_

_”,-.-

_

Property line between Well and Proposed Garage, looking North ‘P :.> f_’ *5 .4: $5”

»“’5‘

Photo 5

'

areaRockgden,rasberries Large Rock and naral ?ora LA ‘5

Page 188 of 368

»v

.\

r

.

i

=

. .-

and continue closer to stream.

Swle Exisitng smalldranaepipe accross driveay.Proe to rplac with

I

2

Photo 6 Looking south accross driveway (wetlands at riht) p ‘..IL

rer

Page 189 of 368

rd Vs0h_ west —

omer Wetlands area —

Page 190 of 368

I.-

welds?

~‘r.

Photo 11 —Drainagetrench toward natural stream(by previous owner). Looking south Separates ‘backyard’ from wooded back section of lot.

s.

Qrev

Page 191 of 368

~¢.

Photo 13 House and garage site proposed next to existing septic. Looking north

Meadowy area, mixed trees growing

northpropertylinewest side; Lookingnor_t Poto 12 ackyard .62‘-

Page 192 of 368

ossu/;Ark

Hi)/WE.

R0

o.<ec£(

‘W DeU~1|L/»)/<£RcL

( ScmHx Show Ho?mu‘ /92,/11””

Page 193 of 368

278 DEVIL LAKE RD

Inset Map InsetWolfe Map

CENTREVILLE ROAD

Lake

ULVILLE ROAD

IL LAKE ROA D

Rock Little Lake Wolfe Lake

¥ PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (BERCIER)

322 DEVIL LAKE RD

340 DEVIL LAKE ROAD

EV

M

D WESTPORT ROA

D

Legend Subject Property Township Boundary Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity 176 CENTREVILLE RD

Wooded Area Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland

340 DEVIL LAKE RD

Wetland Road

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020.

DEVIL

Scale: 1:1,000 0

12.5

25

50

L A KE

ROAD

Page 194 of 368

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

m UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-09-21

Page 195 of 368

Development Services 4432 George St, Box 100 Sydenham ON, KOH2T0 613-376-3027 Ext 2226 buildin southfrontenac.net

Comments:

'

The required setbacks of the proposed dwelling to the existing sewage system appears on conformance with the requirements. The design of the existing sewage system appears adequate to serve to proposed dwelling.

No objections

340 Devil Lake Rd Township of South Frontenac (Bedford)

Bercier, Louise

Applicant Name(s):

Location_

Minor Variance

Type of Application or Proposal:

Planning Department Township of South Frontenac 4432 George St, Box 100 Sydenham, ON KOH 2T0 PLZNA20220129

To:

COMMENTS SEWAGE SYSTEM REVIEW

Application Number:

vs»

x \ . F R0 NTENAC

_

nI‘\___ SO UTH

October 11, 2022

File: MV/FRS/302/2022

Sent by E-mail Ms. Michelle Hannah, Planning Assistant Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 Sydenham, Ontario K0H 2T0 Dear Ms. Hannah: Re:

Application for Minor Variance PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (Bercier) Pt Lot 18, Concession 12; 340 Devil Lake Road Bedford District, Township of South Frontenac Waterbody: Unnamed Watercourse / Unevaluated Wetland (Trib. to Dead Creek)

Cataraqui Conservation staff have reviewed the above-noted application for minor variance and provide the following comments for the consideration of the Committee of Adjustment. Proposal This proposal involves the construction of a new residential dwelling and car port on an existing vacant lot of record. The application requires relief from Section 5.8.2.(a) of the South Frontenac Zoning By-law to reduce the required setback from the highwater mark of a waterbody from 30 metres to approximately 27 metres. Site Description The subject lands are located to the southwest of the intersection of Centreville Rd and Devil Lake Rd and occupy a northeastern portion of Lot 18 in Concession 12 of Bedford District in South Frontenac Township. The topography can be described as relatively low-lying in the southeast corner of the lot where the unevaluated wetland is located. Two watercourses run through the property; one man-made channel enters from the northwest corner and connects with the watercourse/wetland in the southeast portion of the lot. The water exits the lot at the eastern property border, via a culvert under Devil Lake Rd. The wetland/watercourse is hydrologically connected to a complex of wetlands/small lakes that eventually drain into Dead Creek. The property slopes up towards a till mound located at the northern section of the lot where the existing septic tank is located. The southern half of the lot is covered in dense woodlands and wetland vegetation, with cleared areas in the northern half where the proposed dwelling and accessory building are located. Staff visited the site on September 1, 2022. The subject lands are designated ‘Rural’ in the Township’s Official Plan and zoned ‘Rural’ (RU) and ‘Environmentally Sensitive’ in the implementing Zoning By-law. The boundary for

Page 1 of 4

Page 196 of 368

Ms. Hannah (PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (Bercier)) October 11, 2022 the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Overlay appears to roughly coincide with the unevaluated wetland on the property. Discussion The main interests of CRCA in this proposal are the protection natural heritage features (e.g. wetlands and woodlands), the protection of surface water features and the avoidance of natural hazards (e.g. flooding and erosion) associated with those features. Surface Water Features As noted, the subject lands contain a watercourse and wetland that are hydrologically connected to a complex of wetlands/small lakes that eventually drain into Dead Creek. These features provide important ecologic and hydrologic functions including habitat for various species. These features are important in terms of protecting the local environment and overall ecological health in the Township. A suitable buffer area is necessary between any new development and the water features on the subject lands, as a buffer acts to protect the environmental function of this feature by maintaining a riparian corridor and avoiding damaging flooding of property and erosion normally associated with these features. Cataraqui Conservation does not have floodplain mapping in this area – consequently we require a minimum 30 metre buffer (setback) horizontal from the highwater mark of watercourses and wetlands for any development. The 30 metre setback is consistent with the 30 metre setback in the Township’s Zoning By-law. Section 5.2.7(b)(ii)(2) of the Township’s Official Plan considers slight reductions to the 30 metre setback only if it not physically possible to meet the setback requirement, and if the structure shall be constructed as far back as possible from the highwater mark. Similar to the Official Plan, Cataraqui Conservation’s Environmental Planning Policy (EPP) considers new development within the 30 metre water setback area only if there are no reasonable alternatives for locating the development outside of the water setback area, the development is set back as far as possible from the water in all directions, and if the interference on the ecologic function of the wetland has been deemed to be acceptable by Cataraqui Conservation. Based on relevant mapping and observations taken on site, staff estimate that the proposed dwelling is approximately 27 metres from the boundary of the unevaluated wetland, and the proposed car port is located outside the required 30 metre setback. Staff note that due to the presence of the man-made watercourse/drainage channel transecting the property from the north/west, the low-lying wet areas to the south/east, and the existing septic system, the site is considered constrained, and the optimal location for the proposed development is on high and dry land in the northeast section of the property. As proposed, the dwelling and accessory structure are located in this optimal area, are set back as far as possible from the extent of the wetland identified on site while meeting other applicable municipal setbacks, and do not

Page 197 of 368

Ms. Hannah (PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (Bercier)) October 11, 2022 encroach closer to the water features than the closest point of the existing storage shed (which is approximately 16.5 metres from the watercourse). In the opinion of staff, the proposed development maintains the overall drainage pattern of the site and is not anticipated to negatively impact the ecologic or hydrologic integrity of the wetland/watercourse, and is located in an area that minimizes the risks of flooding and erosion associated with these water features. Staff also recommend maintenance and enhancement of a healthy buffer of native vegetation between all buildings/structures and the wetland and use of runoff controls to direct stormwater from hardened surfaces away from the wetland where natural infiltration can occur. Natural Heritage Woodlands As noted, the subject lands contain woodlands which are mainly limited to the northern property line and the southern half of the lot which is designated ‘Environmentally Sensitive’. The southern woodland may meet the applicable criteria in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNRF, 2010) to be considered ‘Significant,’ based on its proximity to the wetland and watercourse, which likely receive ecological benefit from the woodland. As proposed, the development will be located in the northern cleared areas away from the water features on site. Staff are satisfied that the proposed development can occur without negative impacts to the woodland ecosystem. An Environmental Impact Assessment is not warranted at this time, in our opinion, and staff have no concerns with the proposal from a natural heritage perspective. In order to protect woodland health, we recommend that any future construction and site alteration on the lot follow environmental best management practices, including: that any tree and vegetation removal be limited to the footprint of the building and access route (i.e. driveway) only; that vegetation clearing occur outside the bird breeding season (April 15 to August 15) and documentation of any at-risk species and compliance with applicable species-at-risk regulations (https://www.ontario.ca/page/species-riskontario). Recommendation In summary, staff have no objection to the approval of the proposed development under application PL-ZNA-2022-0129. We also recommend implementation of the above-noted environmental mitigation measures (in bold text).

Page 198 of 368

Ms. Hannah (PL-ZNA-2022-0129 (Bercier)) October 11, 2022 Ontario Regulation 148/06 Please note that the portions of the subject lands are subject to Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, which is administered by the CRCA. The purpose of the regulation is to ensure that proposed changes (e.g. development and site alteration) to a property are not affected by natural hazards, such as flooding and erosion, and that the changes do not put other properties at greater risk from these hazards. For this property, any development (buildings and structures) and site alteration (excavation, grading, placement of fill) within 30 metres of the wetland and watercourse is subject to O. Reg. 148/06. Therefore, a permit will be required from our office should the application be approved. Please inform this office of any decision made by the Committee with regard to this application. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 613-546-4228 ext. 239, or by e-mail at jtreash@crca.ca. Yours truly, . Janelle Treash Resource Planner cc:

Sarah Cadue, Planner, South Frontenac Township, via e-mail Applicants, via e-mail

Page 199 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Minor Variance Application (S. 45(1) of Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval, subject to conditions, of this application for zoning relief to locate a single detached dwelling (50 feet by 28 feet) within 30 metres of the high water mark of a waterbody (wetland) on the property. The proposed single detached dwelling will be 27 metres to the highwater mark, whereas the Zoning Bylaw requires a minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark. The applicant is also requesting to place a carport (12 feet by 16 feet) in the front yard of the property. The carport will be 22 metres to Devil Lake Road. This application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Rural (RU) and ‘Environmentally Sensitive’ Zoning Relief Requested for Dwelling Sections 5.8.2(a) and 7.3.2 – to permit a single detached dwelling to be setback a minimum of 27 metres from the highwater mark of a watercourse (wetland), whereas a minimum 30 metre setback is required for all buildings and structures. Zoning Relief Requested for Accessory Building Section 5.24.2 – to permit an accessory building (car port) to be located in front of the projected front wall of the dwelling whereas the Zoning By-law requires an accessory building to be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 200 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

Related Applications The lands are not subject to any additional applications under the Planning Act.

Discussion Property Description The subject property is located at 340 Devil Lake Road, southwest of the intersection of Centreville Road. The subject property is 8174.65 square metres (2.02 acres) and 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Devil Lake Road. The property is grassed with scattered trees and vegetation throughout the property. The property contains low-lying land on the southeast of the lot where an unevaluated wetland is located. There are two watercourse features that run through the property, one man-made channel from the northwest corner that connects with a watercourse/wetland in the southeast portion of the lot. The water exits the lot at the eastern property line, via a culvert under Devil Lake Road. The property slopes up towards a till mound located at the northern section of the lot, where the existing septic system is located. There are also woodlands east of the property and wetlands south of the property. The property contains an existing storage shed (18.58 square metres), well, and an existing tool shed (3.71 square metres). The property has an existing septic tank and bed that was installed in 2011. Summary of Proposal The applicant proposes to locate a one-storey single detached dwelling, 50 feet by 28 feet (130 square metres) on the highest point of the lot east of the existing septic system. The proposed dwelling would be setback a minimum of 27 metres (88.58 feet) from the highwater mark of the unevaluated watercourse (wetland) and setback approximately 31 metres (101.7 feet) to Devil Lake Road. The applicant is also requesting to place a carport 12 feet by 16 feet (17.84 square metres) in the front yard of the property, 22 metres to Devil Lake Road. The proposed dwelling is setback approximately 30.48 metres (100 feet) from the front lot line and is 6.09 metres (19.98 feet) from the interior side yard. The proposed dwelling is 6.63 metres to the existing septic system. The proposed car port is setback 22 metres from the front lot line, 4.0 metres (13.12 feet) from the interior side yard and 3.04 metres (10 feet) from the dwellings northeast corner. The applicant is proposing to use the existing septic system. The existing storage shed that is on the property will be demolished as the structure does not have a permit and the existing tool shed will remain. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 201 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

Agency Comments Public Services was not circulated on this application as the proposed dwelling and carport will be more than 20 metres to the front lot line. The property already has an approved entrance. Building Services (Sewage System Review) indicated on October 21st, 2022, that they have no objection to the application, and that design of the existing sewage system appears adequate to serve the proposed dwelling. The required setbacks of the proposed dwelling to the existing sewage system appears in conformance with the requirements. Cataraqui Conservation (CRCA) provided comments on October 11th, 2022, that they have no objection to the approval of the proposed development under application PL-ZNA-20220129. However, Cataraqui Conservation staff did recommend implementation of environmental mitigation measures, such as the maintenance and enhancement of a healthy buffer of native vegetation between all buildings/structures and the wetland, and the use of runoff controls to direct stormwater from hardened surfaces away from the wetland to where natural infiltration can occur. To protect woodland health, Cataraqui Conservation staff also recommended that any future construction and site alteration on the lot follow environmental best practices, including that any tree and vegetation removal be limited to the footprint of the building and access route (i.e., driveway) only, that vegetation clearing occur outside the bird breeding season (April 15 to August 15) and that there is documentation of any at-risk species in compliance with applicable species-at-risk regulations. These recommendations will be included in a development agreement that is a proposed condition of approval. Lastly, CRCA noted that a permit under O. Reg. 148/06 would be required from their offices should the application be approved. The applicant must initiate this application process prior to the building permit stage. Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. Planning Analysis The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal meets the four tests as explained below.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 202 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The proposed variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan related to rural residential development, and development adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas. The variances would facilitate construction of a single detached dwelling and an accessory building (carport) on lands that are designated Rural in the Official Plan on Schedule A. Section 5.2.7 of the Official Plan speaks to ‘Environmentally Sensitive Areas’ stating that where development and site alterations are proposed in Environmentally Sensitive Areas, it is the intent of this Official Plan that all buildings, campsites and structures not related to the use of the water and all sewage disposal system leaching beds be well set back from the highwater mark. More specifically, a minimum setback of 30 metres (98.4 ft.) from the highwater mark shall apply but greater setbacks may be required depending on conditions specific to individual sites. The subject lands contain a watercourse and wetland that are connected to a complex of wetlands/small lakes that eventually drain into Dead Creek. A suitable buffer is necessary between any new development and the watercourse features on the subject lands. The Township Official Plan, Section 5.2.7 (b) (ii) (2) considers slight reductions to the 30-metre setback only if it is not physically possible to meet the setback requirement, and if the structure will be constructed as far back as possible from the highwater mark. Cataraqui Conservation staff also estimated that the proposed dwelling is approximately 27 metres (88.58 feet) from the boundary of the unevaluated wetland, and the proposed car port is located outside the required 30 metre setback. In addition, CRCA staff stated that due to site constraints (i.e., existing septic system, presence of man-made watercourse/drainage channel, low-lying wet areas to the southeast) that site is considered constrained and the optimal location for development is on high and dry land in the northeast section of the property. Based on the assessment provided by Cataraqui Conservation, Township staff conquer that the proposed dwelling and accessory building are is in the most optimal area. All the other existing buildings and structures are outside of the 30 metres from the highwater mark. Planning staff concur with Cataraqui Conservation staff that there would be no benefit to requiring an EIA given that as proposed the development will be nearly in compliance with the 30 metre setback, a difference of 3 metres. The proposed development is also located in the northern cleared areas away from the water features on site

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 203 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed dwelling and accessory buildings (carport) are permitted uses in the Rural zone. Section 7.3.2 of the Township Zoning Bylaw states that the setback from the high water mark for single-detached residential uses is a minimum of 30 metres (98.4 feet). As stated, the proposed dwelling is 27 metres to the high water mark. While the proposed dwelling is deficient 3 metres, it does meet all the other zoning requirements as follows: •

The proposed dwelling will be 3.66 metres (12 feet) in height, less than the maximum 11 metres (36.1 feet) for single detached dwellings in the Rural Zone.

The car port will be 3 metres (10 feet) in height, less than the maximum 6 metres (19.7 ft.) building height for accessory buildings in the Rural Zone.

The proposed dwelling will be set back 30.48 metres (100 feet) from the front lot line and the car port will be setback 22 metres (72 feet) from the front lot line, exceeding the front yard setback for single detached dwellings in the RU Zone.

The proposed dwelling is proposed as far as it could be from the wetland and meets all other applicable zone regulations. The proposed dwelling and car port would result in 1.86 % total lot coverage. Therefore, the proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? The proposed dwelling is an appropriate development or use of the land as the site is constrained and the optimal location for the proposed development on high and dry land is the northeast area of the property. The proposed dwelling requires relief because it cannot move closer to the lot line because of mature oak trees on the property and an existing septic system. The proposed location is the highest point of the lot and CRCA staff indicated that the proposed development maintains the overall drainage pattern of the site and is not anticipated to negatively impact the integrity of the wetland/watercourse and is located in an area that minimizes the risks of flooding and erosion associated with these water features. It is desirable for the proposed car port to be located in the front yard as its an optimal area for development and set back as far as possible from the extent of the wetland on site. Locating the car port in the front yard allows for the use of the existing driveway and this location will not encroach closer to the water features. The proposed car port is in a location www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 204 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

that maximizes its setback from the highwater mark and considers the topography of the property.

Is the variance minor? The requested variances are minor as they maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and are desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The proposed development is a permitted use in this zone and is not anticipated to impact adjacent properties. Discussions with the property owner and the Cataraqui Conservation have already occurred prior to the application process to ensure that the location of the proposed development was located furthest from the wetland as possible. The applicant has also agreed to work with Cataraqui Conservation to replant trees and native vegetation to enhance a healthy buffer between all the buildings and structures and the wetland.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PL-ZNA-2022-0129 for the property at 340 Devil Lake Road, subject to the following conditions.

  1. The minor variance is for a single detached dwelling to be located 27 metres to the high water mark of the waterbody (unevaluated wetland). The car port is permitted to be located in the front yard of the dwelling, and setback a minimum of 22 metres from the front lot line. The development must be consistent with the drawings received with PLZNA-2022-0129, attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
  2. The Owner is required to enter into a Development Agreement to be registered on the title of the property to the satisfaction of the Township to address the following matters and environmental standards of the Township:

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 205 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0129, Louise Bercier, 340 Devil Lake Road, Bedford District

a. The use of appropriate erosion control measures (e.g., silt fence, straw bales) during construction. b. Roof runoff will be discharged into infiltration trenches or onto coarse rock rubble splash pads. c. Efforts shall be made to maintain and enhance a healthy buffer of native vegetation between all buildings and structures and the lake. d. That any tree or vegetation removal be limited to the footprint of the building and access route (i.e., driveway) only; that vegetation clearing occur outside of the bird breeding season (April 15 to August 15) and documentation of any at-risk species and compliance with applicable species-at-risk regulations. 2. A building permit is required for ALL proposed demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac. 3. Minor variance PL-ZNA-2022-0129 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Sarah Cadue, M.P.L., Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 206 of 368

Page 207 of 368

1 .

is

by

require

Please

completed

that

of

and

and

the

a permit

application).

KFL&A

Standard Major

Rideau

Quinte

Cataraqui

Minor Minor

Valley Conservation (additions & other construction and/or new

Authority

minor

this prior

Review

on

works)

Authority

fees

Authority

Performance

Unit

Fee:

of

$94.00 $94.00 $94.00

Building

South

accordance

the

Admin

with Frontenac.

referred

with

By—|aw.

be filed SKETCH

Zoning

only: application to construction. any

or

str uct ure

$380 $51

$341

$400

$450 $700

0

Auth toority K F the T L o & w these a A ns g hi e p n ci es

Fee:

Secretary— Treasurer to in the chart

building

Committee

1 3,

by Townsh Chapter ip P.

Health Unit and Conservation (Separate payable cheques, Authority, be are to submitted to

the

970.00

,290.00

consultation and

Conservation

Health Only VVITH

are for applications

Conservation

Region

Public Variance Variance

fees permit

Township

the

the of land, Plan. ‘al

provided

1990,

appointed

FRONTENAC OR PERMISSION

2020 persons Act R.S.O.

use Offi

with the FEE in

Planning $940.00 $1 $1

the the

application

of of

or

eight of Planning

January,

provisions

development purpose purpose

By-law

45

Committee

a that Fee be for provided when submitting an application applicable Conservation

without

Type:

of

Note: These additional

It is required applicable) Health and/or

general

appropriate intent intent

Zoning

is a Section by—law.

Updated

TOVVNSHIP OF SOUTH FOR IVIINOR VARIANCE

(1) this one of copy Adjustment. together by a NON-REFUNDABLE made payable cheque to the

Agplication 1-3 Variances Variances 4+ bul ding After

accompanied or debit

It is required Committee

the

vary

zoning

general

nature

for

Requirements

in

the the

a

Adjustment under

may

of formed from

is desirable Maintains Maintains ls minor

variance:

Committee

variance

the

Application

The that

minor

Committee Committee

The

APPLICATION

Page 208 of 368

READ as

THIS

OF

SOUTH

ITEIVI

Planning

CAREFULLY

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O. c.

P.13

APPLICATION

1990,

as

FOR

amended

IVIINOR

VARIANC E

of

lands

applicant

Personal Information

t t a c

Personal herein is information requested under the Planning required Act. This information be used by the Committee will Adjustment/Land of Division e reviewing of purpose the above referenced and application, be made may boards, Commissions, Agencies Authorities, and Persons having interest an . Any the collection questions regarding of this should be directed information Treasurer the of Committee (P.O. Box Sydenham, of Adjustment 100, Ont.. 376-3027 ext.2224).

Collection

abutting

Each

shall a sketch provide the dimensions showing of the subject outlined 29 the in of Question application. The sketch sho dimensioned uld and scaled either or in Imperial Metric This measures. sketch, the is the Application basis the analysis the for of Minor Variance Form. Adjustment. Committee of It is strongly recommended that the applicant spen time to and thoroughly d t carefully assemble the data and transfer the data that the important sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measu which application does not include the above remen required information not may ts. this the wish regard, applicant to secure the assistance may of a person who such sketches. drafting of answering the A guide to is application questions a

PLEASE

TOVVNSHIP

Page 209 of 368

Page 210 of 368

nature

the

to

Please indicate (l.e. residence.

the

nearest

used

-O’Yes

garage,

whether

existing

public

be

subject

to

there shed,

uses

etc.)

are

the

CINO

of

and

property

the

any

EXISTING

land?

preferred to

buildings

FOR

or

of

the is

in

structures

of Also the

the

the

Zoni ng th e the road

390’

VARIANC E

on

the

from

parking

I3/Ves

to

front

facilities

house. closer

indicate these

road?

location

behind

is

of

IVIINOR

road/lane):

amended

provisions

(on

as

location

the

please

be

distance

only,

0

maintained

preferred

garage

The

the

with

dwelling

comply

the

7aC

By—law:

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

Zoning

is by water approximate

municipally El Yes

subject

the

a

allow go there.

not

of

the

subject

and

cannot

front

from

allow,

use

will couldn’t

not

front on road?

used road.

garage

setbacks

will

the

land:

of

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

in

relief

subject

area

building

of

the

the

and

proposed

rnaintained

or

the

SOUTH

Planning

140’

OF

site

property

so

Road

Road/Lane: Green

are

Residential

What

and

of

the subject a privately

If access facilities

Charlie

Name

OR

Does

the the

waterfront

of

why

the

extent

accessory

and

of

depth water):

zoning

The terraln and through it already, area. cleared

nature

reason

an

1300’

current

Build

The

The

To

The

Rural

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 211 of 368

answer

Lot

Setback Side

‘I4.Are

to

Residential

13.The

(If

from

Area

be

any

High

of

building(s) on built the

proposed

Mark applicable)

Water

Setback

Floor

Dimensions

to

uses

B_ujI_ding

Line

from

Line

from

Line

“"::’.,’:,“;$:::;;’:.;f,:’"°

Heigy-t_of

Lot

Rear

Setback

Lot

from

of Structure residence)

If the

Setback Front

Type (E.g.

TOVVNSHIP

30’

50‘

400’

400’

+1-

SF

68’

the

X

yes.

subject

zstorey

+/—

+/—

+/—

+/—

is

Q/Yes

or struc(ure(s). subject land?

of

400’

2400

38’

1 1

SOUTH Planning

Dwelling

(1)

item

OF

or

El

No

additions

(2)

EACH

land:

for

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

to

building

as

FOR

amended

bui|ding(s)

(3)

structure

P.13

or

existing

C.

APPLICATION

1990,

or

indicate:

VARIANC E

structure(s),

IVIINOR

Page 212 of 368

lf

two

NOTES:

(If

your

If yes.

Do

and

lot

applicable)

one

please

plans

14

OF

is

+/—

40’ X

include provide

60’

total

details:

any

size

is

of

from the

high

waterfront,

(2)

of

on

rnark relate

existing

building.

and

(3)

private be will to the

a

FOR amended

or

VARIANC E

structure

NIINOR

El

Yes

the lane, setback same. the CONSTRUCTION NEVV

building

as

structures?

addition,

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

water

proposed

R.S_O.

in this question the completed

on

each

Act,

FRONTENAC

DEMOLITION

required

setback

for

Garage

Storey

property

1000’

19’

1 00'

S’n9’e

+/—

-1-/— 1000'

70‘

yes,

SOUTH Planning

Detched +/—

(1)

item

subject

to

and the dimensions the NOT to

If the line The

Mark

from

Setback VVater High

Outside

or

II‘ It Is story)

Building

Line

from

Line

from

Line

of

story

Indicate

of

Lot

Lot

Lot

frorn

Dimensions Buildinglstructure

(Also

Height

Side

Setback

Rear

Setback

Front

Structure

answer

residence)

of

the

Setback

Type (E_g.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 213 of 368

21

storm

swales

Is

Private

privy,

or

drainage

sewage

provided

system

sewage system, other means:

sewage

whether

is

the

by

sewers,

an

existing

fixtures

the

ditches,

provided owned

to

swales

or

subject operated

the

by

have

other

land individual

by

a or

land

FOR

Yes

the

Yes

or

a

a

and

publicly communal

means?

by

owned well,

continued:

on

|:I

CI Yes

ow ned

ted

era lake,

op

la n ds :


12 E/ ’N ‘2 N (o o No ~ 1a ’ No

D

VARIANC E

subject

IVIINOR

CI Yes

[I

amended

publicly communal

owner:

constructed

land individual

subject

were

current

encroach

and

the subject operated

of

structures

by

system?

the

bedrooms

as

structure?

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 C.

development?

of

structure

uses

to

is

and

disposal privately a

provided owned

septic

and

existing

was

of

space

or acquired

living

plumbing

number

proposed

addition existing

buildings

land

Indicate

water

water

that

privately

means:

a

time

currently

whether

of

existing

subject

the the

operated

Lake

body,

water

the

the

on

Will

in

Increase

(c)

(:1)

in

Increase

the

(b)

of

in

uses

details:

the

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

RAISING

SOUTH

Planning

Increase

the

provide

include

OF

(a)

system, or other

unkown

length

date

2019

date

VVhat

plans please

are

your

If yes,

Do

Indicate

.The

2022

20.The

July

1Q.The

‘I8.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 214 of 368

Please

*”Note:

If

answer

application.

The approximate location the land that is adjacent watercourses, drainage wells and tanks. septic lines.

V)

to

distances

location

importance

property

The

The

iv)

to

all

a

line

on—site IS

abutting

lot

reference

be varied, and should

of

The location of nearest township

HAVE

of

(neighbours’)

abutting

REQUIRED be prepared

and

file

an

file

subject

AT

ever

including

features

from

OF

crossing.

subject

la n

an d

of

Pl a n ni n g

barn of s, si ga ni s fi ca nt

the subject buildings, wetlands, the applicant’s

on

THE location

subject

the the railway

TOP

the

VARIANC E

application

application

the

the

under

MINOR

features include barns, banks.

between bridge or

artificial Examples

stream these

the

been

THE

of

number of

FOR amended

and owners’ fields wells, septic be shown. to The is SKETCH carefully. as neatly and accurately

of

or

land.

and

lands.

as

application

land

number

ARROVV

following:

the

the

the

of

P.13

land has Variance).

give

subject

C.

APPLICATION

1990,

. . . . ..i.e. distance landmark such as a point

of

NORTH

the

all natural the subject ditches, river distance Show to

or

A

showing

give

(l/linor

subject

please

is Consent.

land

the Act

please

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

and dimensions buildings.

iii)

boundaries proposed

MUST

yes,

The and

*"

is

No

Planning

submitted

27

D

is

whether

25

ii)

be

item

SKETCH

must

to

indicate the of

question

S/No

subject

THE

SKETCH

the

Yes

43

the

SOUTH Planning

Subdivision

OF

i)

A

the

El

If known, please under Section

of

of

whether Plan

Yes

a

answer to application.

El

of

indicate

If the the

approval

TOVVNSHIP

Page 215 of 368

Page 216 of 368

and

someone

come

may

acres:

phone

to

appear the full

in

not for

All

in on

should

behalf

address,

section.

your

this ing

number

act

ma

other

are

of

the

question

private

with

looked are

seeking that or

words,

(not shared

the water, embankment.

you

In

this

pre—consuItation

aware

of

FOR

complete

during appear

even

if the here

in

sep arat posta l e

VARIAN CE

variance owner’s All

live with

Form

MINOR

they

amended

Variance

as

with

zoning

you

after

by

driveways, others).

the

of

25

are

a

rather

to

lanes

uire an d the

req

d o th an

that

private

the to from

on

structure accessory

an

rn

Township;

but

property

asking

staff.

your

completed.

not meet add to further

to be height construct can you variance a developing

why

on

be

planning

must

is asking what question be that asking are you asking to increase the seeking variance a to building.

be

parts

Municipally maintained roads residents maintain themselves and that are property generally

Roads: that

for

water front

you

You

area,

Reason comply: why can’t you could because for example, be. that is already too close to because impossible of a steep

your

be

the

Completing Minor

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

of Relief: This it could example, that or are you mark. or that are mark, you lot line than the principal

Extent

Nature and variance high water

high the to

appoint address

to must

zoning:

depth,

District: the roll

when

Current

to

Guide

SOUTH Planning

owners should

A

OF

the Land: Subject The Districts the are same as the former a Townships. If you number (the r number beginning with 1029) long on tax your e are or 020 district is O10, Bedford; numbers your are if the 040-050 030. numbers Loughborough; are or if the 060 district is , Storrin 070, your gton: numbers are district is Portland. 080, your Concession and Lot Numbers: are if you not sure, check bill tax your Number: Your civic Street address civic number has not if a been as si space blank. gn Name of This Road/Street: question whether applies or not are o you ed n a road. public , Plan No: Reference If your has been surveyed, it will property a have one or more on that parts plan. If your has not been surveyed, property blank. Roll No: This is the number beginning with which ‘1D29’ on appears y ur take time look to it up submitting the before application. of

wish name,

determined

Frontage,

f.

e.

b.

a.

Description

authorization.

may

You

names all of address(es)

the

person’s

The and

TOVVNSHIP

Page 217 of 368

Parking

Proposed

take

Water

years,

Length

Date

19)Date

would space.

may

of a

and

to

you

This

If

columns.

construct

construction:

an

includes

find that,

acquired:

supply: water

uses:

most from a

in

existing 18 months?

buildings:

lake.

are

the

example,

If you

you

answer

not

take

e.g.

words.

deck

must

you

on

all

sure, has

in

screened

part

you

will

the

be

your

the

been

of

private

land

provide

it

bui

to

add

cannot be the Committee to permission clear that there

the

development and

be

departm

deck,

well,

used

best

for

on

some

residential

estimate.

but

property?

is

add

ent. accomplished the at

ing

property,

systems. must a

on the septic

wate rfron t

demoliti on proposing raise the bui to ldi ng this increase of question. An an would involve porch

granted made

possession

a

new dwelling,

ANYTHING garages,

o f pl e as as e to con strul ct

now,

access

VARIANC E

sections dwelling,

land

only

IVIINOR

property

can

your

the

complete

on

from height clear to

a

decks,

build

permit are not

are each

you

increase not made

a

proposed ALL addition to

have

a

FOR

amended

recreational

is

as

this be the question same will vacant, and planning are you 10 would be recreational “vacant

to

is

You

planning to additions,

answer

walls did

For

cases

VVhen

with

there

structures

vacant

relevant

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

only

or

“residentiaI"

although you

other it.

Please

In

because under

it

Structure:

do

is

business,

section

answer currently

in be

are

is

If

structures:

buildings

the

property.

residence.

your

ANY

basement

actually

of you

of

are

retail

question

FRONTENAC R.S.C). Act,

demolition All requires a addition proposed or existing walls. is If this

in

new

“yes”

separate

is

structures:

existing

or

land of

the

Development: include anything

their

construct of

removal process, can’t you

instances.

Demolition:

are you information

on

This

Uses: Generally, the land example, use to be described section 13 would in

from

of

SOUTH

Planning

residential,

OF

buildings

there

“yes".

If

e.g.

Docking:

of proposing

question

Description

this

Proposed

but if, for then the described

18)Uses

is

Uses:

and

Description each structure separately

17)Raising

Buildings:

question

Existing

water.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 218 of 368

Septic:

most

SKETCH: complete

If

has

as

this

We

or to

if

not

sketches drawn

do

the

be

an

been

signed the

(PLEASE

or

in

on

variance

of

a

A

do

application it or

can

commissioner

RULER),

scale,

of

the

in be

will

not

with

a

were.

professi

of

oaths signed

of front

pro per ty?s e l pll e ea ser

the

onal show be not

a

detailed,

property,

the re with

the other the

on

but

VARIANC E

consent

deal

granted on aware of any a new owner,

importance to contract

to

for

to

system,

NIINOR

or subdivision information)

application

the application,

front sign

FOR

amended

constructed

granted of the

USE

need

drawn

the

variance the details

as sewage

a minor variance probably be will by-law. are If you

application, sign must

Must

enough

have

for severance this provide

necessarily are not

neatly

that

been

what

previous

and

not

stress

a

that

private

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

be

currently

help

you

zoning

ever

can

application

there

ditches

will

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

answer

property, the to this. of

there

been known,

You

cannot

has

aware

of

Inden1n’fy: submi ing owners All

are

but

sketch.

Is

is a current number. (Staff Has the variance

there number

you

a

owner

done before commissioners. been appointed.

Agreement

the sketch, distances,

If yes: application

for

made

have

granted

Minor long—time

variance:

If there the file

If yes: indicate

property?

consent:

specific

the

SOUTH Planning

the

etc.?

there

cases

OF

for

Are drainage,

in

for

Application

natural

Drainage:

priviesl

proposed

TOVVNSHIP

Page 219 of 368

TOWNSHIPOF SOUTH FRONTENAC PLANNINGDEPARTMENT

NOV0 1 2022

RECEVED

Inset Inset Map Map

Darling Lake

RO AD

Lake

¥

CH

Sydenham Lake

R

CHARLIE GREEN RD AD

O

Mica Lake

ROA D

M CFAD DE N

AR

NORWAY

ER LM

A RO

PL-ZNA-2022-0134 (GURR)

D

2061 CHARLIE GREEN RD

WI

D ROA EEN GR

AD

Little L IT TLE LO G L AKE RO N Long Lake

L IE

BE

DF

D

OR

O DRAPE R LAKE R AD

2019 LITTLE Gould LONG LAKE RD

2006 CHARLIE GREEN RD Legend Subject Property Township Boundary Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

GLAS S L AN E

2006 CHARLIE GREEN RD

L AR CH

D ROA REEN G E I

Wooded Area Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland Wetland Road

2120 CHARLIE GREEN RD

2122 CHARLIE GREEN RD

2124 CHARLIE GREEN RD

1997 LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

Page 220 of 368

LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

CHARLIE GREEN RD

2061 CHARLIE GREEN RD

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

Scale: 1:2,500 0

25

50

100 m

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-09-21

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Subject:

Minor Variance Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, Ethan Gurr, 2006 Charlie Green Road, Loughborough District

Summary The subject application seeks zoning relief to permit an accessory building (detached garage) in the front yard, whereas Section 5.24.2 of the Zoning Bylaw requires an accessory building which is not part of the main dwelling to be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the dwelling. This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application subject to conditions, as this application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: RW – Waterfront Residential Zone Zoning Relief Requested: Section 5.24.2 – to permit an accessory building (detached garage) to be located in front of the projected front wall of the dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law requires an accessory building to be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building. Related Applications The subject property is not subject to any other applications under the Planning Act.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property is located at 2006 Charlie Green Road, off Norway Road. The property is approximately 28328 square metres (7 acres) and has waterfront on the north side of the www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 221 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, Ethan Gurr, 2006 Charlie Green Road, Loughborough District

property on Mica Lake. The frontage on the water is 42.67 metres (140 feet) and the frontage on the road is 119 metres (390 feet). Glass Lane runs through the lot from the east lot line. The surrounding lands are forest and residential. The subject property is developed with a 2-storey single detached dwelling and attached garage which is setback approximately 121.92 metres (400 feet) from the high water mark of Mica Lake. The property contains a driveway off Charlie Green Road which leads up to the dwelling and attached garage. The proposed area of the garage has been slightly cleared, but the remainder of the lot is heavily treed with large mature trees. Summary of Proposal The proposal is to construct a 222.97 square metres (40 feet by 60 feet), accessory building in the front yard of the property. The proposed detached garage will be accessory to the principal dwelling and built off the existing driveway approximately 21.33 metres (70 feet) to Charlie Green Road and 20.1 metres (66 feet) to the front lot line. The proposed detached garage will be a single storey, 5.8 metres (19 feet) in height and setback approximately 304.8 metres (1000 feet) to Mica Lake and approximately 15.24 metres (50 feet) to Glass Lane in the middle of the lot. The proposed detached garage would be approximately 30.48 metres (100 feet) to the side lot line and 137.16 metres (450 feet) to the dwelling. The proposed detached garage is approximately 152.4 metres (500 feet) to the sewage system. The intended use of the proposed garage is for storage and storing vehicles. Department and Agency Comments The application did not meet the criteria for circulation to any departments or agencies. Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. Planning Analysis The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal meets the four tests as explained below. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 222 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, Ethan Gurr, 2006 Charlie Green Road, Loughborough District

Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? • The proposed variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. The subject lands are designated Rural in the Official Plan on Schedule A. The accessory building is an accessory use consistent with the permitted residential use of the property. The proposed detached garage will be setback more than 30 metres from Mica Lake. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. The subject property is zoned RW – Waterfront Residential and the proposed detached garage is a permitted accessory use. The RW – Waterfront Residential zoning on the property considers the land between Charlie Green Road and the dwelling to be the “front yard”. Accessory buildings are not permitted within the front yard as of right. However, the location of the proposed garage is logical for the development and will meet all the other zoning regulations as follows: •

The proposed detached garage exceeds the 30-metre setback requirement for an accessory building to the high water mark as its 304.8 metres (1000 feet) to the lake.

The proposed detached garage will meet the minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings (3 metres is required, whereas 30.48 metres (100 feet) is provided).

According to the application, the proposed detached garage will be setback 21.33 metres (70 feet) to Charlie Green Road and 20.1 metres (66 feet) to the front lot line which is consistent with the minimum 20 metre (65.6 feet) front yard setback required for the single detached dwelling in the RW Zone. The setback is slightly greater than what’s required for a dwelling.

The proposed garage does not exceed lot coverage for accessory buildings, and the proposed detached garage is not larger than the principal building. The lot coverage for the accessory building is approximately 0.8%

The proposed garage building height is 5.79 metres (19 feet), which complies with the Zoning Bylaw maximum accessory building height of 6 metres (19.7 feet) for the RW Zone. Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question?

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 223 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, Ethan Gurr, 2006 Charlie Green Road, Loughborough District

• The requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Locating the proposed detached garage in the front yard protects the environmentally sensitive lands between the dwelling and the lake. As a waterfront property, it is preferable to have the accessory building in the front yard, between the dwelling and the road, rather than between the dwelling and the lake, to avoid any impacts to lake water quality. • The proposed detached garage will be located off the existing driveway and surrounded by the forested area such that it would not be visible from the road. The proposed detached garage will be set back from the road and there is enough tree cover to visually screen the proposed detached garage from the road. •

The terrain of the lot and the waterfront setbacks won’t allow for the proposed detached garage to be constructed behind the house. The lot is also further constricted by the setbacks of the lane though the lot, so the proposed garage can not be constructed closer to the dwelling. The preferred location is closer to the road, where the proposed detached garage is not within the waterbody setback and there is an already cleared area.

The proposed accessory building will be visually screened from the lake by distance, topography, and trees.

Is the variance minor? •

The requested variance is minor as it maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

Staff do not anticipate any significant adverse affects as a result of the requested variance. Due to the amount of tree cover on the lot, the size and the massing of the accessory building is not likely to affect neighbouring properties.

There are no plumbing fixtures proposed and the structure will not encroach on the existing septic system.

The lot area (7 acres) allows for a larger accessory building on the property and is consistent with other accessory buildings sizes for the area.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 224 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, Ethan Gurr, 2006 Charlie Green Road, Loughborough District

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PL-ZNA-2022-0134, subject to the following conditions.

  1. The minor variance is to permit a 222.97 square metres (40 feet by 60 feet) accessory building (detached garage) to be located in front yard of the property, and setback a minimum of 20.1 metres (66 feet) from the front lot line of the property, per the site plan drawing, which was submitted and received with PL-ZNA-2022-0134 on November 1st, 2022, attached to the Decisions as Schedule “A”.
  2. A building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac.
  3. Minor variance PL-ZNA-2022-0134 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Sarah Cadue, M.PL., Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 225 of 368

Page 226 of 368

Page 227 of 368

SKETCH

T0 [LL USTRA TE

D

10

E 30

__

.

§

‘\

‘~.

\ \

—»–pm

E‘

“’-T”

O

E

\

szzss-ozas (m-~

——

I,

~

m,,,,,,g.a1$n(Lr)

PART 7

PART 3

,,,,,no—om(I-f) nrnacil-9*‘

E73

—\

_\

__y

-_

n

_

"

/

‘1

I

‘2

.5

{‘4

IR

,=

If [‘5

I"

I

//

:3

\

,_.,,

/I’

,1

I

_..4x

,—”

_,-——"

\

*r\

..

““9vyLo«‘v‘mJ

PM

-—"”

/

__ -

PART 7

501’-vlnl

éZ__.mea1L°”

PART 7 PLAN 1319-6236

\ ~

3*;

E3

‘5’-«”"-“‘

9

=

T

|?BcyLn\2

..

:


‘9’

.,,..,

-—”

my

‘I:

~“‘

‘§=‘>’=» :3‘

-3 E. “U

W

°3:°"”§£""““I E””~ .__-

_-—‘

.~’

EUPHNSEEHTLINDSITRVITGIEINC. -2020-

‘IUIIIGH

SCALE-1:600

COUNTY of FRONHNAC

TRAILER LOTS ON HILL BAY SITE .BOB’S ME C0-OPERATIW CAMPS’INC. PART of LOT 33 J: 84, CONCESSION 7 Geographic Township of Bedford TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Bob

\

I

3

Lake

[WU

/

Page 228 of 368

/r.§_

OUTH

is

Note: These fees permit applications are

Authority

Conservation

Conservation

Valley

Rideau

Please

a that Fee Authority the applicable application).

without

Type:

a

and and

purpose purpose of of

the the

or

eight of Planning

January,

provisions

development

By—Iaw

and

for

consultation fees prior

Authority

Authority

Review a new

Conservation

3,

4,

or

chart

5

only;

sewage

be

Admin

these

onsite an application submitted

review

$97.00 $97.00 $97.00

Building

the

to

with

By—Iaw.

building

Committee

or

stru ctur e

by Township Chapter P. 13.

agencies

sewage ( to the Separ To ate w ns hi p

Fee:

the Secretary— Treasurer 3 (below) in Note , below in cash.

the

1990,

appointed

the land. Plan.

filed referred

on this application any construction.

Class

to

Fee:

of

be

Of?cial Zoning

use

provided

persons R.S.O. Act

2022

FRONTENAC OR PERMISSION

to Township when submitting are Authority. to

the

Planning $979130 $1 .343.00 $2,058.00

be provided for (where applicable)

permit

South Frontenac Only Performance WITH combination with in a Class than system A

Region

Variance Variance Variance other

of

payable completed

to

required

building

Conservation

It

After

_&EpIication 1 >3 Variances Variances 4+

Conservation

additional

Intent

tent

appropriate

Zoning

Committee 45 the of

Updated

TOVVNSHIP OF SOUTH FOR IVIINOR VARIANCE

one copy It is that (1) this of required application together the of Adjustment, Committee with SKETCH a NON—-REFUNDABLE by accordance with FEE in made payable the Frontenac. to of South Township

Quinte

Cataraqui

system

Township Minor Minor Minor

vary

the for genera the the general nature in

may

a

Section by—law.

is

APPLICATION

Adjustment under a zoning

Requirements

ls desirable Maintains Maintains Is minor

variance:

Committee

the

Application

The that

of formed from

FRONTENAC

The Committee Committee is minor variance

::<\‘~

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPIJCA11ON FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Date Received:

File No:

mm /3{F0

Name of Owner(s):

Full Mailing Address of CMner(s):

H

Phone number of Owner(s): Email Address of Owner(s): 2.

If the applicant is NOT the owner of the subject land, the written authorization of the owner that the applicant is authorized to make the application, must accompany the application.

_,é’£"/’[: ( 0 /“off 1

Name of Authorized Agent:

[go

~o,0

/AJC

,

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent:

Phone number of Authon’zed Agent

AM

Email Address of Authorized Agent:

z

Agent as named above is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of

The description of the subject land:

Zéedford

District: Concession

2

Number:

Street Number:

3 Portland

2.Z

co

Name of Road/Street:

/M40

Part Number(s):

0.70

U Storrington

Lot Number:

Reference Plan Number: Roll Number: _[027—

El Loughborough

QM

~

5/

0 . A/U95

H

{X100

Page 229 of 368

Page 230 of 368

reason

What

Please (I.e.

K

to

the

indicate

whether

Q45

garage,

.

shed,

of

the

jNo

are etc.)

/4A there

uses

and

property

used road.

7‘/av/J

subject to be public

existing

or

the

’c,£L—~’,/,3’

residence,

,6

are

A//4

used nearest

4,4»

Road/Lane:

(2/9

of

~

~

any

EXISTING

land?

is by water approximate

municipally El Yes

subject

the

a

comply

with 9,622

FOR

the

buildings

of

or

G’ the

Zonin g

the

D

on

the

from

parking

Yes

,€4—:&.t/xéc-4:

of

facilities

structures

indicate these

road?

;-72

provisions

/

(pa-.4L/i/04/

9”’

0

/’’{7/’

g

VARIANCE

J—&

MINOR

road/lane):

amended

/A//A,’//4‘

please distance

only,

maintained El No

Z ’/

(on

as

.’/€

By—law:

Area:

776,4’/,4

Zoning

/W

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION c. P.13

,6/zgg

T)

the

/

subject

/,

cannot

L/,6

,._/42::

use

/K77/V

on front road?

AP/4

.4,p,:,/;

the

land:

of

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act.

relief?m

/4’/<

the

subject

£2

area

7,64/4;?/6

of

the

and

SOUTH Planning

proposed

property

the

of

OF

maintained

4.24’

why

the subject a privately

If access facilities and the

(or

Name

OR

Does

/:x

/Vt»:/4/t”.

The

,4/E

0

.»,.J/7’#r’

4/145,:

extent

and

nature

The

zoning

current

23

/

depth water):

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s).

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 231 of 368

of

or

Line

from

from

I! story)

13.The

one

uses

High

of

5

to

to

be

any

built

buiIding(s) on the

/CL‘/’(z6’4’.4///0/v54

proposed

Water Mark (If applicable)

Setback

If

Building

Line

from

Area

two

Lot

Dimensions Floor

story

Indicate

Side

Setback

Height

14_Are

(b

Lot

Structure

answer

k f R:araLcot

S

Front

(AIS!)

of

If the

Setback

Type

TOVVNSHIP

1 1

is

yes.

SOUTH Planning

?7’”“f

for

/0

the

3

/

/—‘

subject

5/é

Yes

or structure(s). subject land?

of

Z

or

land:

additions

N/A

to

existing

or

as

FOR amended

indicate:

MINOR

“/G

f

/

building(s)

/V/A

/o’er‘?

/00

,§"§C3’

Z

/awn

;r

or

1

structure(s),

( 4 : ( ;

VARIANCE

f—?‘

7‘

/

(3)_¢6E,Z:j/

structure

APPLICATION c. P.13

building

(2)J¢?<

EACH

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

;s=<v;g,::2:a<€«z:2;,;x

(1)

item

OF

Page 232 of 368

If the

0

story

Line

from

Line

from

from Line

:2 story)

of

If yes. please

plans provide

SOUTH

is

yes,

Planning for

each (2)

proposed

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

details:

any

DEMOLITION

of

existing

on mark relate building. and

addition,

FOR amended

a private be will the to

(3)

or

C

Yes

i c a t e :

i

VARIANCE

structure

MINOR

the setback lane, same. the CONSTRUCTION NEW

building

as

structures?

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

on property is waterfront, setback the high from water required in this question total size the of completed

include

your

Do

OF

14

(1)

subject If the lot line and the 2) The dimensions and to the NOT

item

NOTES:

High (If

one

to

from Setback Water Mark applicable)

If

Building

have

Outside

or

Indicate

of

Lot

Lot

Lot

Dimensions Buildlnglstructure

(AI

Height

Side

Setback

Setback Rear

Front

answer

Structure residence)

of

Setback

Type (E.g.

1 5.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 233 of 368

21

date

Is

//O

storm

drainage

provided

9;’

is

the

provided owned

ditches,

J

the

the

existing

by

or

<

by

other

the

Yes

Yes

Yes

MINOR

a

and

ope

owne d

d

rate lake,

7ia4/»f

a publicly or communal

means?

by

well,

owned

lan ds:

I

VARIANCE

subject

continued:

on

D

D

3

publicly communal

have

~s’o¢>»<

or

a

land

FOR amended

land individual

owner:

the subject operated

swales

/l/tea

as

structure?

constructed

land individual

subject

were

current

encroach

to and

subject

of

operated

the

uses

to

is

sewers,

r,4/we

disposal a privately

by

by

structure system?

fixtures

bedrooms

structures

-L

and

and

of

an

APPLICATION c. P.13

development?

of

¢‘j.EA4)

provided owned

existing

Z02

was

or septic acquired

living

plumbing

number

space

RAISING

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

proposed

addition existing

in

in

in

the

details:

the

SOUTH Planning

buildings

land

sewage sewage system, means: other

whether

~/./ES‘ /(592.4

or

water

that

a privately means:

time

existing

56”

subject

of

the the

(?’,€/4454

other

or

V5:/(‘

body.

Indicate operated privy,

of

whether

system,

water

Indicate

_;g>

length

the

the

on

Will

Increase

(C) (d)

Increase

(b)

uses

provide

Increase

the

OF

include

(3)

Vxéf.

cJ"Q/_”/

date

What

plans please

are

your

If yes,

Do

2002-

,The

20.The

X

1 9.The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 234 of 368

/; -~

The and

The

ii)

iii)

The the

v)

to

and

distances to importance

property

The

wells lines.

is

of

whether Planning

to

line

on—site

to

file

subject

river distance

subject

including

as

the subject buildings.

of

sig nif as ica nt

barns,

applicant’s

wetlands. the

on

and

of

Pla nni ng

subject lan crossing. d

location

?elds and wells, septic The is shown. SKETCH be carefully, neatly and accurately owners’

to

OF

THE

subject

the the railway

TOP

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

artificial features and land. include Examples or stream banks, barns. these of features from

lands.

the

THE

of

been

betvveen or bridge

land

AT

the

under

MINOR

or‘/z—,ec‘ze,.;,»,./4

number of

FOR amended

application

as

ever

number

ARROVV

following:

the

the

natural

(neighbours)

abutting REQUIRED be prepared

and

of

NORTH

the

give

land has Variance).

file

an

. . . . ..i.e. distance point as a landmark such all the

of

or

ditches, Show

IS

location

abutting

adjacent drainage tanks.

all

lot

reference

A

showing

please

HAVE

yes,

the

/Aargcrr’

give

of

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

subject

subject (Minor

/4;

please

land is Consent.

the Act

4;

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

and dimensions buildings.

MUST

submitted

is

be varied, and should

septic

approximate land that

location

is

/«‘7’

25

No

S/[(0

:1

27

location ofa township

boundaries proposed

be

item

SKETCH

must

Yes

watercourses.

The

iv)

nearest

THE

i)

**

SKETCH

A

El

indicate the of

—(/.:’,.:»z=,q_,v

43

SOUTH Planning

the subject Subdivision

OF

question

whether Plan of

answer to application.

answer If the the application.

**Note:

a

_~./(es

of

indicate

lf known, please under Section

M

If the the of

Please approval

TOVVNSHIP

Page 235 of 368

Page 236 of 368

to

appoint address

to

full

appear the

this

mailing

in address,

section,

Minor

your behalf should

the

APPLICATION c. P.13

on act number

R.S.0.

Completing

Act,

FRONTENAC

someone and phone

be

must

to

as

FOR amended

the here

in

ate postal

separ

VARIANCE

p variance owner’s r All

live with

Forrn

MINOR

if they complete

during appear

even

Variance

Roads:

that

Municipally maintained residents maintain themselves are and that generally property

can’t comply: why you for because be, example, is already too that close to a because of steep impossible

line

All parts

may aware You not be for in pre-consultation

acres: this

the with

of

of

zoning planning

question

other

shared

roads (not

are

seeking or that

words.

by

meet add to further

not

the Township: but lanes

can you a variance developing why

looked after driveways. private with others).

are

the water, embankment.

you

In

of

the

that

private provide

requi red an the

c a n do to than 3 within 0 buildi ng this

on to from

are asking m rather a structure an accessory

and

completed. property

be

you 25 be

your staff.

on

must

Extent This is asking what of Relief: question you are it could be that asking to example, or you that asking increase height are to the or you are a variance that seeking to construct than the building. principal

for

come

area,

Reason could

lot

mark.

front

mark,

water

——

and

water

Nature variance

you

zoning:

depth,

Current

when

Frontage,

name.

wish

Guide

SOUTH Planning

owners should

A

OF

o c e the Subject Land: of Description s a. District: are same as are The Districts the the former Townships. If you sI on the roll number (the long number beginning with 1029) bill. tax your .f or your 020 district is are 010, 030, numbers Bedford; 040-050, if the Loughborough; are or your numbers 060 district is Storringt 070, if the on: are your numbers district is Portland. 080, b. and Lot Concession are your Numbers: not sure, check tax bill if you c. Street Number: Your civic address civic number has been assi not if a gne space blank. d, . Name Road/Street: or you are on This whether not of question applies a road. public e. your Plan No: has been surveyed, it have Reference a If will property one or more on that property has not been parts plan. surveyed, If your blank. Roll No: This is the number beginning which ‘1029’ on with f. appears you r take time submitting to look it up the before application.

may You person’s authorization.

the

The and

names all of address(es)

TOVVNSHIP

Page 237 of 368

Parking

Proposed but for if, then the described

1 3)

Description

actually

instances, existing of ?nd may

Demolition:

are you information

Water

their

Length years,

Structure: under

to

and If

ANY

Act.

are If you includes

the is

a

of

acquired:

from

in a

most lake.

uses:

an

cases

are

you

the

e.g.

are

answer

not

take

answer

example,

you

on

must

you

on the

to

part screened

will

has

sure,

be

the

private

land

provide

of

proposing

possession

a

each

you

in

dwelling,

new

on

and

to

septic development

ANYTHING garages,

raise

a

must

your

the

well,

been

of

but

used

best

for

some

property?

be

departme nt. wit ho of ut reside nce, involve d. in

deck,

n “,

as th e const ructla

increase An an involve

building

waterfront

residential

estimate.

the this question. would porch

to

to

property, systems.

add

the

th e this describe of

now,

access

VARIANCE

the building from permit height be cannot accomplished beginning Committee to the at the on your to add to permission it clear that there is demolition

a

a

build decks,

same the planning recreational

please

sections

land

only

MINOR

property

can

FOR amended

recreational

is

as

all complete dwelling,

your

vacant

relevant

structures

ALL proposed addition to

planning additions,

words,

walls did

For

if

Please with

other

When

In

buildings:

months?

existing 18

it.

You deck

or

business,

only

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

answer to this be question will you are currently and vacant. section 10 would be “vacant in be “residential”

structures: there is

buildings

retail

is

R.S.0.

FRONTENAC

question

construction: construct columns.

This

anything

Development:

of

supply:

water

in

new

separate

“yes”

structures:

of proposing

is

in

existing

or

of

20)Date

land

are

residential.

This

Generally, the land be described section 13 would

Uses: example. use to

include

of

19)Date

space.

18)Uses would

17)Raising a basement

question

If there “yes".

e.g.

Docking:

SOUTH Planning

buildings of on your property. residence.

is

Uses:

and

OF

demoli ion All requires a proposed or increase addition walls. is not made clear If this you are although granted that. you do it because have made not

Description structure the from

1 2)

Proposed

Buildings: question

Existing

water.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 238 of 368

most

Are drainage,

in

yes:

there

has

the

if

known.

been

zoning

property,

Has

and

provide

for

an

a

the

system,

consent

of

front

of

or the sign application,

a

or

it

application

can

commissioner

deal

there

on

the

with

may

VARIANCE

(severance)

in be

a detailed, a professional dimensions accepted.

any

granted

to

but

MINOR

or subdivision information)

for

of importance contract with do show not not be will

in

FOR amended

constructed

as

of

oaths signed

of front

and

to

accurate,

f f

t b a y

s

on the property? other special pe r new owner, the seller prob will mi ably ssi on on the property, granted ple ase were. the variance of

variance aware be

severance this

variance the details

be signed application, sign must

Must the

been

sewage

application

have

private

APPLICATION c. 1990, F’.13

a minor probably are If you

what

previous

ever been you will by—Iaw. a

that

be

Agreement Indemnify: to this done before submitting as owners commissioners. All has been appointed.

there number

this.

to

the

currently

will

application can help

there

ditches

answer

R.s.o.

If

of

is

specific

the

Act,

FRONTENAC

SKETCH: We cannot stress enough the sketch. You do not necessarily need to are but sketches that drawn not to scale, not drawn neatly (PLEASE RULER), USE A

application

If

aware

SOUTH

Planning

is a current (Staff number.

consent:

etc.?

there

cases

OF

you

Minor variance: owner time of a variance for

If there the ?le

If yes: indicate

for Application the property?

for

Drainage: natural

Septic:

TOWNSHIP

‘STE/Y

“W:3

§[E/9/

{M/)4 m

«’.~”/":.=’;;»"/7

./,1/1,;

:1»?/z‘/Iv /M

aw/.:/J .4 7: /’2/.%’/;—"

M ETA L". s’ ‘fa/s’»‘iz2i’.‘

5’;/I/27 ‘}

(LT). ……

m/um/J251/ 9'7J/"~;/H,1z£

./“H3/?/i? .‘}‘.’,“l:-E/t/”//an/.9

Bo I//r.’.I/:’-

*"

36239_0g03

3

CIU’/C :7/,7 ICES7”

……………

w/3.4271

_.

-—

PA T 7 PLA[/’ 7

Page 239 of 368 ‘-

.\

………

……….

mar‘.-.

VI I ©~\1_!.

I

c,=7.,%’"

Chief: BC

AP

Cluuknu‘ By:

TOW 34. NSHI P

LOT CT 33-

PROJE

»\wv.hopk:nschitty.c yors

LAND SURVEYOR TY Ontario SLand Surve

HOPKINS CHIT

lnslrummx:

Found Survey Wood Stake Subject To

534-686 NORRIS COURT KINGSTON.ONTARIO K71’-2R9 ) 884-9266 ( Fa: (swag354-3513

Pu‘:-ly

DATE: MAY 5. 2021

LEGEND:

THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY TO BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE A 5‘ THE TITLE’ BLOCK.

NOTE:

Page 240 of 368

;

La,/Ce

Page 241 of 368

C-_

additional

Please

Rideau

Quinte

Cataraqui

system

Minor

ll/linor

Township Minor

of

the general general

nature

for

intent intent

appropriate

Zonlng

and and

is

Region

Conservation are

Authority

Conservation

Note: These fees permit applications

Valley

Frontenac

that a Fee Authority the applicable application).

without

T¥pe:

a

Planning

for consultation and fees prior

Authority

Authority

Review a new

Conservation

Class

to

Fee:

any

on

or

building

Committee

or

stru ctur e

1 .

by Townshi Chapter p P.

only;

sewage

be

these

onsite an application submitted

review

$97.00 $97.00

Admin

( the Sepa T rateo w ns hi p

agencies

to

sewage

Fee:

with the Secretary— Treasurer 3 (below to in Note ), chart below in Cash,

By-law.

Building

5

the

1990,

appointed

PERMISSION

the land, Plan.

$97.00

this application construction.

2,

OR

filed referred

the

be

Zoning

of Official

use

provided

to Township when submitting are to Authority,

the

$2,058.00

$979.00 343.00 $1

be provided for (where applicable)

perrnit

Only Performance WITH with combination in a than system Class A

South

Conservation

other

Variance Variance Variance

of

payable completed

to

required

building

Conservation

It

After

Agplication 1-3 Variances Variances 4+

in of

or the the

this application with the SKETCH accordance with Frontenac. South

of

purpose

of

of

provisions

eight of Planning

2022

FRONTENAC

persons Act R.S.O.

SOUTH VARIANCE

January,

development purpose

By-law

Committee 45 of the

Updated

TOVVNSHIP OF FOR MINOR

It is one that (1) required copy Committee of Adjustment, together by a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE made payable the to Township

Requirements

in

the the

vary

a

Section by-law.

is

APPLICATION

Adjustment under zoning a

may

from

formed

ls desirable Maintains Maintains ls minor

variance:

Committee

variance

the

Application

The that

minor

is

FRONTENAC

SOUTH

Committee Committee

The

x\.

Page 242 of 368

as

THIS

OF

SOUTH

ITEM

Planning CAREFULLY

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

APPLICATION P.13 c. 1990, as

FOR amended

MINOR

VARIANCE

shall sketch e a prov‘ the dimensions the subject showing of outlined Question 29 the The n of sketch application. shoul d and scaled either or Metric measures. in imperial This sketch, i n is the basis Form, the analysis the Minor for of Variance Committee Adjustment. It is strongly of recommended that the applicant spend time carefully and thoroughly to assemble the data and the transfer data to that the sketch be drawn with important accurate dimensions and measure which does include application not the above be required information not ments. may regard, the secure applicant wish to the assistance may of a person who drafting such sketches. of to A guide the is att answering application questions ac he Personal Collection of Information d. Personal information herein is under requested the required 1 Planning Act, 9 This be used by the information Committee of will Adjustment/Land Division 9 reviewing of purpose the above and referenced be application, made may 0i Agencies boards, Commissions, and an Authorities, Persons having interest regarding the n collection questions this should be directed of information Treasurer the of Committee Adjustment (P.O. Box Sydenham, of 100, Ont.. 376-3027 e><t.2224 ).

READ

Each applicant abutting lands dimensioned the Application

PLEASE

TOVVNSHIP

Page 243 of 368

Page 244 of 368

1 1 .

1 0.

The

(*0

,6

to

subject to be public

whether garage,

Yes

the

ca’

El

A4

of

~

are

the

No

.

e S

/J

Zoning

pally

rec-&

comply

any

EXISTING

land?

the

please

Fa

buildings

distance

only,

maintained III No

with

//N’ dc

/

,4

By—|aw:

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION P.13 c. 1990,

ne?x

the

I

subject

water by approximate

is

subject

the

a

0

cannot

’¢oJ

from

land:

/64-‘52

use

eff

the

fa’

of

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

etc.)

and

property

there shed,

uses

4,9

relief

"

front on road?

used road.

/kg/of

area

subject

i

2—¢£»4/Ae property

existing

Ec,€4:/47/o4)

the

nearest

£4/4

of

the

and

SOUTH Planning

proposed

maintained

or

the

o?

used

«

Road/Lane:

Please indicate (|.e. residence,

What

are

of

If access facilities and the

Name

OR

the

I/xfzg/,$2J

why

the subject a privately

/r;-//Jr‘

_./;-/rc

Does

Gr?

reason

/1///,u

The

:7»/9

//urrxxa

?y

extent

and

zoning

25/

OF

of

depth water):

nature

current

E1//*

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOWNSHIP

or

/

faci

the

structures

indicate these

Zoni ng

— -‘f

on

the

parking from

Yes

the

/

if

VARIANCE

Ities

El

of

.?é5’z/”

,é’z:7”A,4c/3‘

road?

of

MINOR

road/lane):

FOR amended

provisions

(on

as

Page 245 of 368

Setback

Lot

Lot

Line

from

Line

from

Area

proposed

14.Are

to

be

any

the

)

54

v~

K

the

/

5

f

/

O

subject

/

Fl

Yes

A,

v

or

land:

9

Q

_;

Ni/4

additions

,

to

A,

/

?

E

existing

5/ 7

/

as

‘9

FOR amended

bui|ding(s)

(3)

structure

{$3/L7. /

or

APPLICATION c. P.13 1990, building

72 //

I7/’

(2)

EACH

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

for

»/*ra€€r

yes,

structure(s), or land? subject

of

/9

is

SOUTH Planning

515/

1 1

OF

4?

(1

item

7/¢>/«J

uses

High

bui|ding(s) built on

£55/64’/4

13.The

Setback from Vvater Mark (If applicable)

Dimensions Floor

to

ing

of

Line

frorn

B_

Lot

““::.,::°;°:.$;’;:.;:7"e

Heig_ht_of

side

Setback

Rear

Setback

Front

Structure

answer

residence)

of

If the

(E.g.

Type

TOVVNSHIP

or

indicate:

NIINOR

structure(s),

(4 )

VARIANCE

Page 246 of 368

If the

High (If

NOTES:

If

It

of

Is

story)

your

If yes,

Do

item

Q

please

plans provide

include

for

each

(2)

proposed

FRONTENAC R.S.O. AC1,

details:

any

DEMOLITION

of

on

existing

mark relate building.

and

FOR arnended

(3)

structures?

or

Fl

Yes

i

VARIANCE

structure

MINOR

the setback lane, the same. CONSTRUCTION NEW

building

as

private be will to the

a

F.13

addition,

C.

APPLICATION

1990,

is on waterfront, property setback from the water high required in this question total size the of completed

yes,

SOUTH Planning

is

4”‘

OF

14

(1)

subject If the lot line and the 2) The dimensions and the NOT to

one

to

from Setback Water Mark applicable)

Dimensions Buildinglstructure

Line

from

Line

frorn

Line

from

Building

two

Outside

indicate (Also or story

of

Lot

Setback Side

Height

Lot

Lot

Rear

Setback

Front

Structure

answer

residence)

of

Setback

Type (E.g.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 247 of 368

K

/C

21

If

Do

A

Is

or

/1

/3’?

storm

M2

a privately means:

water

,

that

drainage

provided

by

fixtures

bedrooms

by

sewers,

<~

the

existing

ditches,

_?é0&

provided owned

to

77C(‘ swales

4

by

or

Yes

Yes

MINOR

on

the

C! Yes

D45

El

i_l

FOR amended

other

land individual

a

and

publicly communal

means?

or

a

owned well,

own ed

d

rate lake.

ope

lan ds:

D

Cl

El

L]

D

VARIANCE

subject

continued:

by

publicly communal

by

a or

have

4-:’)</r/*7/:’$’ /41:16 7-/6/4 land

subject operated

the

owner:

structure?

as

constructed

land individual

subject

were

current

encroach

and

subject

operated

the

of

the

system?

structure

uses

to

is

and

disposal a privately

z.-

provided owned

734/a4’.

5’;

is

the

/‘//54

of

an

APPLICATION P.13 C.

development?

of

and structures ex/{rr~‘¢

existing

was

or

septic acquired

living

plumbing

number

space

RAISING

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

proposed

addition existing

in

in

in

the

details:

the

SOUTH Planning

buildings

land

whether sewage sewage system, other means:

4&7

system, other or

time

,1

of

the the

¢’»4_{//V

existing

.1

546?

of

whether

6/8

?gx?/42;’

Indicate operated privy,

5

Indicate water body,

length

.2

6

the

((0

subject

on

Will

Increase

(c) (cl)

Increase

(b)

uses

provide

Increase

the

OF

include

(a)

the

Ez/an/4

date

date

plans please

are

your

yes.

What

49;:

re

.The

20.The

19.The

TOVVNSHIF

Page 248 of 368

the the

The the

V) and

distances to importance

property

The

wells lines.

watercourses,

is

the

is

to

line

on—site

tanks.

to

?le

an

file

subject

and abutting REQUIRED be prepared

as

nif as ica nt

of s. sig

barn

the subject buildings, wetlands, the applicant’s

on

and

of

Pla nni ng

subject lan crossing. d

location

and fields wells, septic is SKETCH be shown. The carefully. neatly and accurately owners‘

to

OF

THE

subject

the the railway

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

the

TOP

of

including

THE

the

been

betvveen bridge or

land

AT

of

number

under

MINOR

and artificial features include land. Examples or stream banks, barns, these of features from

lands.

FOR amended

application

as

ever

number

ARROW

following:

the

the

natural subject river distance

(neighbours’) all the

of

of

NORTH

the

give

the

of

p.13

land has Variance).

give

subject

c.

APPLICATION

1990,

distance . . . . ..i.e. point a as landmark such

ditches, Show

IS

location

or

A

is

subject (Nlinor

please

the Act

showing

HAVE

abutting

adjacent drainage

all

lot

land Consent.

please

yes,

or

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

dimensions

yes,

reference

buildings.

and

MUST

a

is

subject

whether Planning

25

No

submitted

27

El

be varied, and should

septic

approximate land that

of

The

iv)

location

The location of nearest township

and

iii)

boundaries proposed

The

ii)

SKETCH

be

item

THE

“*

to

must

Yes

indicate the of

.

souTH

Planning

Subdivision

oI=

question

i)

:

SKETCH

A

III

43

to

whether Plan of

answer application

answer If the the application.

**Not:e

a

El Yes

of

indicate

please If known. under Section

of

If

Please approval

TOVVNSHIP

Page 249 of 368

Page 250 of 368

appoint address and

someone phone

to

appear the full

Completing in

be not may pre-consultation

Roads: Municipally maintained that residents maintain themselves and that generally are property

example,

of

for

All aware

parts

this

the with

of

of

on act number

ma

Minor

should

behalf

section, address,

your

ng

’s

the

APPLICATION C. P.13

1990,

as

the here

live with

in

separ ate postal

VARIANCE

variance owner’s All

Form

IVIINOR

they

complete

during appear

even

if

FOR amended

Variance

planning

zoning

question

other

shared

roads (not

are

seeking or that

words,

can

by

variance a developing

why

looked after driveways, private others). with

are

the water, embankment.

you

In

meet add

that

this

c a

the

requi red an

provide

private

to

the

to do than 3 within 0 build ing

from

on

accessory

further

to

asking

rather structure m

are

not

an

a

25

and

completed. property

be

the Township; but lanes

you

of

you

be

your staff.

on

must

Relief: This is what question asking you it could be that asking to are that asking the height or are to increase you or that are a variance to construct you seeking than the buil ing. principal

for

Extent

You in

acres:

mark, lot line

mark,

and

come

zoning:

area,

Reason why can’t you comply: could because be, for example. that is already too close to a steep because impossible of

water front

Nature variance water

you

depth,

of

to

to

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

the Subject Land: The Districts are the same as the former Townships. are If you the roll number (the long number beginning with 1029) on bill. tax your 020 O10, or district are 030, is Bedford; numbers your 040-050, if the Loughborough; numbers 060 district is Storring are or if the 070, your ton; are numbers district is Portland. your 080. Concession and Lot are Numbers: not sure, check bill tax if you your Street Number: Your civic address civic has not number been if a assi gne blank. space d, of Road/Street: Name This whether question or not are on applies you road. a public Plan No: Reference If your has been it will have property surveyed, a one or more on that has been surveyed, parts not plan. If your property blank. Roll No: This is the number beginning with which ‘1029’ on appears yo r take tirne to look it up submitting the before application. District:

wish name,

Guide

must be

SOUTH

Planning

owners should

A

OF

Current

when

Frontage,

f.

e.

d.

c.

b.

Descript’on

may You person’s authorization.

names of all address(es)

the

The and

TOVVNSHIP

Page 251 of 368

Buildings:

Proposed

actually

may

Water their

years,

of

new

of

do

because under

acquired:

it.

in

a

cases

You deck must on

you

on the

please

sections

land

only

MINOR

property

can

FOR amended

recreational

is

as

all complete your dwelling,

vacant

relevant

structures

the

e.g.

not

take

answer

example,

are

you

answer

are

made

granted

increase clear

not

words,

are

to

part

screened

will

has

sure,

be

the

of

private

land

provide

possession

a

each

that proposing

clear

the be

bulldlng

raise

your

the

well,

been

of

must a

but

used

best

for

some

property?

be

ou resi t involve den d. ce. in

departme nt. wi th of

deck,

a n d “,

t h cons truct le as

increase An involve an

building

waterfront

residential

estimate.

the this question. would porch

to

to

property, systems.

add

the

t h e

of this describe

now,

access

VARIANCE

accomplished the beginning at to on add to your there is demolition

from

and

to

on septic

development

height cannot the Committee

permit

new

ANYTHING garages,

dwelling,

permission

in it you

to

a

a

build decks,

ALL proposed addition to

requires

an

planning additions,

or made

you

a

or

business,

only

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 C.

answer to this be the same question will currently and are vacant, you planning section 10 would be recreational in “vacant be “residential”

walls did

For

If

with

n

on have

Please

When

lake.

not you

other

you

add is

columns.

construct

uses: most

the is

structures: there is

buildings

retail

is

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

question

are If you includes

n

demol

buildings:

existing 18 months?

supply: water from

of

If

construction:

This

If this although

Structure:

it

All proposed

walls. that,

and

ANY

Generally, the land be to described section 13 would

structures: “yes”

a

This

residential, are

proposing to in separate

is

in

use

SOUTH

Planning

buildings of your property.

Uses: example.

existing

or

of

20)Date

Length

land

19)Date

there

“yes”.

lf

e.g.

Docking:

residence.

on

is

Uses:

and

OF

Development: include anything

of

basement

18)Uses would space.

a

find

Demolition: instances, existing of

are you information

Description

question

1 7)Raising

Proposed but if. for then the

described

Description structure from the

question

Existing

Parking water.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 252 of 368

Drainage:

most

a

aware

Is

speci?c

the

there

has

the

if

known,

been

zoning

property,

Has

a

currently

provide

for

an

Must the

be the

front

system,

FOR amended

for

consent

of

of

a

detailed,

accepted.

profess dimensions

a a

application it or

can

commissioner

with show not be

on

on

may

the

with

(severance)

deal

there

VARIANCE

in be

were.

of

oaths

signed

of front

and

accurate, onal to

f f

t b a y

s

ase

on the property? other special pe r the seller prob will mi ably ssi on the property, ple variance

owner,

granted of any

to

but

MINOR

subdivision or information)

or the sign application,

in

will

as

constructed

granted the of

new

importance contract do not

a

variance aware

be

this

severance

variance the details

signed

application, sign must

been

sewage

application

have

private

APPLICATION C. P.13

1990,

minor a probably are If you

previous and what

been will by—law.

ever you

be that

application can help

there

will

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

ditches

answer

Agreement Indemnify: to this done before submitting as owners commissioners. All has been appointed.

not

but

to this.

the

there number

of

of

SOUTH

Planning

a is current number. (Staff

consent:

etc.?

there

cases

OF

We cannot stress the enough You not do need to necessarily sketches that drawn are not to scale, drawn neatly (PLEASE USE RULER), A

SKETCH:

sketch.

If

variance

owner

yes: If application

for you

Minor time

variance:

If there the file

indicate

yes:

If

for Application for the property?

Are drainage,

in

natural

Septic:

TOVVNSHIP

Page 253 of 368

'

x‘

——

(LT) . ….. .. .. .. . .. . … . . … …..

/3/3R T 7 236 PLA N 7 BR

,1

36g39_0203

.~

4‘/7’/;~"?

S5////&’i‘7

.4/1;;

/M

Ff

.4 7:/5/M"/5 4'24/M

41:‘/.:? LAW/V

m

9'7)/-}/H}/‘5

s mra»-m5

Pr/J:.7F:0 ;9r/MEA/*7/c.«z/.a

?u///4//:‘

‘“

Amt,

/v; IFTAL

6’/‘E/Fl ’

M/U00/{V

“’“

“M/‘:7

Cw’/c A?/JRES7’

.._p]N

…………………………

I//-/V 71

_

/".

Page 254 of 368 -. Holding

'

I

~

'

I i ‘_

Yznk

At;

_ , 5_<)Hamu»;

I

:

V"

BC

Cluckud

E-5 :

Hommvs CHIT SURVEYO LA.ND_ TY

AP

Found Survey Wood Stake Subject To

{g’§’f_9§g§‘3R9

NSHI P

Land Surve Ontano RS v.
yors -‘vv.hopkInsch1tty. PROJE 534436 “ORR” 90”” com LOT CT 3 K’”G37?:lN?6’0§’)T TOW 3 3a4_35’3 (673 F”

Chief:

"

“u

Inslmmml:

S/T

—I— VS

LEGEND:

DATE: MAY 6. 2021 Party

'

I

/_

THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEYA TO BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE S THE TITLE BLOCK.

NOTE:

.,\

my

Page 255 of 368

“; Township

of Bedford

0

10

20

30

40

‘.

2

/1.

//

/

I

“’

/

/

/

./

/// // ,,

’/

/-’/’”

,

/

_

\

2,

5*

HOPKINS CHITTY LAND SURVEYORSINC. -2020

10metres

SCALE–1:500

COUNTY of FRONTENAC

_—

~—-<

"

23

"

\

\ \

PIN 36233—016-8 (L?) M’” Boy Lot 1

Sometres

\

\

.\

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

c(oe°>?T Geographic

\s

\

TRAILER LOTS ON MILL BAY SITE CAMPS INC. BOB’S LAKE CO—OPERATIVE PART of LOT 33 &: 34, CONCESSION'7

SKETCH TO ILLUSTRA TE

ALDER LANE

E STL THI

RO A SS CRO

LAN E

108 THISTLE LANE

LANE

KE ROA LA D ALDER RD B

FS RO

O A K BLUF

O A D UR R

C R OW

¥

O

AD

N LA

E

D

126 THISTLE 116 122 LANE THISTLE THISTLE LANE LANE

THISTLE LANE 92 THISTLE LANE

THISTLE LANE

R

ALDE R

101 THISTLE LANE

145 BADOUR RD

O

U

Inset Inset Map Map

B AD

AD

Bobs Lake IDGE

ROA

D

Crow Lake

Bobs Lake

BUR R

LAWSON LANE

ON WS LA

103 MILL BAY LANE

93 MILL BAY LANE

LANE

242A BADOUR RD

Subject Property

L E AN

BADOUR RD

67 MILL BAY LANE

CO OP DR

MILL BAY LANE

96 CO-OP DR

S LD NA O D

Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity

72 MILL BAY LANE

Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Wooded Area Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland Wetland

52 MILL BAY LANE

Road

MILL BAY LANE

NE T LA

CO

O

P

N LA

MILL BAY LANE

E

38 MILL BAY LANE MILL BAY LANE

Page 256 of 368

MICA PO IN T

RO AD

LA NE

OAD BADOUR R

BADOUR RD

84 MILL BAY LANE

60 MILL BAY LANE

27 CO OP LANE E XI

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

68 MILL BAY LANE

41 MILL BAY LANE

E N LA

Township Boundary

55 MILL BAY LANE

38 CO OP LANE

242A BADOUR RD

Unit

MILL BAY LANE 73 MILL BAY LANE

65 MILL BAY LANE

60 DONALDS LANE

Legend

87 MILL BAY LANE

PE NN Y

BADOUR RD

PL-ZNA-2022-0137 (BOBS LAKE COOP) (FRETTS) CO OP LANE

62 THISTLE LANE

LL MI

Y BA

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

MILL BAY LANE

BADOUR RD

Scale: 1:4,000

EN L FAIRHAV

MICA POINT LANE

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020.

16 MILL BAY LANE

0

AN E

BADOUR RD CON 7 PT LOT 33 RP 13R182 PART 392B BADOUR RD 7 BOBS LAKE BADOUR RD 37 FAIRHAVEN LANE

450 BADOUR RD

50

100

200 m

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-10-07

Page 257 of 368

Page 258 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Minor Variance Application (S. 45(1) of the Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0137, Biro, Bonnet and Kinnie (Bob’s Lake Cooperative), 27 and 38 Co-op Lane, Bedford District

Summary The subject application seeks zoning relief to permit replacement trailers at 27 Co-op Lane and 38 Co-op Lane. This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application subject to conditions, as this application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Limited Service Residential – Waterfront – Special Provision (RLSW-3) Related Applications The subject property is not subject to any other applications under the Planning Act.

Discussion/Analysis Background 27 and 38 Co-op Lane are campsites on one of several properties owned by the Bob’s Lake Co-Operative. The subject property is zoned RLSW-3. The RLSW-3 zone permits a maximum of 52 campsites for recreational vehicles on this specific property. The RLSW-3 zone requires that the replacement of any existing trailer on the property be subject to a minor variance application to determine the appropriateness of the size and location of the replacement trailer.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 259 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0137, Biro, Bonnet and Kinnie (Bob’s Lake Co-operative), 27 and 38 Co-op Lane, Bedford District

Property Description 27 and 38 Co-op Lane are located in the interior of the subject property, on generally level ground. 27 Co-op Lane contains a trailer with a sunroom, two sheds, an outhouse and a holding tank. 38 Co-op Lane contains a trailer, a sleeping cabin, a shed and a holding tank. Summary of Proposal The application is to replace the existing trailers at 27 and 38 Co-op Lane. At 27 Co-op Lane, the existing 18.5 foot by 8 foot trailer would be replaced with a new 18.5 foot by 8 foot trailer. The new trailer would be placed in the same location as the existing trailer, beside the existing sunroom. At 38 Co-op Lane, the existing 18 foot by 8 foot trailer would be replaced with a new 39 foot by 8.5 foot trailer. This new trailer would be placed in the same location as the existing trailer, but its orientation would change slightly. Both trailers would be setback more than 30 metres from the highwater mark of Bob’s Lake, and are far removed from any property lines. Department and Agency Comments Public Services did not provide comments on the application as the property is accessed from a private lane. Rideau Valley Conservation Authority was not circulated the application given the distance of the existing trailers from the lake and the nature of the application. Building Services reviewed the sewage system requirements for sites. 27 Co-op Lane has an existing greywater system and an outhouse. There was no evidence of either system failing. If the owner wishes to use all of the plumbing fixtures inside the new trailer (i.e. the toilet), the owner must apply for and obtain a permit to install a sewage system that complies with current Ontario Building Code requirements. Otherwise, the new trailer will need to have its toilet disconnected and not be used. 38 Co-op Lane has an existing greywater system and a separate holding tank. There was no evidence of either system failing. The owner is encouraged to apply for and obtain a permit to install a sewage system that complies with current Ontario Building Code requirements. Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 260 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0137, Biro, Bonnet and Kinnie (Bob’s Lake Co-operative), 27 and 38 Co-op Lane, Bedford District

Planning Analysis The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal meets the four tests as explained below. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The subject lands are designated Rural in the Official Plan on Schedule A. The type and amount of development on Rural lands must maintain the rural character, natural heritage, and cultural landscape in the Township. The proposed variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan related to development in the Rural area and adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed variance for the replacement trailers maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. The trailers are on two of 52 campsites permitted on the subject property by the RLSW-3 zone. The RLSW-3 zone only permits the replacement of existing trailers through a minor variance application in order to determine the appropriateness of the size and location of the replacement trailer. The existing trailer at 27 Co-op Lane is not located near any property lines and is within the bounds of the campsite defined by Bob’s Lake Co-op. The existing sunroom of the trailer would continue to be setback a minimum of 5 metres from the surveyed right-of-way (Co-op Lane) that crosses the campsite, as required by section 5.6.1 of the Zoning By-law. This means that the replacement trailer would also meet all zoning requirements. The existing trailer at 38 Co-op Lane is not located near any property lines, and is more than 30 metres from the highwater mark of Bob’s Lake. The replacement trailer would be setback more than 5 metres from the surveyed right-of-way (Co-op Lane) that crosses the campsite, as required by section 5.6.1 of the Zoning By-law. The replacement trailer would also meet all other zoning requirements. The replacement trailer would be twice as long as the existing trailer. The additional area would be a living room and storage space. Planning staff have determined that the size and placement of the trailers are appropriate.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 261 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0137, Biro, Bonnet and Kinnie (Bob’s Lake Co-operative), 27 and 38 Co-op Lane, Bedford District

Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land, as it would allow the existing trailers to be replaced with similar sized trailers, in the same general location on the property. The variance is not anticipated to result in any land use incompatibilities between the campsites, the right-of-way and abutting properties. Is the variance minor? The requested variance is minor as it maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The replacement trailers will not cause any negative impacts as a result of their size and location on the subject property.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PL-ZNA-2022-0137, subject to the following conditions.

  1. The minor variance is for an 18.5 foot by 8 foot trailer at 27 Co-op Lane, and a 39 foot by 8.5 foot trailer at 38 Co-op Lane. All locations as per the submitted application and sketches that will be attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
  2. A building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 262 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0137, Biro, Bonnet and Kinnie (Bob’s Lake Co-operative), 27 and 38 Co-op Lane, Bedford District

  1. For 27 Co-op Lane, the applicant shall apply for and obtain a permit for a sewage system under the Ontario Building Code, or remove the toilet from the trailer to the satisfaction of the Township.
  2. Minor variance PL-ZNA-2022-0137 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 263 of 368

Page 264 of 368

Page 265 of 368

a

Please

(Le.

What

and

Road/Lane:

indicate

//’\

the

nearest

to used

Cl

Yes

whether garage.

on

.

the

use

relief

the

9

shed,

there

uses

/ are

etc.)

any

with

land‘?

EXISTING

No

buildings

M

or

3

A<.L—E§‘

the

the facilities

Zoning

on

the

parking from

s u b j e c t

L-P;v)<‘.’

Yes

’%(a_,

D

of

‘Kenna/-eta

structures

indicate these

road?

provisions

of

D

M/\

W

VARIANCE

lT~:TF)“

MINOR

road/lane):

FOR amended

3

(on

as

/ S‘

only, please distance

El

maintained

S the

\rvnP€Q\»vnC?uV

comply

1’-‘«n,<>.M

F‘?»(>rv\

By-law:

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 C.

Zoning

by water approximate

is

lZYes

municipally

subject

the

V‘/\

LAr\3—h

the

IX No

of

and

property

road.

used

a

uoé

L‘./§;)€

front on road?

\

the

subject

Wu

cannot

(0

from

land:

I 3

of

p4—3<’aa€\€I\TTY

3;“;

M-V

public

subject to be

existing

or

the

of

proposed

maintained

8\§’:ill—‘—-IA);

are

of

the

property

FT-

why

/’Y\

extent

. q

and

D

subject

@_

B

area

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act.

\x) K \——S‘

3

and

SOUTH Planning

the

«.3

OF

of

depth water): gee’);

zoning

13

subject privately

residence.

the

If access facilities

Name

OR

the

reason

The

Does

nature

The

(lo:

current

The

Depth:

(on

frontaga(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 266 of 368

Line

from

if

from

it

14.Are

to

The

be

any

uses

to

building(s) built the on

.Pc’P)“o’\J

proposed

one

Hig

of

is

story)

Area

two

Water Mark (If applicable

Setback

1 3.

or

Dimensions Floor

story

Lot

Line

from

Line

from

Building

Lot

Lot

of

indicate

Side

Setback

Rear

Structure

answer

residence)

of

the

Setback

Front

Height

(Also

if

Setback

Type (E.g.

the

1 1

OF

SOUTH

yes,

subject

is

Plannlng

T7(Yes

structure(s), or subject land?

/49/

of

(1)

item

TOVVNSHIP R.S.O.

or

No

additions

‘$2<J€’_¢_IrJC’:-

(2)

EACH

land:

for

Act,

FRONTENAC

to

existing

or

.1

N

building (3)

FOR amended

buiiding(s)

Dg I

as

structure

APPLICATION P.13 C.

or

indicate:

NIINOR

structure(s),

(4 )

VARIANCE

Page 267 of 368

story

NOTES:

If

Do

your

yes,

is

story)

it

of

one

to

plans please

14

OF

SOUTH

is yes,

Planning

Q I R4

.

include provide

‘1

h”

details:

any

setback

the

(2)

proposed

of

on mark

existing

relate building.

and

addition,

FOR amended

(3)

structures?

or

El

Yes

in di ca (4 te: )

VARIANCE

stmcture

MINOR

lane, the setback same. the CONSTRUCTION NEVV

building

as

a private be will the to

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 G.

waterfront, water high question in this the completed

on

DEMOLITION

from required total size of

is

-baA$_AJJ(’

26

p_¥{

F’?

4’

R,‘

each

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act.

(gr

Q

for

O

I‘)

I C.

Y-rb

X

'

“”\

,3

‘v\

property

0? \

“J6/’

fg

Qlxie,

/1 L;

9*3‘

Prww

iIL.4u&un.4a.,

E

S’€/=\«Y’§,(s>P;/L(

(1)

item

subject and the dimensions to the NOT

If the line The

Mark

from

if

and

lot

applicable)

hr

Setback Vvater H‘gh

Line

from

Line

from

Line

from

Building

two

Outside

or

indicate

Dimensions Buildinglstructure

(Also

of

Lot

Setback Slde

Height

Lot

Lot

Rear

Setback

Front

answer

Structure residence)

of

the

Setback

Type (E.g.

15.If

TOVVNSHIP

Page 268 of 368

Is

sewage

storm

drainage

land

is

i_A

provided

‘E£

sewage system,

water a privately means:

the

r

a

to

the

;\JO

by

sewers.

subject

were

current

encroach

owned

provided

ditches.

and

to

swales

by

subject

land individual

or

by

other

the

Yes

Yes

a

and

opera ted lake.

means?

AT

lvuR i~\® :I:

a publicly owned or communal

N/A

by

well,

owned

N o

N o N o N o

Y es

land s:

CI

:7

1;]

El

D

VARIANCE

subject

continued:

on

El

L]

a publicly or communal

S’€f/*W<—

operated

the

land individual

have

<_An~5

land

constructed

owner:

Yes

NIINOR

L1 Yes

D

FOR amended

‘)‘é)_)‘®

_

structure?

as

w%‘’’\/

existing

/F¥C»A~«J’:\

of

the

//\1Du1Hx\o/~-t.

is

and

by

the subject operated

uses

锑t

privately

disposal

[<_~£

owned

provided

(*

existing

and

bedro

structure system?

of

an

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

development?

of

structures

acquired

or septic

plumbin

number

i’7&_+

was

existing

RAISING

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

proposed

addition

in

in

in

the

details:

the

SOUTH Planning

buildings

/ A

that

H

means:

e

of

i<+)

.?.ue,<.

time

existing

UUO‘-«<—’\

other

whether

Indicate

or

of

whether

the

system, or other

length

subject

lv\A-I

the

VVill

(d) t

Increase

(c)

on

Increase

(b)

uses

provide

Increase

the

OF

include

(a)

operated privy,

water body,

Indicate

.The

date

20.The

21

date

plans please

are

your

yes,

What

If

Do

19.The

1 8.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 269 of 368

please If known, under Section

*“Note:

*”

to

location of

of

all

a

to

distances

importance

property

The

land

HAVE

abutting

on-site to be varied, and should IS

river

and abutting REQUIRED be prepared

Show

the file

an

file

e.

lands.

as

distance

a

AT

ever

the

been

betvveen bridge or

including

THE

of

number

the

as

the

land

w o o de d barns. signi fican as t

applicant’s

of

PA G E.

and

of

Plan ning

the subject buildings, wetlands,

on

crossing.

subject

location

and fields septic The is SKETCH and neatly accurately

wells. shown. carefully,

be

owners’

to

OF

THE

subject

the

railway

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

the

under

MINOR

TOP

of

FOR amended

and artificial features land. include Examples or stream banks, barns, these of features from

such

subject

as

application

land

number

ARROVV

following:

the

land has Variance).

give

of

APPLICATION c. P.13 1990,

subject

the

natural subject

distance

all

to the ditches,

of

(neighbours’)

landmar

or

point.

line

of

NCRTH

the

give

lot

A

showing

please

is

subject (Minor

please

Consent.

the Act

dimensions

yes,

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.s.o.

reference

buildings.

and

NIUST

submitted

is

NNO 27

is

whether Planning

25

L’)<No

The location approximate the is land that adjacent watercourses, drainage wells and tanks. septic lines.

The

township

location

The

nearest

boundaries proposed

The and

be

item

SKETCH

must

Yes

indicate the of

.

SOUTH Planning

the subject Subdivision

OF

question

THE

SKETCH

A

answer If the the application.

CJ

43

to

whether of Plan

Yes

a

application

answer

El

of

indicate

If the the

of

Please approval

TOVIINSHIP

Page 270 of 368

this

application fee.

is

OF

SOUTH

a

limiting engineers.

Council’s

consider

and

and application. or any

necessary

professional

expenses

application.

Board

the

reimburse

that

as

Township

or

and

shall

south

the other

technical advisable

include

indemnify including court or

FOR

MINOR

and

to

more

fees the advisors

all expenses tribun al

mu icip alit

expenses

for

as the properly

and

administrative

municipality fees any

w he re

represe nting

VARIANC E

Variance Minor Township and. for the purpose

Frontenac

amended

this in of the property

of

INIDEIVINIFY

P.13

A

of

that

before

Applicant

OF

DAY

at

or

“t

all

EXDIFES

Township Anril

for of

to

statements be ving

it to

OF

the

Agent

/1

be

‘l7 7r‘l9:

such

of The

OF

of

C

it

is

.20

O 1,_ré\

n

32953

C

COUNTY

£3

I

QC)

at

w it th h, e

E

.

OF

Age nt

H~l<— this L force and I make

Authorized

same

and

<1

<’(X‘C\C‘n

.20

THE

or

the

true

A

been complied be represented application: the

of

(IN

are

Applicant

“EA

FRONTENAC

5‘

or

have with

K./<LI~.l—n/tum/Q application that knowing

OF this

(\

requests attend or connection

Signature

Act.

SOUTH

true

in

and

FRONTENAC

contained

Province the Corporation of South Frontenac.

etc..

Hannah.

TOVVNSHIF’

Authorized

. 19/

until

application proceeding in

the

that,

$€FTtlwB

SOUTH

process

agrees

Evidence <;f;§”\l:fe_<:‘areca

Iy

the

v\Al”\WlaQ

DAYOF

commissioner,

Ontario.

a

rrle

further administrative

obligation other

Micrrelle_l<all-ierine

<9—¥+V\

Cornrnissio

THIS

DECLARED

Signature

or

TOVVNSHIP

conscientio

declare

cLatlj__and~,

declaration

under

Q7

THE

X"l‘zZ€>i-f-tax.)

solemnly

l.

THIS

AT

Owner/Applicant/Agent no continuing or court any

have

DATED

Board

will

The

and Owner/Applicant/Agent further to agrees provide the municipality, upon request a has been the Ontario with and to application appealed Municipal deposit (over Board. which time time and application fee), from municipality from to charge fees the may, any ex exceedpe to the municipality order process the application. such appeal expenses If in ns shall the difference forthwith billed the with upon Owner/Applicant pay being by municipality. es month overdue than 30 of annum) on accounts more days, per per 1.25°/o (15°/2

The

the

information

to

TO

c.

APPLICATION

1990,

recorded representatives the enter onto subject development.

the

payable

other

fees

to agrees to process Ontario Municipal the to support

foregoing, such and lawyers such acting reasonably,

the decision

the

before

absolute discretion the application.

planners,

Without

proceedings defend

The Owner/Applicant/Agent incurred by the municipality

may

R.$.O.

AGREEMENT

Act.

FRONTENAC

agrees

that proposed

cheque

Planning

Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees The accurate. Owner/Applicant/Agent Conservation appropriate Authority, the of for appropriateness site the

The

Attached to the application

TOVVNSHIP

2-020sketch l,<l

etch for Building Permit Applicotion Scale: r:

,.P&

IAAO nretres

\

tiater’$ sdge

-:$1’l&

q’f i51*uuu

-s

r-

hiqlrcr

)r

o:

Lrr

rJl

I

LOT

(O

orvcE’ssrofv

-l

fi -\

r

-s

}} Z

af

s0uTl$

FRANTENAE

{ gaographre fl*wnship

N

-1.

ttARr

I

(Jr

:a

PI-AN

1.iR*5650

LS

$1 Ot

($

.€ll,h, EAUfiS$I:

P dr,ry,.

t

f (’’ \t?_.Rn PL/1^l r r
Lt g

’lhis is i’lLl]” o Pion r:f Survey sncl shotl nclt be useci except f<;r the pur"pose indieoted in ihe title bi,-:cx. ’lhis sketch is orotected by Copyright (fr l’his sketr;h is not on originol copy urriess ernbossed by sr.rrveyor’s seol

1

C L A N il Y &

F{$FKINTJ

OlJ TAIt I O LA N O .TUR YE YC)R 5 NAP,..tiEA Ol{‘iAltI0

2021

2o2r Page 271’i'r’Y of 14’ 368

2020sketchLdt

Page 272 of 368

|:

'

-“Ta

Page 273 of 368

Page 274 of 368

SLOPEAND EROSION ASSESSMENT 38 MURRAY LANE TOWNSHIP, SOUTH FRONTENAC ONTARIO Our? REFERENCE No. 22—O5lO

The slope was surveyed using a 30-meter The results are summarised on the section

It is anticipated

that any development

will be founded

on bedrock.

The bedrock

at the site is

The property features a plateau overlooking a rocky foreshore and waterfront. The slope is controlled by shallow/outcropping quartzose metasediments and rises through an elevation of i0 metres or so above the lake level at a steady rate of 350. The shoreline and lot are vegetated with established mixed forest including birch and cedar. Some gunstocking is observed on the slope.

3.0 DISCUSSION:

The slope and building site feature outcropping bedrock. measuring tape and a Suunto MC—2compass with a clinometer. presented on Drawing No. lzl.

The site is located on the shore of Thirty Island Lake and is accessed from Murray Lane. The subject lot features some 60 metres of waterfront and is approximately I75 metres—deep. The lot features a terrace and a prominent outcrop; the outcrop has been partially removed to provide for a single—familydwelling. The elevation difference from the roadway to the take is approximately TOmetres. In addition to a singlefamily dwelling, an onsite sewage system and staircase to the waterfront are proposed, and dock facilities are anticipated. is underway by the owner’s hand, an interpretation is A plot plan for development attached.

2.0 BACKGROUND & OBSERVATIONS:

This letter reports the results of a geolechnical assessment carried out at the above captioned property. The subject property includes waterfront on Thirty Island Lake. Thisassessment is intended to assess the hazards to the property, based on a site visit conducted on May 20"”, 2022, premised on a TOO-year serviceability requirement under the provincial Natural Hazards Policy.

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

RE:

SrEvEMITRO

May 31, 2022

755 Baker Crescent Kingston, ON K7M6P5 Ph: (613) 634-4357 Fax: (613) 634-4353 Email: concorde@kos.net

Page 275 of 368

Eave trough is recommended to preserve the grade should be directed away from the slope. adjacent

the foundations. Discharge from

~

We trust that this report is to your satisfaction. this submission, please contact our office.

in accordance

with Section

R. David Oliver. P.Eng.

Yours truly. CONCORD ENGlNEERlNG

Should you have any questions or concerns regarding

Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the lot may be developed 3.l of the Provincial Policy Statement as concerns sloping terrain.

The site is limited in extent, by sloping ground, granular soils and the adjacent lake. Recommendations provided in this report to address these limitations as regards the proposed development of the property. We do not anticipate any problems with erosion or global slope stability from building or retaining works bearing on bedrock as described. The stability of the slope is sufficient to support a reduction of the typical l5-metre setback from top of slope to 6 metres.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS:

Preservation of the shoreline and foreshore vegetation is consistent with provincial policy. if disturbance is necessary measures to re-establish the vegetative cover should be implemented as effectively and soon as possible to avoid undue erosion.

downspouts

designed

Footings bearing on the bedrock scaled and cleaned of weathered and disturbed material may be for an allowable bearing pressure of 5OOKPa. Settlements for footings founded directly on bedrock should be negligible. The bedrock is not regarded as frost susceptible. lf sloping bedrock is encountered footings should be pinned using T6” lengths of l5M bar embedded iO” into the underlying bedrock spacing of dowels will depend on site conditions. Similarly, footings for access stairs should be pinned to bedrock and supports properly braced.

The granular soils once disturbed are considered prone to erosion. During construction control measures such as silt fencing at the crest of the slope are recommended. The performance of control measures should be monitored and additional efforts taken as warranted. Disturbed areas should be restored and seeded or replanted to promote re-growth, as soon as possible following completion of the work.

Reference No. 22-0510

Page 276 of 368

¥

Inset Inset Map Map GE LA N E A RO

RL

L ANE

1650 WESTPORT RD

E

N

Thirty Island Lake

A

P OLI L

PL-ZNA-2022-0139 (MITRO)

E NR Y AN

L

Thirty Island Lake

LAN E

S A L N

MC N IC

L HO

B OCK LA N E BA C

S

E

E

V TE

MURRAY LANE

S DU D GO L L ANE MINER LAKE

T

HE

WHITE

RT

G IN

ROAD

O TP ES W

SP E

D

YOU N

39 MURRAY LANE

MURRAY

Legend Subject Property

LANE

Township Boundary 32B MURRAY LANE

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

396 STEVE BABCOCK LANE

Wooded Area Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland Wetland

WILSON RD

Road

492 SPERLING LANE

SPERLING LAN E

Page 277 of 368

451B SPERLING LANE 496 SPERLING LANE

391 SPERLING LANE

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

Scale: 1:2,000 0

25

50

100 m

511A SPERLING LANE

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83 WILSON RD

Date: 2022-10-07

Q U I NT E C O NS ER V AT I O N - P L AN N I NG A C T R EV I EW QC File No. PL0298-2022 Municipality:

Township of South Frontenac

Landowner:

Stephen Mitro

Location:

38 Murray Lane

Roll #:

10290200400930400000

Application Description:

Minor Variance Appl’n File No. PL-ZNA2022-0139

Part Lot 8, Concession 3

Bedford

Requesting a reduction in the minimum setback from the high-water mark of Thirty Island Lake from the required 30 metres (as per Section 10.3.1 of Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75) to 21 metres. Additionally, the application seeks a variance to Section 5.8.2.b. of the Zoning Bylaw to allow a reduction from the required 15 metre setback from the top of bank adjacent to the slope to a setback of 6 metres from the top of the bank adjacent to the slope. The proposed variance will allow for construction of a 1,350 square foot dwelling, including an attached deck.

Feature:

Thirty Island Lake Planning Act - Natural Hazard policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and Quinte Conservation Planning Act Review policy Conservation Authorities have Provincially delegated responsibilities to represent Provincial interests regarding natural hazards under section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (2020). Natural hazards include areas subject to flooding, prone to erosion, dynamic beaches, and unstable bedrock. Generally, the policies of the PPS direct development to areas outside of hazard lands. A Slope and Erosion Assessment prepared by Concord Engineering, dated May 31, 2022, was reviewed in support of the minor variance application. As per the assessment, proposed development will be founded on bedrock resistant to erosion and stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 years. The consultant suggests that a 6-metre setback from the top of the slope is sufficient for the proposed dwelling.

Comments:

As per the drawing included with the Slope and Erosion Assessment, the top of the slope is approximately 15 metres from the seasonal high-water mark of the Lake, with the additional 6 metre setback from the top of the slope it is understood that the variance will allow for the construction of a single-family dwelling inclusive of a deck located 21 metres from the seasonal high-water mark of Thirty Island Lake. As a result of the findings from the Slope and Erosion Assessment by Concord Engineering (May 31, 2022), staff are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with section 3.1 of the PPS.

Ontario Regulation #319/09 (Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses The subject lands lie within the regulated area of Thirty Island Lake (by virtue of Ontario Regulation #319/09 – Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses). Please note that the owners will need to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to development (construction / filling/ excavation/ site grading) within 30 metres of the top of the slope adjacent to Thirty Island Lake.

Page 1 of 2

Page 278 of 368

Quinte Region Source Protection Plan Quinte Conservation provides Risk Management services as prescribed by the Clean Water Act, 2006 on behalf of member municipalities. Part of this is reviewing building and planning applications to ensure no new significant drinking water threats as outlined in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are created. Policies for significant threats in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are not applicable as the subject property lies outside of an intake protection zone or wellhead protection area for a municipal drinking water system. As such no Section 59 Clearance Notice is required.

Planning Act - Natural Heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement Section 2.1 of the Natural Heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement protects features including (but not limited to), provincially significant wetlands, significant wildlife habitat, significant woodlands, and significant areas of natural and scientific interest. The subject lands do not lie within a Provincially Significant Wetland, or within an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest. Note that, the landowner is responsible for ensuring that endangered species are not harmed as a result of any proposed development on the subject lands. The Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA, 2007) applies to all proposed development. Species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened on the Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) list are protected under the ESA, 2007. Section 9 prohibits killing, harming, harassing, possessing, collecting, buying, and selling etc. of species listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened on the SARO List. Section 10 prohibits the damage or destruction of the protected habitat of species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened on the SARO List. For further information on species at risk, or to determine what species may be present in your area please consult the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks or visit their website at https://www.ontario.ca/page/species-risk. As per the Slope and Erosion Assessment, prepared by Concord Engineering and dated May 31, 2022, Quinte Conservation has no objection to the minor variance application. Final Comments:

A permit will be required from Quinte Conservation prior to any development within 30 metres of the top of the bank adjacent to Thirty Island Lake. This includes the dwelling subject to the minor variance application and any other development proposed within 30 metres from the top of the slope.

October 17, 2022 Date

Sam Carney Planning Technician And: Catherine Sinclair, Regulations Officer

Page 2 of 2

Page 279 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Minor Variance Application (S. 45(1) of Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0139, Stephen Mitro, 102902004009304, Portland District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application for zoning relief for a seasonal dwelling, subject to conditions, as this application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zoning Relief Requested for Dwelling Sections 5.8.2(a) and 10.3.3 – to permit a seasonal dwelling to be setback a minimum of 21 metres from the highwater mark of Thirty Island Lake, whereas a minimum 30 metre setback is required for all buildings and structures. Section 10.3.3 – to permit a seasonal dwelling to establish a minimum 21 metre front yard, whereas the RLSW zone requires a minimum 30 metre front yard. Section 5.8.2(b) – to permit a seasonal dwelling to be setback a minimum of 6 metres from the top of bank, whereas a minimum 15 metre setback is required for all buildings and structures. Related Applications The lands are not subject to any additional applications under the Planning Act.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 280 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0139, Stephen Mitro, 102902004009304, Portland District

Discussion Property Description The vacant 1.5 hectare (3.7 acre) property has frontage on Thirty Island Lake and on Sperling Lane. It is unofficially accessed from Murray Lane. The lands consist of several high ridges separated by valleys leading from Sperling Lane to Thirty Island Lake. The shoreline consists of an approximately 10 metre high, steep slope. A portion of the ridge along the shoreline at the northeast corner of the property was removed to create a level area. Summary of Proposal The owners propose to construct a 1,350 square foot, one-storey seasonal dwelling, and a sewage system. The dwelling would be located in the northeast corner of the property, setback a minimum of 21 metres from the highwater mark and a minimum of 6 metres from the top of bank. The dwelling would result in 0.8% lot coverage. The dwelling would be serviced by a new sewage system to be setback more than 30 metres from the highwater mark. A driveway will be constructed from Sperling Lane following the valleys on the property or a right-of-way will be sought over Murray Lane. The variances are being requested to make use of the existing cleared area and to avoid the valleys and the high ridges on the property. Supporting Documentation A Slope and Erosion Assessment (Concord Engineering, May 31, 2022) was submitted in support of the application. The consultant assessed the shoreline slope for type of bedrock, angle, and stability. The report concluded that the proposed dwelling would be founded on bedrock that is resistant to erosion and is stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 years, as required by provincial natural hazard policy. The report recommended a minimum 6 metre setback from the top of bank be required for the proposed dwelling, and recommended the implementation of best construction practices. Agency Comments Quinte Conservation reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment on behalf of the Township. They were satisfied with the findings of the report. They have no objection to the approval of the application. Written permission will be required from Quinte Conservation under O. Reg. 319/09 for the proposed dwelling, if the variance application is approved.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 281 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0139, Stephen Mitro, 102902004009304, Portland District

Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. Planning Analysis The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal meets the four tests as explained below. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan related to waterfront residential development, and development adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas. The variances would facilitate construction of a seasonal dwelling on lands that are designated Rural in the Official Plan on Schedule A. The proposed dwelling would be close to a steep shoreline. Section 5.2.4 of the Official Plan states that the Township will direct development or site alterations away from lands identified by the municipality which may be subject to shoreline erosion hazards. This is typically done through the implementation of a 15 metre setback from the top of bank, as required by the Zoning By-law. A Slope and Erosion Assessment was completed that determined that it would be safe for the proposed dwelling to be setback only 6 metres from the top of bank. Quinte Conservation reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment on behalf of the Township, and were satisfied with the findings of the report. The proposed location of the building envelope, and the size of the dwelling, minimizes site alteration required and maximizes the setback of the sewage system from the highwater mark, as intended by section 5.2.7(b) of the Official Plan. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed seasonal dwelling is a permitted use in the RLSW zone. A seasonal dwelling is appropriate given that Sperling Lane is not maintained year-round, and so is not accessible in the winter. The dwelling was designed to maximize its setback from both the highwater mark and the front lot line, and to minimize its footprint. Also, the setback of the sewage system has been maximized from the highwater mark. The reduced setback from the top of bank is supported by a Slope and Erosion Assessment. The proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 282 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0139, Stephen Mitro, 102902004009304, Portland District

Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? The requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The proposed dwelling and sewage system locations in the northeast corner of the property will minimize site alteration and vegetation removal required (e.g. maintain topography, soil mantle and existing vegetation), and minimize or avoid seasonal drainage issues that could be associated with construction within one of the valleys more than 30 metres from the highwater mark. Is the variance minor? The requested variances are minor as they maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and are desirable for the appropriate development of the land. They are not anticipated to impact the existing or planned functionality of the property and adjacent properties. The proposed dwelling would be 12 metres from the eastern property line, and vegetation would be maintained to provide visual screening from the nearest neighbour. Trees and vegetation maintained along the shoreline and top of bank would provide visual screening and buffering to the lake.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PL-ZNA-2022-0139 for the property with assessment roll number 102902004009304, subject to the following conditions.

  1. The minor variance is for a seasonal dwelling. The dwelling is permitted to establish a minimum 21 metre front yard, to be setback a minimum of 21 metres from the highwater mark of Thirty Island Cranberry Lake, and to be setback a minimum of 6 metres from the top of bank. The location of the dwelling on the property must be consistent with the revised Sketch for Building Permit Application received by the Township on October 19, 2022. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 283 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0139, Stephen Mitro, 102902004009304, Portland District

  1. The Owner is required to enter into a Development Agreement to be registered on the title of the property to the satisfaction of the Township to address the following matters and environmental standards of the Township: a. Appropriate erosion control measures (e.g. silt fence, straw bales) must be used during construction and until the site is stable and revegetated. b. Roof runoff will be directed away from the shoreline of Thirty Island Lake and neighbouring buildings and structures, and discharged to natural or constructed leaching pits/areas to maximize infiltration or onto coarse rock rubble splash pads to reduce the velocity of runoff. c. A natural vegetated buffer must be maintained in its natural state within 30 metres of the shoreline, except in the immediate area of the building envelope.
  2. A building permit is required for ALL proposed demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac.
  3. Minor variance Pl-ZNA-2022-0139 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 284 of 368

.~:

Page 285 of 368

Page 286 of 368

reason

of

Please

(I.e.

/Vhat

and

are the

indicate

residence,

be

subject to

public

I

mm”

uses

used road.

whether

:?Yes

garage,

there shed,

etc.)

are

the

on

the

comply

any

EXISTING

land?

is by water approximate

Yes

rnunicipally (‘I

Zoning

<7<+ mdw».

the

please

buildings

distance

only,

No

maintained Fl

the

-Hui

with

FOR

rm

or

the

facilities

Zoni ng

close

the

the

from

parking

on

/ru

I45

VARIANC E

1:1 Yes

-+92

of

3 am

.g<

structures

indicate these

road?

provisions

of

MINOR

road/lane):

amended

W2

(on

as

B)/~IEV\IZ

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 C.

4:+m+~c

cannot

40

from

subject

R.S.O..

subject

a

§H~-44

use

R’

rlNo

of

property and

road?

front

.r\€/

relief

the

land:

of

Act,

FRONTENAC

\«u—,w

the

subject

/i1..v’—,‘b.<3*¥-r-\

existing

or

the

):c/«.2

nearest

used

to

00* “‘*’;{/

the

access

facilities

lf

Of

the

proposed

4; property

the

42.3J CI-u—

extent

of

and

area

SOUTH Planning

3~I:O\

OF

maintained

RoadlLane:

DA

why

<-(:,\ w

the subject privately

a

and

35

l-_C4\o«né.—

Name

Does OR

The

“Ha.

»}

nature

zoning

farm

depth water):

?/O S‘ current

a$k<\»..

The

Va

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSI-IIP

Page 287 of 368

If

answer

'

d”

of

Bu

Iding

Line

frorn

from Line

Line

to

Area

14-.Are

to

(’/A

13.The

uses

High

of

be

any

building(s) on the

built

(1)

is

got

x

W

the

I

.

subject

,

L16

@’?es

or structure(s). land? subject

of

@

yes.

V‘ “V2

[058 -mi”

W

7

5/”

/;

SOUTH

Planning for

or

land:

11 No

additions

to

. Z36

.«.

existing

F ’ 7,

fiw’ u

mg‘

(36

0

0””

5 7,‘ .

[Z 6 1

or

as

\

as

‘7 2’ /2

(,

,

buiIding(s)

3194,

or

1.‘*L

32*

26,;

?x

3 5-’.

I

(4)

VARIANCE

structure(s),

D1”/</< 9-“

indicate:

FOR MINOR amended

a. I *

(3)

structure

APPLICATION c, P.13

building

siéé‘

'

‘ill .,( '

(2)

EACH

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act,

R%’&)“’(’ /(’”r:)‘‘’

1 1

OF

$9” .s\

‘%

item

ego / 9—cr,‘r>q-u-RY 1,

proposed

Setback from Wm. Mm (If applicable)

Dimensions Floor

’f

““::;.”, .;:::;~:: s..:;’"

Height

Side

Lot

Lot

Setback Rear

Setback

Lot

Front

from

of Structure residence)

the

Setback

Type (E.g.

TowNsHn=-

Page 288 of 368

If

the answer

Setback

slow

or

indicate have

Lot

Setback Side

Lot

Lot

Real’

Setback

Front

if

of

:2 us story)

Line

from

Line

from

Line

from

NOTES:

item (1)

~

14

SOUTH

is yes.

Qur

dimensions to the

please

plans provide

include

the

and

\

79 5 0‘

\

total

;\~«.,

details:

any

size

is of

from the

(2)

re,/vw“

of

question

completed

this

high

FOR

structures?

a private be will to the

(3)

structure

VARIAN CE

ir<~.? <‘.d ¥vPr‘ 0oo.ceJ,

v/Ves

the setback same. NEVV CONSTRUCTIO N the

or

NIINOR

lane.

amended

building

as

.—,»~r.<*~g-0-n\‘€

existing

mt

on mark relate

building.

and

P.13

addition.

c.

APPLICATION 1990,

water

proposed

waterfront. the

in

on

DEMOLITION

required

setback

property

qg

7/1‘

ll’ the line NOT

I

|

1%

The

subject

one

'

Lt6

each

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

“*7

for

Sbpf

Planning

R63: R0 /1

§‘3\c«‘M/\vé4"

your

If yes.

Do

and

lot

Setback frorn High V\Iater Mark applicable) (If

outside Dimensions Buildinglstructure

(Also

to

OF

r Stru (yE|?:.(|“esideI’:1tcIe’)e ‘3< ct./6

-r

TOVVNSHIP

Page 289 of 368

21

date

the

the

Is

drainage

}:<A«A

storm

that

means:

sewage system,

water a privately means:

time

is

the

existing

,.,

by

»

existing

the

.,

owned

provided

ditches.

to

swales

owner:

structure?

as

or

subject

by

have

other

individual

land

communal

publicly

by

a or

land

3+’)?

the

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

well,

a

and

a publicly or communal

means?

by

owned

owne d

oper ated lake,

lan ds:

R

D

D

[1

Ll

VARIANCE

subject

continued:

on

D

I;

I‘!

D

FOR IVIINOR amended

S‘.<.-32’

constructed

operated

the

land individual

subject

were

and

subject the operated

of

-,.~

encroach

bynthe‘curr’ent

x/6’+C/”’\

sewers.

§

?xtures

bedrooms

structures

to

an

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

development?

of

structure system?

uses

is

and

1‘

and

disposal a privately

provided owned

~-

Siam./rg?»

provided

{X-Jrwc‘, ?‘»"-U-k<A»l

other

sewage

or

whether

Indicate

system, or other

whether

of

operated privy,

water body,

LiS.

length

\Cv.7l’

existing

.was

existing

of

space

or septic acquired

living

plumbing

number

proposed

addition

buildings

land

the

the

I Pr-‘*1‘*1’

subject

on

VVi||

in

(d)

in

Increase

Increase

in

the

(b)

of

(c)

uses

details:

the

FRONTENAC R.S.C). AC1‘,

RAISING

SOUTH Planning

Increase

the

provide

include

OF

(a)

are

please

plans

(.I;""~‘xvs

Indicate

.The

20.The

/‘n/5. 5

date

1 9.

The

your

yes,

Vvhat

If

Do

‘I8.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 290 of 368

Please

“Note:

The the

v)

importance

to

distances

and

is

of

and

be

septic

approximate land that

property

The

lines.

wells

of

township

location

watercourses,

The

iv)

nearest

location

proposed

and

The

boundaries

The

ii)

*"‘

be

item

THE

iii)

souTI-I

Planning

is

No

line

should

to onesite varied,

tanks.

drainage

of

(neighbours)

and abutting REQUIRED prepared

be

?le

subject

including

Examples banks, features

the

barns, from

OF

the

of

l

rail way woode d s,

land

of

barns, signi?ca nt as po ssi ble .

applicant’s

th e

an

PAGE.

and

of

a n d

Planning

subject

buildings. wetlands,

the

on

crossing.

subject

location

THE

subject

the

railway

include

features

or

TOP

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

the

under

MINOR

wells, septic ?elds and Shown. The SKETCH is carefully, neatly and accurately

owners’ be

to as

or stream of these

the

THE

of

been

of

FOR amended

betvileen

AT

ever

number

bridge

arti?cial

lands. and land.

as application

land

number

ARROVV

following:

the

the

file

. , . . ..i.e. distance such as a

landmark

point

of

the

an

land has Variance).

give

of

APPLICATION 1990, c. P.13

subject

NORTH

the

give

all natural to the subject river ditches, distance Show

IS

location

or

A

is

subject (l/linor

please

the

showing

dimensions

abutting

lot

land Consent.

Act

please

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.s.o.

HAVE

reference

adjacent

all

a

buildings.

and

NIUST

yes,

Planning

submitted

27

is

whether

25

[)8 No

in

indicate of the

question

SKETCH

rnust

to

43

to

i)

A

answer

application.

SKETCH

If the

the

Yes

If known, please under Section

‘1

or:

whether the subject Plan of Subdivision

Yes

a

answer application.

U

of

indicate

if the of the

approval

TowNsHII>

Page 291 of 368

Page 292 of 368

\

c)

d)

|:|

I: :1

befov-I.

Site

:1

|:| |:]

Directions

Island

to

CHANGE

E]

1003

OF

BUILDING

|:l

for

or the

use

View

lot

or (upon

of

Sydenham

of

III

On

address:

KOH

Bedrooms

or

MOE

El Cl

the

level

Non—ResidentiaI

Residential

to

to

to

Other

Non-Residential

?xtures

1:]

sewage

r

syst em

is

Living

non— residentla|

use

overhead

Non—ResidentiaI

includes

on-site

room

the

s

St. e

‘_ (g_lJlhfro_r1_ tcp7_ac

applicable)

per

what

mark,

Services)

(where system

existing

|:JPlumI:ling

from

as

water

?xtl.lre(s)

high

Building

George

ON, sydenham 613-—376—3027

4432

purlzlmgrr

(Schedule

package:

Planning

approvals sewage

required

2T0

(if

of

if the

ownership)

required land

perforrnance

Agreement

request)

(proof

be

Agriculture, will

OCCUPANCY:

property

or

lane

or

MNR,

page

APPLICATION:

review

Development

ADDITION:

MINOR

E‘

bill

Deed

Authority, calculation

property

Tax

of

VARIANCE

reason

Plan

Survey

[:1

Conservation

Existing

sewage Flow Design Daily and proposed lines, lot from all showing distances Plollsite plan (Schedule 2) lines and all buildings labelled dwelling floors of the all Floor plan layout of plumbing of the and Ilsting type kitchen) bedroom, etc). tubslshowers, (ie: sinks, toilets, letter Authorization Agenllovvfler

application

card)

listed

p)

page

credit

Level

or

ilonls

Project

A separate occupancies of Copy

The

cheque,

Dolded

CHECKLIST

I H

a)

information

the

U

Performance

debit, of

requilc

(cash,

-vill

APPLICATION

FR©NTE’qAC

S O

W};

Review

Z SYSTEM]

payment

completed

Fee

applications

E] 2) |__—_| |:| 1:] |:]

All

SEVVAGE

“’\‘\

‘-"=-9”’

A

f

.

Page 293 of 368

¥

Gould Lake

N LLE

VI

LAN

MC CO

Inset Inset Map Map

1001 ISLAND VIEW LANE

1010 BLUE JAY LANE

E

BELL RD

GO

ORD R O BE D F AD

ROA LD

E ERETT L AN

L AK E

D

D

VANLUVEN ROA

Knowlton EV Lake

U

D

HOLLEFORD ROA

PL-ZNA-2022-0140 (MURPHY) (SANDS) 1003 ISLAND VIEW LANE Legend Subject Property Township Boundary

NA TU R E L AN E

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Wooded Area Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland

1003 ISLAND VIEW LANE

Wetland ISLAND VIEW L

1022 NATURE LANE

Knowlton Lake

Road

ANE

1021 ISLAND VIEW LANE

1023 ISLAND VIEW LANE

Page 294 of 368

1033 ISLAND VIEW LANE

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

Scale: 1:1,500 0

12.5

25

50 m

1047 ISLAND VIEW LANE

1045 ISLAND VIEW LANE

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-10-07

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Application for Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0140, Murphy, 1003 Island View Lane, Loughborough District

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and that the Committee defer making a decision on application PL-ZNA-2022-0140 until such time as the shoreline erosion hazard issue raised by Cataraqui Conservation is addressed to the satisfaction of Township and Cataraqui Conservation staff.

Property Description This one acre (0.4 ha) property is located on Island View Lane and has frontage on Knowlton Lake. The existing 1056 square foot dwelling with 295 square foot attached deck is setback 9.7 metres from the highwater mark. The lands slope gently from the lane to the dwelling. There is a high, steep embankment on the waterside of the dwelling. The dwelling is setback approximately 3 metres from the top of the embankment (i.e. top of bank). Vegetation on the property consists of manicured lawn with several mature trees. The embankment is covered mostly in low-growing vegetation.

Proposal The application is seeking permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property within 30 metres of the highwater mark of the Knowlton Lake. The enlargement would consist of a 750 square foot second storey addition on a portion of the dwelling that is setback 14 metres from the highwater mark.

Preliminary Discussion Cataraqui Conservation staff, in a letter dated October 26, 2022, recognized that the proposed addition would not encroach closer to the lake than the existing dwelling nor does it expand the footprint of the existing building. They recommended the maintenance and

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 295 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Application for Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0140, Murphy, 1003 Island View Lane, Loughborough District

enhancement of a healthy buffer of native vegetation between the dwelling and the shoreline. Although the second storey addition would be no closer to the lake than the existing dwelling, Cataraqui Conservation staff identified that the existing dwelling is within the shoreline erosion hazard. The extent of the erosion hazard was calculated to extend 23 metres onto the property from the shoreline. They noted that there is some evidence of active erosion along the till shoreline and that the depth to bedrock is unknown. Cataraqui Conservation provides technical advice on natural hazards to the Township, and they regulate development in areas that may be subject to natural hazards through Ontario Regulation 148/06. Cataraqui Conservation’s guidelines for implementing Ontario Regulation 148/06 do not permit new buildings or structures (including second storey additions) within the erosion hazard, unless it can be demonstrated that the development is not subject to risk. They recommend that a site-specific geotechnical investigation and slope/erosion assessment be completed by a qualified professional to further assess the hazard prior to any approval by the Committee of Adjustment. The Township’s Official Plan, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, directs development and site alteration away from lands which may be subject to shoreline erosion hazards. The Zoning By-law also contains provisions on this matter. It is appropriate for the Committee of Adjustment to defer making a decision on this application until a site-specific geotechnical investigation and slope/erosion assessment is completed to demonstrate whether the embankment is stable, and whether it would be safe for the proposed second storey addition to be allowed in the proposed location.

Report Prepared By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 296 of 368

Page 297 of 368

Page 298 of 368

nature

The

Please (Le.

What

and

the

area

of

the

property

“%

iE’Yes

whether garage.

vv —

subject to be public

tar;

from

a

of

the

land?

there shed, I:

are No

etc.)

any

EXISTING

E

1,134/K»

5 buildings

«:4

4,u/ic\I6—

/ .»

road/lane): 7

Adt?gi

(E,

VARIANC E

\Jb“<-(’FJ’L

SPACE

MINOR

2

or

of

on

the

from

parking

coT‘ To rr9l6— 1 1 Yes E

.

the facilities

structures

indicate these

road?

Ho\MF st/oay

of the provisio Zoni c1.J»L/L13-)";§ ng 1~(l(wkt/ 30 u/«err:/L41

the

FOR

amended

@

(on

as

only, please distance

maintained Cl No

Ol?gu/K

x/J /A

is by water approximate

E

‘FWD

in/«u>¢~T:v\1«’

municipally Cl Yes

subject

the

Av)

TH with @.;LMe.’#/¢

comply

/V17’!/\ll\J

cannot

By—Iaw:

curuzexxtx’

Zoning

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION c. P.13

co’i’raAe_i,el/Ho

uses

road.

and

property

1

on front road?

use

the

Fr/Low»

cucmzzee

relief

\I/

subject

O<)zL «Pew (Lu:/Uz_zeNT To

used

mom

the

land:

ti;

of

FRDNTENAC R.$.O. Act,

Russ

A.)1A>(

To

the

subject

QQ K40

and

cu/L«LtC_i\1TI,*(

existing

or

the

({L_

indicate

are

nearest

to used

SOUTH

Planning

proposed

maintained

&r:.A?a

Road/Lane:

residence.

the

of

the subject privately

access

facilities

If

Name

OR

Does

a

\€

F‘CTTACr\e

srueovalzo

«s

the

ulxnxiry

corms.-e

thus why

«wt

extent

iL»E,i,\»?.t=

and

zoning

OF

of

depth

water):

reason

The

one1142

*gr/tame;

current

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 299 of 368

Setback

of

Lot

Lot

Line

from

Line

frorn

Line

from

Building

Lot

ctu

re

to

1 1

14.Are

13.The

to

(If

frorn ““a”‘

Area

any be

uses

High

of

building(s) built on the

proposed

applicable)

“"“‘°’

Setback

Dirnensions Floor

is yes,

SOUTH Planning

¢cTrA

subject

\7.aw_

the

iVi’Ves

/

or

,4

:£e<

or

(DEUCE

building

?No

as

FOR amended

12

«J

to

/

\L( ., S

existing

i/L»e.s.\

u/\

or

ms-erelc building(s)

?xqlh

D48

Fr

I

0 ’ ) _ < é 2 .; / » .
) <

( 4 )

VARIANCE

structure(s),

4 0 IM I

Q aa’ Y :;:L’£:U‘L0P’<L 3©’ , 3! [O.‘?i»—« :5:/’%‘?’(G

Lu

vase

indicate:

NIINOR

K $T€v’L~/

Ce Ai/L

(3)

structure

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

Co;:Ac(f‘<E

additions

,_1

land:

ig,((,/,4

‘44

M

iv\

(k\

V

7‘

(0

(‘\V

or s(ructure(s). subject land?

of

lé;

7}+§v\A

Q“"~‘+”

/

57-0

67 E

(2)

EACH

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act.

for

(13%: :f>E»\.cE

item

OF

““Z’.°e‘r’,‘,“’¢’.‘ii3.‘?.,“e!{e’f’,§’"° @919

Height

Side

Setback

Rear

Setback

Front

Stru

answer

residence)

of

If the

Type (5.9.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 300 of 368

If the

Lot

Setback Side

Line

from

from Line

Line

from

to

item

or

two

NOTES:

High (If

1 6.

story)

of

ipzm

please

plans

mm

your

If yes,

Do

7‘

4

1

7- QM

945

§L9—F”‘

wk

1

details:

any

0

DEMOLITION

AIFII/(()L(‘TLOi/Q

provide

S/“o(L\f

‘35

(2)

proposed

(F

ex

of

FOR amended

structures?

structure

Q/¢es

i

VARIANCE

the setback lane. the same. CONSTRUCTION NEVV

or

NIINOR

cmTA6E

(3)

building

as

a private be will the to

r€’«‘rNC»

existing

on mark relate building. and

addition,

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

is on waterfront, property setback the high water from this required in question total size the of completed

Q

include

I\J\

each

FRONTENAC R.S.O. Act.

E-

Q _g'0[ b M

Q5 7,6

Q

subject If the lot line and the 2) dimensions The and the NOT to

Setback from Water Mark applicable)

Outside Dirnensions Buildinglstrueture

story

[?g

q

for

l low!

yes,

I 1/‘

l>rD’\l

is

SOUTH Planning

<§l,Z\

(1)

14

OF

ON (1 . h t . (1 . f B H Islynge 62 (Aleslogindigate

Lot

Lot

Rear

Setback

Front

answer

of Structure residence)

Setback

Type (E.g.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 301 of 368

21

your

the

3

or

Is

storm

P!‘L(}£°tTl;_

privy,

drainage

seso?c

is

the

provided

owned

by

sewers,

§‘fs’'I”/<//

disposal privately a

fixtures

bedrooms

,

the

by

swales

or

gags

have

“(

IVIINOR

E’(es

other

u.~mLi¢

the

VARIANC E

I

op

la n s:

ow ned

ted

era lake,

mu

publicly communal

a

and

subject

aA(3E

or

a

means?

by

El

E]

I

faces L‘:’/id?a;

owned well,

continued:

on

s.ePT.c

individual

land

Yes

?’(es

l

communal

publicly

by

a or

land

subject the operated

meg

to and

__

structure?

constructed

land individual

subject

were

FOR amended

@ ’< Qt.’-’’LVLF_;:<\‘.T 5’ ‘E4/L es aLu>g/)1/ S?/ w \i//\

~ QI’ & l_l Yes

as

‘—C*C”<‘IOl~3 op owner: current

encroach

KM’/A

ditches,

lamp?

provided owned

the subject operated

of

structures

to

om

N

existing

APPLICATION 1990, c. P.13

development?

A?

structure system? szwué by the

uses

is

and

and

acquired

existing

ATQ/L

provided

sewage system, other means:

sewage

whether

vc»

Indicate

F:

operated

LA ic

means:

or

body,

water privately

a

other

that

was

or septic .45. ’l’rv\£

living

plumbing

of

space

«Puumm

number

an

/Li;¢.DI./l5<(’(

of

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O. RAISING

proposed

addition existing

in

in

in

the

details:

the

buildings

land

SOUTH

Planning

flté?/U’\l

7; ear/LS

time

system,

whether

5

of

water

length

of

the the

more existing

lo! ea

date

iww,

subject

on

Will

Increase

((2)

(d)

Increase

(b)

uses Increase

the

OF

use!)

(a)

are

include provide

\E.F’C’{

please

plans

%Fu-Tcr¢is¢_;c> date the

What

Va

If yes.

Do

Indicate

.The

20.The

19.The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 302 of 368

“*Note:

please If known, under Section

The

iii)

The

V)

distances to importance

property

The

is

of

line

to

of

file

an

subject

natural subject river distance

(neighbours’)

the

(

including

THE

betvveen or bridge

land

AT

OF

the subject buildings.

ga ni s fi ca nt

si of ns.

bar

applicants

wetlands. the

on

location

THE

vl fg )

mm a

an d A

of

Pl an ni ng

subject la crossing. nd

the

the railway

TOP

,5

‘:)§

subject

application

the

application

the

VARIANC E

and fields wells, septic SKETCH be shown. The is carefully, neatly and accurately owners’

to as

of

been

the

under

NIINOR

and artificial features land. include Examples or stream banks. barns. these of features from

lands.

ever

number of

FOR amended

application

as

nI‘rLrvr-‘er/&Tv

number

ARROVV

following:

file

land has Variance).

the

the

NORTH

the

abutting REQUIRED be prepared

and

the

of

P.13

distance . . . . ..i.e. point as a landmark such

all the

of

or

A

showing

ditches, Show

IS

abutting

lot

give

subject (Minor

lA<!\l7lI/\CsQO(1>

HAVE

reference

location adjacent drainage tanks.

all

a

give

subject

C.

APPLICATION

1990,

l/L/I/P:

please

land is Consent.

the Act

please

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

dimensions

yes,

and buildings.

IVIUST

submitted

is

No

to on-site be varied, and should

septic

that

approximate

location

location of township

be

Ar"o12nm)é,

boundaries proposed

El

whether Planning

25

is

subject

|1>|/go

27

indicate the of

item

the

SOUTH Planning

Subdivision

OF

question

SKETCH

must

to

the land watercourses, wells and lines.

The

iv)

“*

The and

ii)

nearest

THE

SKETCH

i)

A

$-v9’)4Q~l

answer lf the the application.

.’?’<es

43

to

whether Plan of

Yes

a

application.

answer

W

of

indicate

If the the

of

Please approval

TOVVNSHIP

Page 303 of 368

Proposed rebuild and addition of 25x25 < E

,5!

'

‘§9.‘%Cr‘:<E5i “‘

§

5’:102901005005800

Toc

10.9Mx7.9M

Bi

179 BEATRICELANE

3%

’-’

:

:5 ‘5 < E N

Page 304 of 368

WKID: 4326 Lat/Long A

La” 44'66°64° Lon: 76.5876

Note: All hand measurements

N

County of Frontenac

Highwater mark

‘TopOP emu

Relocated Septic Tanks

10.9MX7.9M

Aggroximate Area Lot addition approve 2022 Plus 179

Garage Built 2016

Beatrice lane as one lot 21235sq m 5.25 Acres 5-

“ii:

“1’

Aggroximate Area 179 Beatrice Lane 4078.51 sq m .96 acres

%i’“-‘iii Scale1: 51,128

Page 305 of 368

Note: All measurements

using mapping tool

Existing Cottage

Septic Bed

Built 1967

Built Dec 2015

7.4m x 13.4m

Existing cottage built in 1969 and out buildings Toc

Garage 10.9Mx7.9M

Cottage .4m x 13.4m

Utility Shed 2.43 X3.65

Page 306 of 368

WKID:4326 Lat/Long A

Note: All hand measurements

County of Frontenac

Current design, same foot print facing the lake along with same dimension of our current deck. Current Shape of Cottage & Deck

§

5

E

2

E E 3 2

E 8

3

5 2 E E

3

additio”

illililllllililiiilliiii

3

§

Pr°p°5ed

q !

' i

I

.:.::;”..:::;::.’:e

,.i:iiillliii|m|’ E

Page 307 of 368

Page 308 of 368

………..…..~……..…….

M…

DEPARTMENT -DLANN’.NG

scum FRONTENAC

TOWNSHIP OF

OCT2 1 2027

CONTRACTOR/HOMEOWNER

60‘Md

eltxoczer

oemng ocnhadxull

Juuwv.

kitchen

TO CONFIRM ROOF PITCH U SPAN PRIOR TO ORDERING TRUSSES

¥

Lake

T RO

D

AD

DE

201 BEATRICE LANE

D

S

RR I DG

E

OA D

RE S LANE

N SE

T S

Bobs Lake

U

D T ROA

AD

AY ROA BUCK B

AY O R

Burridge Lake BU GARRET

HO

NS RO AD BU R

AD STEELE R O

Bobs Lake

Bobs Lake

RO A

D

ROA AW BRADSH

GR E EN B

NE LA DEW

WI

T

T

IT

RO ANDERSON

NORTH Inset A D Map Inset Map Crow

MCNEI L R

PL-ZNA-2022-0141 (SMALLMAN-TEW)

RT RO TPO AD W ES

Long Pond Lake

197 BEATRICE LANE

179 BEATRICE LANE Legend Subject Property Township Boundary Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

Bobs Lake

Wooded Area

179 BEATRICE LANE

Waterbody Provincially Significant Wetland 22 BEATRICE LANE

Wetland Road

171 BEATRICE LANE

BE E RIC AT

LA

159 BEATRICE LANE

NE Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020.

Page 309 of 368

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only. 141 BEATRICE LANE

Scale: 1:1,500 0

12.5

25

50 m

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-10-17

November 3, 2022 22-SFR-MVA-0082 (Bedford) Township of South Frontenac Committee of Adjustment PO Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON K0H 2T0

Attention: Sarah Cadue Subject:

Smallman-Tew, Peter; Application for Minor Variance, PL-ZNA-2022-0141–179 Beatrice Lane, Lot 23, Concession 5; Geographic Township of Bedford, Now the Township of South Frontenac; Roll Number: 1029 0100 5005 8000 0000 ———————————————————————————————————–Dear Ms. Cadue, The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) has reviewed the subject applications within the context of:

The Proposal The RVCA understands this application is to construct a 57.8 m2 addition setback approximately 22 m from Bobs Lake. The proposed addition is to be constructed to the rear (east) of the existing dwelling and will not encroach on the established setback.

Page 310 of 368

The Property The subject property is an irregularly shaped 0.48 ha (0.96 acres), it is understood that a recent lot addition has resulted in a total lot size of 2.53 ha. The lot is indicated as having lot 140 m of frontage on Bobs Lake (Green Bay). The property is developed with a dwelling and attached deck, garage and sheds. Staff from our office participated in pre-consultation site visit in 2019. The lot slopes to the waterfront and is accessed by a stairway. The lot has several mature trees and a steep rocky shoreline. A review of the desktop mapping, indicated the following natural hazards or natural heritage features: -Our office has a regulated flood level of 163.07 metres above sea level associated with Bobs Lake -Bobs Lake is considered to be a watercourse for the purpose of our regulation -The property overlies a highly vulnerable aquifer -Steep slopes may be present along portions of the shoreline A review of our records does not reveal the presence of marine clays, organic soils, or wetland areas. Review Comments Provincial Policy Statement Regarding Section 2.1 our office has no concerns. Regarding Section 2.2 of the PPS, recommendations are provided related to the management of stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion control and maintenance of vegetation to mitigate impacts on water quality Concerning section 3.1 of the PPS our office has no concerns given the location of the proposed addition. Ontario Regulation 174/06 Currently, our office regulates the shoreline of Bobs Lake. Should any development be proposed along the shoreline of Bobs Lake (including, but not limited to, grading, site alteration, dock installation, or erosion protection works) prior written permission is required from our office in accordance with our (Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses) made under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. The development proposed in the subject application does not include any shoreline alteration and is outside RVCA’s regulation limit, therefore written permission is not required from our office under the aformentioned regulation. Bobs Lake-Crow Lake Catchment Report This lot is located on Green Bay in Bobs Lake, the 2017 report indicates that West Basin has a water quality rating that ranges from “Good” to “Very Good”. Few nutrient exceedances, good fish habitat conditions in late summer, and generally clear water contributed to the rating. This

Page 311 of 368

Page 2 of 4

bay is noted to support lake trout thus minimizing nutrient input is important to maintain the habitat conditions of this sensitive species. The catchment report notes that well-vegetated shorelines are critically important in protecting water quality, and habitat conditions and reducing the potential for erosion. It highlights the importance of shoreline protection particularly where water setbacks cannot be met and the role in reducing the amount of stormwater runoff to the lake, this is particularly important on sensitive waterfront properties that have steep slopes or shallow soils. Mississippi Rideau Source Water Protection Plan This property has been identified as overlying a highly vulnerable aquifer as stated in the catchment report and indicated in the Mississippi-Rideau Source Water Protection Plan. These are aquifers that are vulnerable to surface contaminants due to thin or absent soils overlying bedrock that may be fractured. Where these conditions exist, it may be possible for contaminants to enter drinking groundwater supplies. For this reason, care should be taken to avoid land uses and practices that may inadvertently lead to undesirable effects on groundwater. For this reason, care should be taken to avoid land uses and practices that may inadvertently lead to undesirable effects on groundwater. Some best practices that could be considered include: • • • • •

increased well casing depths; increased distance of septic systems from drinking water wells; ensuring wells are located upgradient of septic sewage disposal systems ensuring that wells and septic systems are properly maintained, avoiding the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.

Recommendations Should the Township allow the variance our office would have the following recommendation for conditions of any implementation agreement or notes to be included in any decision:

Page 312 of 368

Page 3 of 4

and future construction) and be maintained in place until vegetation has re-established. This should be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. -Should any work be undertaken along the shoreline of Bobs Lake permits would be required by the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 (“Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses”). Conclusions In conclusion, our office has no objection to the subject application. Please advise us on the Committee’s decision respecting this application or any changes in the status of the application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (613) 692-3571 x1109 should you have any questions. Yours truly,

Sarah MacLeod-Neilson Planner cc –Peter Smallman-Tew, owner

Page 313 of 368

Page 4 of 4

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application for permission to enlarge a legal non-conforming dwelling under section 45(2) of the Planning Act, subject to conditions.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Relief Requested The applicant seeks permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property within 30 metres of the highwater mark of Bob’s Lake (Green Bay). The dwelling is setback 14. 5 metres from the high water mark. A 625 square foot addition, with a 68 square foot covered porch, would be constructed to the rear of the dwelling, 22 metres to the high water mark. The height of the dwelling will also be increasing from 6.09 metres (20 feet) to 7.62 metres (25 feet). Related Applications The lands are not subject to any additional applications under the Planning Act.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The property is located at 179 Beatrice Lane off Green Bay Road and has 140 metres of water frontage on Bob’s Lake. The property has a lot area of 6.21 acres (2.51 hectares) as a result of a lot addition approved in 2022 (file S-22-21-B). The topography is sloped down towards the lake and is accessed by a stairway and consists of exposed bedrock, with scattered mature trees. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 314 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

The property is developed with a seasonal dwelling (cottage) with attached deck, a detached garage, and two small utility sheds. The septic bed was installed in 2015. The existing dwelling is setback approximately 15 metres (49.21 feet) from the highwater mark. The attached deck is setback 14.5 metres from the highwater mark. The 936 square foot detached garage is setback approximately 40 metres (131.23 feet) from the highwater mark. The small utility sheds are located between the garage and the shoreline. The sewage system is located between the dwelling and the lane. Summary of Proposal The existing cottage will be renovated and converted to a year-round home. The rear wall of the dwelling will be partially demolished to accommodate an addition at the rear (east) of the dwelling. The proposed addition will be 7.5 metres by 7.5 metres, 57.76 metres squared. The proposed addition would be approximately 22 metres to the high water mark. At the back of the addition will also be a covered porch that is 6.28 square metres (67.67 square feet). The applicant provided updated building plans on October 21st, 2022, showing a covered porch added to the addition. The proposal includes raising the existing dwelling 1.53 metres (5 feet) so that it will be level with the addition. The proposal includes replacing the current pier blocks to enclose the foundation with a crawl space. This will increase the height of the building from 6.09 metres (20 feet) to 7.62 metres (25 feet). The proposed addition will have an increase in plumbing fixtures and increase in living space. The filter bed of the septic system is proposed to remain the same but the septic tanks on the back of the existing dwelling will be relocated to the back of the proposed addition from the current location. The existing uncovered deck on the waterfront side will also be demolished and reconstructed to the exact same dimensions. There will be no change in its size or location. According to the application, the existing deck is setback 14.5 metres (47.57 feet) from the highwater mark of Bob’s Lake. This structure will not need a minor variance as it will not be getting any closer to the water, increasing in size, or building footprint. Agency Comments Public Services did not provide comments on the application as the property is accessed from a private lane. Building Services provided comments on November 4th, 2022, that the existing sewage system is sized adequately to serve the proposed rebuild of the cottage including the proposed addition, based on the KFL&A permit BE-39-15. A risk of failure due to the age of approximately 7 years of service is unlikely. A site visit to confirm proper use and maintenance will be completed. As such, Building Services has no objection to the approval of the planning application. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 315 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) provided comments on November 2nd, 2022, that they have no objection to the addition to the rear of the dwelling. Recommendations were provided related to the management of stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion control and the maintenance and enhancement of vegetation within the existing setback and throughout the 30 metre setback of the highwater mark from Bobs Lake. These recommendations should be included in any decision. The development proposed in the subject application does not include any shoreline alteration and is outside RVCA’s regulation limit, therefore, written permission is not required from their offices under Ontario Regulation 174/06. Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time this report was written. Planning Analysis The property is zoned RLSW – Limited Service Residential Waterfront in Zoning By-law No. 2003-75, so the dwelling is a permitted use. The use of the property is residential and will not change as a result of this application. Section 5.10.2 of the Zoning By-law states that existing buildings with less than the minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of a waterbody may be repaired, renovated or strengthened to a safe condition provided there is no enlargement of the gross floor area or increase in height. This provision prohibits the enlargement and increase in height of these existing buildings, without seeking permission from the Committee of Adjustment. The existing dwelling was built in 1967 prior to the current Zoning By-law and is setback 14.5 metres (47 feet) from the highwater mark. Through its powers under section 45(2) of the Planning Act, the Committee of Adjustment may grant permission to enlarge the dwelling with the addition of living space and increase in height. The height of the dwelling is proposed to be raised from 6.09 metres (20 feet) to 7.62 metres (25 feet) to accommodate a crawlspace below the existing building. The increase in height of the dwelling is not anticipated to have an adverse visual impact, such as loss of sunlight, privacy, and views, on the properties to the north and south over the existing condition. The view from the lake is also not anticipated to be noticeably different than the impact of the existing dwelling, the enlargement will be visible from the south side of the lake.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 316 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

The proposed addition would be to the existing dwelling. The addition will be one storey, 7.6 metres by 7.6 metres, or 57.76 metres squared. It will be 7.62 metres (25 feet) in height. There will also be a small, covered porch to the rear of the addition. The proposed addition to the dwelling would be constructed to the rear of the dwelling, 22 metres to the high water mark. The proposed addition would be further from the highwater mark than the existing dwelling. Lot coverage of the principal building will increase from approximately 1.1% to 1.4%, which is less than the 5% permitted in the RLSW zone. Bob’s Lake is an at-capacity Lake Trout Lake, which means it is at-capacity for development with respect to additional nutrient loadings which may adversely affect water quality. As such RVCA has provided various recommendations and best practices they felt should be included in any implementation agreement or any decision should the variance be approved. These recommendations will be included in a development agreement that is a proposed condition of approval. The addition is not anticipated to have an adverse visual impact on the neighbouring properties as it would be located at the rear of the dwelling. The view from the lake is also not anticipated to be impacted over the existing condition. Conclusion It is the opinion of staff that it is appropriate for the Committee of Adjustment to grant permission to expand the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property, as described in this report.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 317 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

Recommendation That the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve for application PL-ZNA-2022-0141 for 179 Beatrice Lane, subject to the following conditions.

  1. Permission is granted to enlarge the dwelling on the subject property by increasing the dwelling height by 1.53 metres (5 feet), and by increasing its gross floor area by 625 square feet, with setbacks to be consistent with the application sketch and the Building Plans received by the Township on October 21, 2022.
  2. The applicant is required to apply for, and enter into a Development Agreement that would be registered on the title of the property to the satisfaction of the Township to address the following matters and environmental standards of the Township prior to the issuance of a building permit: a. Maintenance of and enhancement of vegetation within the existing setback and throughout the 30 metres setback of the high water mark from Bob’s Lake. b. Appropriate erosion control measures (e.g., silt fence, straw bales) must be used during construction and until the site is stable and revegetated. c. Any excavated materials will be disposed of 30 metres or more from the normal highwater mark of any watercourse or wetland at a proper disposal site. This shall be to the satisfaction of the Township. d. Roof runoff should be directed to the rear or side yards and to an area of soil depth or containment adequate to allow for absorption, infiltration, and treatment. Collection and management of runoff in this manner helps to control untreated surface water from running overland to Bobs Lake. This assists in preventing nutrients and sediment from reaching these features. This shall be to the satisfaction of the Township. e. Proper decommissioning of the existing sewage tanks and/or their relocation. f. Should any work be undertaken along the shoreline of Bobs Lake permits would be required by the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 (“Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses”).
  3. A building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development, or demolition of existing structures, on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 318 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application (S. 45(2) of the Planning Act) PL-ZNA-2022-0141, Peter Smallman - Tew, 179 Beatrice Lane, Bedford District

Report Prepared By: Sarah Cadue, M.P.L., Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 319 of 368

Page 320 of 368

Page 321 of 368

Committee

Please additional

Rideau

Quinte

Cataraqui

system

Township Minor Minor Minor

is

for

the general

general nature

the the

payable the

Valley

permit

These fees applications

are

Authority

Conservation

Class

Conservation

Conservation

Region

a

(1)

a

A

of

with

and

for

consultation fees prior

Authority

Authority

new

Review a

of of

or the the

on any

Class

to

Fee:

?led

3,

4,

or

this application construction.

2,

chart

5

application

these

stru ctur e

Secretary—

or

( the Separ To ate w ns hi p

agencies

to

sewage

Fee:

Treasurer Note 3 (below ), in cash,

onsite

Admin

submitted

only;

sewage

be

an

review

$97.00 $97.00 $97.00

in

the

building

1 3.

by Townshi Chapter p P. Committee

below

to

with

By~Iaw.

Building

the

the

1990,

appointed

the land, Plan.

referred

of

be

Zoning

Of?cial

use

provided

to Township when submitting Authority, are to

the

Planning $979.00 $1 .343.00 $2,058.00

2022

FRONTENAC OR PEFEIVIISSION

persons Act R.S.O.

this application with the SKETCH accordance with South Frontenac.

be provided for (where applicable)

Conservation

SOUTH

VARIANCE

January.

provisions

development purpose purpose

By—law

and and

copy

perrrlit

system

Performance

combination

I/l/ITH

in than

Variance Variance other

Frontenac

only

South

Variance

of

application).

completed

applicable

the

Zoning

Committee 45 the of

OF

eight of Planning

NIINOR

Updated

FOR

TOVVNSHIP

together FEE in Township of

that a Fee Authority

It is required Conservation payable to

without

TyJ3e:

to

NON-REFUNDABLE

Agplication Variances 1 -3 Variances 4+ building After

Note:

one

a

Section by—Iaw.

is

appropriate intent intent

ofAdjustrnent,

that

Requirements

in

required Committee

It

Is desirable Maintains Maintains Is minor

vary

Adjustment under a zoning

may

of formed from

variance:

by a made

the

Committee

Application

The that

Committee is minor variance

The

APPLICATION

Page 322 of 368

READ shall

THIS

OF

provide

ITEM

SOUTH Planning

in

CAREFULLY

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990, as

FOR amended IVIINOR

VARIANC E

and

as

sealed

outlined

a sketch showing the dimensions the subject of Question 29 of the application. The sketch sho either in or Imperial Metric measures. This sketch. uld is the basis for the analysis Form. the of Minor Variance Committee Adjustment. of lt is strongly recommended that the applicant spen time to carefully and thoroughly d t assemble the data and transfer the data important that the sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measu application which does not include the above required information be may not rement s. the regard, applicant wish may to secure the assistance of a person who drafting of such sketches. A guide to answering the application questions is a tt Collection of Personal a Information c h Personal information herein is requested required under the Planning 1 Act, e This information be will used by the Committee 9 of Adjustment/Land Division d of purpose reviewing 9 the above referenced application, and be made may .0 boards, Commissions, Agencies and Persons having Authorities. an interest i questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed Treasurer the of Committee Adjustment of (F’.O. Box 100, Sydenham, Ont.. 376-3027 ext.2224).

Each applicant abutting lands dimensi ned the Application

PLEASE

TOVVNSHIP

Page 323 of 368

Page 324 of 368

'

of

me

'

space '

extent

hydro

and

the

lines

a lack following

small to due

The

IS

why

requesting

and

zoning

0

to

Seasonal

the

applicable

Not

are

nearest

the

used

subject be to public

V Yes

whether garage.

cottage

wltnin

of

the

the

standard the in

so cottage.

cannot

Zoning

proposed

orooen

rneter as garage line sned

cannot to

etba

oe

there shed,

uses

used road.

D

of

the

No

are etc.)

and

property

road?

any

EXISTING

land’?

water by approximate

is

Yes

subject

the

?

No

buildings

to

or

of

me

of

of of on

facil

the

D

tern

the

Zoni ng

on

s

the

from

parking

Yes

proposed patio f property: lo I The deck

the

the

and

305”‘

VARIANC E

slope

mower.

size

the

laneway.

structures

these

indicate

road?

closer

please distance

only.

Cl

be

top

provisions

the

sq.ft

Ihe The water for lawn ATVs. elsewhere eouc The k

the

to

NIINOR

road/Iane):

FOR amended

11469.98

(on

as

located

storage

from

deck

with

setback as well

comply

and

By—law:

Area:

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION c. P.13

1950,

garage

the

subject

proposed not the to moi the placement of

why

from proposed

use the space

the

relief

the

land:

of

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

§/°’?I%i’i<iet)°rf1maer:r‘ii‘1£i‘iilEcipally maintained

the

or closet

explains restrict

Verona

existing

or

the

relief

of

area

subject

32”“

and

the

mostlv

maintained Lane.

Road/Lane:

Please indicate (I.e. residence,

What

and

of

privately

IVICNI ullen

a

If access facilities

Name

OR

SOUTH

Planning

proposed

of

depth water):

OF

Do3r§3rR§”?‘ui5(iie°gt"Er3/Extgr

location

are

nnaoen

reason

We

nature

UR1

current

accessories

storage

The

The

The

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 325 of 368

Setback

story

or

Indicate

14-.Are

1 3.The

to

be

if

uses

building(s) built on the

al cottage

Mark

from

of

one

to

High

it is story)

Area

tvvo

proposed

any

Line

from

Line

from

Line

frorn

Building

applicable)

season

(If

Water

Setback

Dirnensions Floor

(Also

of

Lot

Setback Side

Height

Lot

Lot

Rear

Setback

Front

answer

Structure residence)

of

If the

(E.g.

Type

m

m

m

AND

subject

m2

subject

?

for

Yes

or

land:

El

No

additions

(2)

EACH

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.0.

K‘-j. cg‘-Iv-V

structure(s). land?

the

3-31

209

5’”

one—stor’y

15.33

'

yes.

“E6

is

SOUTH Planning

_4=¢§.’,n,

2'35

of

or

)

1 1

OF

couage

(1

item

TOVVNSHIP

to

building

existing

or

as

FOR amended

buiIding(s)

(3)

structure

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

or

indicate: (4 )

VARIANCE

structure(s),

IVIINOR

Page 326 of 368

If the

Building

Line

from

Line

from

Line

from

to

item

NOTES:

(If

High

If

Do

Mark

of

yes.

your please

plans provide

include

is

25

any

size of

from

is

for

less

2-5”‘

than story

2

3.9l‘n

of

on

existing

FOR arnended

(3)

or

El

Yes

i

VARIANCE

structure

IVIINOR

the setback lane. the same. CONSTRUCTION NEVV

building

a private be will the to

on,

as

structures?

7,-iv-i

mark relate building.

and

»~

attached

(deck)

1:11

?,M’\

“A

add

*C,»Sv~
, 7,.“ 4),,‘

sketch

one

waterfront,

Q). 13:655.

2%,

Deck

’5‘m

‘See

(2)

proposed

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 O.

the water high this question in the completed

on

each

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

DEMOLITION

required

details:

total

setback

story

K/\

.\vv\

shed

37m

“"|

property

15-5

‘-

3.35rn One

m

‘Q51

a

_

\‘l

.,.3__;=,.?

yes,

SOUTH Planning

Storage

14

OF

7.3m

(1)

subject 1) If the lot line and the 2) The dimensions and to the NOT

applicable)

Vvater

Setback

Buildinglstructure

from

0”’-S_ide

Dimensions

_

lA’:‘:°‘r’;d;fa‘f:°"‘£":°‘fy?”&

Of

Lot

Setback Side

Height

Lot

Lot

Rear

Setback

Front

Structure

answer

residence)

of

Setback

Type (E—9-

TOVVNSHIP

Page 327 of 368

of

Is

No,

storm

other

there

has

is

a

natural

the

was

a

is

was by

existing on

and

well

to

the

In

of

the since

existing

property.

to and

by

swales

or

subject operated

the

land individual

FOR

have

other

land individual

by

communal

the

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

MINOR

communal

a

and

publicly

means?

or

a

owned well,

owne d

ated lake,

oper

lan ds:

W

[9

L? No

$

El

VARIANCE

subject

continued:

on

1:]

El

El

El

amended

publicly

by

or

a

land

constructed

owner:

in

as

structure?

construction

subject

were

current

encroach

property.

ditches,

the

provided owned

the

the subject operated on

on

the

by

structures

June

Water.

sewers,

system

bedrooms ?xtures

property

is

an

APPLICATION F.13 c.

1990,

development?

of

R.S.O.

structure system?

uses

to

in

and

the

disposal a privately

by

or septic

Constructed

of

space

acquired

living

plumbing

number

proposed

owner

private

Act,

FRONTENAC

RAISING

provided owned

slope

septic

provided

private

means: a

by

sewage system,

in

in

in

the

details:

the

buildings

land

SOUTH

Planning

addition existing

remained

that

water privately means:

a

time

cottage

existing

of

the the

purchased

subject

provided

drainage

There

or

is

is

sewage

privy.

whether

Indicate

operated

VVater

system, other or

whether

cottage

The

length

Indicate water body.

.The

the Current

was

The

the

on

Will

Increase

(c) (d)

Increase

(b)

uses

provide

increase

the

OF

include

(a)

date

Cottage

date

What

plans please

are

your

If yes,

Do

21

20.The

‘l9.The

1 7.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 328 of 368

If known. please under Section

**Note:

to

is

The location approximate the land is that adjacent watercourses, drainage wells and tanks. septic lines.

V)

to

distances

property importance

The

The

iv)

be and

of

The location of nearest township location

is

HAVE

IS

abutting

and abutting REQUIRED be prepared

Show

natural subject river distance

all

to the ditches,

of

(neighbours’)

landmar

or

point..

line

lot

of

file

.e.

or

septic

and

of

Pla nni ng

and

nas

of s. sig

barn

applicant’s

wetlands,

the subject buildings,

[and subject crossing.

the ?elds

THE

is SKETCH and accurately

from

OF

location

subject

the

on

railway

the

TOP

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

the

under

MINOR

include barns,

features

The neatly

wells,

features

the

THE

between bridge

Examples banks,

be shown. carefully,

owners’

a

AT

of

been

of

including

number

land

artificial or stream these of

and land.

lands.

as

FOR amended

application

as

ever

number

distance

subject

such

to as

file

ARROVV

following:

the

the

the

an

land has Variance).

give

of

APPLICATION F’.13 c.

1990,

subject

NORTH

the

give

reference

on-site to varied, should

all

a

A

showing

is

subject (Minor

please

Consent‘

land

the Act

please

yes,

or

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

and dimensions buildings.

Vhi)

proposed

boundaries

THE

yes,

The and

MUST

submitted

27

r4No

ii)

be

item

25

subject

whether Planning

w(No

indicate the of

question

SKETCH

must

Yes

43

to

the

SOUTH Planning

Subdivision

OF

i)

**

SKETCH

A

answer If the the application.

El

application.

answer

of

whether Plan

Yes

a

If the the

of

El

of

indicate

approval

25.Please

TOVVNSHIP

tax

cu

Page 329 of 368

Page 330 of 368

to

all

Nature

in on

this

and

are generally

shared

property

this

with

ofthe

of

(not

Minor

planning

zoning

question

should

Form

the

live with

MINOR

they

complete

must

that

private

a

can

others).

after driveways,

by

variance developing

why Ing

in

separ ate postal

VARIANCE

meet add to further

not

that

c a n

the

provide

private

the

requi red an

buildi ng

do to than 3 within 0

this

on to from

accessory

a

an

m

the Township; but lanes

you

of

are

asking rather structure

you 25 be

and

completed.

here

property

be

during appear

even

if

FOR amended

Variance

as

on your staff.

behalf

address,

section,

your

ng

looked

or

see

words

with

are

other you are the water, embankment.

that

’ef:

roads

it

Roads: Municipally maintained that residents maintain themselves

Re

line

parts

number

act

ma

the

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

This is what question asking could be that asking are to you that asking or are to increase the you height that or are a variance to construct you seeking than the building. principal of

example,

Extent

All

You aware not be may for pre—consuItation in

acres:

in

lot

mark.

mark,

—for

and

come

area,

to

appear the full

Completing

someone and phone

must be

to

FRONTENAC R.S.C). Act,

Reason why can’t you comply: could for be, because example, that is already close too to because of a impossible steep

front

water water

variance

you

zoning:

depth,

address

appoint

should

owners

Guide

SOUTH Planning

Current

when

Frontage.

wish name,

address(es)

of

A

OF

variance p r owners All o c e the Subject Land: Description of s District: The a. are Districts the the same as former are Townships. If you s the roll number (the long number beginning on with bill. 1029) your tax . 020 or O10, 030, district is the numbers your are if 040-050, Bedford: numbers 060 Storringt Loughborough; are or is district if the 070, your on; numbers district is are Portland. your 080. b. Concession and are Lot Numbers: check bill not tax if you your sure. c. Street Number: Your civic address civic number has not been if a assi gne blank. space d, Name of Road/Street: This whether question applies or not are on you a road. public e. Plan No: has Reference been If your it will have property surveyed, a one or more on that has been surveyed. parts plan. not If your property blank. Roll No: This is the number beginning with ‘1029’ which on f. appears you r take time look it up to before the submitting application.

authorization.

person’s

may

the

and

You

names

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 331 of 368

Buildings:

Proposed

Water their

buildings property.

of

“yes”

and

ANY

of under

Structure:

proposed

All

separate

to

the is

columns.

construct

answer

is

be

is

a

it.

acquired:

in a

existing months?

18

supply: water from

of most lake.

uses:

buildings:

did

cases

For the

not

take

e.g.

are

answer

example,

are

you

walls

answer

words,

If you

Please with

other

VVhen

In

to build

on

question

the

will

dwelling,

complete your

you

new dwelling,

will

has

sure,

that

screened

part

be

the

private

land

provide

of

proposing

clear

possession

a

each

you

it

in

ANYTHING

to

well,

been

your

the

porch

this

of

building

must a

but

used

best

for

some

property?

involve

An

be

d.

waterfront

residential

an

in

departme nt. wi th of ou reside t nce, involve

deck,

a n d “,

t as h const ructIe

increase

building

estimate.

the

question. would

raise

to

property, systems.

add

the

this

t h e describe

of

now,

access

VARIANCE

accomplished the beginning at on add to your there is demolition

the be

and

to

septic

on

the same planning recreational

please

sections

land

only

IVIINOR

property

be

all

development

garages,

can

FOR amended

recreational

is

from permit height cannot the to Committee to permission

a

a

decks,

ALL proposed addition to

additions,

this

on

must

structures

vacant

relevant

as

and are vacant, you would 10 be “vacant

to

deck

You

or

“residentiaI”

planning

an

only

APPLICATION P.13 1990, C.

business,

currently section in

there

structures:

are If you includes

construction:

This

If

buildings

retail

question

FRONTENAC R.S.C). AC1‘,

demolition requires or increase addition walls. is made clear not If this although are that, you granted do it because have not made you a

in

new

structures:

proposing

is

in

are

residential,

This

SOUTH Planning

Generally, the land be described section 1 3 would

Uses: example, use to

existing

or

of

20)Date

Length years,

land

your

of

“yes”.

there

e.g.

Docking:

residence.

on

is

If

Uses:

and

OF

Development: include anything

of

19)Date

would space.

18)Uses

17)Raising basement a

actually

may

existing find

Demolition: instances,

of

Description are you information

question

Proposed for if, then the described

but

Description structure the from

question

Existing

Parking water.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 332 of 368

SKETCH:

If

drawn

as has

this

this.

to

is

the

there

has

the

All

submitting owners

are not (PLEASE

stress necessarily

been if known,

zoning

to

the

be signed application, sign must

Must the

USE

a

the

or

in

consent

of

of

the

sign

a

io n ple ase

the

commissioner application or it can

accepted.

be

in

of signed

front

to

of

oaths

and

accurate,

property, were. detailed, professional

the

dimensions

a a

on

may

with

(severance)

deal

there

VARIANCE

s tb y a f f

the property? on other special pe rm the seller prob will iss ably

variance

on

owner.

granted of any

to

but

IWINOR

or subdivision information)

front application,

FOR

amended

system,

for

contract with do show not not be will

importance

as

constructed

granted the of

new

variance be aware

variance the details

to scale, RULER), A

need

enough

application

been

sewage

for severance this provide

an

have

private

APPLICATION 1990, P.13 C.

a minor probably are If you

help

previous and what

drawn

a

been

will by—law.

ever you

can

be that

currently

application

there

ditches

will

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

answer

current (Staff

is

speci?c

indemnify:

that

SOUTH

Planning

property,

Has

cannot do not

to before

a

number.

the

neatly

We

etc.?

OF

consent:

commissioners. been appointed.

done

Agreement

not

of

cases there

there number

sketch. You but sketches

yes: application

aware

of

there the file

If

l/linorvariance: owner a variance

for you

time

If yes: indicate

If

Are

most

drainage.

in

for Application the property?

for

Drainage: natural

Septic:

TOVVNSHIP

Page 333 of 368

f/\LW\UL\

7;L

,{,/ zmm,/

6850 ROAD 38

6157 CARLETON DR AK

L

N DR IVE

SALMO N

RM

Vanluven Lake

D

E

TO

6840 ROAD 38

6182 LAKEVIEW DR

S

DRIVE

CK

VER ON

6826 ROAD 38

E L AN

RO

I

A ST REE T

SA ND

6138 CARLETON DR

ER LV

KE

OA

R

VERONA

AD RO

Verona Lake

INBR O O H INCH

ROAD VELL BANK STR E

E6142 T CARLETON DR

S

R

6834 ROAD 38

ROA D

38

6154 ECARLETON DR

¥

4237 SALMON LANE

N E

CAR LETO

T ER ES

D RO A

S LA

Inset Inset Map Map

Hambly Lake

PL-ZNA-2022-0142 (KOBUS) (KIMMETT)

6170 MCMULLEN LANE

D

6154 MCMULLEN LANE Legend Subject Property

6164 MCMULLEN LANE

6132 CARLETON DR

Township Boundary Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

6160 MCMULLEN LANE

Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

6822 ROAD 38 6089 CARLETON DR

6154 MCMULLEN LANE

Wooded Area Waterbody

6816 ROAD 38

Provincially Significant Wetland

Verona Lake 6152 MCMULLEN LANE

Wetland

DR IV

E

Road

6812 ROAD 38

M

6804 ROAD 38

CM

UL

N LE

6146 MCMULLEN LANE

6105 CARLETON DR

Page 334 of 368

6103 CARLETON DR

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020. While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

Scale: 1:1,500 6097 CARLETON DR 6094 CARLETON DR

0

12.5

25

50 m

6091 CARLETON DR

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-10-17

Page 335 of 368

TOWNSHIP OF

SLOPEAND EROSION ASSESSMENT 6154 MCMULLEN LANE SOUTH TowNsHIR,ONrARIo FRONIENAC OURREFERENCE No. 22-0518

PLANNINGDEARTMENT October I8, 2022

755 Baker Crescent Kingston, ON K7M6P5 Ph: (613) 634-4357 Fax: (613) 634-4353 Email: concorde@kos.net

The property features a plateau overlooking a rocky foreshore and waterfront. The slope is controlled by shallow/outcropping marble bedrock and rises through an elevation of 5 metres or so above the lake level at a rate of 37° or less. The shoreline was developed by filling some time ago. The regrowth is well established and includes cedars and hardwoods. Some gunstocking is observed on the lower slope between the outcropping bedrock and the lake.

3.0 DISCUSSION:

The slope was surveyed using a 30—meter measuring tape and a Suunto MC—2compass with a clinometer. The results are summarised on the section presented on Drawing N0. M1. A W‘-diameter steel rod was used to sound the soils. Refusal was typically realised at depths of less than 700mm. The reaction to the probe is consistent with granular soil.

The site is located on the west shore of Verona Lake and is accessed from McMu|len Lane; for the purposes of this assessment the property is considered to face east toward the lake. The subject lot features some 30 metres of waterfront, an existing cottage, garage, waterfront access and clock. The elevation difference from the roadway to the lake is approximately 5 metres. A plot plan for development is underway by the owner’s hand, a recent version is attached. It is understood the foundation for the cottage is to be underpinned to bedrock, and a new wood deck and shed are proposed, as outlined on the owner’s plot plan. The work will take place on a terrace overlooking the lake.

2.0 BACKGROUND 8. OBSERVATIONS:

This letter reports the results of a geotechnical assessment carried out at the above captioned property. The subject property includes waterfront on Verona Lake. This assessment is intended to assess the hazards to the property, based on a site visit conducted on June 3’“, 2022, premised on a TOO-year serviceability requirement under the provincial Natural Hazards Policy.

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

RE:

DANIEL KIMMEIT

ENG

EERING SOUTH FRONTENAC

CONCO II '

OCTI8 2022

RECEIVED

Page 336 of 368

.

to advance

2

adjacent

the foundations. Discharge from eave

We trust that this report is to your satisfaction. this submission, please contact our office.

in accordance

with Section

Yours truly. CONCORD ENGINEERING

Should you have any questions or concerns regarding

Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the lot may be developed 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement as concerns sloping terrain.

of the property. We do not anticipate any problems with erosion or global slope stability from building, shed, decks or any similar structures bearing on bedrock west of the crest of the slope as described. The stability of the slope is sufficient to support a reduction of the typical l5—metresetback from top of slope to nil.

The site is limited in extent, by sloping ground, granular soils and the adjacent lake. Recommendations provided in this report will address these limitations as regards the proposed development

4.0 CONCLUSIONS:

Preservation of the shoreline and foreshore vegetation is consistent with provincial policy. If disturbance is necessary measures to re—establish the vegetative cover should be implemented as effectively and soon as possible to avoid unclue erosion.

Eave trough is recommended to preserve the grade trough downspouts should be directed away from the slope.

Footings bearing on the bedrock scaled and cleaned of weathered and disturbed material may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 500KPa. The bedrock is not regarded as frost susceptible. if sloping bedrock is encountered footings should be pinned using l6" lengths of l5M bar embedded lO" into the underlying bedrock spacing of dowels will depend on site conditions.

The granular soils once disturbed are considered prone to erosion. During construction control measures such as silt fencing at the crest of the slope are recommended. The performance of control measures should be monitored and additional efforts taken as warranted. Disturbed areas should be restored and seeded or replanted to promote re-growth, as soon as possible following completion of the work.

No groundwater was observed at the time of the fieldwork. Excavation is not expected near or below the surface of the groundwater table or bedrock.

Reference No. 22-0518

Page 337 of 368

{‘l‘

_‘r¢‘-__,.’.:,

-.

«

.r

Reference No. 22-0518

1;, ~

z~.,, !

.

'

. ;

-.

;,

‘EH

l

.

v/-

defihed y,shallow marble bedrock.

Page 338 of 368

Reference No. 22-0518

Page 339 of 368

Page 340 of 368

Q U I NT E C O NS ER V AT I O N - P L AN N I NG A C T R EV I EW QC File No. PL0302-2022 Municipality:

Township of South Frontenac

Landowner:

Susan Kobus / Daniel Kimmett

Location:

6154 McMullen Lane

Roll #:

10290800901040000000

Part Lot 9, Concession 11

Portland

Requesting relief of the proposed accessory building (detached garage/shed) and open deck to the top of the slope and high-water mark of Verona Lake. It is understood that the proposed accessory building will be located 9.5 metres from the top of the slope and 16.8 metres from the seasonal high-water mark of the Lake. Further, the open deck proposed for the easterly side of the dwelling will be located 0 metres from the top of the slope and 3.9 metres from the seasonal high-water mark of the Lake.

Application Description:

Minor Variance Application File No. PL-ZNA2022-0142

Feature:

Verona Lake and steep slope adjacent to the Lake Planning Act - Natural Hazard policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and Quinte Conservation Planning Act Review policy Conservation Authorities have Provincially delegated responsibilities to represent Provincial interests regarding natural hazards under section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (2020). Natural hazards include areas subject to flooding, prone to erosion, dynamic beaches, and unstable bedrock. Generally, the policies of the PPS direct development to areas outside of hazard lands. Quinte Conservation staff have reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment report, prepared by Concord Engineering dated June 24, 2022, later updated October 18, 2022. The report assessed the stability of the slope on the subject property, in addition to the 100-year erosion limit. The report states that the bedrock at the site is resistant to erosion and stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 years and concludes that a development setback of nil is sufficient. As per the report, it is understood that the deck will bear on the bedrock west of the crest of the slope (landward side as opposed to closer to the water) and the proposed site diagram illustrates the deck will not extend beyond the top of the slope.

Comments:

Although the report also proposes that no setback be applied to the top of the slope to a proposed building or shed, Quinte Conservation would enforce a minimum setback of 6 metres (as well as a minimum setback of 15 metres from the 1:100-year flood plain of Verona Lake – whichever is greater), to the proposed garage/shed accessory building. As the proposed deck does not extend any further past the top of the slope, and the accessory building meets the minimum 6 metres from top of slope and 15 metres from 1:100-year flood plain, staff have no concerns with the proposed development resulting from the proposed variance application. As a result, staff are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with section 3.1 of the PPS.

Ontario Regulation #319/09 (Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses The subject lands lie within the regulated area of Verona Lake, as well as the steep slope adjacent to the Lake (by virtue of Ontario Regulation #319/09 – Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses). Please note that the owners will need to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to development (construction / filling/ excavation/ site grading) within 45 metres of the 1:100-year flood plain of Verona Lake and within 30 metres of the top of the slope adjacent to Verona Lake (whichever is greater). Page 1 of 2

Page 341 of 368

Quinte Region Source Protection Plan Quinte Conservation provides Risk Management services as prescribed by the Clean Water Act, 2006 on behalf of member municipalities. Part of this is reviewing building and planning applications to ensure no new significant drinking water threats as outlined in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are created. Policies for significant threats in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are not applicable as the subject property lies outside of an intake protection zone or wellhead protection area for a municipal drinking water system. As such no Section 59 Clearance Notice is required.

Planning Act - Natural Heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement Section 2.1 of the Natural Heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement protects features including (but not limited to), provincially significant wetlands, significant wildlife habitat, significant woodlands, and significant areas of natural and scientific interest. The subject lands do not lie within a Provincially Significant Wetland, or within an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest. Note that, the landowner is responsible for ensuring that endangered species are not harmed as a result of any proposed development on the subject lands. The Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA, 2007) applies to all proposed development. Species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened on the Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) list are protected under the ESA, 2007. Section 9 prohibits killing, harming, harassing, possessing, collecting, buying and selling etc. of species listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened on the SARO List. Section 10 prohibits the damage or destruction of the protected habitat of species listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened on the SARO List. For further information on species at risk, or to determine what species may be present in your area please consult the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks or visit their website at https://www.ontario.ca/page/species-risk.

Final Comments:

As per the Slope and Erosion Assessment prepared by Concord Engineering (dated June 24, 2022, and revised October 18, 2022), Quinte Conservation has no objection to the minor variance application as presented. A permit from this office will be required prior to construction of the proposed deck and accessory building.

October 24, 2022 Date

Sam Carney Planning Technician And: Mark Boone, Hydrogeologist/Regulations Officer

Page 2 of 2

Page 342 of 368

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Application for Minor Variance and for Permission to Enlarge Legal Non-Conforming Use (S. 45(1) and (2) of Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of the portion of this application for zoning relief for an accessory building (detached garage) setback less than 30 metres from the highwater mark and less than 15 metres from the top of bank, subject to conditions, as this portion of the application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of the Planning Act. This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment deny the portion of this application for permission to enlarge a legal non-conforming dwelling under section 45(2) of the Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Settlement Area Zoning: Urban Residential – First Density (UR1) Zoning Relief Requested for Accessory Building Section 5.8.2(a) – to permit an accessory building (detached garage) to be setback a minimum of 16.8 metres from the highwater mark of Verona Lake, whereas a minimum 30 metre setback is required for all buildings and structures. Section 5.8.2(b) – to permit an accessory building (detached garage) to be setback a minimum of 9.5 metres from the top of bank, whereas a minimum 15 metre setback is required for all buildings and structures. Relief Requested for Dwelling The application is seeking permission under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property within 30 metres of the highwater mark of the Verona Lake. The enlargement would be in the form of an attached deck. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 343 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

Related Applications The lands are not subject to any additional applications under the Planning Act.

Discussion Property Description This 1065 square metre (0.26 acre) property has frontage on McMullen Lane and Verona Lake. A hydroline crosses the property parallel with the lane. There is a high, steep slope along the shoreline at the east end of the property. Otherwise, the lands are generally level. The property is developed with a dwelling and a small shed. The one-storey dwelling has an approximately 635 square foot footprint, according to the agent. The dwelling is setback 6.3 metres from the highwater mark, and approximately 3 metres from the top of bank. The small, approximately 70 square foot shed is located immediately to the south of the dwelling against the southern property line. The sewage system for the dwelling is located to the west, between the dwelling and the lane. There is a well to the north of the dwelling near the top of bank. Summary of Proposal The application is seeking a variance for an accessory building (detached garage). The application states that the garage would be used for the storage of ATVs, lawn mower, patio furniture, tools and outdoor accessories. The 291 square foot (27 square metre), onestorey garage would be located on the north end of the property. It would be setback 16.8 metres from the highwater mark and 9.5 metres from the top of bank. The application is also seeking permission to add a deck to the waterside of the dwelling. The application states that the deck would facilitate a secondary emergency exit off the waterside of the cottage. The irregular-shaped deck would have an area of 275 square feet (25.5 square metres). The deck would be setback 3.9 metres from the highwater mark and 0 metres from the top of bank. Supporting Documentation A Slope and Erosion Assessment (Concord Engineering, October 18, 2022) was submitted in support of the application. The consultant assessed the shoreline slope for type of bedrock, angle, and stability. They determined that the bedrock at the site is resistant to erosion and is stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 years, as required by provincial natural hazard policy. The report concluded that they do not anticipate any problems with erosion or global slope stability from building, shed, decks or similar structures bearing on bedrock west of the crest of the slope. Also, that the stability of the slope is sufficient to support a reduction from the required 15 metre setback from the top of bank. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 344 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

Agency Comments Quinte Conservation reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment on behalf of the Township. They were satisfied with the findings of the report. They have no objection to the approval of the application. Written permission will be required from Quinte Conservation under O. Reg. 319/09 for the proposed garage and deck, if the variance/permission application is approved. Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. Planning Analysis for Accessory Building The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal for the accessory, detached garage meets the four tests as explained below. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan related to residential development, and development adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas. The subject property is designated Settlement Area on Schedule A of the Official Plan. The proposed detached garage would be an accessory use to the permitted, existing residential use of the property. The proposed garage would be close to a steep shoreline. Section 5.2.4 of the Official Plan states that the Township will direct development or site alterations away from lands identified by the municipality which may be subject to shoreline erosion hazards. This is typically done through the implementation of a 15 metre setback from the top of bank, as required by the Zoning By-law. A Slope and Erosion Assessment was completed that determined that it would be safe for the proposed garage to be setback less than 15 metres from the top of bank. Quinte Conservation reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment on behalf of the Township, and were satisfied with the findings of the report. The proposed location of the garage appears to maximize the setback from the highwater mark, as intended by section 5.2.7(b) of the Official Plan. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed accessory building (detached garage) is a permitted use in the UR1 zone. The setbacks from the highwater mark and from the top of bank appear to be maximized, www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 345 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

when considered in conjunction with the minimum setback required from the hydrolines that cross the property, and the required functionality of the building (e.g. rotating the building 90 degrees may impact the ability to park a vehicle in the garage). Safe access between the garage and the top of bank can be achieved with the 9.5 metre setback from the top of bank. The garage would be farther from the highwater mark and the top of bank than the existing dwelling. The proposed garage and existing shed would result in 3.1% lot coverage for all accessory buildings, which is less than the maximum 5% permitted. It is also less than the lot coverage of the dwelling (5.5%). The proposed variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? The variances for the proposed detached garage are desirable for the appropriate use of the land and building as it allows for the enclosed storage of vehicles and goods which should help keep the property in a neat and safe condition. Is the variance minor? The requested variances are minor as they maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and are desirable for the appropriate use of the land and building. They are not anticipated to impact the planned functionality of the property. An existing cedar hedge on the north side of the property will provide visual screening to the dwelling to the north. The existing dwelling will provide visual screening to the dwelling to the south. The height of the shoreline embankment and distance of the garage from the top of bank, and being farther back than the existing dwelling should help minimize visual impacts when viewed from the lake or properties across the lake. Planning Analysis for Enlargement of Dwelling The property is zoned UR1 in Zoning By-law No. 2003-75. The UR1 zone permits a single detached dwelling, but not a seasonal dwelling. The dwelling on the property is a seasonal dwelling, as it is not winterized. This seasonal dwelling use is a legal non-conforming use because the building was constructed prior to the current Zoning By-law. Section 5.10.2 of the Zoning By-law states that existing buildings with less than the minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of a waterbody may be repaired, renovated or strengthened to a safe condition provided there is no enlargement of the gross floor area or increase in height. This provision prohibits the enlargement of these existing buildings, without seeking permission from the Committee of Adjustment. The existing dwelling is a legal non-conforming building because it was constructed prior to the current Zoning By-law and is setback 6.3 metres from the highwater mark of Verona Lake. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 346 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

Through its powers under section 45(2) of the Planning Act, the Committee of Adjustment may grant permission to enlarge the dwelling. The dwelling is setback 6.3 metres from the highwater mark, and approximately 3 metres from the top of bank. The land between the dwelling and the top of bank is generally level, and is vegetated with grass. The slope is vegetated with low-growing plants and a few trees. The proposed 275 square foot deck would be setback 3.9 metres from the highwater mark, and 0 metres from the top of bank. This would result in a reduction in setbacks over the existing situation of the dwelling. Measurements taken by staff at the property indicate that the deck would actually extend beyond the top of bank. Although the deck may not impact on neighbours, it is the opinion of staff that it would not be appropriate or desirable to permit a deck to be attached to the dwelling in the proposed location which goes closer to the high water mark and to the top of bank. A deck that extends to, or beyond, the top of bank on the subject property may impair the ability of the owner to safely maintain and repair the dwelling, and the slope if needed. In addition, it would not be consistent with how the majority of waterfront properties along McMullen Lane and Carleton Drive, and around Verona Lake, have developed and redeveloped over time. Setbacks from the highwater mark and top of bank have been maintained or increased on waterfront properties in order to provide buffers along the shoreline (which helps maintain lake water quality) and to ensure safe access around buildings and to slopes and shorelines. The lands to the north of the dwelling, in line with the dwelling, would be more appropriate for a deck or patio area as they are generally level and less impeded. Conclusion It is the opinion of staff that it is appropriate for the Committee of Adjustment to grant the requested variances for the proposed accessory building (detached garage), as this portion of the application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of the Planning Act. It is the opinion of staff that the Committee of Adjustment should not grant permission to enlarge the legal non-conforming dwelling on the property, as described in this report.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 347 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0142, Kobus (Kimmett), 6154 McMullen Lane, Portland District

by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PL-ZNA-2022-0142 relative to the detached garage, subject to the following conditions. It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment deny the portion of the application that relates to enlarging the legal non-conforming dwelling.

  1. The minor variance is for an accessory building (detached garage). The garage is permitted to be setback a minimum of 16.8 metres from the highwater mark of Verona Lake and 9.5 metres from the top of bank. The location of the garage on the property must be consistent with the submitted application and sketches that will be attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
  2. The Owner is required to enter into a Development Agreement to be registered on the title of the property to the satisfaction of the Township to address the following matters and environmental standards of the Township: a. Appropriate erosion control measures (e.g. silt fence, straw bales) must be used during construction and until the site is stable and revegetated. b. Roof runoff will be directed away from the top of bank, and discharged to natural or constructed leaching pits/areas to maximize infiltration or onto coarse rock rubble splash pads to reduce the velocity of runoff. c. A natural vegetated buffer must be maintained in its natural state along the shoreline embankment.
  3. A building permit is required for ALL proposed demolition and construction on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac.
  4. Minor variance Pl-ZNA-2022-0142 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 348 of 368

Page 349 of 368

Page 350 of 368

Page 351 of 368

reason

(l.e.

Please

of

used

the

back

N Yes

garage,

area

with

is

shed.

there

uses the

I:

are No

etc.)

a

and

any

weekends. EXISTING

and

land?

30

buildings

please distance

only.

the

extensive

rernoval

with

in

front

or

of

the

the

1:]

on

on

the

from

parking

Yes

ex ist in g Zonin g whic h Drive

See

652

VARIANCE

trees

yard

facilities

structures

indicate these

excavation.

large

road’?

of

oak

(cottage).

provisions

the

Acres

of

NIINOR

road/lane):

FOR amended

7.9

(on

as

building

feet

By-law:

maintained El No

requires

is by water approximate

QKYes

comply requires

municipally

subject

the

holidays

of

yard

x

principle

feet

Zoning

Area;

Frontage

land.

APPLICATION c. P.13

1990,

the

12

the

subject

than

cannot

line

uneven

back

use

on

property used and road.

road?

front

yard

from

dimensions front

in

the

land:

of

FRONTENAC R.S.0. Act.

relief

subject

the

the

shed

summer

whether

for

existing

subject be public to

Lane

maintained

property

the

to

of

the

and

SOUTH Planning

proposed

shed

place

the

closer

to the used or nearest

Grove

indicate

are

in

to

Road/Lane:

residence,

Cottage

What

plan

why

be

pre—buiIt

extent

zoning

OF

of

depth water): feet

and

subject the privately

Maple

a

terrain

If access facilities and the

Name

OR

Does

The

Original

The

a will

Shed

nature

RLS

current

530

Place

The

The

Depth:

(on

frontage(s),

Frontage

The

TOVVNSHIP

Page 352 of 368

setback

Lot

d‘

of

I

Lot

to

to

to

use for

uses

High

°f

building(s) built on the

proposed

any be

Continue

13.The

14.Are

frorn

Area

Water Mark (If applicable)

Floor

Dim°“Si°“S

‘fi

Bu

Line

from

:‘,’,,’,’;,’,$a,,,$,; 5,0”,

'

side

Setback

Line

from

I’ll

H: k f R:a’_aL°ot

s

F,-cnt

Setback

‘ AI

answer

the

Sq-

feet

vacation

subject

ft

20

Story

f 99

feet

feet

t

yes.

E2<Yes

5tructure(s), or subject land?

summer

of

720

About

One

55

350

is

SOUTH Planning

Cottage

1 1

OF

120

(1)

item

t ure f st (32-:’;_c”_eside:ce)

If the

Height

T

TOVVNSHIP

or

EINo

t

sq.

feet

to

St°“y

feet

weekends

additions

and

Fee

feet

7

56

one

55

350

130

ft.

existing

Sauna

or

as

FOR

sq

feet

so

390

feet

or

(4 )

VARIANC E

structure(s),

Deck

feet

feet

feet

Front

120

MINOR

indicate:

arnended

building(s)

56

5

(3)

structure

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

building

Barrel

(2)

EACH

land:

for

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

Page 353 of 368

If the

Lot

of

B

Line

from

Line

NOTES:

High (If

your

If yes,

Do

Mark

frorn

of

item

150

12

1 1

Shed

yes,

fee‘

fee‘

Story

16

feet

feet

fee‘

is

SOUTH Planning

feet

X

One

45

330

1 60

Sma”

(1 )

14

or for

each

40

12

1

30

reet

1 75

please

plans provide

include details:

any

DEMOLITION

of

t

B

d

on rnark relate building. existing

and

feet

feet

Story

feet

f ee

Sh

addition,

FOR

amended

(3)

structures?

or

El Yes

i

VARIANCE

structure

MINOR

the setback lane, the same. CONSTRUCTION NEW

building

as

private be will the to

a

APPLICATION P.13 e. 1990,

feet

x

«

One

450

50

L 3'96

(2)

proposed

FRONTENAC Act, R.S.O.

subject is on If the waterfront, property line and high lot the setback from the water 2) The this dirnensions required in question and NOT the size the to total of completed

water applicable)

Setback

Buildinglstructure

Dirnensions

°“‘5id°

<A’::.*::;:=:::;;..,n,,

Height

gfézalfgt

Setback Rear

Front

from

t ure

o f St ruc residence)

Lot

to

answer

Setback

T ype (E.g.

1 5.

TOWNSHIP

Page 354 of 368

24.Is

21

date

date

About

or

or

No

storm

Private

that

privately a means:

drainage

Septic

whether

of

the was

existing

provided

is

the

existing

by

sewers,

of

an existing

?xtures '

bedrooms

the

the

ditches,

provided owned

owner:

swales

or

subject the operated

by

have

other

land by individual

by

the

subject

and a

publicly communal

means?

or

a

well.

owned

continued:

on

Yes

own ed

d

rate lake.

ope

lan ds:

N

Yes :1

D

D (No

Yes

El

VARIANCE

D

Yes

MINOR

IX NO EX NO D

FOR amended

a publicly or communal

land

constructed

land individual

subject

were

current

to and

the subject operated

of

structures

by

encroach

as

structure?

APPLICATION c. 1990, P.13

development?

of

R.S.O.

structure system?

uses

to

is

and

and

disposal a privately

provided owned

or septic acquired

living

plumbing

number

space

RAISING

Act.

FRONTENAC

proposed

addition

in

in

in

the

details:

the

SOUTH Plannlng

buildings

land

the

sewage sewage system, other means:

Well

whether

other

time

years water

existing 1 985

of

the

system,

Private

Indicate operated privy.

water body,

subject

2015

the

on

Will

Increase

(c) (d)

Increase

(b)

uses

provide

Increase

the

OF

include

(a)

37

length

Estimate

June

What

plans please

are

your

If yes,

Do

Indicate

_The

20.The

19.The

1 7.

TOVVNSHIP

Page 355 of 368

If known, please under Section

Yes

“Note:

to

The

yes,

distances to importance

property

The

all

a or

of

(neighbours’)

abutting REQUIRED be prepared

and

file

an

?le

subject

of

these

AT

ever

the

been

betvveen bridge or

from

?elds and septic The SKETCH is neatly and accurately

features

subject lan crossing. d

location

P

and

of

Pla nni ng

of .

sig ni? as can t

barns

the subject buildings, wetlands, the applicant’s

on

railway

the

OF

THE

subject

the

the

VARIANCE

application

application

the

the

under

NIINOR

TOP

of

including

THE

of

number

wells. be shown. carefully,

owners’

to

as

FOR

amended

and arti?cial features land. Examples include or stream banks, barns,

lands.

as application

land

number

ARROVV

following:

the

the

NORTH

the

of

land has Variance).

give

subject

APPLICATION c. P.13 1990,

. . . . ..i.e. distance landmark as such a point

A

the

all of natural to the subject river ditches, Show distance

S

abutting

reference lot line

to on-site varied, and should

be

HAVE

showing

give

(Minor

subject

please

Consent.

is

R.S.O.

land

the Act

please

yes,

or

Act,

FRONTENAC

and dimensions buildings.

MUST

submitted

is

I2{No

27

is

whether Planning

25

approximate location the land that is adjacent watercourses, drainage wells and tanks. septic lines.

of

location

nearest

The

location of township

The

boundaries proposed

SKETCH

THE

be

item

The and

.

SOUTH

Planning

2:! No

indicate of the

question

ii)

must

Yes

43

to

OF

the subject Subdivision

i)

““‘

SKETCH

A

answer If the the application

28,

D

application.

answer

of

whether Plan

If the the of

1::

of

a

indicate

Please

approval

TOVVNSHIP

Page 356 of 368

STEELE RD

Inset Inset Map Map

O RTH D N

Crow Lake

ROA ANDERSON

Eagle Lake 144 STEELE RD

Bobs Lake

Bobs Lake

AY RO

PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (FLOHR & O’SHEA)

330 PINESHORES LANE

N SE

T S

HO

S

GR EEN B

AD

Fish Creek

B UCK BAY

C R EE K ROAD

RE S LANE

RO A D

F

ISH

AD STEELE R O

BOB S LA K

E

NS RO AD BU R

AD W RO BRADSHA

ROAD 3 8

¥

115 STEELE RD

U

R OAD

81 MAPLE GROVE LANE

Bobs Lake

Legend Subject Property

200 STEELE RD

Township Boundary MAPLE GROVE LANE

MAPLE GROVE LANE

117 MAPLE GROVE LANE

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

83 MAPLE GROVE LANE

Wooded Area

81 MAPLE GROVE LANE 9 MAPLE GROVE LANE

114 MAPLE GROVE LANE

31 MAPLE GROVE LANE

M

Road

ME AD

7 MEADOW LANE

L E AN

R OA D

O

17 MEADOW LANE

EL TE

E

S

301 BOB’S LAKE RD

50 MAPLE GROVE LANE

20 MAPLE GROVE LANE

Bobs Lake Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2020.

MEADOW LANE

ANDERSON RD N

9B ROBIN LANE

ANDERSON RD N

STEELE RD

9B ROBIN LANE 41 MEADOW LANE O

R

Page 357 of 368

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

9A ROBIN LANE

MEADOW LANE

Wetland

MAPLE GROVE LANE 158 MAPLE GROVE LANE

5 MEADOW LANE

W

22 MEADOW LANE

Provincially Significant Wetland

142 MAPLE GROVE LANE 148 MAPLE GROVE LANE

98 MAPLE GROVE LANE

E LAN E E GROV APL

Waterbody

128 MAPLE GROVE LANE

51 MEADOW LANE

33 ROBIN LANE

Scale: 1:4,000 48 ROBIN LANE

0

37.5

75

150

26 ROBIN LANE

B IN LAN E

40 ROBIN LANE 36 ROBIN LANE

m UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2022-10-17

November 3, 2022 22-SFR-MVA-0081 (Bedford) Township of South Frontenac Committee of Adjustment PO Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON K0H 2T0

Attention: Sarah Cadue, Planner

Subject:

Flohr, Rick & O’Shea, Debby, Application for Minor Variance, PL-ZNA-20220143– 81 Maple Grove Lane, Lot 24, Concession 3; Geographic Township of Bedford, Now the Township of South Frontenac; Roll Number: 1029 0200 2039 7000 0000

Dear Ms. Cadue, The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) has reviewed the subject applications within the context of:

The Proposal The RVCA understands this application seeking relief from the zoning by-law for the construction of two sheds, identified as shed A (12 ft x 30 ft) and shed B (12 ft x 16 ft) on the submitted site plan. It is understood shed A requires relief from section 5.24.2 of the Township’s Zoning by-law as it will not be located to the rear of the existing dwelling.

Page 358 of 368

The Property The subject property is approximately 3.2 ha. There is an existing cottage with an attached deck, a small sauna, and shed “B” as identified in the site plan. The lot is largely forested with several mature trees retained throughout the developed portion. The terrain is varied with rocky outcrops, the developed portion slopes gently south towards Maple Grove Lane. A review of the desktop mapping and site visit conducted Nov 2, 2022 indicated the following natural hazards or natural heritage features: -A watercourse flows from north to south through the centre of the property -A second watercourse not identified on mapping products was observed on site approximately 13 m from the dwelling. -The property overlies a highly vulnerable aquifer -Steep slopes may be present on the subject property A review of our records does not reveal the presence marine clays, organic soils or wetland areas. Review Comments Provincial Policy Statement Regarding Sections 2.1 and 3.1 of the PPS our office has no concerns. In relation to Section 2.2 of the PPS our office has some concerns regarding the proposed development and has provided recommendations to protect, restore or improve water quality. Ontario Regulation 174/06 The subject property is not within an area regulated by RVCA, as a result, written permission from our office is not required with respect to development and site alteration. Please note that any proposed alterations to watercourses or waterbodies, including but not limited to, culvert installation, bridge crossings, diverting, dredging, realigning, stabilizing, requires the prior written permission of the RVCA in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 “Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses”. Tay-River-Bobs Lake Catchment Report The subject property is located within Tay River-Bobs Lake catchment, the mapped watercourse flows south approximately 350 m before draining into Bobs Lake (West Basin). The 2017 report indicates that West Basin has a water quality rating that ranges from “Fair” to “Good”. The unmapped watercourse observed appears to join the mapped watercourse south of Maple Grove Lane and would likely be considered a headwater drainage feature. These features provide important ecosystem services such as sediment transport, aquatic and terrestrial habitats. To protect watercourses and natural features best land use management practices should be implemented that maintain natural runoff patterns that encourage infiltration of surface water. This includes retaining natural vegetation on the site, particularly within the 30 m riparian zone along the shoreline of all waterbodies, watercourses, and wetlands.

Page 359 of 368

Page 2 of 5

Mississippi Rideau Source Water Protection Plan This property has been identified as overlying a highly vulnerable aquifer as stated in the catchment report and indicated in the Mississippi-Rideau Source Water Protection Plan. These are aquifers that are vulnerable to surface contaminants due to thin or absent soils overlying bedrock that may be fractured. Where these conditions exist, it may be possible for contaminants to enter drinking groundwater supplies. For this reason, care should be taken to avoid land uses and practices that may inadvertently lead to undesirable effects on groundwater. For this reason, care should be taken to avoid land uses and practices that may inadvertently lead to undesirable effects on groundwater. Some best practices that could be considered include: • • • • •

increased well casing depths; increased distance of septic systems from drinking water wells; ensuring wells are located upgradient of septic sewage disposal systems ensuring that wells and septic systems are properly maintained, avoiding use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers.

Discussion & Recommendations It is understood at the time of application that the unmapped watercourse had not been identified. During the site visit flowing water was observed within the channel located approximately 16 m from shed “B” and 13 m from the existing dwelling. The Townships Zoning by-law states: “Notwithstanding anything in this By-law, no building or structure (other than a marine facility as defined in this by-law), or septic tank installation including the weeping tile field shall be located: a. within 30 metres (98.4 ft.) horizontal of the highwater mark of a waterbody or permanent watercourse, notwithstanding that such body of water or watercourse is not shown on any schedule forming part of this By-law.” -Section 5.8.2 In considering the application for relief from Section 5.24.2 our office has no concerns for the proposed location of shed “A” it is noted that this section of the zoning by-law requires “accessory building which is not part of the main building shall be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building.” To meet this provision shed “A” would be within the required 30 m setback of the watercourse. Our office has no objection to the proposed location. With respect to shed B it is acknowledged that there are limited opportunities to locate the structure outside the 30 m setback within the developed portion of the property. The shed has previously been placed on the property with grading to support the structure without the benefit of review by our office. Natural drainage patterns in the vicinity of the shed appear to direct runoff away from the unmapped watercourse towards the existing driveway. It is the opinion of this reviewer that an improvement in the setback could be achieved to better meet the intent of the Township’s zoning by law.

Page 360 of 368

Page 3 of 5

Should the Township allow the variance our office would have the following recommendation for conditions of any implementation agreement or notes to be included:

Sarah MacLeod-Neilson Planner cc – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, owners

Page 361 of 368

Page 4 of 5

Page 362 of 368

Page 5 of 5

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 10, 2022 Minor Variance Application (S. 45(1) of the Planning Act) Subject: PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

Summary This application is a request for zoning relief to allow an accessory building (shed) to be located in the projected front yard of an existing dwelling. The application is also requesting relief to place another accessory building (shed) within 30 metres (98.4 feet) of the highwater mark of a watercourse. This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application, subject to conditions, as this application meets the four tests of a minor variance under section 45(1) of Planning Act.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Limited Service Residential Zone (RLS)

Zoning Relief Requested Section 5.24.2 – to permit an accessory building (Shed “A”) to be located in front yard of the property, whereas Section 5.24.2 of the Township Zoning Bylaw states any accessory building which is not part of the main building shall be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building. Section 5.8.2 (a) – to permit an accessory building (“Shed B”) to be setback a minimum of 16 metres from the highwater mark of a waterbody or permanent watercourse, whereas the Zoning Bylaw requires a minimum of 30 metres setback from the high water mark of a waterbody or permanent watercourse.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 363 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property municipally known as 81 Maple Grove Lane is located east of Steele Road. The property is at the corner of Maple Grove Lane and Meadow Lane and has an area of approximately 3.2 hectares (7.9 acres). The property consists of forest and rocky outcrops. The developed portion of the property slopes gently south towards Maple Grove Lane. There is a watercourse feature (creek) on the west side of the lot that appears to be connected to a larger watercourse north of the lot. There also another watercourse feature on the east side of the property, approximately 13 metres (43 feet) to the rear of the dwelling. A small footbridge has been installed to allow the crossing of the feature. The subject property contains a seasonal dwelling (cottage) with a front deck and a rear deck, a barrel sauna and septic tank and field. The property contains a gravel driveway leading up to the dwelling. The septic tank and field are located to the south of the dwelling in the front of the dwelling. The surrounding lots are developed with similar residential uses.

Summary of Proposal The application is requesting relief to permit a 34 square metres (360 square feet) shed, further referred to as Shed “A” on the submitted site plan, to be located in the front yard of the dwelling, 25 metres (82 feet) to Maple Grove Lane. Shed “A” will be one storey with a height of 3.35 metres (11 feet). The setback of the proposed shed to the high water mark of the westerly watercourse is 53.34 metres (175 feet). Shed “A” is more than 30 metres (98.4 feet) from the easterly watercourse. The interior side yard setback is 15 metres (11 feet) and the setback to the dwelling is 15 metres (11 feet). The eastern watercourse feature was identified during the review of the application and upon review of 2014 aerial photography. As the applicant was proposing to locate another smaller shed 17.83 square metres (192 square feet) behind the dwelling, referred to as Shed “B” on the submitted site plan, the need for an additional variance was identified. It was noted during a site visit that this shed was recently placed on the property. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 364 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

As a result, the applicant is also requesting relief to place Shed “B” in a location setback 16 metres (53 feet) from the highwater mark of the watercourse.

Department and Agency Comments This application as not circulated to Public Services as the proposed sheds are located on a private lane. This application did not meet the criteria to be circulated to Building Services (sewage review) as no plumbing fixtures are being proposed in either of the sheds. Rideau Valley Conservation (RVCA) provided comments on November 3rd, 2022. They confirmed, based on a site visit to the property, the presence of a flowing watercourse 13 metres from the existing dwelling and 16 metres from the proposed Shed “B” on the submitted drawings/site plan. RVCA staff did not have any objection to the proposed Shed “A” as it is outside the required setbacks from the watercourses. RVCA staff stated that with respect to Shed “B” it was acknowledged that there are limited opportunities to locate the structure outside the 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback within the developed portion of the property. Natural drainage patterns in the vicinity of the shed appear to direct runoff away from the unmapped watercourse towards the existing driveway. It is the opinion of the reviewer that an improvement in the setback could be achieved to better meet the intent of the Township’s Zoning By-law. RVCA proposed several recommendations and best practices that they felt should be included in any implementation agreement for the minor variance for Shed “B”.

Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report.

Planning Analysis The proposal needs to be assessed against the four tests of a minor variance outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. All four tests must be met for an application to be approved. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposal meets the four tests as explained below.

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 365 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The subject property is designated Rural in the Township Official Plan. Both sheds are accessory uses consistent within the permitted residential use of a property in the Rural designation. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The proposed sheds are permitted accessory uses to the seasonal dwelling in the RLS zone. For Shed “A”, Section 5.24.2 of the Zoning Bylaw states that any accessory building which is not part of the main building shall be erected to the rear of the projected front or exterior side wall of the main building. Where accessory buildings are located behind the main buildings, they shall be located in accordance with the provisions of the particular zone. Accessory buildings are not permitted within the front yard as of right. However, the location of Shed “A” is logical for the development due to site constraints and will meet all the other Zoning Bylaw regulations as follows: •

Shed “A” will be setback 25 metres (82 feet) from Maple Grove Lane which is consistent with the minimum 20 metre (65.6 feet) front yard setback required for the dwelling in the RLS Zone. The setback is slightly greater than what’s required for a dwelling.

The height of the shed will be 3.4 metres (11 feet), whereas 6 metres (19.7 feet) is the maximum height permitted for accessory buildings in the RLS Zone.

The proposed shed is located a suitable distance from the property lines taking into consideration the location of the septic tank, the watercourse features, and the road.

The proposed shed will meet the minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings (3 metres (9.8 feet) is required, whereas 15 metres (49.2 feet) is provided).

The proposed shed does not exceed the maximum permitted lot coverage for accessory buildings, and the structure is not larger than the principal building.

Section 5.24.6 of the Zoning Bylaw also states that the minimum distance between any building on a lot including accessory buildings and principal buildings shall be 3.0 metres (9.8 feet), the distance between Shed “A” and the dwelling is 15 metres (49.2 feet).

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 366 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

Shed “B” was placed in the rear yard, 16 metres (52 feet) from the easterly watercourse. Shed “B” is farther from the watercourse than the dwelling. Shed “B” meets all the other Zoning Bylaw requirements for accessory buildings. The interior side yard setback is 15 metres (49 feet), the height is 3.4 metres (11 feet), and its setback 4 metres (13 feet) from the dwelling. Shed “B” is also 50 metres (164 feet) to the westerly watercourse and therefore meets the 30-metre (98.4 feet) setback to that watercourse. As such, the variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? Shed “A” is located 25 metres (82 feet) from Maple Gove Lane. The shed will be located off the east side of the existing driveway. Locating the shed to the rear of the dwelling (north) would not maximize the distance from the highwater mark and would require extensive excavation and work to remove large Oak trees on the property. It also may disrupt the watercourse features on the property. The requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land as locating the shed in the front yard allows it to not encroach on the setback of the watercourse. The shed will be visible from the road; however, it would be well set back from the front lot line. The existing gravel driveway may need to be widened to accommodate the accessory building. Shed “B” is relatively small. It would be located to the rear of the dwelling. The shed is in a location that slopes south towards Maple Grove Lane away from the watercourse, so that roof runoff from the shed would naturally flow away from the watercourse. The location is an actively used area on the property. With respect to Shed “B”, there are also limited opportunities to locate the structure outside the 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback within the developed portion of the property. Is the variance minor? Shed “A” does not appear to have any negative effects to the adjacent properties as it would be setback 25 metres from the lane and is within an already cleared area. Shed “A” will be visually screened from adjacent properties by the existing forest on the property. Yes, the variance is minor as it maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Shed “B” does not appear to have any negative effects to the adjacent properties as it located the rear of the dwelling and setback 15 metres (49 feet) from the interior side yard and there is a visual buffer provided by the forest. Yes, the variance is minor as it maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 367 of 368

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - PL-ZNA-2022-0143 (Flohr & O’Shea) – Rick Flohr & Debby O’Shea, 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford

RVCA has made recommendations for the implementation of best practices in relation to Shed “B” but based on the size of the watercourse, the size of the shed, and the forested nature of the property, a Development Agreement with such conditions is not warranted.

Notice/Consultation Notice of the Statutory Public Hearing was given pursuant to the requirements of the Planning Act, at least 10 days in advance of the Public Hearing. This included notice given: • • • •

by mail to every owner of land within 60 metres of the subject lands by posting notice signs on the subject lands by posting on the Township’s Current Planning Application webpage by e-mail to prescribed persons and public bodies

Recommendation That the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application PZNA-2022-0143 for 81 Maple Grove Lane, District of Bedford, subject to the following conditions:

  1. The Minor Variance is for two sheds. That Shed “A” is permitted to be located in the front yard of the dwelling, and setback a minimum of 25 metres from the front lot line abutting Maple Grove Lane. That Shed “B” is permitted to be setback a minimum of 16 metres from the high water mark of the easterly watercourse on the property, as per the drawings received with PL-ZNA-2022-0143, attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
  2. A building permit is required for ALL construction and demolition on the property. There shall be no additional development, or demolition of existing structures, on the property without the approval from the Township of South Frontenac.
  3. Minor variance PL-ZNA-2022-0143 is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws.

Report Prepared By:

Sarah Cadue, M.PL., Planner

Reviewed By:

Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 368 of 368

Help support independent journalism
If NFNM’s reporting matters to you, Buy Me a Coffee is a simple way to help keep local watchdog coverage going.
Buy Me a Coffee