Committee Of Adjustment - 11 Nov 2021 - Agenda

Published November 11, 2021

Word Count 41471 words

Reading Time 195 min read

Body: Committee of Adjustment Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee Date: November 11, 2021 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of Adjustment/2021/Committee Of Adjustment - 11 Nov 2021 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

Township of South Frontenac Committee of Adjustment Agenda

TIME: 7:00 PM, DATE: Thursday, November 11, 2021 PLACE: Council Chambers/Electronic Participation. 1.

Call to Order

Resolution

Adoption of Agenda

Resolution

Electronic Meeting Information

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/virtualcommittee-of-adjustment-meetings.aspx Instructions about participating via Computer, Laptop, Smartphone, Tablet and Telephone can be found at the above noted link as well.

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.

Declaration of pecuniary interest

Approval of Minutes – September 9th & October 14

Resolution - September 9th Minutes

Resolution - October 14th Minutes

New Consent Applications:

S-68-21-P (Hawley) Location: Part Lot 9, Concession 1, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as a vacant property on Wilton Road Purpose of Application: Consent for the creation of a new residential lot consisting of approximately 1 hectare (2.7 acres) with a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Cummins Road from a property with Roll Assessment Number 102908001003802. The applicants are extending the existing public road known as Cummins Road to provide road frontage for the severed parcel. The public road will be required to be built to Township Public Road Standards. The retained lands will retain the existing development and will be approximately 34.5 hectares (85.2 acres) in area with approximately 99 metres (326 feet) of frontage on Wilton Road.

4 - 56

57 - 83

Page 1 of 200

Minor Variance Applications from Previous Meetings

MV-48-20-P (Kulchitskaya) (The Boulevard Group) Location: Lot 8, Concession 11, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, Being Parts 1 and 2 on Plan 13R10944, municipally known as 2353 Silver Rock Lane, Verona Lake.

84 120

Purpose of Application: To reduce the minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark, the maximum permitted lot coverage and the minimum separation distance between accessory structure and principal structure in order to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling and a detached garage. The proposed development will require the following variances: Section from Zoning By-Law requiring Relief Front Yard + Highwater Mark

Lot Coverage for house (Principal) Distance between house and garage

Required / Permitted 30 metres minimum (98.4 feet minimum) 5% (maximum permitted) 3 metres minimum(9.8 feet minimum)

Proposed

House: 25.2 metres (82.7 feet) Garage: 27.1 metres (89 feet) 6% 2.14 metres (7 feet)

New Minor Variance Applications:

MV-43-21-S (Ackworth-New) Location: 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, Buck Lake Purpose of Application: To request permission to increase the height of the existing structure and enlarge gross floor area of the building by adding a second storey and widening and enclosing the front covered porch.

121 152

VMV-44-21-L (Barrett) (Norris) Location: Property with PIN: 36280-0309 on Senior Lane, Cronk Lake, District of Loughborough. Purpose of Application: To vary section 5.24.2 of the Zoning Bylaw to permit the construction of an accessory structure (being a storage shed) being located in the projected front yard 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.

153 181

MV-45-21-S (Tullett) Location: 538 Mount Chesney Road Purpose & Effect of the Proposed Variance: The property contains a detached garage and a shed (under construction). The applicant proposes to construct a single detached dwelling on the property. The purpose of the proposed variance is to seek relief from section 5.24.2 of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 to permit the two accessory buildings in the front yard of the single detached dwelling. The effect is to legalize the location of the accessory buildings between the dwelling and Mount Chesney Road.

182 200

Other Business

Report to the Committee - Delegated Consent Decisions

Page 2 of 200

10.

Adjournment

Resolution

Page 3 of 200

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Thursday, November 11, 2021 7:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting from Council Chambers 4432 George Street, Sydenham, ON Page 4 of 200

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 of the Committee)

• Claire Dodds (Director)

• Alan Revill

• Christine Woods (Senior Planner)

• Norm Roberts

• Anna Geladi (Planner)

• Mike Nolan

• Michelle Hannah (Planning Assistant & Secretary Treasurer)

• Doug Morey • Mike Howe • Tom Bruce Page 5 of 200

• Ken Gee

Format for the Meeting

The Chair will introduce the file
The Planner will provide an overview of the application
Comments and/or Question from:

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Comments or Questions from Committee Members

The Committee will then deliberate and vote on the application
The Chair will state whether the vote was carried Page 6 of 200

Appeal Rights

Page 7 of 200

• 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. • 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 8 of 200

In Case of Technical Difficulties • If a Committee member disconnects from the meeting, the meeting will proceed if quorum is met and the Committee member will attempt to reconnect. • Should all members of the Committee disconnect, members will be asked to reconnect. • If the meeting cannot be restored 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 letting you know. Page 9 of 200

Agenda

Page 10 of 200

• Call to Order • Adoption of Agenda • Declaration of Pecuniary Interests • Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting • Consent Applications • Minor Variance / Permission Applications • Consent Granting Authority Report • Other Business • Adjournment

Consent Application S-68-21-P Applicant: Tom and Marlene Hawley Location: South side of Wilton Road and on the north side of Cummins Road Recommendation: Approval • Pending public comment • Subject to conditions Page 11 of 200

File: S-68-21-P

Proposal  To create a new residential lot Severed Parcel 2.7 acres in area and have a minimum of 76 metres of frontage on Cummins Road Retained Parcel 85.2 acres in area and have approximately 99 metres of frontage on Wilton Road

Page 12 of 200

Building Location

Road extension

Page 13 of 200

File: S-68-21-P

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Building Department (Sewage System Review) – No Objection • Cataraqui Conservation – No Objection • Public Comments – One comment received inquiring about the public road standards and how the City of Kingston will be involved • Public Services – No objection, subject to conditions • City of Kingston – No concerns from a land-use perspective, nor to the extension of Cummins Road, subject to conditions Page 14 of 200

File: S-68-21-P

Conditions Requested by Public Services & City of Kingston: • The severed parcel be subject to a construction agreement to construct the roadway. • The agreement will be with both municipalities and will specify all costs for investigation, design construction, contract administration, financial security, and any other expenses required for the road extension to the satisfaction of both municipalities • All costs are the responsibility of the applicant and the applicant provide financial security totaling 100% of the estimated construction costs • Detailed engineering design will be required for the road extension and turning circle, including but not limited to geotechnical investigation, to the satisfaction and approval of both municipalities

Page 15 of 200

• The road must be constructed and operational to the satisfaction of both municipalities prior to issuance of the Certificate of Official.

File: S-68-21-P

Planning Analysis  The proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and conforms to the County of Frontenac Official Plan.  Township Official Plan requires that all new rural lots front onto and gain direct access from an existing public road which reflects a reasonable standard of pavement or gravel construction and is maintained year round by the municipality. The Township Official Plan does not contemplate the creation of new lots without frontage on an existing public road.  Zoning By-law requires new lots to have 76 metres of road frontage.  Currently no existing road frontage on the severed parcel Page 16 of 200

 Applicants need to extend the road in order to gain frontage

File: S-68-21-P

Planning Analysis  Township Staff and City of Kingston Staff are agreeable with a road extension at the expense of the applicant, to provide the required lot frontage for the severed parcel. Therefore, with the correct conditions in place, the proposal meets the general intent of the Official Plan will be able to comply with land division policies

Page 17 of 200

 The proposal for the construction of a road and the creation of a new lot will be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and the County of Frontenac Official Plan, the South Frontenac Official Plan and will comply with the Township of South Frontenac Zoning By-law, subject to conditions.

File: S-68-21-P

Recommendation: Approval Subject to Conditions • Prepare acceptable reference plan or legal description • The land owned by the applicant used to construct the turning circle will be transferred and deeded to the Municipality. • Enter into a construction agreement with the Municipality and the City of Kingston prior to the construction of the road • Provide detailed engineering design for the road extension and turning circle • Road must be operational and constructed before issuance of Certificate of Official • Pay property taxes • Pay 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland • Decommission any abandoned wells Page 18 of 200

• Applicant to enter into a development agreement to be registered on title (to address potable water, lot grading and drainage, roof runoff, erosion and sediment control measures, limiting vegetation removal)

File: S-68-21-P

Questions & Comments

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Questions or Comments from Committee Members

Resolution & Voting Page 19 of 200

Upon the Chair asking if any member of the Committee is opposed to the Resolution, please advise if you are opposed. The Chair will call if the vote is carried or is lost.

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.

Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P Applicant: Margarita Kulchitskaya Agent:The Boulevard Group Property: Silver Rock Lane, Verona Lake, District of Portland Proposal: To permit a single detached dwelling and detached garage Recommendation: Approval Page 20 of 200

• Pending public comment • Subject to conditions

File: MV-48-20-P

Property Description • Rural designation • RLSW Zone • 0.3 acres (0.12 hectares) in size • Existing shed • Topography: Rises steeply from Verona Lake to plateau Page 21 of 200

File: MV-48-20-P

Original Proposal • Permit a single detached dwelling with an attached deck, and a detached garage

• Deferred: February 2021 • More information on: Top of Bank, Sewage System, Hydro Lines and size of proposal Relief Requested

Page 22 of 200

• • • • •

Highwater mark setback Top of Bank Front yard Lot Coverage Minimum separation distance

File: MV-48-20-P

Current Proposal • Permit a single detached dwelling and a detached garage • New Eljin Sewage System • Relocation of Hydro Lines • Geotechnical Study Relief Requested

Page 23 of 200

• • • • •

Highwater mark setback Top of Bank Front yard Lot Coverage Minimum separation distance

File: MV-48-20-P

Page 24 of 200

Proposed location to the left – view from the lane

View from the water

File: MV-48-20-P

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Public Services – Did not meet criteria for circulation. • Building Services – No Objections to Sewage System or Minimum Separation Distance between Buildings. • Quinte Conservation – No objections. • Public Comments – Two comments were received on the original application. One phone call was received regarding the current application. Page 25 of 200

File: MV-48-20-P

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 200375
Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
Is minor Page 26 of 200

File: MV-48-20-P

Recommendation • It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application MV-48-20-P, subject to conditions. • Conditions: • The Minor Variance is approved in accordance with plans submitted. • Building permit is required for ALL construction on the property. • A development agreement is required to address Concord Engineering recommendations and Township environmental policies • Shed be removed by obtaining a demolition permit Page 27 of 200

• MV-48-20-P is only applicable to Zoning By-Law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws

File: MV-48-20-P

Questions & Comments

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Questions or Comments from Committee Members

Resolution & Voting Page 28 of 200

Upon the Chair asking if any member of the Committee is opposed to the Resolution, please advise if you are opposed. The Chair will call if the vote is carried or is lost.

Permission Application MV-43-21-S Applicant: Jane Acworth-New Property: 7100 Billy Green Road Proposal: To enlarge a legal-non conforming building Recommendation: Approval Page 29 of 200

• Pending public comment • Subject to conditions

File: MV-43-21-S

Property Description

Page 30 of 200

• Rural designation • RLSW Zone • 8.5 acres • Buck Lake – at capacity • Existing Dwelling is located on the small peninsula • Sewage System 2021 – behind dwelling

File: MV-43-21-S

Proposal • To enlarge a single detached dwelling by increasing its height and gross floor area, within the required setback from the highwater mark • Replace front porch with foyer addition • To repair, renovate and strengthen the dwelling to a safe condition and to meet the current building code standards.

Page 31 of 200

Existing Front Porch

Existing Mid-section Overview of existing development from the rear

Proposed Development Page 32 of 200

View from peninsula View from the water

Page 33 of 200

File: MV-43-21-S

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Public Services – Did not meet criteria for circulation. • Building Services – No Objections. • Cataraqui Conservation – No objections. • Public Comments – No comments received.

Page 34 of 200

File: MV-43-21-S

Planning Analysis • The dwelling is a legal non-conforming building • Proposed dwelling is consistent with the existing and permitted residential use of the property • Allow development to meet Ontario Building Code requirement • The increased building height would: • comply with the RLSW zone provision • not affect surrounding properties • existing setback to the highwater mark will be maintained • The foyer addition would: Page 35 of 200

• continue to be farther from the highwater mark of the southeast corner of the dwelling

File: MV-43-21-S

Recommendation • It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve application MV-43-21-S, subject to conditions. • Conditions: • Permission is granted in accordance with plans submitted. • Building permit is required for ALL construction on the property. • A development agreement is required to address Cataraqui Conservation recommendations and Township environmental policies

Page 36 of 200

File: MV-43-21-S

Questions & Comments

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Questions or Comments from Committee Members

Resolution & Voting Page 37 of 200

Upon the Chair asking if any member of the Committee is opposed to the Resolution, please advise if you are opposed. The Chair will call if the vote is carried or is lost.

Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L Owner: Joe Barrett Agent/Applicant: Braydon Norris Property: PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough District Proposal: To permit an accessory structure in the front yard Recommendation: Approval Page 38 of 200

• Pending public comment • Subject to conditions

File: MV-44-21-L

Property Description • Rural designation • RLSW Zone • South of Senior Lane • “L shaped” • Cronk Lake • Wetland on west side • Existing Accessory Structure Page 39 of 200

File: MV-44-21-L

Proposal • Permit an accessory structure in the front yard • 155 square feet in area • 34 metres from highwater mark

• Privy located outside of highwater mark and in front yard • A building permit for the seasonal dwelling has been received

Page 40 of 200

Front Lot Line Property Boundaries Water

View from wetland inlet

View from top of property

View from water Page 41 of 200

File: MV-44-21-L

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Public Services – Did not meet criteria for circulation. • Building Services – Building Staff have spoken to the applicant prior to the submission of the minor variance application regarding the existing “cabin” on the property to provide applicant with options. • Cataraqui Conservation – No objections, located outside 30 metre setback. Note that the property is subject of an ongoing enforcement investigation and are Staff are seeking removal of the structure.

Page 42 of 200

• Public Comments – One comment received requesting more information about the use of the structure.

File: MV-44-21-L

Planning Analysis Variance meets four tests of a minor variance

Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan
Maintains the general intent and purpose of Zoning By-law No. 200375
Is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question
Is minor Page 43 of 200

File: MV-44-21-L

Recommendation • It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application MV-44-21-L, subject to conditions. • Conditions: • The Minor Variance is approved in accordance with plans submitted. • Building permit is required for ALL construction on the property and there shall be no additional development or demolition without approval from South Frontenac. • Cabin be removed by obtaining a demolition permit within 6 months of this minor variance approval or it may be moved to a compliant location on the property by obtaining a building permit. Page 44 of 200

• MV-44-21-L is only applicable to Zoning By-Law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws

File: MV-44-21-L

Questions & Comments

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Questions or Comments from Committee Members

Resolution & Voting Page 45 of 200

Upon the Chair asking if any member of the Committee is opposed to the Resolution, please advise if you are opposed. The Chair will call if the vote is carried or is lost.

Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S Applicant: Andrew Tulett Property: 538 Mount Chesney Road Recommendation: Approval for garage / denial for shed • Pending public comment • Subject to conditions

Page 46 of 200

File: MV-45-21-S

Property Statistics • Rural designation • RU-26 zone • 538 Mount Chesney Road • 1.0 ha • Existing garage • Shed under construction Page 47 of 200

File: MV-45-21-S

Proposal • Single detached dwelling • Garage and shed in front yard

Page 48 of 200

File: MV-45-21-S

Page 49 of 200

Shed

Garage

File: MV-45-21-S

Page 50 of 200

Property viewed from Battersea Road

File: MV-45-21-S

Department, Agency and Public Comments • Public Services – did not meet criteria for circulation • Building Services – did not meet criteria for circulation • Public Comments – none received to date

Page 51 of 200

File: MV-45-21-S

Planning Analysis

Variance for garage meets four tests of a minor variance
Variance for shed a. Does not meet intent and purpose of Zoning By-law b. Is not desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land

Page 52 of 200

File: MV-45-21-S

Recommendation • Receive comments from the public and, pending comments received • Deny minor variance application MV-45-21-S relative to the shed • Approve the portion related to the garage subject to these conditions: • The Minor Variance is to permit the existing garage in the front yard of the proposed dwelling, and to be setback approximately 23 metres from the front lot line • Building permit is required for ALL demolition and construction on the property • The shed shall be removed within six months

Page 53 of 200

• MV-45-21-S is only applicable to Zoning By-Law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws

File: MV-45-21-S

Questions & Comments

Committee Members – Questions for Staff
Applicant / Agent / Members of the Public
Further Questions or Comments from Committee Members

Resolution & Voting Page 54 of 200

Upon the Chair asking if any member of the Committee is opposed to the Resolution, please advise if you are opposed. The Chair will call if the vote is carried or is lost.

Consent Granting Authority • S-50-21-B (MacComish) – The creation of a new lot – October 29 • S-52-21-S (Chambers) – The creation of a new lot – October 13 • S-55-21-B (Funk) – Lot addition – October 13 • S-56-21-S (Sousa) – Lot addition – October 29 • S-57-21-B (Bresee) – Creation of a new lot – October 29 • S-60-21-P (Promm) – Lot addition – October 29 Page 55 of 200

Conclusion/Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Meeting

Page 56 of 200

Page 57 of 200

Consent Application Chan e of conditions Change of conditions

Application Type: $908.00 $204.00 $357.00

Building Admin Fee:

$1 ,OO5.00 $204.00 $454.00

TOTAL:

It is required that one (1) copy of this application be ?led‘ with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of AdjustmentlLand Division Committee, together with the SKETCH referred to in Note 3 (below), accompanied by a NONREFUNDABLE FEE outlined in the table below in cash or cheque made payable to the Township of South Frontenac.

Application Requirements

Planning Act. Whether the proposed severed lot is premature or in the public interest. Whether the consent conforms to the intent of the Official Plan. The suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is being severed. The number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of roadways and their adequacy in relation to any proposed roadway linking the proposed severed area with the established‘ roadway system. The dimensions and shape of the proposed lot. Any restrictions on the subject land (or on the buildings and structures to be erected on it) and any restrictions on abutting lands. Conservation of natural resources and ?ood control. The adequacy of utilities and municipal services. The adequacy of schools. The area of land, it any, exclusive of roadways, that is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes (such as for parks). The physical configuration of the new lot having regard to energy conservation.

The Committee, in considering Consent (Severance), shall have regard, among other matters, to the health, safety, convenience and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the municipality and to: The effect of development on matters of provincial interest as referred to in Section 2 of the

The Committee of Adjustment is a Committee of Eight persons appointed by Township Council‘.The Committee is formed under Section 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 Chapter P-13. to authorize the division of property-

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Updated January, 2021

Page 58 of 200

$344

Personal information requested herein is required under the Planning Act, 1990 as amended. This information will be used by the Committee of Adjustment/Land DivisionCommittee for the purpose of reviewing the above referenced application, and may be made available to those boards, Commissions, Authorities, Agencies and Persons having an interest in this matter. Any questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed to the Secretary

Collection of Personal information:

Each applicant shall provide a sketch showing the dimensions of the subject land and of all abutting lands as outlined in question 17 of the application. The sketch should be accurately dimensioned and scaled in either Imperial or Metric measures. This sketch, in conjunction with the Application Form, is the basis for the analysis of the Consent Application by the Land Division Committee. it is strongly recommended that the applicant spend the necessary time to carefully and thoroughly assemble the data and transfer the data to the sketch. it is important that the sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measurements. Any application which does not include the above required information may not be accepted. in this regard, the applicant may wish to secure the assistance of a person who specializes in the drafting of such sketches. A Reference Plan (survey) is not necessarily required for the Committee to consider the application but will be required at a later date prior to the stamping of the deeds.

PLEASE READ THIS ITEMCAREFULLY:

Township of South Frontenac onsite sewage disposal review (per new lot) Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority (per new [at or lot addition) Quinte Conservation Authority (per new lot) (lot addition) Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (per new lot or lot addition)

It is required that a Fee be provided for the Township with respect to on—sitesewage disposal andlor Conservation Authority (where applicable) when submitting an application. A separate cheque, payable to the applicable Conservation Authority, is to be submitted to the Township with the completed application, the fee for the onsite sewage disposal review can be added to the application fee. Please Note: These fees are for consuttation on this application only; these agencies may require additional pennit applications and fees prior to any construction.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 59 of 200

9>
3 Q2
'

08> S23

?am an _

in £11.12,

aw‘€

‘

‘D

Signature(s) of Owner(s)

Agent as named above is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of processing this application for Minor Variance.

Email Address of Authorized Agent:

Phone number of Authorized Agent;

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent:

Name of Authorized Agent:

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.

Email Address of Owner(s): _

Phone number of Owner(s): __

Full Mailing Address of Owner(s):

Name of Owner(s):

Date:

File No:

Pre—consultationFee Received: / Amount: 931031 .- 00 (within 6 months to be applied to the application fee)

Date of Pre-Consultation Meeting:

Date Received:

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 60 of 200

E Area: 9

?at

Frontage (on road/lane):

Part Number(s):

v6.5

R oaox 7326Pt W/‘l7L0}’\

E I I507 Ci830:”;/17 Eat

0‘

&.‘On Q‘?61 1163;)‘

‘O4’

2 .7’ A(“mag

“Wt

§OL’>

Area

Depth

Frontage On Water

E: M)» l"rm ?ow‘

5; I 3

A-CV09

7’ ‘Q 217777

/’)Qé

NewLot:

Existing Uses

Proposed Uses

Please list/describe the existing and proposed USES of the land to be severed and to be retained:

Area

Depth

Frontage On Water

Frontage On Road

_ _

Frontage On Road

330‘ Mm Cummrhe

Retained Lot:

a. The frontage, depth and the area in metric (area can be acres). (Complete this section for a new lot only)

The following infonnation regarding the land intended to be severed and the land to be retained: NOTE: if your application is for a new lot, answer question 6(a); if the application is for a lot addition or right—of-way only, answer question 6(b).

The type and the purpose of the proposed transaction, such as a transfer for the creation of a new lot, a lot addition, an easement/right—of—way,a charge, a lease or a correction of title.

Depth:

Frontage (on water):

The frontage(s), depth and area of the subject iand.

03 2308-0000

;

Proposed New Lot:

o\o~

Roll Number:

zb§o~

g OM

Reference Plan Number:

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 61 of 200

l5Egg g 1;)Q11 6.

Structures Proposed

Frontage On Road: Frontage On Water”. Depth:

Area:

Frontage On Road:

Frontage On Water:

Depth:

Area:

Lot Addition (or R.O.W.):

Retained:

Lot Addition or R_O.W:

Structures Existing

Present Use of Property

Structures Proposed

Proposed Use of Property

Please listldescribe the existing and proposed USES of the land to be severed and to be retained:

Retained Lot: (This is the property_from which the lot addition is being severed or over which the R.O.W. willrun)

Proposed Lot Addition (or right—of-way)

(b) The frontage, depth and the area in metric (area can be . (Complete for a lot addition or rightof-way (R.O.W.) only)

Retained Lot:

Structures Existing

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 62 of 200

[A§z;!‘§?V\

Com min 5

Retained Lot:

New Lot:

If access to the new lot is by water only, 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.

NOTE: Some roads (particularly fonner “County” Roads) have speci?c requirements for spacing between entrances. Also, any proposed new entrance must have safe sight—|ines. These requirements may affect the success of your application. If you wish to check the status of your road or sight line conditions, please contact the Roads Department at 376-3027.

The retained lot:

The new lot (lot addition or R.O.W.):

Name of road or lane which accesses:

_j::?

indicate whether there are any easements or restrictive covenants affecting the subject land and a description of each easement or covenant and its effect (if known):

SQHZQE

Retained Lot:

New Lot:

Retained Lot:

Qoh 6

Note the method by which sewage disposal will be provided, e.g. private septic, privy or other means:

New Lot:

Note the method by which water will be provided, i.e., by a publicly owned and operated piped water system, privately owned and operated individual or communal well, a lake or other water body or other means.

“jug-i'2Y,3; sxgravk

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 63 of 200

(b) The decision on the application:

XNO

application.

success of your application because of incompatibility issues. Please check with the Planning Department regarding the implications of any farm structure, on your

a) The boundaries and dimensions of the subject land, the part that is to be severed and the part that is to be retained. b) The location of all land previously severed from the parcel (if applicable) originally acquired by the current owner of the subject land. C) The approximate location of all natural and arti?cial features on the subject land and on the abutting lands. Examples include buildings, railways, roads, watercourses, drainage ditches, river or stream banks, barns, wetlands, wooded areas, wells and septic tanks. Show distance of these features from the applicant’s property lines. d) The current uses of land that is abutting the subject land, such as residential, agricultural and commercial uses (if agricultural, please indicate the approximate distance of any barn structure from the proposed new lot). Note: The existence of a nearby barn or other fann type structure may affect the

A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following:

Yes

(b) The decision on the application:

15.Are there any abandoned wells on the property you aware of?

(b) The ?le #:

If known, has the subject land ever been the subject of any other application under the Planning Act, such as an application for an amendment to an of?cial plan, a zoning by—law,a minister’s zoning order, a minor variance? if so, please indicate:

(a) The file #2

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 64 of 200

QQ Q)’. 4'0 Ccu'0&h

i) Please prepare your sketch so that North is at the top of the page.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 65 of 200

DAY or

,2oal Auémgl: 33; I lgrlel? j lop/1 Zl:?‘U§}4’l/ OF Hg-wldf l»\tJ-‘Bi

‘M

l, solemnly declare that all the s atements contained in this appl tion are true and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made qmder oath and by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act.

THIS

DATED AT THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

The Owner/Applicant further agrees that, until such requests have been complied with, the municipality willhave no continuing obligation to process the application or attend or be represented at the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative proceeding in connection with the application:

The OwnerlApplicant further agrees to provide the municipality, upon request and in cases where an application has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, 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 in order to process the application. If such appeal expenses exceed the deposit, the Owner/Applicant shall pay the difference forthwith upon being billed by the municipality, with interest at the rate of 1.25% per month (15% per annum) on accounts overdue more than 30 days,

Without limiting the foregoing, such fees and expenses shall include the fees and expenses of consultants, planners, engineers, lawyers and such other professional and technical advisors as the municipality may, in its absolute discretion acting reasonably, consider necessary or advisable to more property process and support the application.

The OwnerlApplicant agrees to reimburse and indemnify the municipality for all fees and expenses incurred by the municipality to process the application, including any fees and expenses attributable to proceedings before the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative tribunal if necessary to defend the Committee’s decision to support the application.

The Ownen’ApplicantlAgent agrees that the information recorded in this Consent Application Form is accurate. The OwnerlApplicant/Agent agrees that representatives of the Township, Public Health and, where applicable, the appropriate Conservation Authority, may enter onto the subject property for the purpose of determining the appropriateness of the site for the proposed development.

Attached to this application is a cheque payable to the Township of South Frontenac in the correct amount representing payment of the application fee.

AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 66 of 200

This question is asking about such things as a 20 ft. wide Bel! or Ontario Hydro easement, a registered right—of-way to access another property, or something like someone having a life—long interest in the property.

If you know the person who will be purchasing the new lot or lot addition, please indicate. Othenrvise, indicate “self”.

Please complete all sections that pertain to your application. Ifyour application is for a new lot please complete section (a). If your application is for a lot addition or a right-of—way,please complete section (b).

Please indicate the purpose of this consent application from among the choices provided.

space blank. d. Name of Roadlstreetz This question applies whether or not you are on a private lane or a public road. e. Reference Plan No: If your property has been surveyed, it will have a plan number, and one or more parts on that plan. If your property has not been surveyed, leave this space blank. f. Roll No: This is the number beginning with ‘1029’ which appears on your tax bill. Please take time to look it up before submitting the application.

—-

Description of the Subject Land: a. District: The Districts are the same as the former Townships. lf you are not sure, check the roll number (the long number beginning with 1029) on your tax bill. Ifthe numbers are O10, 020 or 030, your district is Bedford; if the numbers are 040 or 050, your district is Loughborough; if the numbers are 060 or 070, your district is Storrington; and if the numbers are 080, your district is Portland. b. Concession and Lot Numbers: ifyou are not sure, check your tax bill c. Street Number: Your civic address if a civic number has not been assigned, leave this

If there is someone acting on behatf of the listed owner(s) (eg. a solicitor, a consultant, or a family member) then that person would be the agent, and the owner(s) must sign part (e) to indicate that the agent has the authorization to act on behalf of the owner(s).

the full mailing address, complete with postal code.

. The names of at least one owner must appear in this section, and the address(es) should be

A GUIDE TO COMPLETING YOUR APPLICATION FORM

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 67 of 200

The Agreement to indemnify is your agreement that your application will be processed at your expense, and that any additional expenses will be your responsibility. If there is more than one owner, both owners must sign the application, unless one person has been appointed as agent for purposes of processing the application- The signature(s) can be witnessed at the Township Office, or you can have a commissioner.

15.The Sketch is probably the most important part of your application. You do not need to pay a professional to prepare it for you, but it must be drawn to scale; it must contain all of the information outlined; and it must be drawn with north direction at the top of the sketch.

14.This question is asked because no new lot will be created unless the Committee is satis?ed that any abandoned wells on the property have been properly sealed in accordance with Ministry of Environment guidelines.

Please indicate ifyou have applied for a zoning by-law amendment, an official plan amendment, or a minor variance, and if so, indicate the file # (or date) and the purpose of the application.
Please indicate if you have ever applied fora severance application or a plan of subdivision or a plan of condominium for the subject land since September 5, 2000.

11.If you do not know how your property is zoned, leave this question blank until you have talked to the planning staff.

situations.

10.The majority of cases will be private septic, but there may also be some privies or other

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR CONSENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 68 of 200

3583 ft

85.19

Acres

Retained Parcel

326 ft WILTON ROAD FRONTAGE

4337 ft

EDGE

ROAD

NOTE: ROAD FRONT AGE IS FROM CUL-DE-SAC

PROPOSED SEVERANCE LOT

NOTE THERE ARENO BARNS WITHIN 750 M

Page 69 of 200

cu:-u

nnrlumuz

no/u-A/vm

Iuismz:

as-an com: n\nu—nua¢nuan—n—‘a¢\xumm-0.-unutlanncu-.)\nu4\h-mt.-a.<..zo1

Page 70 of 200

3825 YARKER RD

4239

Inset YARKER Map RD

Florida Rd

WILTON RD W/S

W ilt o

MCCONNELL RD

Hen derson Rd 3481 WILTON RD

4247 HENDERSON RD

WILTON RD

3473 W ILTON RD

3469 WILTON RD

S-68-21-P (HAWLEY)

Henderson Rd

3445 WILTON RD

4292 HENDERSON RD

CLARK RD

CITY OF KINGSTON

4224 HENDERSON RD

3388 FLORIDA RD

Legend Proposed Severance City of Kingston Parcel Fabric

3385 WILTON RD

Provincially Significant Wetlands Wetland

WILTON RD

Waterbody WILTON RD

HENDERSON RD

Road

W ilt

CON 1 PT LOT 9 BOUNDRY RD

Subject Property

3414 WILTON RD

3373 WILTON RD

FLORIDA RD

4224 HENDERSON RD

WILTON RD

3355 WILTON RD

FLORIDA RD

WILTON RD WILTON RD

3304 OLD WILTON RD

WILTON RD

Proposed Severance

3306 WILTON RD

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.

Page 71 of 200

WILTON RD

CUMMINS RD

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

Scale 1:10,000

CITY OF KINGSTON

0 30 60 120 180 240 Meters UTM Projection NAD 83

Date: 2021-09-01

Page 72 of 200

September 23, 2021

File: SEV/FRS/321/2021

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

Dear Ms. Hannah: Re:

Application for Consent to Sever S-68-21-P (Hawley) Part Lot 9, Concession 1; 0 Wilton Road Township of South Frontenac (Portland District) Waterbody: Unevaluated Wetlands

Cataraqui Conservation staff have reviewed the above-noted application for consent to sever and offer the following comments for the Land Division Committee’s consideration. Summary of Proposal The applicant has requested severance of a 1.0 hectare parcel of land from with a minimum of 76 metres of frontage onto Cummins Road from a property with frontage on Wilton Road. The applicants are extending the existing public road known as Cummins Road to provide road frontage for the severed parcel. The retained lands will retain the existing development and will be approximately 34.5 hectares in area with approximately 99 metres of frontage onto Wilton Road. Site Description The property is located on the east side of Wilton Road south of Henderson Road. The topography of the lot to be severed can be characterized as being relatively flat with overland drainage in an easterly direction. Mapping suggests that the retained parcel contains a number of unevaluated wetland features. However, there are no natural hazard or natural heritage features identified that are associated with the lot to be severed.

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 73 of 200

Page 2 of 3

The property is currently designated ‘Rural’ in the Official Plan and ‘Rural’ (RU) and ‘Environmentally Sensitive’ in the implementing Zoning By-law for South Frontenac Township. The environmentally sensitive designation appears to correspond with the location of the unevaluated wetlands on the retained parcel. Discussion The main interests of Cataraqui Conservation with respect to this application are the avoidance of natural hazards (e.g. flooding), protection of the unevaluated wetlands and water quality. Natural Hazards Flooding: Flood plain mapping is not available for the unevaluated wetlands on the retained lot. Section 5.8.2 of the Zoning By-law specifies that no building or structure or septic tank installation shall be located within a minimum 30 metres horizontal of the highwater mark of a waterbody or watercourse. Similarly, Cataraqui Conservation’s Environmental Planning Policy (EPP, 2021) also suggests a 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of a waterbody for new development, provided that, in the opinion of staff, there is sufficient difference in elevation (to be determined on a case by case basis). Based upon a review of relevant mapping, the severed lot and the retained lot appear to contain considerable area for future development outside of any area that may be susceptible to flooding. Natural Heritage and Water Quality As noted above, the lands contain some unevaluated wetland features which are identified as being environmentally sensitive. Section 5.2.7 of the Official Plan suggests that lands within 90 metres of the highwater mark of such a feature may be developed in accordance with the underlying land use designation when an Environmental Impact Assessment is prepared that indicates that no negative impacts will occur to the natural features or the ecological functions of the feature. The Official Plan also recognizes the need to minimize impacts to water quality by reducing phosphorous inputs, preventing erosion and maintaining natural appearances. Accordingly, policies have been included that can vary the setback from the highwater mark from 30 to 90 metres depending on the site characteristics such as steepness of slope, vegetation cover, soil depth and soil phosphorus retention. Section 5.2.7 (b)(ii)(3) of the Official Plan indicates that a reduction from the setback may only be considered if

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 74 of 200

Page 3 of 3

it is not physically possible or environmentally desirable to meet the 30 metre setback requirement, and that there will be no negative impacts to fish habitat or water quality. Similar to the Official Plan, Cataraqui Conservation’s EPP suggests that proposals for development should incorporate a minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of a waterbody in order to protect the water quality of surface water. In this instance, there appears to be suitable development envelopes outside of the required setbacks for natural heritage features and water quality on the lot to be severed and the lot to be retained. Recommendation Staff have no objection to the approval of application S-68-21-P based on our consideration for natural hazards, natural heritage, and water quality and quantity protection policies. Ontario Regulation 148/06 Cataraqui Conservation, under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, regulates development within 15 metres of a flood plain or erosion hazard, and within 30 metres of an unevaluated wetland. Portions of the retained lot are subject to Ontario Regulation 148/06. The applicant or future owners of the retained lot will be required to contact the undersigned at the building permit stage for more information regarding permitting requirements under Ontario Regulation 148/06. Please notify this office of any decision made by the Committee with regard to this application. If you have any questions, please contact Andrew Schmidt at (613) 5464228 extension 244 or by e-mail at aschmidt@crca.ca. Yours truly,

Andrew Schmidt

Andrew Schmidt Supervisor, Development Review /as c.c.

Anna Geladi, South Frontenac Township (via e-mail) Rhonda Roantree, Cataraqui Conservation (via e-mail)

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 75 of 200

Report from Public Services S-68-21-P Application Number: ___________________________________________________

Tom and Marlene Hawley Applicant’s Name: _____________________________________________________ 1 9 Portland Lot: _______________District:

Concession: _________________ A vacant property on Wilton Road with Frontage on Cummins and Wilton Road Road: ________________________________________________________________

Road Maintenance:

✔ Year-round □

Seasonal □

Sight Lines: Are there adequate sight lines for the entrance?

✔ Yes □

No □

If no, what changes would be required to improve sight lines?

Road Conditions:

Are there any special drainage/ditching concerns related to creation of new lot(s)? ✔ Yes □ No □ If yes, what action is the applicant required to take?

Drainage in this area is very flat and will be reviewed with Kingston Officials as part of the design process.

Is the overall road condition adequate to serve increased development/traffic? ✔ Yes □ No □ If no, please explain, and indicate if there are any measures that could be taken to correct the inadequacies.

Road will need to be extended and a new cul-de-sac constructed. Applicant would be required to enter into a development agreement to design and construct the roadway and post the appropriate securities.

Road Widening Required? ✔ No □ To be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor □ Yes □ Any specific requirement?

Widening of ROW is anticipated for the construction of an off-set cul-de-sac design.

Approved by the Public Services? ✔ Yes □ Yes, with conditions □ No □ If yes, with conditions, please describe conditions below.

Subject to a development agreement to construct the roadway in accordance with the Township’s standards and City of Kingston’s standards (boundary road).

Signature on behalf of Public Services

October 3, 2021

Date

Page 76 of 200

Consent Application Report Date:

November 5, 2021

Application No: Owner & Applicant: Location of Property:

S-68-21-P Tom and Marlene Hawley Part Lot 9, Concession 1, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as Wilton Road Purpose of Application: Consent to create one new residential lot Recommendation: That provisional consent be: 

granted with conditions (attached) deferred denied

Purpose:

enlarge abutting lot 

create new lot right-of-way / easement Severed Parcel

Retained Parcel

Official Plan Designation:

Rural

Zoning:

Rural

+/- 1 hectare (+/-2.7 acres)

+/- 34.5 hectares (+/-85.2 acres)

a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) on Cummins Road

+/- 99 metres (326 feet) on Wilton Road

Area: Frontage on Road:

Frontage on Water: N/A

N/A

Review: Subject to conditions, this application will be able to meet all applicable policy. However, currently this application: X 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 (3.3); X Conforms to the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (5.2, 5.7.4, & 7.1); X Complies with Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 (or will comply subject to a standard condition of rezoning or minor variance); and  Has no unresolved objections/concerns raised from agencies or the public.

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

Page 77 of 200

Background By-law 2020-27 delegates approval of undisputed consent applications to the Director of Development Services, or their designate. This application as it stands does not meet all the By-law 2020-27 criteria for an undisputed consent application as it does not conform to the Official Plan or comply with Zoning By-law policies as there is not currently lot frontage on Cummins Road. Therefore, the Director of Development Services cannot make a decision on the application. The Committee of Adjustment will hear the application at its November 11th meeting for a decision.

Proposal The purpose of this consent application is to create a new residential lot. The subject property is located on the south side of Wilton Road and on the north side of Cummins Road. Cummins Road is on the shared road allowance between the Township of South Frontenac and the City of Kingston. There is existing residential development and agricultural operations along Wilton Road and Cummins Road. The subject lands consist of, and are surrounded by, farmland and forest. The severed parcel is located at the south end of the subject property along the Cummins Road allowance. Cummins Road currently ends to the west of the severed parcel. The applicants are proposing to extend this public road to provide frontage for the severed parcel. Cummins Road is jointly owned by the Township of South Frontenac and the City of Kingston. The severed parcel will be approximately 1 hectare (2.7 acres) in area and have a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Cummins Road. The severed parcel is vacant and is predominantly treed. The retained parcel will be approximately 34.5 hectares (85.2 acres) in area and have approximately 99 metres (+/- 326 feet) of frontage on Wilton Road. The retained parcel is vacant and consists predominantly of farmland and forested areas. There are small pockets of wetland located in the south and middle of the retained parcel.

Department, Agency and Public Comments Public Services – Comments received from Public Services on October 3, 2021 indicated that Cummins Road would need to be extended and a new turning circle constructed to provide the severed parcel with frontage on a public road. It is anticipated that a road widening will be needed for the construction of an off turning circle design. Drainage will need to be reviewed as part of the design process for extending and building the public road, as the area is very flat. There would be adequate sight lines for an entrance for the severed parcel on the new road. Public Services have no objection to the approval of the application on the condition that the severed parcel be subject to an agreement to construct the roadway in accordance with the Township and City of Kingston Public Road Standards and the applicant will need to post the appropriate securities related to the works. City of Kingston – City of Kingston Planning Services Staff provided comments in an e-mail dated September 29, 2021 that they have no concerns with the application from a land-use perspective, nor to the extension of Cummins Road. City of Kingston Staff have requested that the following matters be required as conditions of approval:   

the applicant acknowledges the required extension of Cummins Road is geographically located within both the Township of South Frontenac and the City of Kingston; the applicant will be required to provide detailed engineering design for the road extension and turning circle, including but not limited to geotechnical investigation, to the satisfaction and approval of both municipalities; the applicant will be required to enter into a construction agreement with the two municipalities that specifies all costs for investigation, design construction, contract administration, financial 2

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

Page 78 of 200

 

security, and any other expenses required for the road extension to the satisfaction of both municipalities; that all costs are the responsibility of the applicant. The construction agreement will require the applicant to provide financial security totalling 100% of the estimated construction costs in a form satisfactory to both municipalities; and the applicant acknowledges that the roadway must be constructed and operational to the satisfaction of both municipalities prior to issuance of the Certificate of Official.

Building Services (Sewage System Review) – Comments received from Building Services on October 27, 2021 indicate that they have no objection to the approval of the application. Comments note that the severed parcel is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage disposal system. Furthermore, it notes that depending on the location, soil conditions will require additional suitable granular soil to construct a sewage disposal system; specific requirements for additional soil will be addressed prior to site development. Cataraqui Conservation – Comments received from Cataraqui Conservation on September 23, 2021 indicate that Cataraqui Conservation has no objection to the approval of the application. It was noted that there are no natural hazard or natural heritage features associated with the severed parcel. Furthermore, it was noted that there are considerable areas outside of any area that may be susceptible to flooding on the retained parcel and outside the waterbody setback from the wetlands located on the retained parcel for both the severed and retained parcel for future development to occur. It was noted that a permit under O. Reg 148/06 may be required for future development and site alteration on the retained parcel within 30 metres of the wetlands. The applicant or future owner of the property must contact Cataraqui Conservation at the building permit stage. Public Comments – One member of the public inquired about the public road standards and how the City of Kingston will be involved. Township staff spoke with the individual and provided them with a copy of the Township of South Frontenac Road and Lane Standard Cross-Section Policy and walked them through the process of what would be required to build a new road. They were satisfied that Public Services from both the City of Kingston and the Township of South Frontenac are involved in the process.

Analysis The Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (PPS) promotes efficient land use and development patterns which sustain the well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term and that support strong, liveable and healthy communities, protect the environment and public health and safety, and facilitate economic growth (section1.1.1a). The Provincial Policy Statement 2020 permits residential development in the rural designation that is locally appropriate and is appropriate to the infrastructure which is planned or available while avoiding the need for the unjustified and/or economical expansion of this infrastructure The PPS also promotes development that is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels. The County of Frontenac Official Plan (section 3.3), consistent with the PPS, permits residential development in the Rural designation provided that the new development should not be located on lands which would involve major public expense in opening up or maintaining access routes, or providing other public services facilities, unless the public services, access and/or facilities are provided at the developer’s expense. Section 7.1(a) of the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan requires that new lots will have no adverse environmental, social or economic impact on the Township or adjacent land uses. The proposed extension of Cummins Road will be constructed at the applicant’s expense. All costs for investigation, design construction, contract administration, financial security, and any other expenses required for the road extension will be the responsibility of the applicant. Therefore, the financial burden on the municipalities will be minor. 3

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

Page 79 of 200

The new road will benefit the severed parcel as well as one existing lot located in the City of Kingston. The road extension is proposed to service one lot and will provide a suitable turn-around area for winter maintenance and waste collection vehicles to maneuver. The impact of the road extension is minimal and the purpose of the road is to serve new development. Section 7.1 (h) of the Township Official Plan requires that all new rural lots front onto and gain direct access from an existing public road which reflects a reasonable standard of pavement or gravel construction and is maintained year round by the municipality. The Township Official Plan does not contemplate the creation of new lots without frontage on an existing public road. There is currently no existing road frontage on the severed parcel, therefore, the applicants need to extend the road in order to gain frontage. The severed parcel could only be supported by staff if Cummins Road is first extended. By requiring the applicants to construct the road prior to the signing of the Certificate of Official, the road will be existing at the time the consent approval is finalized. Township Public Services and City of Kingston Planning Services are agreeable with a road extension at the expense of the applicant, to provide the required lot frontage for the severed parcel. Therefore, with the correct conditions in place, the proposal meets the general intent of the Official Plan will be able to comply with land division policies (section 7.1). In order to ensure that the public road will be built to Township of South Frontenac Public Road standards the applicant will need to enter into a construction agreement with both the Township of South Frontenac and the City of Kingston to design and construct the roadway as per comments from Public Services and the City of Kingston. The road will be brought up to an appropriate municipal standard as contemplated in section 4.10(a)(ix) of the Township Official Plan. There has been no previous severance from the subject property since the adoption of the Township Official Plan in September of 2000. In accordance with Section 5.7.4 of the Official Plan, the severed parcel is eligible as a rural residential severance. The severed parcel meets the Rural Residential policies (section 5.7.4(ii)) including having a size and shape that conforms to the zoning by-law, the ability to be serviced by a private sewage disposal system. The Township requires the ability to be serviced by a private well to be demonstrated as a condition of consent approval. Section 5.7.4 (ii)(d) requires that all rural residential lots have public road frontage. Section 5.7.4 (ii)(a) requires new rural lots to have at least 76 metres of frontage on a public road. As mentioned above, a condition of approval for the severance will be that the applicants extend Cummins Road by 76 metres to provide the required minimum 76 metres of frontage for the severed parcel. Through conditions, the requirement to have frontage on a public road will be met and can achieve what the Official Plan contemplates. There is sufficient area on the retained parcel and the severed parcel for development to occur outside the minimum 30 metre setback from the wetlands on the retained parcel as required by section 5.2 of the Official Plan, and by Zoning By-law No. 2003-75.

Conclusion The proposal for the construction of a road and the creation of a new lot will be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and the County of Frontenac Official Plan, the South Frontenac Official Plan and will comply with the Township of South Frontenac Zoning By-law, subject to conditions. It is recommended that application S-68-21-P be approved for the consent to create a new residential lot in Part Lot 9, Concession 1, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, subject to conditions.

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

Page 80 of 200

Recommended Conditions for Consent Application S-68-21-P Expiry Period

Conditions imposed must be met within one year 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 one year, the application shall be deemed to be refused. Provided the conditions are fulfilled within one year, the application is valid for two years from the date of Certificate of Official issuance. The deed must be registered within two years of the issuance of the Certificate of Official. Severed Lands
The land to be severed by Consent Application S-68-21-P shall be for the creation of one new residential lot with approximately 1 hectares (2.7 acres) of land and have a minimum of 76 metres (250 feet) of frontage on Cummins Road. Survey/Reference Plan or Registerable Description
An acceptable reference plan or legal description of the severed lands in duplicate [Registry Act, s.81, Land Titles Act, s. 150], the deed or instrument conveying the severed lands, and the Certificate of Official shall be submitted to the Secretary-Treasurer for review and consent endorsement within a period of one year [Planning Act, s. 53(41)] after the date that “Notice of Decision” is given [Planning Act, ss. 53(17) and 53(24)].
The surveyor or applicant shall submit the draft Reference Plan, including an area calculation 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
The land owned by the applicant used to construct the turning circle will be transferred and deeded to the Municipality. This section of land will need to be surveyed to an acceptable width and transferred to the Municipality.
The surveyor who prepares the reference plan referred to in Conditions #3 and #4 shall also determine by survey the width of the un-opened road allowance 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 un-opened road allowance; 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 5

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

Page 81 of 200

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. 7. Cummins Road shall be extended a length of 76 metres (250 feet) within the road allowance to provide frontage for the severed lands. a. Prior to construction of the road extension, the applicant shall enter into a construction agreement with the Municipality and the City of Kingston that specifies all costs for investigation, design construction, contract administration, financial security, and any other expenses required for the road extension to the satisfaction of both municipalities are the responsibility of the applicant. The agreement shall include information regarding the design and construction criteria for Cummins Road and will require the applicant to provide financial security totalling 100% of the estimated construction costs in a form satisfactory to both municipalities. The agreement shall be registered on title to the property prior to the commencement of the construction of the road, and; b. The applicant shall provide a detailed engineering design for the road extension and turning circle, including but not limited to geotechnical investigation, and engineering review to the satisfaction and approval of both municipalities.The extension of the public road will need to be designed and constructed to Township Standards and City Standards for public roads in accordance with the Township of South Frontenac Road and Lane Standard Cross-Section Policy to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac Staff and City of Kingston Staff. This design will be approved prior to the execution of the construction agreement, and; c. The road extension must be constructed and operational to the satisfaction of both municipalities prior to issuance of the Certificate of Official. Municipal Requirements 8. 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. 9. The Township of South Frontenac shall receive 5% of the value of the severed lands through Consent Application S-68-21-P, in lieu of parkland [Planning Act, s. 51(1)]. 10. 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 S-68-21-P. 11. 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. 12. The applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the Township to be registered on title to the severed parcel to address the development of the lot. The development agreement includes the requirements items to be submitted at the building permit stage, such as:  a lot grading and drainage plan  an entrance permit Zoning 13. 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 Municipality.

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

Page 82 of 200

Submitted by: Anna Geladi, Planner Reviewed by: Christine Woods, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner Site Visit: June 28, 2021

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

Page 83 of 200

Page 84 of 200

provided the Committee

is of the opinion

Planning Fee: Building Admin Fee: $940.00 $94.00 $1,290.00 I$94.00 $1,970.00 I$94.00

$1,984.00 $2,064.00

TOTAL: I $1,034.00

KFL&A Public Health Unit Minor Variance Only Minor Variance WITH Performance Review

$450 $700

It is required that a Fee be provided for the Health Unit and Conservation Authority (where applicable) when submitting an application (Separate cheques, payable to KFL&APublic Health and/or applicable Conservation Authority, are to be submitted to the Township with the completed application). Please Note: These fees are for consultation on this application only; these agencies may require additional permit applications and fees prior to any construction.

1-3 Variances 4+ Variances After buildinglithout a permit

Applicatior?ype:

It is required that one (1) copy of this application be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, together with the SKETCH referred to in Note 3 (below), accompanied by a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE in accordance with the chart below in cash, debit or by cheque made payable to the Township of South Frontenac.

Application Requirements

is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. ls minor in nature

The Committee may vary Zoning By-law provisions that the variance:

The Committee of Adjustment is a Committee of eight persons appointed by Township Council. The Committee is formed under Section 45 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.13, to authorize a minor variance from a zoning by-law.

Updated January, 2020

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE OR PERMISSION

Page 85 of 200

Personal information requested herein is required under the Planning Act, 1990 as amended. This information will be used by the Committee of Adjustment/Land Division Committee for the purpose of reviewing the above referenced application, and may be made available to those boards, Commissions, Authorities, Agencies and Persons having an interest in this matter. Any questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed to the Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment (P.O. Box 100, Sydenham, Ont., KOH2T0, Phone 376-3027 eXt.2224).

Collection of Personal Information

Each applicant shall provide a sketch showing the dimensions of the subject land and of all abutting lands as outlined in Question 29 of the application. The sketch should be accurately dimensioned and scaled in either Imperial or Metric measures. This sketch, in conjunction with the Application Form, is the basis for the analysis of the Minor Variance Application by the Committee of Adjustment. It is strongly recommended that the applicant spend the necessary time to carefully and thoroughly assemble the data and transfer the data to the sketch. It is important that the sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measurements. Any application which does not include the above required information may not be accepted. In this regard, the applicant may wish to secure the assistance of a person who specializes in the drafting of such sketches. A guide to answering the application questions is attached.

PLEASE READ THIS ITEM CAREFULLY

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

Page 86 of 200

Margarita Kulchitskaya

File No:

The B°“’eVa’d

GVOUP

Bedford

Concession Number:

District: 11

The description of the subject land:

?(Port|and

PY ‘-T 3

Loughborough

Storrington

Agent as named above is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of processing this application for Minor Variance.

Email Address of Authorized Agent:

Phone number of Authorized Agent:

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent: _

Name of Authorized Agent:

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.

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 APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 87 of 200

51"”

27”‘

Area:

1,210 Sqm

Frontage (on road/lane):

2245’“

will enable a two bedroom dwelling to be constructed.

{No

What are the existing uses of the subject land?

N/A

If access to the subject property is by water only, please indicate the parking and docking facilities used or to be used and the approximate distance of these facilities from the subject land and the nearest public road.

Silver Rock Lane

Name of Road/Lane:

Yes

The existing lot of record is undersized. The requested minor variances

The reason why the proposed use cannot comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-law:

in the setbacks to the water and between the house and garage. The septic setback to the lane reduced from 5m to 3m

reductions Topermit a 6% lot coveragefor the house, and minor

The nature and extent of the relief from the Zoning By-law:

RLSW

The current zoning of the subject land:

Depth:

Frontage (on water):

The frontage(s), depth and area of the subject land.

Does the subject property front on a municipally maintained road? OR a privately maintained road? dYes No

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

Page 88 of 200

(1) (2)

indicate: (4)

14.Are any bui|ding(s) or structure(s), or additions to existing bui|ding(s) or structure(s), PROPOSED

Slngle-Family Dwelling

’ <3)

item 11 is yes, for EACH building or structure

13.The proposed uses of the subject land:

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Dimensions of Floor Area

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

Setback from Side Lot Line

Setback from Rear Lot Line

Setback from Front Lot Line

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

‘"

Ifthe answerto

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

Page 89 of 200

NOTES:

252m

10.1

3,09”.

Dwelling

(1)

25.2m

‘

2-,-.1m

5-27"

3'10"‘

Garage

(2)

27-1’“

Approx 38m

NIA

4.0m

3.0m

Approx 33 “1

Septic

(4)

If the subject property is on waterfront, and on a private lane, the setback from the front lot line and the setback from the high water mark will be the same.
The dimensions required in this question relate to the NEW CONSTRUCTION ONLY, and NOT to the total size of the completed building.

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Outside Dimensions of Building/Structure

LOT COVERAGE

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

Setback from Side Lot Line

JLane)

Setback from

(water):

Setback from Front Lot Line

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

15.lf the answerto item 14 is yes, for each proposed addition, building or structure indicate;

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

Page 90 of 200

Will the addition or structure encroach on the existing septic system?

(d)

‘

Yes

Indicate whether water is provided to the subject land by a publicly owned and operated piped water system, a privately owned and operated individual or communal well, a lake, or other water body, or other means:

Indicate whether sewage disposal is provided to the subject land by a publicly owned and operated sewage system, a privately owned and operated individual or communal septic system, a privy, or other means:

{No

N/A

21 .The length of time that the existing uses of the subject land have continued:

N/A

20.The date the existing buildings and structures were constructed on the subject lands:

August 2012

Yes

‘

Increase in living space

-Yes

Increase in plumbing fixtures

(b)

Yes

Increase in number of bedrooms

(a)

What are the uses of the proposed development?

If yes, please provide details:

Do your plans include the RAISING of an existing structure?

19.The date the subject land was acquired by the current owner:

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

Page 91 of 200

‘?No

¢No

Ifthe answer to item 27 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

Yes

If known, please indicate whether the subject land has ever been thesubject of an application under Section 43 of the Planning Act (Minor Variance).

The boundaries and dimensions of the subject land including the location of any existing and proposed buildings.

ii)

The approximate location of all natural and artificial features on the subject land and on the land that is adjacent to the subject land. Examples include buildings, railways, roads, watercourses, drainage ditches, river or stream banks, barns, wetlands, wooded areas, wells and septic tanks. Show distance of these features from the applicant’s property lines.

The location of all abutting (neighbours’) lands.

The location of a reference point……i.e. distance between the subject land and the nearest township lot line or landmark such as a bridge or railway crossing.

THE SKETCH MUST HAVE A NORTH ARROW AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following:
If the answer to question 25 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

Yes

Please indicate whether the subject land is subject of an application under the Planning Act for approval of a Plan of Subdivision or Consent.

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

Page 92 of 200

Ha-an >4 m…

Page 93 of 200

Ha-an >4 m…

Page 94 of 200

Ha-an >4 m…

Page 95 of 200

Ref.No.:2l—O207 P2 Report No. Drawing No. 1 2 Septic Tank Low profile

w/effluentfilter

3600—|itres

and access

Exlstmg Stairs

manholes

Pump Chamber Low profile 3600—|itres

With access manhole Goulds EP—04 or approved equivalent

Pump

Programmable controls on separate circuit

Provide high level alarm

and beacon

Effluent forcemain 1—§"¢ polyethylene, 100 p.s.i.—rated Provide equivalent of 4 feet of earth cover or verify self—draining 1-5"Tee at center of header

Dispersal Bed

65m’ Finish with sand loam graded to shed water Topsoil and establish grass cover

Eljin A42

Treatment unit total of 14 required BMEC 20-03-395

—

Distribution pipe Sch. 40 PVC Orifices 1-“5”¢ Sweep the end of each lateral to a distal cleanout Provide access manholes for each cleanout 32mm¢

TOP Of b??k

Hopkins and Proposed dwelling

per Chitty

OLS

Relay pump/manifold elevations to engineer to confirm pump spec/programming.

Proposed garage

Notes Observe setbacks for septic tank: 1.5 m from structure or property line 15 metres from well cased to 6 metres 30 metres from other wells

Observe setbacks from distribution pipe: 17 metres from drilled well 7 metres from structure 4 metres from property line

7—metl’e

Grade supported retaining wall X‘

i Proposed Eljen bed 65m Extstmg 30’’ depth g o

14x Eljin A24 units

Overhead powerline to be relocated /

CONCORD

–

ENGINEERING

613 634-4357 Fax: 613 634-4353 E—mai1: concorde@kos.net. Tel;

755 Baker

Kingston,

‘

Project:

Crescent Ontario K7M 6P5

Design

Sewage System

Page 96 of 200

2353 Silver Rock Lane

15 metres 50 feet

South Frontenac

Township, Ontario

DFGWWJ3Preliminary Onsite Cnemi

RY Contractor

Sewage

System

Viabilty

lnc.

Dwn by: R90

Chd by:

Date.’l5—Sept—21

Ref.No.: 21 -0207 P2 Report No. Drawing No.2 2

Proposed dwelling

32mm¢

12” Loam/topsoi

Sch.

40 PVC distribution

pipe

R min.

13" special sand

24" sand

fill and

native

drape

Anti—si|tation

over distribution

pipe and treatment

unit

E jin A24 unit

sand

15<=T<=20min/cm

Existing grade

Bedrock

250—600mm

below existing

grade

50 feet

I I 15 metres

CONCORD ENGINEERING Tel: 613 634-4357 Fax: 613 634-4353 E—mail: concorde@kos.net

755 Baker Crescent Kingston, Ontario K7M 6P5

Project:

Sewage System

Page 97 of 200

2353

Silver Rock Lane

South

Frontenac

D’0Wi"‘93 Preliminary C“e“t5

Design

Township, Ontario

Onsite

RY Contractor

Sewage System Viabilty

Inc.

Dwn by: RDO

Chd by:

Date:25—Aug—21

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. PL0314-2020 Municipality:

Township of South Frontenac

Landowner/ Agent:

Margarita Kulchitskaya / The Boulevard Group

Location:

2353 Silver Rock Lane / Morning Glory Lane

Roll #:

10290800900561000000

Lot 8, Concession 11

Portland

Allow for increased lot coverage of the house, and a reduction of the 15 metre setback from the top of the slope to 9.8 metres (or, a reduction of the 30 metre setback from the high water mark to 25.2 metres) for the proposed dwelling; and, a reduction of the 30 metre setback from the high water mark to 27.1 metres for the proposed garage. A variance is also required from the septic system to the interior lot line and the setback from the lane.

Application Description:

Minor Variance File No. MV-4820-P

Feature:

Verona (Rock) 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 has reviewed the Slope and Erosion Assessment prepared by Concord Engineering (dated March 30, 2021). The slope was identified as marble bedrock and is “resistant to erosion and stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 years”. This resulted in a reduction of the 15 metre setback to 9.8 metres from the top of the slope for all development, which is easily identified and measured from the existing wooden staircase located at the crest of the slope. It should be noted that the 9.8 metres from the top of the slope is measured to the proposed dwelling, as illustrated in the “Building Permit Application Plot Plan”. It is understood that there will be no deck proposed to be attached to the dwelling.

Comments:

As per the Slope and Erosion Assessment report and “Building Permit Application Plot Plan” provided with the application, Quinte Conservation staff support the reduction in the setback from the slope and are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with section 3.1 of the PPS as development will be located outside of any natural or flood-related hazard.

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 (Rock) 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 top of the bank adjacent to Verona (Rock) Lake.

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.

Page 1 of 2

Page 98 of 200

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 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. Further, an Environmental Impact Study was not provided with the current planning application, and as per Quinte Conservation’s Regulation and Policies we will not be recommending one. Final Comments:

As per the Slope and Erosion Assessment report and “Building Permit Application Plot Plan”, Quinte Conservation has no objection to the application as presented.

June 29, 2021 Date

Sam Carney Planning & Regulations Technician

Page 2 of 2

Page 99 of 200

Page 100 of 200

January 28, 2021.

Committee of Adjustment, Township of South Frontenac, P.O. Box 100, 4432 George Street, Sydenham, ON KOH 2T0

RECEIVED FEB0 1 2021

Dear Sirs:

TOWNSHIP OF

SOUTH FRONTENAC Re: Application for Minor Variance ‘°”*”““NG DEPARTMENT File No.: MV-48-20-P Lot 8 Cone. 11 District of Portland 2353 Silver Rock Lane Verona Lake —

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you regarding the above Application. My husband and I purchased the cottage property in 1978, and enjoyed the cottage for many years, however now it belongs to my daughter and son—in-law, Jo-Ann & Frank

Klieber. In 2004, I had plans drawn up to build a house on the lot property, but as I was leaving the Township Of?ce, after approval and submitting a cheque, I was told a house had to be built within one year, I had to withdraw my application for the Permit at that time, due to illness in the family, as Icou1dn’t go ahead with the construction.

A couple of years later, I again planned on selling my home in Kingston, and moving to the above lot property, but after I had Mr. Revelle from the Township O?ice visit my property, he said thatl could only build a 600 sq. ft. house. He stood on the property where I could build, and was very adamant that I could only build a small 600 sq. ft. House, and de?nitely no garage. This was also con?rmed by Mr. Lindsey Mills, when I visited the Township Office at a later date. Since this was after the OMB Hearings‘ ?nal decision, the house would have to be 98.4 ft. from the water on this second application for a Permit.

Since this was not suitable for me, I then sold the lot property to my Grandson, Frank M. Klieber, thinking he could build a small cottage or ?shing cabin, whatever. In View of the proposed Application for Minor Variance, I feel this would be very unfair, as I was de?nitely planning on building there myself earlier, but was denied the

opportunity.

Page 101 of 200

I de?nitely agree with my daughter’s family that the proposed structures as detailed in this Application for Minor Variance would detract greatly from the ‘quiet enjoyment’ of the cottage property re the size, loss of privacy, views, height, shadowing,noise, etc. If approved, this Variance, being NOT minor, as it is over twice the regulated requested size of 5%, would greatly affect the use of the cottage in a most negative way.

I also believe it is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, 2003-75, which contain the goals and objectives of the municipality regarding the regulation of the height, bulk, mass, size, spacing, and the general character of the area. As stated previously, there are many factors, i.e. privacy issues, views, height, shadowing, noise, parking, etc. Which would de?nitely affect the quiet enjoyment of the abutting cottage, and detract greatly from its use. I also think approval of this Application for Minor Variance would set a very bad precedent for the area, as many others would begin seeking Minor Variances for their properties, causing confusion and unnecessary administrative costs and upset.

Thanks for your consideration in this matter. Respect?illy, /

‘

(Mrs.) June Purvis,

Page 102 of 200

Committee of Adjustment, Township of South Frontenac, P.O. Box 100, 4432 George Street, Sydenham, Ontario KOH 2T0.

January 28, 2021.

RECEIVED FEBU1 2021

Dear Sirs:

TOWN$?POF

T FRONTENAC Re: APPLICATIONFOR MINOR VARIANnE #MvF,z§%7(l§‘G DEPRTMENT Lot 8, Cone. 11, Pts 1 and 2, Plan 13R10944, Silver Rock Lane, Verona Lake

23353

As we are the present owners of 1033 Morning Glory Lane, and this property has been in our family since 1978, we feel the above Application would have a very detrimental effect on our cottage property.

We would appreciate your considerationregarding the negative effects to our property:

We personally do NOT believe this variance is a MINOR one. It is more than 100% increase in size for the garage and house. It is not just an addition of a deck or change in a driveway, which would be considered MINOR. This application is for a high two—storey structure to be built on an elevated property of at least 10-12 ft., as well as a large, oversized wrap-around deck.. The end result would be a home and a garage towering over our small cottage, which would de?nitely obscure the sunlight, causing the cottage to be in a shadow many of the daylight hours. This loss of sunlight would de?nitely affect the quality of life at our cottage.. One would barely be able to see the sky past these huge structures. 2. There would also be a de?nite loss of PRIVACY. The inhabitantsof the proposed structure would be in a location which would allow them to look down at all times at our lower—levelcottage and the activities of the people there. They would be able to constantly monitor everything going on at the cottage…tota1lyunacceptable. This would result in visual intrusion, as the living-room, bedroom and kitchen windows are on the same side as the proposed structure, withtheir large deck facing us. From what we understand from the drawings, the deck alone would be 608 sq. Ft. (that’s almost another cottage in itself). Any outside activities, such as gardening, sunbathing, etc. would be totally exposed to those living in the proposed structure. 3.

As far as the VIEW is concerned, there would be no view as the View from the existing living-room, kitchen, and bedroomwindows at our cottage would look directly at the back of a garage and over-towering house, whereas previously one could look across an open space which de?nitely adds to one’s relaxation and enjoyment. Instead there would be a de?nite barrier/obstruction. Also, the aesthetic aspect would be totally lost, as there would be less trees and greenery in that area.

The size, height, and bulk of the proposed structures would totally detract from the openness and views of the existing cottage. The negative impact of insensitive and obstructive overbuilding on greenery and openness would be a de?nite consideration. Instead of 6% use of the property, as stated on the Minor Variance Application, which should be 5%, the proposed buildings would use 10.9% of the property., not including the huge wrap-around deck.

Page 103 of 200

4. NOISE There will be deafening noise during constructionand during later visitationsand gatherings, adversely affecting the quiet enjoyment of us using the cottage. —

The above long-established amenities regarding openness and Viewsince 1978 would be adversely affected by approval of this Minor Variance. 5. Regardingthe ten square metre accessory structure, which they propose to be demolished,there never has been a ten square metre building there on the Lot, so that should not be considered as a garage replacement. Our son purchased the Lot property from my mother, but he was told by Lindsay Mills that he could ONLY build a 600 sq. ft. home on it…de?nitely no garage or accessory buildings. It would have to be 100 ft. back from the high-water mark. This discouraged him from building so he put it up for sale. It was on the market for over two years and because of the said above limitationson the Lot, he had to reduce the Selling Price of the property, thus taking a huge loss.

We were considering buying our son’s lot, but after speaking with Lindsey Mills at the Township Office, and his determinedargument that we could only add on a 10’ x 20’ addition to our existing cottage, we decided it wasn’t worth purchasing the lot, and would only be able to add a small addition. It would be veryunfair to us and also our son if this Committee of Adjustment were to allow such contravention of the existing by-laws and Official Plan.

In closing, we would like to state that the variance is NOT minor, and the proposed Minor Variance is not appropriate for this parcel of land as it is not the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaws. Approval of this Minor Variance Application would most de?nitely contravene the intent and purpose for which these Zoning By-laws and O?icial Plan were created.

Also, the approval of this Minor Variance would set a very poor precedent for the other cottagers and home owners in our neighbourhood, and will DEFINITELYlower the value as well as the enjoyment of our

family-heritagecottage.

Thanks very much for considerationregarding our concerns. Kind regards,

9/c‘e)4,a/r , Qtpérwv Frank and Jo-Ann Klieber.

Page 104 of 200

Michelle Hannah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:

February-09-21 6:10 PM planning Michelle Hannah MINOR VARIANCE #MV-48-20-P

I was the previous owner of 2353 Silver rock lane. While I owned the lot, I had planned to build a house and garage but due to the small lot size and after speaking with Lindsay Mills about what I wanted to do, it was made CLEAR that I was only allowed to do a total of 600sq/ft house with a setback of 100 feet from waters edge and DEFINITELY NO OTHER BUILDINGS (GARAGE) on the property. As he was so adamant nothing more could be built, I decided to sell the property as I need a garage. The lot was first listed with Ernie Sparks who works for REMAX reality for $129,000 and due to the small size and people doing their research and knowing they could not build over the 600sq/ft total, it deterred people from the lot. It ended up running out with Ernie Sparks and was relisted with Jason Sands for $120,000. Again the lot did not move due to the size of home that was allowed to be built on it. The listing ran out and was re-listed with Adam Rayner from SUTTON group and sold to the present owner for $62,000 because lack of interest due to the limitations of building size.

So needless to say it’s frustrating to hear the current owners are asking to build a house and garage which is 10.9% lot coverage as it was made CLEAR to me and previous interested buyers that only 5% was allowed. Also there was NEVER a 10sq/m (100sq/ft) accessory structure or ANY building of any sort on the lot as they the minor variance application states. I sure hope the existing bylaws and official plan is followed and enforced as it was on me and also only getting half the price of what it was originally listed for due to the existing bylaw limitations. If this is passed its setting a president for the neighbourhood and also will take away the enjoyment and whole purpose of having a cottage when you have an OVERSIZED building next door and so close to my parents cottage. As well as it will significantly decrease the value of my parents property as it’s not appealing to possible future buyers if they ever decided to sell. Thank you for your time and listening to my concerns in this matter.

Page 105 of 200

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 11, 2021 Subject:

Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application for zoning relief the construction of a new structure, 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: RLSW Zoning Relief Requested Section 5.8.2a), 10.3.1 & 10.3.2: Highwater mark setback & Front Yard for principal dwelling – To permit a single detached dwelling and a detached garage to be setback 25 metres (82 feet) and 28 metres (91 feet) respectively from the highwater mark of Verona Lake, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback from the highwater mark for all buildings and structures. Section 5.8.2b): Top of Bank – To permit a single detached dwelling and a detached garage to be setback 9.8 metres (32 feet) and 6.7 metres (21 feet) from the top of bank whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 15 metre (49.2 feet) setback. Section 5.24.6: Accessory Buildings – To permit the minimum distance between the single detached dwelling and the detached garage to be 2 metres (6.5 feet) whereas the Zoning By-law requires 3 metres (9.8 feet).

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

Page 106 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

Section 10.3.1: Lot Coverage – To permit a single detached dwelling to have a maximum lot coverage of 6%, whereas the Zoning By-law permits a maximum of 5% lot coverage for the principal building.

Discussion/Analysis Summary of Proposal An application for minor variance was received in November 2020 to permit a single detached dwelling with an attached deck, and a detached garage within the required minimum 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of Verona Lake. This application was revised to exclude an attached deck. Subject Property The subject property is located at the intersection of Morning Glory Lane and Rocky Shore Lane, which are accessed off Silver Rock Lane, off Hinchinbrooke Road. The subject property is 0.3 acres (0.12 hectares) in size, and has frontage on Verona Lake. A hydro line runs across the subject property from east to west approximately 10 metres from the Morning Glory lane. The topography of the subject property can be described as rising steeply from the shoreline of Verona Lake to a flat plateau where the development is proposed. The subject property contains an existing shed, as well as a set of stairs and a landing leading down to the lake. Original Application The application received in November 2020 proposed a single detached dwelling with attached deck and a detached garage. The single detached dwelling was proposed to be two storeys in height with a footprint of 75.3 square metres (810.5 square feet). The single detached dwelling would include an attached deck with a footprint of 57 square metres (613.5 square feet). The dwelling would be setback a minimum of 25 metres (82 feet) from the highwater mark and the deck would be setback a minimum of 21.5 metres (70 feet) from the highwater mark of Verona Lake. The dwelling and deck would result in 10.9% lot coverage for the principal building. The proposed detached garage would be 45 square metres (484 square feet) in area and would be setback 27 metres (88.9 feet) from the highwater mark. The detached garage would be located east of the dwelling, a minimum of 2 metres (6.5 feet) from the dwelling. The garage would result in a 3.7% lot coverage for accessory buildings. The proposed location of the dwelling, attached deck and the detached garage is on a plateau located beyond the top of a steep cliff leading down towards the lake. The proposed development would be located approximately 2.5 metres (8 feet) from the hydro lines. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 107 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

The sewage system location was identified on the sketch to be located directly under the hydro line between the dwelling and the lane. No information was provided regarding the type of sewage system proposed. This application was deferred at the February 11, 2021 Committee of Adjustment meeting to provide additional time for the applicant to consult with a sewage system installer to identify an appropriate sewage for the proposed development, to consult with Hydro One to address the required setback from hydro lines to the proposed development, to confirm setbacks from the top of bank and the highwater mark, and to consider an alternative design and size for the proposal that would reduce the lot coverage of the principal building. Actions taken by Applicant / Agent Based on feedback received from Committee of Adjustment members at the February 2021 meeting, as well as Quinte Conservation, the agent submitted a revised application which includes a dwelling with no deck and a detached garage. By removing the deck, the revised lot coverage will be 6%. No changes were made the proposed size and location of the dwelling or garage. The revised proposal took into account a sewage system design, hydro line locations, and the slope. The applicants consulted with a sewage system installer and have applied for an Eljin sewage system to be located on the subject property between the dwelling and the lane in order to adequately service the proposed development. The applicants also contacted Hydro One and are re-aligning the overhead utility wires from the existing east-west direction to a north-south direction along the western property line in order to meet required setbacks from hydro lines. In consultation with Quinte Conservation, the applicants undertook a geotechnical study to assess erosion hazards and slope stability on the property. The slope was identified as marble bedrock and is resistant to erosion and stable at vertical slopes within the context of 100 year floodplain. The geotechnical study concluded that the stability of the slope on the subject property is sufficient to support a reduction to the 15 metre setback from the top of bank to 9.8 metres for the principal dwelling. Revised Application The revised minor variance application requests permission for reduced setbacks from the highwater mark and top of bank, a reduced separation distance between buildings, as well as an increase in the maximum lot coverage for a principal building. The variances would facilitate the construction of a single detached dwelling, a detached garage and a new sewage system on the subject property. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 108 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

The proposed dwelling will be 75.3 square metres (810.5 square feet) in area, setback a minimum of 25 metres (82 feet) from the highwater mark of Verona Lake and 9.8 metres (32 feet) from the top of bank. The dwelling will be two storey, in compliance with the height allowed for a dwelling in the Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone. The dwelling will comply with setbacks from the side yard, rear yard, private lane and hydro lines. The dwelling would result in 6% lot coverage for the principal building. The distance between the dwelling and the garage will be 2 metres (6.5 feet). The garage will be located to the east of the dwelling. The proposed detached garage will be 45 square metres (484 square feet) in area, setback 28 metres (91 feet) from the highwater mark and 6.7 metres (21 feet) from the top of bank. The garage will be in compliance with the building height, interior side yard and rear yards required in the RLSW Zone, as well as the general provision for lot coverage for accessory structures. The proposed sewage system will be located beyond the 30 metre (98.4 feet) setback from Verona Lake and will be 3 metres (9.8 feet) from the rear property line. The existing shed on the subject property is proposed to be removed. The stairs are proposed to remain to provide safe access to the lake. Department and Agency Comments Public Services This application did not meet the criteria for circulation. Building Services Comments received from Building Services on January 21, 2021, regarding a Sewage System Review, indicated that no test pits had been dug and there had been no consultation with a sewage system installer regarding the proposed location of the sewage system for the residence. Comments received from Building Services on October 29, 2021 indicate that they have no objections to the revised application, the report by Concord Engineering, specifically the drawing titled “Preliminary Onsite Sewage System Viability” dated September 15, 2021 provides adequate information to support a sewage system. It was noted that a building permit is required for the proposed sewage system.

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

Page 109 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

Building Services also provided comments on the minimum distance between the dwelling and the garage. It was explained that the minimum distance separation between buildings for the Ontario Building Code is required to be 1.2 meters (4 feet) and therefore there are no concerns from a Building Code perspective. It was noted that an engineer design will be required should underpinning occur between the proposed dwelling and garage. Quinte Conservation In an e-mail dated January 27, 2021, Quinte Conservation Staff noted that the subject lands lie within the O. Reg. 319/09 regulated area of Verona Lake. They will enforce a 15 metre development setback from the 1:100 year floodplain of Verona Lake, located at the toe of the slope, and a minimum setback of 15 metres from the top of bank, located near the stair landing at the crest of the slope. Quinte Conservation requires these setbacks to implement O. Reg. 319/09. Quinte Conservation noted that should a reduction in the 15 metre setback from the top of bank be requested, a slope stability study must confirm the stability of the slope. Comments received from Quinte Conservation on June 29, 2021 note that Quinte Conservation has received the Slope and Erosion Assessment prepared by Concord Engineering (dated March 30, 2021). Quinte Conservation staff support the reduction in the setback from the top of bank and are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with section 3.1 of the PPS as development will be located outside of any natural or flood-related hazard. As such, Quinte Conservation has no objection to the revised application. It was noted that a permit under O. Reg 319/09 will be required for the proposed development as it is located within a regulated area. The applicant must contact Quinte Conservation at the building permit stage. Public Comments In February 2021, comments were received from two members of the public regarding the original application. They expressed concerns regarding the size of the development, loss of privacy, views, height, shadowing, noise and the variance not being minor. Due to the time between the original and revised applications, Township Staff re-circulated the application to all property owners within 60 metres of the subject property, including the members of the public who submitted comments in February 2021. To date, no comments have been received.

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

Page 110 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland 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/does not meet 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, specifically the policies on limited service residential development, and development within environmentally sensitive areas adjacent to a lake. The proposed development is consistent with the permitted residential use of the property, is not expected to be subject to an erosion hazard, and maximizes setbacks from Verona Lake. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law as the proposed dwelling is a permitted use on the subject property. The subject property is an undersized lot of record, approximately 48 metres (157 metres deep). The proposed dwelling is located as far back from the highwater mark as possible while taking into account the site constraints, being the sewage system location and the existing depth of the subject property. It is not possible to push the development farther from the highwater mark as pushing it further would not allow a sewage system to be located on the property. The only location for the proposed sewage system is between the dwelling and the lane, as far back from the highwater mark as possible. The dwelling is therefore constrained by the location of the sewage system. The top of bank setback is supported by the geotechnical report which indicated that the exposed bedrock is stable and that the plateau is a suitable location for the proposed development. The application was revised for lot coverage for the principal building from 10.9% to 6% by removing the deck. The proposed 6% lot coverage for the dwelling is considered minor for this lot of record. The total lot coverage for the property would be under 10% for the principal building and accessory structure. The proposed detached garage is located as far back from the highwater mark as possible while maintaining area for the minimum two parking spaces required for a dwelling, as well as the location of a driveway. The geotechnical report indicated that the proposed detached garage is located outside the erosion hazard. The proposed detached garage is located next to the principal dwelling and does not project closer to the lane than the proposed dwelling. The decrease in distance between the buildings is reasonable for the proposed development as it complies with the Ontario Building Code. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 111 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question? The variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the subject property, as it would facilitate development of the property with a modest-sized dwelling in a location that is practical given the physical constraints. The applicant has proposed to re-align the hydro line in order to allow for development to occur on the property. The proposed location of the dwelling and garage are practical on the subject property maximizing the setbacks from the lake and top of bank, and allowing sufficient area for a sewage system. The dwelling and garage would be accessed from the existing driveway. Locating the garage and the dwelling closer together allows for the interior side yard setbacks to be met and provides more separation between the development and neighbouring properties. There are trees located between the dwelling location and the lake that screen views from the water. Is the variance minor? Yes, the 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.

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 February 11, 2021 and November 11, 2021 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 (e.g. Conservation Authority, County Clerk, School Boards, Ontario Power Generation Inc. and Hydro One Inc.)

Building Services were consulted in developing the report.

Recommendation That the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application MV-48-20-P, subject to the following conditions.

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

Page 112 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-48-20-P, Kulchitskaya, ROLL #: 102908009005610, Verona Lake, Portland District

The Minor Variance is for a single detached dwelling with a 75.3 square metre (810.5 square foot) ground floor area and a 45 square metre (484 square foot) detached garage. The single detached dwelling is permitted to establish a 25 metre (82 feet) front yard, be setback a minimum of 25 metres (82 feet) from the highwater mark of Verona Lake and 9.8 metres (32 feet) from the top of bank. The single detached dwelling is permitted to establish a maximum of 6% lot coverage. The detached garage is permitted to be setback a minimum of setback 28 metres (91 feet) from the highwater mark and 6.7 metres (21 feet) from the top of bank. The minimum distance between the dwelling and the garage may be 2 metres (6.5 feet). All as per the drawings received by the Township on November 5, 2021 that will be attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
The applicant 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 Township environmental policies and recommendations outlined by Concord Engineering in their report dated March 30, 2021 including that: a. silt fencing at the crest of the slope be in place during construction control b. Disturbed areas on the property as a result of construction should be restored and seeded or replanted to promote growth immediately after construction has happened c. Eavestroughs are recommended to preserve the grade adjacent the foundations, and discharge from eaves through downspouts should be directed away from the slope.
A building permit is required for ALL construction and demolition on the property. There shall be no additional development on the property without the approval of the Township of South Frontenac.
The shed on the property shall be removed by obtaining a demolition permit to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
Minor variance MV-48-20-P is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Anna Geladi, Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

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

Page 113 of 200

Page 114 of 200

I would also like to add that I do not consider this Minor Variance to be a ‘Minor’ one. There are many variances requested within this one Minor Variance, i.e. distance from the highwater line, distance re garage, and the fact that less than

Also, one of the most important adverse effects to their property is the fact that their privacy will be totally lost. This is not in accordance with Article 3.0 of the Official Plan dated March, 2003 which states, “Adverse effects as defined in the Environmental Protection Act, means one or more of ‘loss of enjoyment of normal use of property”’. With a tall house directly abutting the cottage, with residents there peering down at the cottage, all privacy at the cottage is gone. This is definitely a serious concern which should be considered when approving the above Minor Variance.

Those items included loss of view, height concerns of the proposed building, shadowing, noise, driveway compromise, parking, and most of all, complete devaluation of their property.

Please refer to Jo—Annand Frank K|ieber’s letter dated January 28, 2021, as I agree with all the items listed regarding the adverse effects to their property at 1033 Silver Rock Lane, if this Minor Variance is approved.

TO: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - November 11, 2021

of Portland 2353 Silver Rock Lane, Verona Lake

Re: Application for Minor Variance, File No. MV-48-20-P, Lot 8, Conc. 11, District

Sent: November—11-21 9:21 AM To: Michelle Hannah mhannah@southfrontenac.net Subject:

From: June Purvis [

Page 115 of 200

June Purvis.

Respectfully,

Thanking you, I remain,

2003-75.

The most devastating effect if this Minor Variance is approved, is the fact as stated above, that it completely DEVALUATESthe value of the abutting cottage property. This is a very serious matter and should definitely be considered. As myself and my family have paid taxes for over forty years for the cottage, I think the approval of this Minor Variance would be totally and ethically in conflict with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By—Law,dated

levelof the proposed building is at a much higher level than the

cottage, as the cottage property.

Page 116 of 200

Re: APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE #MV-48-20-P Lot 8, Cone. 11, Pts 1 and 2, Plan l3Rl0944, 2353 Silver Rock Lane. Verona Lake

As far as the VIEW is concerned, there would be no view as the view from the existing living-roorn,

Any outside activities, such as gardening, sunbathing, etc. would be totally exposed to those living in the proposed structure.

There would also be a de?nite loss of PRIVACY. The inhabitants of the proposed structure would be in a 2. location which would allow them to look down at all times at our lower-level cottage and the activities of the people there. They would be able to constantly monitor everything going on at the cottage…totally unacceptable. This would result in visual intrusion, as the living-room, bedroom and kitchen windows are on the same side as the proposed structure, with their large deck facing us. From what we understand from the drawings, the deck alone would be 608 sq. Ft. (that’s almost another cottage in itself).

We personally do NOT believe this variance is a MINOR one. It is more than 100% increase in size for 1. the garage and house. It is not just an addition of a deck or change in a driveway, which would be considered MINOR. This application is for a high two-storey structure to be built on an elevated property of at least 10-12 ft., as well as a large, oversized wrap-around deck.. The end result would be a home and a garage towering over our small cottage, which would de?nitely obscure the sunlight, causing the cottage to be in a shadow many of the daylight hours. This loss of sunlight would definitely affect the quality of life at our cottage.. One would barely be able to see the sky past these huge structures.

We would appreciate your consideration regarding the negative effects to our property:

Dear Sirs:

Committee of Adjustment, Township of South Frontenac, P.O. Box 100, 4432 George Street, Sydenham, Ontario KOH 2T0.

January 28, 2021.

4412 Holmes Rd., Inverary, ON KOH 1X0.

Page 117 of 200

Kind regards,

Thanks very much for consideration regarding our concerns.

’

In closing, we would like to state that the variance is NOT minor, and the proposed Minor Variance is not 7. appropriate for this parcel of land as it is not the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaws. Approvalof this Minor Variance Application would most de?nitely contravene the intent and purpose for which these Zoning By-laws and Official Plan were created.

It would be very unfair to us and also our son if this Committee of Adjustment were to allow such contravention of the existing by-laws and Official Plan.

We were considering buying our son’s lot, but after speaking with Lindsey Mills at the Township Of?ce, and his determined argument that we could only add on a 10’ x 20’ addition to our existing cottage, we decided it wasn’t worth purchasing the lot, and would only be able to add a small addition.

Our son purchased the Lot property from my mother, but he was told by Lindsay Mills that he could ONLY build a 600 sq. ft. home on it…de?nitely no garage or accessory buildings. It would have to be 100 ft. back from the high-water mark. This discouraged him from building so he put it up for sale. It was on the market for over two years and because of the said above limitations on the Lot, he had to reduce the Selling Price of the property, thus taking a huge loss.

Regarding the ten square metre accessory structure, which they propose to be demolished, there never has 5. been a ten square metre building there on the Lot, so that should not be considered as a garage replacement.

The above long-established amenities regarding openness and View since 1978 would be adversely affected by approval of this Minor Variance.

—

NOISE There will be deafening noise during construction and during later visitations and gatherings, adversely affecting the quiet enjoyment of us using the cottage.

Page 118 of 200

Page 119 of 200

It was mentioned in the Staff Report under Public Comments that there was no reply as of yet, from the people who submitted comments in February 2021. We only received the letter dated November 1, 2021 Public Meeting letter on November 4 pm
Another issue we’re concerned with, is the fact that section 6.17 of the Official Plan states “only consideration will be given if it is physically not possible or environmentally desirable to meet the requirement ifthe 30m setback from water. They can meet the 30 meter setback by building a smaller house, so they shouldn’t be given a reduction in the setback from the water.
The impact on us is the Garage, which will be at the top of the hill, as well as the 10 meter (33 feet) height of the house, towering over our small cottage and our kitchen, living room and bedroom windows are on the west side of our cottage, so they’|| be able to look down into our cottage anytime, thus, zero privacy! Also, what we’|l see when we look out our windows on the west side or when we’re trying to relax on our deck, we’l| be seeing a garage at the top of the hill, instead of the nice blue sky and landscape and a 33 foot tall house sitting on top of the hill. This will completely take away our privacy and the whole reason for having a cottage. Our cottage has been in our family over 42 years and knowing that we won’t be able to go there and just sit and look at the view without feeling watched, defeats the whole purpose of a cottage. Of utmost importance to us obviously, is that it will greatly devalue our property, should this Minor Variance be approved. ljust want to reiterate the Lack of Privacy and that it will DEVALUE our property when we’ve owned out there, longer then any of the other homeowners and cottagers nearby.
As we had previously stated on our January 28, 2021 letter, we still feel that approving this Minor Variance will have an adverse effect to our property as previously written and mentioned at the last Public Meeting.

To: Committee of Adjustment

Message,——— –—-—Original , From: Jo—Ann. Sent: November—11—2111:54 AM To: Michelle Hannah mhannah@southfrontenac.net; planning p|anning@southfrontenac.net Subject: Application for Minor Variance, File MV—48—20-P, Lot 8, Con. 11, District of Portland, 2353 Silver Rock Lane

Page 120 of 200

allowed’

Sent from my iPhone

Thank you, Jo-Ann & Frank Klieber

In closing, Frank and I just want to again mention our serious concern of our Cottage and that it will be greatly devalued should this Minor Variance go through and also our privacy and our view.
Under_Disscussion/Analysis and the 3_0msetback, it shouldn’t be because it’s there to protect shoreline, lake and be a buffer. They could accomodate a structure/dwelling on this property that doesn’t require a reduction to the 30 meter setback.

Report,

Would you please explain to us, the Outside Dimension of Building Structure/Dwelling is 38.1m= 410 sq ft and the Garage shows 26.8 which =288.47 sq ft, so could you clarify this to us please because on the Plot Plan, the house is 810.52 sq ft/75.359 meters
Could you tell us what is the proper sq meter size of the Lot because on the Minor Variance Application it is 1210 sqm , but on the Building Permit Application Plot Plan, the Lot Area is 1241.8 sqm. So they’re going by the 1241.8 sqm, which at 6%: 801.99 sq ft dwelling or at 5%=668.31sq ft. At 1210sqm at 6%=781 sq ft, at 5%=651 sq ft, So there’s a difference in lot coverage depending on which size it actually is so please confirm.

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE OR PERMISSION

Updated January, 2021 The Committee of Adjustment is a Committee of eight persons appointed by Township Council. The Committee is formed under Section 45 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.13, to authorize a minor variance from a zoning by-law. The Committee may vary Zoning By-law provisions provided the Committee is of the opinion that the variance:

• • •

Is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Is minor in nature

Maintains the

Application Requirements

It is required that one (1) copy of this application be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, together with the SKETCH referred to in Note 3 (below), accompanied by a NONREFUNDABLE FEE in accordance with the chart below in cash, debit or by cheque made payable to the Township of South Frontenac. Application Type: 1-3 Variances 4+ Variances After building without a permit

Planning Fee: $959.00 $1,316.00 $2,010.00

Building Admin Fee: $94.00 $94.00 $94.00

TOTAL: $1,053.00 $1,410.00 $2,104.00

It is required that a Fee be provided for the Township to review onsite sewage disposal and Conservation Authority (where applicable) when submitting an application (Separate cheques, payable to the applicable Conservation Authority, are to be submitted to the Township with the completed application). Township of South Frontenac Minor Variance Only Minor Variance WITH Performance Review Minor Variance in combination with a new Class 2, 3, 4, or 5 sewage system other than a Class A system

$450 $700 $1,150

Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority

$420

Quinte Conservation Authority

$344

$390 Rideau Valley Conservation Authority Please Note: These fees are for consultation on this application only; these agencies may require additional permit applications and fees prior to any construction.

1 Page 121 of 200

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

PLEASE READ THIS ITEM CAREFULLY Each applicant shall provide a sketch showing the dimensions of the subject land and of all abutting lands as outlined in Question 29 of the application. The sketch should be accurately dimensioned and scaled in either Imperial or Metric measures. This sketch, in conjunction with the Application Form, is the basis for the analysis of the Minor Variance Application by the Committee of Adjustment. It is strongly recommended that the applicant spend the necessary time to carefully and thoroughly assemble the data and transfer the data to the sketch. It is important that the sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measurements. Any application which does not include the above required information may not be accepted. In this regard, the applicant may wish to secure the assistance of a person who specializes in the drafting of such sketches. A guide to answering the application questions is attached.
Collection of Personal Information Personal information requested herein is required under the Planning Act, 1990 as amended. This information will be used by the Committee of Adjustment/Land Division Committee for the purpose of reviewing the above referenced application, and may be made available to those boards, Commissions, Authorities, Agencies and Persons having an interest in this matter. Any questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed to the Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment (P.O. Box 100, Sydenham, Ont., K0H 2T0, Phone 376-3027 ext.2224).

Date Received: _________________________

File No: _________________________

2 Page 122 of 200

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

Name of Owner(s): JANE ACWORTH-NEW

Full Mailing Address of Owner(s):

Phone number of Owner(s): Email Address of Owner(s): 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. Name of Authorized Agent: ______________________________________________________ Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent: _________________________________________

Phone number of Authorized Agent: _______________________________________________ Email Address of Authorized Agent: _______________________________________________ Agent as named above is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of processing this application for Minor Variance.

Signature(s) of Owner(s)

The description of the subject land: District:

Bedford

Portland

Concession Number: 15 Street Number: 7100

Loughborough

X Storrington

Lot Number: 3 & 4 Name of Road/Street: BILLY GREEN ROAD

Reference Plan Number: ______________________ Part Number(s): ____________ Roll Number: 060-070-16400-0000

3 Page 123 of 200

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

The frontage(s), depth and area of the subject land. Frontage (on water): 1,938.91 ft.

Frontage (on road/lane): 1,461.41 ft.

Depth: 454.65 ft. at widest point

Area: 8.54 acres______________________________

The current zoning of the subject land: RSLW

The nature and extent of the relief from the Zoning By-law:   

Increase height of structure approximately 2’6” above existing roofline within 30 m from lake Enlarge gross floor area by adding a 2nd storey within 30 m from lake Enlarge gross floor area by extending and enclosing front porch within 30 m from lake

The reason why the proposed use cannot comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-law: SEE PLAN NOTES FOR DETAILS 

The required setbacks to increase the height and gross floor area of the property cannot be met because the property is already within 30 m of the lake.

Does the subject property front on a municipally maintained road? privately maintained road? Yes No

X Yes

No OR a

Name of Road/Lane: BILLY GREEN ROAD

What are the existing uses of the subject land? RESIDENTIAL

Please indicate whether there are any EXISTING buildings or structures on the subject land. (I.e. residence, garage, shed, etc.) X Yes

4 Page 124 of 200

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

If the answer to item 11 is yes, for EACH building or structure indicate: Measurements are approximate by owner using Frontenac.ca map and surveyor’s report

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

Setback from Front Lot Line Property line

(1) Residence

(2) Boathouse/Bunkie

(3) Barn

(4) Cabin In woods

In excess of 115 metres

70.09 m

59.79 m

7.31 m

15.78 m

46.08 m

90.36 metres to boathouse bay

26.9 m

7.69 metres to water on east side; 15.78 metres to water on west side

46.08 m

90.36 metres to boathouse bay

27 ft 2 storey

20 ft approx. 2 storey

27 ft approx. 2 storey

15 ft approx. 1 storey

131.2 sq metres

262 x 241 ft.

435 x 283 ft.

10 x 12 ft.

a) 7.31 m b) 15.07m

15.78 m

46.08 m

90.36 metres to boathouse bay

Setback from Rear Lot Line Lake west Setback from Side Lot Line Lake south Height of Building (Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Dimensions of Floor Area

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable) a)Water West/rear side b) Water East/ front side

The proposed uses of the subject land: RESIDENTIAL

Are any building(s) or structure(s), or additions to existing building(s) or structure(s), PROPOSED to be built on the subject land? X Yes

No 5 Page 125 of 200

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

If the answer to item 14 is yes, for each proposed addition, building or structure indicate: Measurements are approximate by owner using Frontenac.ca map and surveyor’s report

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

(1) Bridge section joining two cottages

(2) Enclosed Front Porch

(3)

(4)

In excess of 115 m 110 m Setback from Front Lot Line Property Line 7.31m

22.6 m

Approx. 41.9m

17.2 m to east bay shoreline Approx.30 m from south shoreline 17 ft

Setback from Rear Lot Line Lake West Setback from Side Lot Line Lake South 30 ft. Height of Building 2 storey (Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

19’ 2” x 15’ 5”

16’ 10” x 7’

7.31 m to Lake West

15.07 m to east bay

Outside Dimensions of Building/Structure

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

NOTES: 1) If the subject property is on waterfront, and on a private lane, the setback from the front lot line and the setback from the high water mark will be the same. 6 Page 126 of 200

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

The dimensions required in this question relate to the NEW CONSTRUCTION ONLY, and NOT to the total size of the completed building.

Do your plans include any DEMOLITION of existing structures?

X Yes

If yes, please provide details:    

Removal of front and rear exterior walls of bridge section Removal of existing roof of bridge section Removal of interior partitions and existing staircases Removal of existing front porch (dimensions approximately 7 ft deep x 8 ft wide)

Do your plans include the RAISING of an existing structure? yes, please provide details:

XYes

No If

Raising vertical height and roofline of bridge section 18.

What are the uses of the proposed development? (a)

Increase in number of bedrooms

Yes

X No

(b)

Increase in plumbing fixtures

XYes

(c)

Increase in living space

X Yes

(d)

Will the addition or structure encroach Yes

X No

on the existing septic system? Existing gross square footage: approx. 1,640 square feet Proposed gross square footage: 2,098 square feet 19.

The date the subject land was acquired by the current owner: June 6th 2020

The date the existing buildings and structures were constructed on the subject lands: Original cottage: 1948; Bridge section: 1976; North cottage: 1991

The length of time that the existing uses of the subject land have continued: 7 Page 127 of 200

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

73 years

Is storm drainage provided by sewers, ditches, swales or by other means? Natural drainage

Please indicate whether the subject land is subject of an application under the Planning Act for approval of a Plan of Subdivision or Consent. Yes

X No

If the answer to question 25 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

If known, please indicate whether the subject land has ever been the subject of an application under Section 43 of the Planning Act (Minor Variance). Yes

No Unknown

If the answer to item 27 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following: 8 Page 128 of 200

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

THE SKETCH MUST HAVE A NORTH ARROW AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

ii)

The boundaries and dimensions of the subject land including the location of any existing and proposed buildings.

iii)

The location of a reference point……i.e. distance between the subject land and the nearest township lot line or landmark such as a bridge or railway crossing.

iv)

The location of all abutting (neighbours’) lands.

**Note: ** The distances to on-site and abutting owners’ wells, septic fields and barns, from the property to be varied, IS REQUIRED to be shown. The SKETCH is of significant importance and should be prepared as carefully, neatly and accurately as possible.

AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY Attached to this application is a cheque payable to the Township of South Frontenac representing payment of the application fee. The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees that the information recorded in this Minor Variance Application Form is accurate. The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees that representatives of the Township and, where applicable, the appropriate Conservation Authority, may enter onto the subject property for the purpose of determining the appropriateness of the site for the proposed development. The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees to reimburse and indemnify the municipality for all fees and expenses incurred by the municipality to process the application, including any fees and expenses attributable to proceedings before the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative tribunal if necessary to defend Council’s decision to support the application. Without limiting the foregoing, such fees and expenses shall include the fees and expenses of consultants, planners, engineers, lawyers and such other professional and technical advisors as the municipality may, in its absolute discretion acting reasonably, consider necessary or advisable to more properly process and support the application.

9 Page 129 of 200

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended The Owner/Applicant/Agent further agrees to provide the municipality, upon request and in cases where an application has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, 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 in order to process the application. If such appeal expenses exceed the deposit, the Owner/Applicant shall pay the difference forthwith upon being billed by the municipality, with interest at the rate of 1.25% per month (15% per annum) on accounts overdue more than 30 days, The Owner/Applicant/Agent further agrees that, until such requests have been complied with, the municipality will have no continuing obligation to process the application or attend or be represented at the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative proceeding in connection with the application: DATED AT THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC THIS DAY OF______________________, 20________ I, _________________________________________ OF __________________________________ solemnly declare that all the statements contained in this application are true and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath and by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act.

Signature of Applicant or Authorized Agent

DECLARED before me at the TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC (IN THE COUNTY OF FRONTENAC) THIS DAY OF______________________, 20________

A Commissioner, etc.

A Guide to Completing the Minor Variance Form

The names of all owners must appear in this section, even if they live in separate residences, and the address(es) should be the full mailing address, complete with postal code.
You may wish to appoint someone to act on your behalf during the variance process. If so, that person’s name, address and phone number should appear here All owner’s must sign the authorization.
Description of the Subject Land: a. District: The Districts are the same as the former Townships. If you are not sure, check the roll number (the long number beginning with 1029) on your tax bill. If the numbers are 010, 020 or 030, your district is Bedford; if the numbers are 040-050, your district is Loughborough; if the numbers are 060 or 070, your district is Storrington; and if the numbers are 080, your district is Portland. 10 Page 130 of 200

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

b. Concession and Lot Numbers: if you are not sure, check your tax bill c. Street Number: Your civic address – if a civic number has not been assigned, leave this space blank. d. Name of Road/Street: This question applies whether or not you are on a private lane or a public road. e. Reference Plan No: If your property has been surveyed, it will have a plan number, and one or more parts on that plan. If your property has not been surveyed, leave this space blank. f. Roll No: This is the number beginning with ‘1029’ which appears on your tax bill. Please take time to look it up before submitting the application. 4) Frontage, depth, area, acres: All parts of this question must be completed. 5) Current zoning: You may not be aware of the zoning on your property and this can be determined when you come in for pre-consultation with planning staff. 6) Nature and Extent of Relief: This question is asking what you are asking to do that requires the variance – for example, it could be that you are asking to be 25 m rather than 30 m from the high water mark, or that you are asking to increase the height of a structure within 30 m of the high water mark, or that you are seeking a variance to construct an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principal building. 7) Reason why you can’t comply: In other words, why can you not meet the required setbacks. It could be, for example, because you are seeking a variance to add on to an existing structure that is already too close to the water, or that developing further from the water would be impossible because of a steep embankment. 8) Roads: Municipally maintained roads are looked after by the Township; private roads are lanes that residents maintain themselves (not private driveways, but lanes that provide access to your property and that are generally shared with others). 9) Parking and Docking: This question is only relevant is you can only access your property by water. 10) Existing Uses: e.g. residential, retail business, vacant recreational land 11) Buildings: If there are ANY buildings or structures on the property now, the answer to this question is “yes”. 12) Description of buildings and structures: You must complete all sections of this question for each structure on your property. If there is a deck on your dwelling, please describe it separately from the residence.

11 Page 131 of 200

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

Proposed Uses: Generally, the answer to this question will be the same as the answer to #10, but if, for example, the land is currently vacant, and you are planning to construct a dwelling, then the use to be described in section 10 would be “vacant recreational land”, and the use described in section 13 would be “residential”
Proposed structures: If you are planning to build ANYTHING on the property, the answer to this question is “yes” – This includes additions, decks, garages, septic systems.
Description of new construction: ALL proposed new development must be described here. If you are proposing to construct an addition to a dwelling, and to add a deck, please show this information in separate columns.
Demolition: All demolition requires a permit from the building department. In some instances, a proposed addition or increase in height cannot be accomplished without the removal of existing walls. If this is not made clear to the Committee at the beginning of the process, you may find that, although you are granted permission to add on to your residence, you can’t actually do it because you have not made it clear that there is demolition involved.
Raising of Structure: In other words, are you proposing to raise the building in order to construct a basement under it.
Uses of Development: Please answer each part of this question. An increase in living space would include anything with walls – e.g. a screened porch would involve an increase in living space.
Date land acquired: When did you take possession of the property?
Date of existing buildings: If you are not sure, provide your best estimate.
Length of existing uses: For example, has the land been used for residential purposes for 30 years, or 18 months?
Water supply: in most cases the answer will be private well, but some waterfront properties take their water from a lake.
Septic: in most cases the answer will be private sewage system, but there may be some privies.
Drainage: Are there specific ditches that have been constructed to deal with drainage; is there natural drainage, etc.?
Application for consent: Is there currently an application for consent (severance) being proposed for the property? 12 Page 132 of 200

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

If yes: If there is a current application for severance or subdivision on the property, please indicate the file number. (Staff can help provide this information)
Minor variance: Has there ever been a minor variance granted on the property? If you are longtime owner of the property, you will probably be aware of any other special permission granted for a variance to the zoning by-law. If you are a new owner, the seller will probably have made you aware of this.
If yes: If there has been a previous variance granted on the property, please indicate the application number if known, and what the details of the variance were.
SKETCH: We cannot stress enough the importance of a detailed, accurate, and complete sketch. You do not necessarily need to contract with a professional to draw the sketch, but sketches that are not drawn to scale, do not show dimensions and distances, or are not drawn neatly (PLEASE USE A RULER), will not be accepted.
Agreement to Indemnify: Must be signed in front of a commissioner of oaths – you may have this done before submitting the application, or sign the application in front of staff who can sign as commissioners. All owners must sign the application, or it can be signed by an agent if one has been appointed.

13 Page 133 of 200

$KETCH1*] BU ‘ [NNC PERMWTAPPLVCATIONPLOT PLAN

Llane. wvucwv

Mu:

Rwu-wnv

cu ouw suvnx

<1-I wan-ustn

.._

-7 ,o..—

m, W

NTS

44;

mum

7:5

1312

unJzn:rwm-urunm

mmm.

mm.

unw-

N 4 N 4 V

vocrmmlxvunuzwmu

mvm.

msmc nzvnvnw uvosu:

Luwlw

mum

mm:

n mm mm

ms: an» uwnwu

nut

mama KLHIIMIK

Road

mwxznum

mm.

IASII1

:;m:

36 4

PaTta[3

wvu.

……m

rmtsm

Green

Billy

EL?

smmw gm: svonu ?nva

—

want:

7100

IAVUO Sin-an

Emma maaenum :a mu mm.

wvvsvav mmm sum kw

0109

L LQEML

…. ..

DNvLRW news;

(343) 275

Mu.
“Hum-«<1: DY mm ‘o DWDC

2: 0-:

-mm!

New

mmmm m D:

[.m..“ZZ“"’iI£ M

“MT” M

RLSII

..x W

Luann u. my

Page 134 of 200

Ha-an >4 m…

Page 135 of 200

Ha-an >4 m…

Page 136 of 200

BILLY GREEN RD

Inset Map

PE RT H

RO AD

7101 BILLY GREEN RD

Buck Lake

Y LL

E GR

Mountain Lake Long Lake

MV-43-21-S (ACWORTH - NEW) 7100 BILLY GREEN ROAD

Hinge Lake Davis Lake

Legend Subject Property

Provincially Significant Wetlands

7100 BILLY GREEN RD

Wetland D

Wooded Area

RO A

Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

Lake Trout Lake - Not at Capacity

Non-Lake Trout Lake - At Capacity

BIL LY GR E

Buck Lake

Water

Parcel Fabric Road

Railway

BILLY GREEN RD

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

Page 137 of 200

Scale 1:2,500

100

Meters 6920 BILLY GREEN RD

BILLY GREEN RD

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2021-09-22

October 22, 2021

File: MV/FRS/325/2021

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

Application for Minor Variance MV-43-21-S (Acworth-New) Lots 3, 4, Concession 15; 7100 Billy Green Road Storrington District, Township of South Frontenac Waterbody: Buck Lake

Cataraqui Conservation staff have reviewed the above-noted application for minor variance and provide the following comments for the Committee of Adjustment’s consideration. Summary of Proposal The proposal involves the construction of a second storey addition and enclosing a porch within 30 metres of the lake. More specifically, the variance is requested to: • Reduce the required setback from the highwater mark from 30 metres, as required by Section 5.8.2.a) of the South Frontenac Zoning By-law, to 7.31 metres in order to permit the construction of a second storey addition and a porch. Site Description The property is located on the east side of the south branch of Buck Lake on the west side of Billy Green Road. The topography of the site can be characterized as having a low bank (approximately 3 metres high) adjacent to the lake, then levelling out somewhat in the location of an existing dwelling. The property is currently designated ‘Rural’ in the Official Plan and ‘Limited Service Residential – Waterfront Zone’ (RLSW) in the implementing Zoning By-law for South Frontenac Township. Buck Lake has been designated as a highly sensitive Lake Trout Lake in the Official Plan for South Frontenac Township. Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 138 of 200

Page 2 of 4

Discussion The main interests of Cataraqui Conservation in this proposal is the protection of the water quality of Buck Lake and the avoidance of natural hazards (e.g. flooding and erosion) associated with the shoreline. Natural Hazards Flooding: Cataraqui Conservation does not have floodplain mapping for Buck Lake. The maximum recorded water level for Buck Lake is 133.16 metres geodetic. For Buck Lake, the maximum recorded water level is used in lieu of an engineered flood plain. Cataraqui Conservation’s Guidelines for Implementing Ontario Regulation 148/06 (see description below) requires that all development be set back a minimum of 6 metres from the regulatory floodplain of a waterbody. Based upon elevation mapping data, the proposed second storey addition will be located approximately 6 metres from the regulatory flood plain. The proposed porch enclosure is further away from the flood plain. Therefore, staff have no concerns with the proposal from a flood hazard perspective. Erosion: Cataraqui Conservation defines the extent of potential erosion hazards to include an allowance for toe erosion, a stable slope allowance for bedrock of 1 (vertical):1 (horizontal), plus an erosion access allowance of 6 metres, or 6 metres from the stable top of valley. Staff note that the proposed development is within the 6 metre access allowance but will not aggravate access further as there is an existing structure already there and the proposal is to add a second storey. The porch enclosure is further away from the erosion hazard. Staff have no concerns with the proposal from an erosion hazard perspective. Water Quality Section 2.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) suggests that planning authorities should seek to protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water. Accordingly, the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the Township of South Frontenac provide guidance with respect to how development should occur in consideration of protecting, improving and restoring water quality within the municipality. Similarly, Cataraqui Conservation’s Environmental Planning Policy (EPP, 2021) contains provisions that seek to support these objectives.

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 139 of 200

Page 3 of 4

Also, as noted above, Buck Lake is identified as a highly sensitive Lake Trout Lake, and as such, the waterbody is afforded additional protection to ensure development does not negatively impact the water quality of the lake. Section 5.2.8 of the Official Plan suggests all development or site alterations proposed within 30 metres of the highwater mark of a designated Lake Trout Lake requires the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and that a Lake Impact Assessment may also be required. However, in the opinion of staff, development within the water setback may be considered when there are no reasonable alternatives for locating the development outside of the water setback area, the development is no closer to the water than existing buildings or structures on the property the development complies with the maximum lot coverage provisions of the Zoning By-law, and suitable methods to minimize negative impacts on water quality are incorporated into the development. The proposed development is located in a reasonable location since the proposal involves a second storey addition onto an existing dwelling and a small porch that is as far away as possible from the water on two sides, the development complies with the maximum lot coverage provisions in the Zoning By-law, and the development will be no closer to the water than existing development. Therefore, staff do not believe that an EIA is required in this instance. If approved, staff recommend that roof runoff be directed away from the lake, and that the area between the development and the lake be maintained as a vegetated buffer to the satisfaction of the Township. Recommendation Staff have no objection to the approval of application MV-43-21-S based on our consideration for natural hazard, natural heritage and water quality policies. Ontario Regulation 148/06 Cataraqui Conservation, under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, regulates development (construction, filling, and site alteration) within 15 metres of a flood plain or top of bank. Staff note that the proposed development is within 15 metres of the regulatory flood plain and the top of bank. Therefore, a permit will be required for the proposed development under said regulation. The applicant will be required to contact the undersigned at the building permit stage for more information regarding permitting requirements under Ontario Regulation 148/06.

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 140 of 200

Page 4 of 4

Please notify this office of any decision made by the Committee of Adjustment with regard to this application. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (613) 546-4228 extension 244 or by e-mail at aschmidt@crca.ca.

Yours truly,

Andrew Schmidt Andrew Schmidt Supervisor, Development Review /as c.c.

Anna Geladi, Planner, South Frontenac Township (via e-mail)

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 141 of 200

Page 142 of 200

Jane Acworth—New

Applicant Name(s):

Comments:

A new sewage system has been approved and installed to meet the design requirements in accordance with the submitted drawings for the proposed construction. The Building Department has no objection to the proposed construction.

7100 BillyGreen Road Township of North Frontenac (Storrington)

Minor Variance

Type of Application or Proposal:

Locatmn:

MV-43-21 —S

Planning Department

Application Number:

To:

Sewage System Review Comments

4432 George Street, PO Box 100 Sydenham, ON KOH2T0 613-376-3027

The Township of South Frontenac Building Services

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 11, 2021 Subject:

Permission Application MV-43-21-S, Acworth-New, 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, District of Storrington

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

Background Relief Requested The application seeks permission to enlarge a single detached dwelling under Section 45(2) of the Planning Act, by increasing its height and gross floor area, within the required setback from the highwater mark.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property is 8.5 acres (3.4 hectares), and is located on the west side of Billy Green Road. It has frontage on Buck Lake which is an at-capacity (highly sensitive) lake trout lake. The subject property is generally flat and is predominantly forested. There is an indentation of the shoreline on the south portion of the property creating a small peninsula. The existing dwelling, boat house and sheds are located on the peninsula. The shoreline consists of an approximately 3 metre high bank. The topography rises towards the centre of the property. The existing dwelling is located on a small peninsula about halfway on the property. The dwelling is located 7.31 metres (24 feet) from the highwater mark of Buck Lake. The total footprint of the existing dwelling is approximately 131.2 square metres (1412.2 square feet). The dwelling consists of three sections, which have varying heights. The north and south sections are two storeys and the middle section is one storey. The maximum height is 8 metres (27 feet).

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

Page 143 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application MV-43-21-S, Acworth-New, 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, District of Storrington

A sewage system was installed on the property in 2020/2021. It is located to the north of the principal dwelling, more than 30 metres from the highwater mark. Summary of Proposal The proposal is to increase the height of the dwelling by 0.9 metres (3 feet) to a maximum height of 9.2 metres (30 feet) and to increase the gross floor area by 42.5 square metres (458 square feet) by adding a second storey to the middle section to the existing cottage. The proposal is also to replace an existing front porch with an addition (foyer), 15 metres (49 feet) from the highwater mark. The existing front porch is approximately 2.1 metres long by 2.4 metres deep (7 feet long by 8 feet deep). The foyer addition would be 4.9 metres long by 1.8 metres deep (16 feet 10 inches long by 7 feet deep). The gross floor area of the dwelling would increase to 195 square metres (2098 square feet). These proposals are being applied for in order to repair, renovate and strengthen the dwelling to a safe condition and to meet the current building code standards. Department and Agency Comments Public Services – This application did not meet the criteria for circulation. Building Services (Sewage System Review) – Comments received from Building Services on October 19, 2021 indicate that they have no objection to the approval of the application. It was noted that the sewage system was designed to accommodate the proposal in accordance with the submitted drawings for MV-43-21-S. Cataraqui Conservation – Comments received on Cataraqui Conservation on October 22, 2021 indicate that Staff have no objection to the approval of the application. It was noted that the proposed second storey addition will be located approximately 6 metres from the regulatory flood plain and the proposed porch enclosure (foyer addition) is further away from the flood plain. They also noted that the proposed development is within the 6 metre erosion access allowance but it will not aggravate access further as the existing structure is already there and the proposal is to add a second storey. They noted that the porch enclosure is further away from the erosion hazard. Furthermore, they recommend that the roof runoff be directed away from the lake and that the area between the development and the lake be maintained as a vegetated buffer. It was noted that a permit under O. Reg 148/06 will be required for the proposed development as it is located within a regulated area. The applicant must contact Cataraqui Conservation at the building permit stage. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 144 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application MV-43-21-S, Acworth-New, 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, District of Storrington

Public Comments No comments were received from the public at the time of the writing of this report. Planning Analysis Section 5.10.2 of Zoning By-law 2003-75 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. The proposal associated with this application would result in an increase in building height to the dwelling that is within 30 metres of the highwater mark and would result in an increase in gross floor area. The increased building height would comply with the RLSW zone provision. The setback from the highwater mark is not changing. The applicant is requesting permission to enlarge the dwelling, which is a legal nonconforming building that was constructed prior to the passing of Zoning By-law No. 200375. In this situation, the Committee of Adjustment should consider whether to grant permission to enlarge the legal non-conforming building, by increasing its height and gross floor area, under Section 45(2) of the Planning Act. The increase in the height of the dwelling is proposed to permit a second storey to the middle section of the building in order to replace the existing spiral staircase with a staircase that meets Ontario Building Code requirements, and to add an additional bathroom. The increase in building height will not affect surrounding properties as the development is located on a peninsula and there is a large open space located between the dwelling and the closest neighbouring property to the south. There are trees along the shoreline that will conceal the increase in height from the waterfront. Raising the dwelling on the existing footprint will result in the least disturbance to the natural features on the subject property. The existing setback to the highwater mark will be maintained for the middle section of the dwelling. The proposed foyer addition is considered appropriate for the continued use of the property. Re-aligning and expanding the front porch will provide accessible safe access into the dwelling. Furthermore, keeping the depth of the front porch and expanding only the width, will maintain the existing setback to the highwater mark. In addition, the foyer addition would continue to be farther from the highwater mark of the southeast corner of the dwelling, which is 14.7 metres from the highwater mark. Requiring a development agreement on the property will ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the Township environmental standards, and will implement www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 145 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application MV-43-21-S, Acworth-New, 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, District of Storrington

the recommendations for roof run-off and re-vegetation outlined by the Conservation Authority. It is the opinion of staff that it is appropriate for the Committee of Adjustment to grant permission to enlarge the legal non-conforming building, 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:    

Recommendation That the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve for application MV-43-21-S, subject to the following conditions.

Permission is granted to enlarge a legal non-conforming building on the subject property. The existing dwelling is permitted to have a maximum building height of 9.2 metres (30 feet), to be expanded for a foyer measuring 4.9 metres long by 1.8 metres wide (16 feet 10 inches long by 7 feet wide) as per the drawings, floor plans and application submitted with MV-43-21-S, received on November 3, 2021, that will be attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
The applicant 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 Township environmental policies and Cataraqui Conservation recommendations outlined in their letter dated October 22, 2021. 



Roof runoff will be directed away from the shoreline of Buck Lake 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. Maintaining existing natural tree cover and understory on the property, especially between the dwelling and the shoreline, in a natural state.

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

Page 146 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Permission Application MV-43-21-S, Acworth-New, 7100 Billy Green Road, Perth Road, District of Storrington

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. Report Prepared By: Anna Geladi, Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner

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

Page 147 of 200

IR£vIEwANn‘m<E

ngsvnusaurv

rm msuesatm

wonxounzmuornzmunzcvsrenanumax suu(cnatu24.urnv/n:¢ouc.orm:ouumo |mnu4un:n.mnn¢nmus

aunmaocooe. nzalsrmzn mmewmowmm w-sszsouxrsconu mrvwnuaa mu nnuucnunu um-cu-em.o.m.umu…u.cuu..m=.o….u«…u.»-xa.u»u nvvouaalnwrdn-uunvnrnmnnan

Illnnw-sin:-I\nua>4KAua-uncnuw-umzvasu-t

nvvoriuaanunnmmmnnuan

w.u—.».=-umuu

Acorn.-«llunmunuavuanouuun

ruzuzaaru-uwillnlulrnvn-amcvrvv–unw–Inavnrncnnanmurvxua runruuuI)uIauAwnnIvrunuv:r-muavuvwlml.-Ill:-I-vnurux-ttlwnu nnuuauiuvucnvauum-vow-nuns»:

u“ >omnso«.

cncu

uu.m_

uni-IoluWKl4I£n:.nAuIIuauuru:IwI:u.-uAI:un-In

nlwnnsunvontuuvnuauulxrxrllrazuwulnonuumnnnuu -qunupmmzum

vwuoxuvun

….9..mn..ru..-.o=

m-nunpum-m-u.

Asvvtnvwa-rxsln-uuIImIIru:u.nvo(IuvunaIn¢nnu.nnrp—u>

=.«_.u.-w-nun-an-wmo-a.ouu.—u.

mum

-mun u-.

Irnoau1.nLunv|n¢rIn(uIIuuunnnnn>c:(v(-muaqvrtnlunuu

uvvulnoa-Auaamn-alnzuvnaxuruvlnnmm-coal

u-‘L

A:-any-u-nuvuunuon-unuwdrnnwlllocnuuumrnwmwquaiulwuznnnuuxn

vnuulauvuluurmuuunnnluuwulvinvnnnunnunlrurnmtumxduwrl ru-I(ooIvxIn-a-unruvunur-no-tuvannanlnn-u wtlrlvluznvmquu-tau dnnnlnonunul

uJoI-xnmlu-Iaznvzulunwjnlouuvluo-Iaatula-vwulnmuwn

tanalvlawal-lnwtnunnnnannnullaao-luvuuuurm

uvrucnwnuxulvnn-Iluun-qnuullnnruvu-tunlaanun

um-….a.uu<a-nnummvanuamunu

1-antinu-4raI~~nAalulL~~4rI:na’vnvxuonuluu—vnrcno(nnI\7¢em-tl

nxrnrncuotnnnwlmruvumwwvlwruvwlawvmunr muwvunnrlnnsnnuurunonnrunncvmnnunn

m. an. wu..I.sEcnouwIm

sum:

|EnRoa(

dwvmmmsvauvunmmuls

Dns

mu secnou wma snmunmax: namw nmsnzn c.-was

LESS mm Ir

Gaumswczmnzwnusu

mus: or was us: umnrnson.MMIO. uxo ma names In. nu ma xxn nmmwrv. r~un:-an-svszaa mm nsagho-ueomee :2 w:a-um. mmonm. a

-mu

ummmnumumanamzunuc

-.m_..u.n~.u

-nu

um um» um

momwu K.IN.x91u

nacI¢wann«uIIA~.||u.vnlwuI\nuII£wIV1I

Mwvvxnnurvvl.-nnvu-tnalrcluulnnntn-azul nuuu-nun-a nuxun-loxbuuvatn

nun-nuumununxu-u—m…¢—.nnu

nnxtnnnnvnznvlnou-(nlnwnulntuolnmnlnna ……n.a…ya.u..o.ann.muuu……..o..m.—.u.-o».mn_n…==….a.-mun.-

mumNrIlm.II|w|lnn-nnnnnuvntnmmnnmntutovvuuullnuuunannn

….n…m…u

m..m..nu»a.m..

-u.mo……..

m-«nm»umn..au..mu-u-;…ueun-m-.u,.u..q…a.:.n…

. …….

um”

.1!-honor

nuvuuxnnclnnxuulnnoa-umalounu

nc-zaxnaoilxlnulun

ms-nu

-an.-.xmnn….u..-…omm¢mmum.u-.».u

nu-vnolnvavwlhowlm-nu‘-xnvcruuu-nnllu-awn-13-!-me:

nultullusucu

…….–annnunuuunIn-nLIur1suIzlInnuu.II-xuInu:wn<nnnnwvlnaaomnxvvnnnnwrluunnaatmoulmumlumvun-tun:-Kn

.0.

Page 148 of 200

use-InHutuuncu-xnnncnuwoun-vac-vuam-cu-vuugn-annmuutuvmvmmvnmunnccnnxnlwantlDual!n1:wLxaIl-.lvuIny—-aurarn-Innvwwnnoulutoawuuuununlnauw rounnlmcm nu.-wosm

mu…

|.IdJu.Iuuu

….. m…uu–…m..u..u.n..

-cu

..-…-

~.-n

nanny!

In-uunloumnvl

nmnzwmn ms

nasvmsumroanca new.»

wow(o«n£Hu.rar1I:nnMR£5csrEn.:nuMDEn

suaszcnonzd ornavusaomzornazomuuo aunnmocouz nuacmmtnmonermu nzasmm: m nczwvmvmrzcmsszsnxtmnss

mwwunau

rmuncn-A3770

uvmvcvunru cnwrnuuuvnvt

.,n2v£n-.–=–_

mom ELEvAncm

Mouse or n-. x IISAmmuson. umo,

awnmoms: nu.

cue

mvwuu.on um um nous. 6I3—§1>-Z?a

(mu:

nueruuonwuu

wu- win

Pmkvhwresz

mm mm:mm

mmvuwnum. mu

Page 149 of 200

nuaa

Lmmuw.

-=-

-u

wan»:

n-umuu.-..—.nn.u-xu-.;…

|.:F1£L:vA’no«

-cu

I-(-7:

“I

–.u

..u

Jlalnn

…. -.w…….m…

mzvuswmnwas azspousnurv

mum: Disncu u 4. as nmsacu c, or me ammo

mumounamxosnsmunzmsrzxmuuuau sulstcnou

wuxuocans. :um.w.nsn,»mn:rnnuu cusszycarsoomss Isalsrzwaz In miwvwovturs mwnun. nan uzu

am: new Ame

‘rt

a ousmauvmuoou

».

.= _ g :

msmsumm

.mm.u-sr

mn:_uw~Asns

-H

..,w.,.,,.,,,,

l

E : 5 4”‘ E

rvvu

(manna

….

alum

,,_.,,,.

ransom

_,.

,= …….—.m<

m…-

…‘..r

.m-

H unnnulonnunnmua-nu-avuvnacunu …‘…….-ma-g Iu:<-t-¢>IxI-nunluuInIanwIoonIvvnIvn.u-

mun

u…m.v……..n-m.uu.-u.m…….;……u..».umm-…n—mu..mu….m

n.-…».u.o….uoo_mmum….e.«u…a.n…..»…u………..m.:.«…-.n…-m..y-…nm….u..»…..u….ma.-e.o….¢.~~..n….»._…..~~m.n-=..m…-um-.m.on.:m-amnuyuuu …….»-ac.»nuuuumuumum-….~~:..un.u.u…~~.nuu.u..m.u».qum.=uu..u

AA!-wvIl<n.uIIu-nu.mnaunr-mlznumnnannwcavimctqtuuulluannn.M.||n(IunIna|nuInnnn,|-o-clmanm-(nu

luuuu-nxninnnunuoua

Mxnruntr-tun-Innmavoulnwurunwkxumanunuxavnozv-umu<|I.<: unnnna-nnyvo-urnoungooman

.n.m.—…..m-_….

n-._m..—….-…..w.

…u-m.:uwu.~u..m..a.u…..uv_.n-.u….<.-

nnuvvl.-Icwylrntvwu-~~nuuIIuI.uII~~m:

….mm.ou……..a.

Mu…

Lwunavnacllwnvnrnanvaczvuvuunpa-Luv-«nun:-n:»v3«usn>-undlmvmv-dunnnnnnnuruuuvntavuutnaavuzlluzul-Irunuluannuaxavlnrvrlwvunnnmmutlunzlnlvwurmn

umnooa

mowosuz

….«-="“‘

11’

-w.nurnuu-n-

: -.

_ ‘

msmtceamoo-4

‘-. E

-_ E

“W..-

E -.

41’

’ ,¢ .1

“-

Jj__.. .1. _,

um:

nA”"’

‘3.

….u

;

1.-

..5

-_n

Dustmasumloou

‘4 -. 1-

ausrmnunanoou

En:ImaLnmuRnou

mm:

;

. 3

3 Ensnaamcotu

‘_

EXISTINOLMJNDRV Ensnuu

‘-. _—.q

—~

us: nmnmon. wuxo.cue mo MOLME5xn. mm: on nonurn mans; su-usznu umu I.:-ehoummuge a win: -um mumnmea nm um: um xuprwwu sou. mu

Tjé

‘I1

HOUSE06 MIKE

Iumoau

…n

…..,

Page 150 of 200

…. E .

…w

,,,,,__

,…..r

; …~.r.y..r

sun-nu mm nook

..~r

5 a

. '

..-«-

.. w"

,. zxmxusr

nuuuuc

nocuuou

an–t

vmnuvunnvalanhnnnntvzm

u-r

«-1

W-rt

,,..y

….

:-um

-anon…-a.

mzvnzwnmwz azspousnuvv sou ms oesxvu won-< aw muuanvcnnu nznmznmunoaz svnszcrm 11.4 or nmssan c. arm: oumuo wLn1uocwLIAuouAL.|itD.AmnErmns

nsmsrezznnnosnwmvmraunssrscarzaonss mwwxnau.

us ¢m>m_w¢

u»..un.cnca

nun ncuznno

mum»

EDD

am: n.EvAno«

nous: oi INIEE us: umumson, wuuo.mo ma wows xv lNvI[IN’(V_

an um um

McNE:6u<I7b1l5a

rwuu l.u9h¢Iu(ohN:e

wen. wwu houkonhlera um so» am

mumoun naN.19zu

Page 151 of 200

m.a.m.

..,..

am…

……m.—-U.-um-mug…

:1£vAvIon

-an

…«.w

bu!

-u

-….n

a…

nmaum-u

mzvnzwmonxeuzsvansmm vonmznesscu woman nawxornennuuzasrznaomocx wus(l:r1ovuL4.uFmw:I0Nc.oFm£omAnn wmuowoa IAMO.IAl..rED.AN?IrEFIRIlIS

nsuumaznumuvrnownwscusszsurzoonzs wwmxlau.

nnuauumo

run!

rnvlr

1’

um.»

nvrr-1-nvrv

..x

rnvlr

nor

M,.¢~nv““

uw-.nm-

«II

.,..-

‘.,:.m\

-‘.4

M1a.aw

’:

a ‘

….n

E 9 uunr

¥TIO-lgb?bml

3 mummrmmmu mnammus :

……. Mm, ,j.j_.f

1.3511.-sum:

um.

}

rant:

v-’

,.ax

m-.n………r

7.Ilh’—7

…..»

-nu »m….mn…u-.au=o-an»-:-=.m. punnnnlal-unluu

-Aa:u-cliunurwwnxnlnnnn-walnut:-v

I»-rvxuuuucalrlamxturvmuvm-n-zuutuvlontaluvvu-tuluuaunloluaxlnuntu -Iziluuluruununin-<:ImIonnlr¢uu4»o-unnonnuuulnlupo

ruuuualuqmoiz-nun

lurvnwmuvvuvl-anrnnvnnnnyuuuauullcrtulu-tusnuanvununuunl

van:-uxeauwnzuv-mm:-ux

nnnnvanxnvnxnuaunvmvmnutuunsnnunlnuunhcnaa uuumvummu».u.uo.-.—wun..mm..nu-mo.uumuuu-nu.»

novuiucvntnnnn-MI:-xaulonxnvuuunxq

nqnaunzu

mun»-In

Ana

~.nm.mum—.«..w-_ua.«.-mm.n…mu—

munumwun

nun-umnnnmsunuxuu-un-numan-.awo.aunn¢.u.; nulunsvanln-umunvua-tau-«Iva

vlumvann-u-I

z-m-.…m».-.muu

Lnmsvucvluiwnntaatevmluuaonu-v-?lovtumuunmouwolwucnvmhtunwuu

tutu.»-unvrI.u.vn1w:rI'~lu<n¢unnnI:Iwu –«nu-uwuu-mmsnm

vnI.nmnan-I-(Inn

mxwvllnaavtrnrvl-uauA.-uxulnunlvlutn

uunxmu-nvuxmrlouvxunn-mu

nanlnnnuuxunauaeaasmzvrnunlmalucauu-ruuvmvun-M

swowosznszoom nooa

.. raw

5 3 rl

-. .n

Exlsnuc

._ 5

wouszas mm uu nEND(I5ON.MM1D.C!(O mu »ouAr5 an wvzukv. on um um mma sums-zua

umsn E ; amnoou

tum;

…

u.um.ouunm-u a

win: mm

hauxonhlee

um 30»

morvzwuam. new

Page 152 of 200

,…mr.r…-

sun…

moon».

.m…..

Iva-nuoIIuI1.I«xnvun-riucou

,.X.,,,.,,,

EXISING szooun noon

Iuu

….

..«..w

._a-

…..q

u…

n nonhu-Inn-n

Page 153 of 200

Fee:

$2,010.00

|_$1,316.00

Planning $959.00

Building Admin Fee: $97.00 $97.00 $97.00

1,056.00 ,413.00 $2,107.00

ITOTAL:

Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority

Township of South Frontenac Minor Variance Only Minor Variance WITHPerformance Review Minor Variance in combination with a new Class 2, 3, 4, or 5 sewage system other than a Class A system

$420.00

$720.00 $1 18300

It is required that a Fee be provided for the Township to review onsite sewage disposal and Conservation Authority (where applicable) when submitting an application (Separate cheques, payable to the applicable Conservation Authority, are to be submitted to the Township with the completed application).

1-3 Variances 4+ Variances After building without a permit

Application Type:

It is required that one (1) copy of this application be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, together with the SKETCH referred to in Note 3 (below), accompanied by a NON-REFUNDABLE FEE in accordance with the chart below in cash, debit or by cheque made payable to the Township of South Frontenac.

Application Requirements

C…

provided the Committee is of the opinion

ls desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. ls minor in nature

The Committee may vary Zoning By-law provisions that the variance:

Updated January, 2021

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE OR PERMISSION

Page 154 of 200

Personal information requested herein is required under the Planning Act, 1990 as amended. Committee for the This information will be used by the Committee of Adjustment/Land Division purpose of reviewing the above referenced application, and may be made available to those boards, Commissions, Authorities, Agencies and Persons having an interest in this matter. Any questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed to the Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment (P.O. Box 100, Sydenham, Ont., KOH 2T0, Phone 376-3027ext.2224).

Collection of Personal Information

Each applicant shall provide a sketch showing the dimensions of the subject land and of all abutting lands as outlined in Question 29 of the application. The sketch should be accurately dimensioned and scaled in either Imperial or Metric measures. This sketch, in conjunction with the Application Form, is the basis for the analysis of the Minor Variance Application by the Committee of Adjustment. It is strongly recommended that the applicant spend the necessary time to carefully and thoroughly assemble the data and transfer the data to the sketch. It is Any important that the sketch be drawn with accurate dimensions and measurements. application which does not include the above required information may not be accepted. In this regard, the applicant may wish to secure the assistance of a person who specializes in the drafting of such sketches. A guide to answering the application questions is attached.

PLEASE READ THIS ITEM CAREFULLY

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

Page 155 of 200

/ 9/4‘ T

7“

. a. ».

C <33; C

‘

“

‘

Bedford

Number:

Concession Number:

District: J

The description of the subject land:

‘

Portland

Lot Number:

i‘

X Loughborough

Q./.g

Storrington

Agent as named aboupis hereby authorized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of ‘linor Variance.

2’ if ‘V

Email Address of Authorized Agent:

‘= -

i_,=‘In.

I ‘- “vi

Phone number of Authorized Agent:

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent:

Name of Authorized Agent:

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

Email Address of Owner(s):

Phone number of Owner(s):

Full Mailing Address of Owner(s):

Name of Owner(s): (3

’

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

Page 156 of 200

The nature and extent of the relief from the Zoning By—Iaw:

;%gw’4Area; 9.6 o.;2.3, l o 3 -‘fr

‘

ax?‘

“$0 ‘.

_‘»~,

‘

.‘ 1. ‘

5”-I,

inCI

:’

t-~

{“2 ._I

6.66£55 «bi5; .-V; Ox 5 *’;~"’c:.«.»‘”o.\r{

.,’_

i __.” /7,.’ I.’ . ¢_’.. F I (“V “- 5 ‘ ‘L.

6 '

,’/1 ’ ,

v—.. ‘

I‘

‘._

. ‘

»’

-—

IE0 7 5 gr?

‘

Yes

mvo

?{/31”.‘/:”.i

.7”: .7’5.
l~:f_ Q;

.5;

is IL:

no.1

What are the existing uses of the subjectland?

i.— _,«’

/“2/:3’W?

Name of Road/Lane:

L»/<:"~~7”‘s‘3.-”r_;"~~"}”‘“ar.?’" /DCLV1LlC>?"*

If I

The reason why the proposed use cannot comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-law:

‘

fl ,OCC@55ofZ srructi/rz to §‘/‘(>7 in from/“gs/. ‘T9_E.»/m 52%,/7‘«./;c¢ .»*3’<;> {rip —Ffo.rrf/ 43¢ 1”O p4_Cmft txccéggéég 7;:(El 55 L,«5!’/

-: l emf/tr,

current zoning of the subject land:

l'3\L$Iv’l/

The

Does the subject property front on a municipally maintained road? No OR a privately maintained road? EIYes

Depth:

I 6

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended /, -.4?-VNI “/I I’ 6-’: _ _‘,‘’:‘~ Frontage (on road/lane): _‘? I ; Frontage (on water): O <7}

Page 157 of 200

_.;» ~~

-u

‘

;‘_

‘ii’ '

“

_=’

’

‘\

«_

*‘

‘*

W/..

..b…x

Vi!’ Ruff,

I/I” F _-

‘~ “

_ '

5 =, 7‘) w.,/

(3)

(4)

14.Are any building(s) or structure(s), or additions to existing building(s) or structure(s), PROPOSED to be built on the subject land?

.‘:’

(2)

5%?”

’

4’

13.The proposed uses of the subject land:

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Dimensions of Floor Area

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

??___J

Setback from SideLot Line

Setback from Rear Lot Line

Setback from Front Lot Line

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

(1)

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

Page 158 of 200

Do your plans include any DEMOLITION of existing structures?

Yes

NOTES: 1) If the subject property is on waterfront, and on a private lane, the setback from the front lot line and the setback from the high water mark will be the same. 2) The dimensions required in this question relate to the NEW CONSTRUCTION ONLY, and NOT to the total size of the completed building.

[Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Outside Dimensions of Buildinglstructure

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

Setback from Side Lot Line

Setback from Rear Lot Line

Front Lot Line

Setback from

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

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

details:

Increase in living space

Will the addition or structure encroach on the existing septic system?

(c)

(d)

Increase in plumbing fixtures

(b)

Increase in number of bedrooms

(a)

What are the uses of the proposed development?

If yes, please provide

;,.__

If 1’?

T/1

‘

id:L‘‘_

-A

4’

._ ‘

“l

—

‘

ix)‘ 1

fNo

gfNo

f’No

structures were constructed on the subject lands:

Yes

21.The length of time that the existing uses of the subject land have continued:

,…

20.The date the existing buildings and

‘M

I “‘95 ._,.

‘

Yes

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 agagmended Signature

per month.

19.The date the subject land was acquired by the current owner:

Page 159 of 200

Page 160 of 200

Q/’

If the answer to item 27 is yes, please give the ?le number of the application and the status of the application.

Yes

If known, please indicate whether the subject land has ever been the subject of an application under Section 43 of the Planning Act (Minor Variance).

Ifthe answer to question 25 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

33/l\lo

The location of a reference point… …i.e. distance between the subject land and the nearest township lot line or landmark such as a bridge or railway crossing.

iii)

**Note. **

The boundaries and dimensions of the subject land including the location of any existing and proposed buildings.

ii)

The distances to on—siteand abutting owners’ wells, septic fields and barns, from the property to be varied, IS REQUIRED to be shown. The SKETCH is of significant

The location of all abutting (neighbours’) lands.

THE SKETCH MUST HAVE A NORTH ARROW AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following:

Yes

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

Page 161 of 200

I3‘7’H

DAYOF

5% fémbéf

Kl”?V540/l

,2o

3”

Signat re of Ap l ant or Authorized Agent

nit

Signature of Applicant or Authorized Agent

I, OF solemnly declare that all the statements contained in this applicationare true and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made by virtue of e Canada Evidence Act. under oat

[33/0Zc{o{l /V0/’/“/:5’

THIS

DATED AT THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

The OwnerlApplicant/Agent further agrees that, until such requests have been complied with, the municipality will have no continuing obligation to process the application or attend or be represented at the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative proceeding in connection with the application:

The Owner/Applicant/Agent further agrees to provide the municipality, upon request and in cases where an application has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, 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 in order to process the application. If such appeal expenses exceed the deposit, the Owner/Applicant shall pay the difference forthwith upon being billed by the municipality, with interest at the rate of 1.25% per month (15% per annum) on accounts overdue more than 30 days,

The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees to reimburse and indemnify the municipality for all fees and expenses incurred by the municipality to process the application, including any fees and expenses attributable to proceedings before the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative tribunal if necessary to defend Council’s decision to support the application.

The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees that the information recorded in this Minor Variance Application Form is accurate. The Owner/Applicant/Agent agrees that representatives of the Township and, where applicable, the appropriate Conservation Authority, may enter onto the subject property for the purpose of determining the appropriateness of the site for the proposed development.

Attached to this application is a cheque payable to the Township of South Frontenac representing payment of the application fee.

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

Page 162 of 200

Reason why you can’t comply: In other words, why can you not meet the required setbacks. it could be, for example, because you are seeking a variance to add on to an existing structure that is already too close to the water, or that developing further from the water would be impossible because of a steep embankment.

—-

Nature and Extent of Relief: This question is asking what you are asking to do that requires the variance for example, it could be that you are asking to be 25 m rather than 30 m from the high water mark, or that you are asking to increase the height of a structure within 30 m of the high water mark, or that you are seeking a variance to construct an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the principal building.
Current zoning: You may not be aware of the zoning on your property and this can be determined when you come in.for pre—consu|tation with planning staff.
Frontage, depth, area, acres: All parts of this question must be completed.

blank. f. Roll No: This is the number beginning with ‘1029’ which appears on your tax bill. Please take time to look it up before submitting the application.

space blank. d. Name of Road/Street: This question applies whether or not you are on a private lane or a public road. e. Reference Plan No: If your property has been surveyed, it will have a plan number, and one or more parts on that plan. If your property has not been surveyed, leave this space

Description of the Subject Land: a. District: The Districts are the same as the former Townships. If you are not sure, check the roll number (the long number beginning with 1029) on your tax bill. Ifthe numbers are 010, 020 or 030, your district is Bedford; if the numbers are 040-050, your district is Loughborough; if the numbers are 060 or 070, your district is Storrington; and if the numbers are 080, your district is Portland. b. Concession and Lot Numbers: if you are not sure, check your tax bill c. Street Number: Your civic address if a civic number has not been assigned, leave this

You may wish to appoint someone to act on your behalf during the variance process. If so, that person’s name, address and phone number should appear here All owner’s must sign the authorization.

The names of all owners must appear in this section, even if they live in separate residences, and the address(es) should be the full mailing address, complete with postal code.

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

Page 163 of 200

Length of existing uses: For example, has the land been used for residential purposes for 30

20)Date of existing buildings: If you are not sure, provide your best estimate.

19)Date land acquired: When did you take possession of the property?

space.

—

18)Uses of Development: Please answer each part of this question. An increase in living space would include anything with walls e.g. a screened porch would involve an increase in living

Raising of Structure: In other words, are you proposing to raise the building in order to construct a basement under it.
Demolition: All demolition requires a permit from the building department. In some instances, a proposed addition or increase in height cannot be accomplished without the removal of existing walls. If this is not made clear to the Committee at the beginning of the process, you may ?nd that, although you are granted permission to add on to your residence, you can’t actually do it because you have not made it clear that there is demolition involved.
Description of new construction: ALL proposed new development must be described here. If you are proposing to construct an addition to a dwelling, and to add a deck, please show this information in separate columns.

—

Proposed structures: If you are planning to build ANYTHINGon the property, the answer to this question is “yes” This includes additions, decks, garages, septic systems.
Proposed Uses: Generally, the answer to this question will be the same as the answer to #10, but if, for example, the land is currently vacant, and you are planning to construct a dwelling, then the use to be described in section 10 would be “vacant recreational land”, and the use described in section 13 would be “residential”
Description of buildings and structures: You must complete all sections of this question for each structure on your property. If there is a deck on your dwelling, please describe it separately from the residence.
Buildings: If there are ANY buildings or structures on the property now, the answer to this question is “yes”.
Existing Uses: e.g. residential, retail business, vacant recreational land

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 164 of 200

—

Agreement to indemnify: Must be signed in front of a commissioner of oaths you may have this done before submitting the application, or sign the application in front of staff who can sign as commissioners. All owners must sign the application, or it can be signed by an agent if one has been appointed.
SKETCH: We cannot stress enough the importance of a detailed, accurate, and complete sketch. You do not necessarily need to contract with a professional to draw the sketch, but sketches that are not drawn to scale, do not show dimensions and distances, or are not drawn neatly (PLEASE USE A RULER), will not be accepted.
If yes: If there has been a previous variance granted on the property, please indicate the application number if known, and what the details of the variance were.
Minor variance: Has there ever been a minor variance granted on the property? If you are longtime owner of the property, you will probably be aware of any other special permission granted for a variance to the zoning by-law. If you are a new owner, the seller will probably have made you aware of this.
If yes: if there is a current application for severance or subdivision on the property, please indicate the ?le number. (Staff can help provide this information)
Application for consent: is there currently an application for consent (severance) being proposed for the property?

‘

Drainage: Are there specific ditches that have been constructed to deal with drainage; is there natural drainage, etc.?

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

{:<;5’: 56n . I«’ oF

,-….....~

““4

we m: M

LOT

:_…——-—–——-’—.1;.mw.”..:.a??“h–N–*9

’

‘–

‘

a\s

WI»; mum

an“,

..,..€_5«‘;_m~ ‘’‘’’‘°”

‘v

“”""-3:

lgzrghgl

§~.

CQHCFSSIDI-W. . r ALLVI-’§¥’I2~~FIm‘IEIW~~;IE’-I” ‘. .1 . mm :q*»__~W’_M”

Wm»

—»~——-v–—-"–«–vm

:3’,

“’

VV5 /’

1-mm mmmm ruluu mes:mu-m

‘nu

-1

_ ..._____5C!"€@......_. ‘ _L-n-s-4~:*""“”

Page 165 of 200

Little Devil Lake

Inset Map Cronk Lake

Doubloon Lake

BEDFORD ROA D

SHULTZ LANE

LIT T L

E LO

1052 GORDON LANE N

GL AKE 1029 1068 COLE RO GORDON Little Long Lake AD LANE

5810 BEDFORD RD

CO LE L

LANE CON 9 PT LOT 8 BU L RP 13R15278 PART L SE YE LANE 1 CRONK LAKE

Cronk Lake

MV-44-21-L

CRONK LAKE

(BARRETT) (NORRIS) SENIOR LANE

Eel Bay

1037 SENIOR LANE

5796 BEDFORD RD

1030 COLE LANE

AN E

Little Long Lake 1022

Glassy Lake

Legend Subject Property

E N SENIOR LANE

GORDON LANE

1069 SENIOR LANE

Road

1071 SENIOR LANE

Railway

Provincially Significant Wetlands

1072 SENIOR LANE

L SEN IOR

Wetland

Wooded Area Water

ANE

Parcel Fabric

CON 8 PT LOT 9

5760 BEDFORD RD 2315 LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

Page 166 of 200

LIT T

2261 LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

2315L LITTLE EL LONG LAKE ORD

2368 LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

BASSWOOD LANE

LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

E LITTLE 2342 RO LONG LAKE ARD

2190 LITTLE LONG LAKE 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.

Little Long Lake

LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

Scale 1:3,500

140

Meters 2293 LITTLE LONG LAKE RD

UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2021-09-22

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 11, 2021 Subject:

Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L, Barrett/Norris, PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough District

Summary This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment grant approval of this application for zoning relief for an accessory structure in the front yard, 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: RLSW Zoning Relief Requested Section 5.24.2: Accessory Structures – To permit an accessory building in the projected front yard of the main building, 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.

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The subject property is located on the south side of Senior Lane, which is located off Gordon Lane, off Bedford Road. The subject property also has waterfront on Cronk Lake. The subject property is shaped like an “L” that has been rotated 90 degrees to the east. Senior Lane runs along a portion of the north side of the property. The property’s waterfront on Cronk Lake is located along the long part of the “L”. There is a wetland on the west side of the property. The subject property can be described as rising from the shoreline towards higher elevation near the rear of the property. The subject property contains an existing accessory structure, hereon forward referred to as a cabin. The approximately 11.7 square metre (125 square foot), one storey accessory www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 167 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L, Barrett/Norris, PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough District

structure “cabin” is setback 15 metres from the highwater mark of Cronk Lake. The cabin was constructed without zoning relief and without a building permit. Township Staff, Building Staff and Planning Staff, spoke with the Owner prior to the submission of a minor variance application and indicated that the cabin is not a permitted use on the property as it is less than the minimum gross floor area required in the RLSW zone, and it does not comply with all applicable setbacks. Township Staff outlined options including removing the cabin entirely, moving the cabin to a compliant location, or requesting a minor variance to maintain the cabin in the existing location. The cabin was also constructed without a permit from Cataraqui Conservation under O. Reg. 148/06. Cataraqui Conservation issued several notices to the property owner requesting removal of the structure. From conversations with the applicant, it is the understanding of Township Staff that this cabin will be removed entirely from the subject property. Summary of Proposal The applicant is proposing to construct a seasonal dwelling on the subject property. The seasonal dwelling will be located on the west end of the subject property. The seasonal dwelling would be 61 square metres (660 square feet) and located in compliance with all required setbacks for a principal building in the RLSW zone as outlined in Zoning By-law No. 2003-75. The applicant has submitted a building permit for the seasonal dwelling. The application for minor variance is to permit an accessory building within the projected front yard of the proposed seasonal dwelling on the subject property. The proposed accessory structure (storage building) will be 2.6 metres by 5.5 metres (8.6 feet by 18 feet), or approximately 14.4 square metres (155 square feet) in area. It will be single storey in compliance with the height for an accessory structure in the RLSW zone. It will be located 34 metres (112 feet) from the highwater mark of Cronk Lake. Due to the “L” shape of the subject property, it will be located in the front yard of the seasonal dwelling. The applicant is also proposing to construct a privy. The privy will be located outside the 30 metres (98.4 feet) setback from the highwater mark and will also be located in the front yard. Department and Agency Comments Public Services – This application did not meet the criteria for circulation. Building Services (Sewage System Review) – This application did not meet the criteria for circulation. Building Staff have spoken to the applicant prior to the submission of the minor variance application regarding the existing “cabin” on the property. www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 168 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L, Barrett/Norris, PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough District

Cataraqui Conservation – Comments received from Cataraqui Conservation on October 22, 2021 indicate that Staff have no objection to the approval of the application. It notes that all proposed structures are located outside of the 30 metre water setback and therefore have no concerns from a flooding, water quality or erosion hazard perspective. Cataraqui Staff also note that this property is the subject of an ongoing enforcement investigation as the existing structure was constructed within 30 metres of the waterbody without a permit under O Reg. 148/06. Staff are seeking removal of the structure “cabin” under that regulation. Furthermore, it was noted that a permit under O. Reg 148/06 is required for any development on the subject property within a regulated area. The applicant must contact Cataraqui Conservation at the building permit stage. Township Staff - There is an unopened road allowance located to the rear of the subject property. In order to get to the proposed location of the structures, one needs to cross over a wetland with a very narrow walking path, cross over the un-opened road allowance or access the location for the proposed accessory structure via the water. It is the understanding of Township Staff that materials for construction are already on the property and transportation will be minimal. Materials from the existing cabin on the property will be re-purposed to construct the proposed accessory structure. The property does have legal deeded access via Senior Lane and the applicant has applied for a building permit to construct their seasonal dwelling. It is noted that the un-opened road allowance is not to be used for vehicle access and can’t be used for temporary or permanent access to the buildings without a license agreement, and no structures are allowed to be placed on the un-opened road allowance. The applicant has indicated that they are aware the portion is landlocked and will be accessing the location by a narrow walking path and the water. The applicant also indicated that all extra materials that need to be brought in will be done via the lake once it is frozen as this is the easiest access method. 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 169 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L, Barrett/Norris, PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough 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/does not meet the four tests as explained below. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the proposed structures will be an accessory use consistent with the permitted residential use of a property within the Rural designation. The accessory structure and the privy will be located outside of the 30 metre setback from the lake. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? The variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law as accessory structures are permitted uses on the subject property. The proposed structures do not exceed the maximum permitted height, nor lot coverage, and is not larger than the principal building. They are located a suitable distance from property lines, and would be setback more than 30 metres from the highwater mark. 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 subject property. The shoreline of the subject property is considered to be the front yard according to the Zoning By-law. The “L” shape of the property does not allow for easy access to the shoreline, as there is a wetland and only a narrow portion of land to cross over to the shoreline. Locating the structure in the front yard is practical, as it facilitates access to items needed to access the lake and allows the dwelling to be developed further from the water. It is understood from the applicant that materials for construction will be brought in from the lake when it is frozen. Is the variance minor? Yes, the variance is minor as it maintains the general intent 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 170 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-44-21-L, Barrett/Norris, PIN: 36280-0309, Cronk Lake, Loughborough District

Building Services were consulted in developing the report.

Recommendation That the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application MV-44-21-L, subject to the following conditions.

The Minor Variance is for two accessory structures. The structures are permitted to be located in the front yard of the dwelling as per the latest drawing received on October 22, 2021 and submitted with MV-44-21-L, attached to the Decision as Schedule “A”.
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.
A demolition permit shall be obtained to remove the existing structure (cabin) located approximately 15 metres from the highwater mark of Cronk Lake. The structure shall be removed to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official or their designate. The structure shall be removed within 6 months of obtaining this approval of MV-44-21-L. Alternatively, the cabin may be permitted to be moved to location that is compliant with the provisions of Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 on the parcel by obtaining by obtaining a building permit and any required permits in accordance with Cataraqui Conservation’s regulations to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
Minor variance MV-44-21-L is applicable only to Zoning By-law No. 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Report Prepared By: Anna Geladi, Planner Reviewed By: Christine Woods, MCIP RPP, Senior Planner www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 171 of 200

October 22, 2021

File:MV/FRS/326/2021

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 MV-44-21-L (Barrett / Norris) Lot 8, 9, Concession 9; 0 Senior Lane Loughborough District, Township of South Frontenac Waterbody: Cronk Lake

Cataraqui Conservation staff have reviewed a revised submission in support of the above-noted application for minor variance and provide the following comments for the Committee of Adjustment’s consideration. Summary of the Proposal The proposal involves the construction of an accessory structure and a privy on the subject property. The variance is requested to: • Permit a 14.2 square metre accessory structure to be located in the front yard. • Permit a 2.3 square metre privy to be located in the front yard. Staff note that the accessory structure and privy are now proposed to be located greater than 30 metres from the highwater mark as required by Section 5.8.2 of the Zoning Bylaw. Staff also note that this property is the subject of an ongoing enforcement investigation as the accessory structure was built within 30 metres of the waterbody without a Cataraqui Conservation permit under Ontario Regulation 148/06. Staff are seeking removal of the structure under said regulation. Site Description The property is located on south shore of Cronk Lake. The topography of the property can be described as rising gradually from the shoreline toward the south where the accessory structure and the privy will be located. Currently, the property contains the accessory structure.

Cataraqui Conservation 1641 Perth Road, PO Box 160, Glenburnie ON, K0H 1S0 • info@crca.ca • 613-546-4228 • CataraquiConservation.ca

Page 172 of 200

Ms. Hannah (MV-44-21-L) October 22, 2021 The property is designated ‘Rural’ in the Official Plan and zoned ‘Limited Service Residential – Waterfront Zone’ (RLSW) in the implementing Zoning By-law. Cronk Lake itself is designated ‘Environmental Protection’ in the Zoning By-law. Discussion The main interests of Cataraqui Conservation with respect to this application are the avoidance of natural hazards (e.g. flooding and erosion) associated with the shoreline of Cronk Lake, and the protection of the water quality of the lake. Natural Hazards Flooding: Flood plain mapping is not available for Cronk Lake. Section 5.8.1 of the Zoning By-law states that: “no building or structure shall be located within the flood plain of a watercourse or waterbody.” Section 5.8.2(1) of the Zoning By-law specifies that no building or structure or septic tank installation shall be located within a minimum 30 metres horizontal of the highwater mark of a waterbody or watercourse. Similarly, Cataraqui Conservation’s Environmental Planning Policy (EPP, 2021) also recommends a 30 metre setback for new development and site alteration from the high water mark of a waterbody provided that there is sufficient difference in elevation to ensure development will not be susceptible to flooding. The revised proposal places all structures outside of the 30 metre water setback. Therefore, staff have no concerns with the proposal from a flooding perspective. Erosion: Cataraqui Conservation defines the extent of potential erosion hazards to include an allowance for toe erosion, a stable slope allowance for bedrock shorelines of 1(h):1(v), plus an erosion access allowance of 6 metres. Staff are satisfied that the proposed development will be located outside of the erosion hazard allowance. Water Quality Section 2.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) suggests that planning authorities should seek to protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water. Accordingly, the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the Township of South Frontenac provide guidance with respect to how development should occur in consideration of protecting, improving and restoring water quality within the municipality. Similarly, Cataraqui Conservation’s EPP contains provisions that seek to support these objectives. Section 5.2.7 b)(i) of the Official Plan for South Frontenac Township suggests that a 30 metre setback from the high water mark is required to be maintained as a buffer in order to protect water quality. Similarly, Cataraqui Conservation’s Environmental Planning Policy recommends that new development and site alteration, including septic system tile fields and open or enclosed decks/patios attached to the main dwelling, be set back a minimum distance of 30 metres from the highwater mark of a waterbody. However, Page 2 of 3 Page 173 of 200

Ms. Hannah (MV-44-21-L) October 22, 2021 new development within the water setback may be considered when there are no reasonable alternatives for locating the development outside of the water setback area, the development is no closer to the water than existing buildings or structures on the property the development complies with the maximum lot coverage provisions of the Zoning By-law, and suitable methods to minimize negative impacts on water quality are incorporated into the development. The revised proposal places all structures outside of the 30 metre water setback. Therefore, staff have no concerns from a water quality perspective. Recommendation Staff have no objection to the approval of application MV-44-21-L based on our consideration for natural heritage, natural hazards, and water quality protection polices. Ontario Regulation 148/06 Please note that a portion of the property is subject to Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, which is administered by Cataraqui Conservation. 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. Within a regulated area, written permission must be obtained from Cataraqui Conservation prior to development taking place. 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. 244, or by e-mail at aschmidt@crca.ca Yours truly,

Andrew Schmidt Andrew Schmidt Supervisor, Development Review /as c.c.

Anna Geladi, South Frontenac Township (via e-mail) Hailey Esdon, Cataraqui Conservation (via e-mail)

Page 3 of 3 Page 174 of 200

Dear Development Services Committee Re: File No: MV-44-21-L Storage Shed on Front lawn of projected property I am writing to address the issue of Joe Barrett’s (applicant Braydon C. Norris’s) application for an accessory structure (a storage shed).

photo: without permits and permissions, this is the (insulated wired) small home built on Barrett property on the edge of the lake.

Dear Committee, I am an (across a narrow stretch of water) neighbour to this land for the proposed “accessory shed” on the Barrett Property. Currently there is an illegal small home built by the owner which was swiftly built in a 4 week period and now, is required to be removed.

Page 175 of 200

Now, applicant is requesting to build an accessory shed on the land. But no primary dwelling exists so a shed would not be an accessory. Nor is a shed this far from a primary dwelling necessary when the owner/applicant owns perfectly appropriate land and access meters away from the proposed future seasonal dwelling.

In 2011, when considering buying our little off grid cabin, i was assured by the municipal planner that in no way could anything ever be built on this land (associated with the proposed current variance). We were told that the municipal; road allowance, building set backs and the closeness of the lake would NOT allow dwellings to be built. These are the reasons i bought my cabin on the lake – because we were assured NOTHING could be built right in front of us… currently, we are faced with an illegally built white windowed, wired and insulated small home (which we understand will be taken down) and now, an appeal of sorts, an application for a variance to build an ‘accessory shed’ on the same land, almost in the same place, is presented. I DO NOT agree to this variance for a “shed”. I was assured that there would be no dwellings even allowed to be built on this stretch of land. I want to trust the word of the municipality when they were clear that by all rules of set backs and building codes NO DWELLING would be built on this land. Sadly, I do not believe it will be a shed.. “just for paddles and life jackets and a canoe” as indicated by the applicant to Anna Geladi in correspondence. We believe that it will become exactly as the current illegal small home is right now.. and it will be occupied and used as a hunting and sleeping cabin, wired with electrical, noisy and not abiding by current bylaws and rules. If this variance is granted, we expect that the “accessory shed” will then become much more than simply a shed and will soon be very much like the insulated sleeping house that was built and stands there illegally, already. We are concerned about this “accessory shed” becoming a sleeping/living/hunting dwelling when the dust settles from this application. There is little the municipality can do with respect to noise violations on an offgrid, off road, accessory “shed” on a property. If we thought that this was an honest and true application for a “shed”, it would be something to kindly consider but Joe Barrett/Norris have already ENTIRELY and

Page 176 of 200

BOLDLY broken laws and disregarded rules when they built an insulated four season tiny home on the edge of CRONK lake without permission and permit – and now because they were reported and required to remove it, are requesting a permit for an accessory shed for a house that doesn’t even yet exist – 750 meters away from a PROPOSED seasonal dwelling… We do NOT think that this application is honest nor true. The Barretts seemed do what they wanted, where they wanted it and disregarded municipal rules and permitting when it came to building the small house that is on this spot. The thought is that this application for an “accessory shed” is simply a way for the family to proceed with illegal activity and building. This application for a “shed” in the front lawn of a dwelling that has not even been built yet, seems like a way to continue with unlawful and disrespectful behaviour. Barrett owns properties DIRECTLY adjacent to the property in question – properties very close to the proposed future primary dwelling! and sheds and accessory buildings can be built very very close to the dwelling and need not be 750 Meters away from where the house will be. Paddles, boats and life jackets can be stored and the lake accessed in fewer than 100 meters! Mr. Barrett has shown little respect governance of our lands and lakes and i don’t expect that he nor his applicant will abide by future laws regarding this proposed “accessory shed”.

Page 177 of 200

FUTHER Concerns and considerations: The application for a variance for a shed in the front of a property is a deflection from the salient issues of this application.

There is no primary building in front of which this “shed” would be placed; and while there is an application for a proposed primary dwelling, it will be important that that happen before ANY variances or permissions are granted;
Applicant says the location of proposed “shed” is the only place a shed could go. This is not at all true;
Joe Barrett owns two pristine water front properties adjacent and within 100 meters of the proposed dwelling and upon which a boat house/shed can easily be built, from which the lake easily accessed from a road HE owns!!! seconds from the proposed seasonal dwelling. Even if he is selling the lot to Norris, he could simply deed access to the lake on the road, seconds away.. there is NO need for an accessory shed almost a kilometer away;
Proposed “shed” location is 750 Meters from a proposed future primary dwelling. The applicant does NOT need to erect a shed 750 meters away as there are MANY other locations for sheds on and beside his proposed dwelling. Mr. Barrett owns the very road that gives access to Cronk lake on the East side (senior Lane) and two other properties where canoes and paddles can be easily stored.
After already building a costly four season, fully insulated and wired tiny home without any permits nor permissions, Applicant is proposing an shed in almost the exact location for what will be an accessory “shed” – an accessory to a home that doesn’t even exist;
It seems reasonable to imagine that this “shed” is a loophole solution rather than respecting municipal/CRCA rules and regulations and that the proposed “shed” over time, will very likely shapeshift into ANOTHER insulated sleep house;
Our experience of the guests, friends, family and children of the other Barrett properties are as loud, rule-breaking people who do not respect others on the lake: Generators run all night, beers cans float in the water in the morning and loud music is

Page 178 of 200

blared across the lake throughout the night for nights on end. We often wear earplugs at our cabin to be able to override the music and noise from their properties.

This family erected a fully insulated small home on the water’s edge without permits and permission and we expect that the “accessory shed” will not follow rules either – this puts our quiet and sanctuary of a small uninhabited end of the lake in serious jeopardy; 8. Applicant has not shown due diligence in abiding laws and rules, permits and permissions when he built a small home on the water’s edge, what evidence do we have that laws and rules will be taken seriously and respected by this applicant/owner for an alleged “shed” Personally: In 2011, i spent a great deal of time in the South Frontenac municipal office discussing with a planner whether anything could ever be built on the irregular Barrett property east of the road allowance. The answer was no. So we bought the cabin. The Barrett area of the shoreline bordered by the municipal road allowance is the only quiet, unlit, uninhabited part of the shoreline we look at from our cabin. Our cabin and accompanying land, on the other hand, offers clear uninhabited pristine quiet wilderness for 25 families to enjoy. Upon looking at maps and measuring set backs, i was told that no building could ever occur on that portion of land because of set backs, road allowance, building codes.. we were assured that there would be no buildings, no lights, no living on that portion of the lake. So we bought the cabin. Two years ago, to our upset and horror, Joe Barrett erected a fully insulated wired small house on poured concrete footing right on the edge of the lake across from us.

Page 179 of 200

Now, Mr. Barrett (Mr. Norris) are proposing to build a 8'6" X 18’ “shed” after they remove their illegally built tiny house and as an accessry to a proposed seasonal dwelling 750 meters away. I have real concerns about the validity of Mr. Barrett’s/ Norris proposal for an accessory shed. There is no primary dwelling. There is LOTS of other places for sheds closer to the water on Barrett property. This application seems a whole lot like a loophole hope to keep a dwelling illegally on the area of land our family was assured could NOT be built upon. Please please consider what this application is really about. Questions: If the variance is accepted: Will the municipality ensure that the current illegal house be removed from the property?; Will the municipality ensure that the shed is built 6 months post final occupancy of the main dwelling? What will the municipality do, if approved, when there are reports of people staying in this proposed “assessory shed” as a sleeping cabin? when it becomes wired? or runs a generator all day?

Page 180 of 200

If it is approved, will the municipality be certain to enforce that this ‘shed’ not be used as a sleeping cabin?

I request that the development committee seriously consider a few things:

What does it mean to tell a constituent (me) that there could be no building ever on that stretch of land and now allow building there? an answer that affecting our buying a property? and that serious affects our quality of life at our own (lawful) cabin on the lake?
The owner and applicant disregards and does not abide laws governing planning, development, land and waterways on Cronk Lake and this application is a smoke screen for permission to build a dwelling where no dwelling is allowed;
Does this application (variance) for an accessory shed even apply when there is NO CURRENT DWELLING on the property?
Why is the applicant not using properties and owned access to CRONK LAKE that are within 100 meters of the proposed future dwelling?? rather than almost a kilometer away?
Why is there a need for this application at all when NO PRIMARY DWELLING exists?
Is it possible that this application for a variance for a proposed accessory shed on a proposed seasonal dwelling is an attempt for Joe Barrett and Mr. Norris to sidestep the laws and requirements we ALL have in the municipality to build according to and with permits and permissions? Please do not allow Mr. Barrett and Mr. Norris a variance to the laws governing this land.. there should be no “shed” in a location that makes no sense at all to a future dwelling.

Thank you.

Page 181 of 200

‘

Page 182 of 200

provided the Committee is of the opinion

ls-desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure Maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Maintains the general intent and purpose of theZoning By-law. is minor in nature

vary ZoningBy-law provisions

$959.00 $1,316.00 $2,010.00

Planning Fee: $94.00 $94.00

(17

Building Admin Fee: yr’ M

$1 ,41 i"o"i $2,104.00

$450 $700 $1’15O

$420

Township of South Frontenac Minor Variance Only Minor Variance WITHPerformance Review Minor Variance in combination with a new Class 2, 3, 4, or 5 sewage system other than a Class A system

Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority

H’ D$b_

it is required that a Fee be provided for the Township to review onsite sewage disposal and Conservation Authority (where applicable) when submitting an application (Separate cheques, payable to the applicable Conservation Authority, are to be submitted to the Township with the completed application).

Application Type: 1-3 Variances 4+ Variances After building without a permit

It is required that one (1) copy of this application be filed with the Secretary-Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment, together with the SKETCH referred to in Note 3 (below), accompanied by a NON-REFUNDABLEFEE in accordance with the chart below in cash, debit or by cheque made payable to the Township of South Frontenac.

Application Requirements

The Committee may that the variance:

The Committee of Adjustment is a.Committee eight persons appointed by Township Council. The Committee is formed under Section 45 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.13, to authorize a minor variance from a zoning by-.|aw.

TOWNSHIP OFSOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINORVARIANCE OR PERMISSION Updated January, 2021

Page 183 of 200

Personal information requested herein is required under the Planning Act, 1990 as amended. This information will be used by the Committee of Adjustment/Land Division Committee for the purpose of reviewing the above referenced application, and may be made available to those boards, Commissions, Authorities, Agencies and Persons having an interest in this matter. Any questions regarding the collection of this information should be directed to the Secretary Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment (P.O. Box 100, Sydenham, Ont., KOH 2T0, Phone 376-3027 ext.2224).

Collection of Personal Information

PLEASE READ THIS ITEMCAREFULLY

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

Page 184 of 200

of Owner(:::

Full Mailina Address

_‘..¢f

or uwne/rs)

Bedford

Street Number:

Concession Number:

District:

The description of the subject land:

oignaturers)

Lot Number:

2 :1’

Loughborough

Name of Road/Street:

Portland

a?fstorrington

orized to act on behalf of the owners for purposes of

/ariannn

fnr

nrnnc-eeinn

thie nnnlinafinn

Agent as named above is hereby a

Email Address of Authorized Agent:

Phone number of Authorized Agent:

Full Mailing Address of Authorized Agent:

Name of Authorized Agent:

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.

Email Address of Owner(s):

Phone number of Owner(s):

Nblzfw

Name of Owner(s):

‘sf’?

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

’

Q’Cl

Page 185 of 200

33} Area:

QE’?g,5Fb

lgxgoé

T?gnr

$§r)&LF

{TIN

YWQ

rials

E‘.

;t3:nm\L.g bw.I;=LL/A/6

2’O

7 3.

”

N I:

a?-

D No

§’§bQ

\N@

What are the existing uses of the subject land?

&?’Q-H5, .1: Z

Name of Road/Lane:

%=¥‘e’s

e_3,-gz?e, CQ;oéW2c2Cr1O:Q /$55/62:‘. /5 r~ra7—

The reason why the proposed use cannot comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-law:

“V9 Qoiocx”

The nature and extent of the relief from the Zoning By-law:

Q0 M;

The current zoning of the subject land:

Frontage (on road/lane):

Does the subject property front on a municipally maintained road? OR a privately maintained road? El Yes No

Depth:

Frontage (on water):

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 186 of 200

(2)

3'2 X 40\

(;2\ ‘

\ 5

/ lrxl

Nam)

LN)‘

\r9\

(3)

/Z”

§?5-

(4)

14.Are any building(s) or structure(s), or additions to existing building(s) or structure(s), PROPOSED to be built on the subject land?

@;3lb1?l0CE —‘E_\°sN\L)[

. /

?lllim

_’\Op/\

13.The proposed uses of the subject land:

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Dimensions of Floor Area

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

Setback from Side Lot Line

\/
M

::;$a::Jii,:2qil ,\9

Setback from Front Lot Line

T(‘l,Ei?:itdérrtlxoeve

(1 i

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

Page 187 of 200

(2)

lY\

‘

L X ‘V)

83 X ELF

06?

W I‘/3 ,—-My

1 ,

% \bENOg /

(1) (3)

(4)

Do your plans include any DEMOLITIONof existing structures?

Yes

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable)

Outside Dimensions of Building/Structure

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Height of Building

Setback from Side Lot Line

Setback from Rear Lot Line

Setback from Front Lot Line

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

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

18.

Increase in number of bedrooms

Increase in plumbing fixtures

Increase in living space

Will the addition or structure encroach on the existing septic system?

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

What are the uses of the proposed development?

If yes, please provide details:

. QQQZQ

E’No

L,o?:,__

gr/4‘:-a/V\

?a_\u\°?rE

épmowwc;

SW-737v}msaraasir ll: “TO ‘E?

(L\/“Pr“'\Z

Indicate whether water is provided to the subject land by a publicly owned and operated piped water system, a privately owned and operated individual or communal well, a lake, or other water bod , or other means:

j+ yemzs

21.The length of time that the existing uses of the subject land have continued:

20.The date the existing buildings and structures were constructed on the subject lands:

QZQ8all

Yes

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

19.The date the subject land was acquired by the current owner:

Page 188 of 200

Page 189 of 200

applica:://

If the answer to question 25 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the

**Note: **

The boundaries and dimensions of the subject land including the location of any existing and proposed buildings.

ii)

The distances to on-site and abutting owners’ wells, septic fields and barns, from the property to be varied, IS REQUIRED to be shown. The SKETCH is of significant importance and should be prepared as carefully, neatly and accurately as possible.

The location of all abutting (neighbours’) lands.

The location of a reference point……i.e. distance between the subject land and the nearest township lot line or landmark such as a bridge or railway crossing.

THE SKETCH MUST HAVE A NORTH ARROW AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following:

Ifthe answer to item 27 is yes, please give the file number of the application and the status of the application.

Yes

If known, please indicate whether the subject land has ever been the subject of an application under Section 43 of the Planning Act(Minor Variance).

Yes

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

Page 190 of 200

_&¢Z;DAY

oF .

20&_

declaration

(U ,x.k~c?L 1,‘{l\sQEQ.Q«J OF :\Tm/TF2»-”~fL solemnly declare that all the statements contained in this application are true and I make this solemn it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made conscientiously be/li_e‘ving

THIS

DATED AT THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

The Owner/Applicant/Agent further agrees that, until such requests have been complied with, the municipality will have no continuing obligation to process the application or attend or be represented at the Ontario Municipal Board or any court or other administrative proceeding in connection with the application:

‘

Attached to this application is a cheque payable to the Township of South Frontenac representing payment of the application fee.

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

Frontage (on road/|ane):

Frontage (on water):

Depth:

Area:

jg}

2]O

’-‘73.

Y‘/\

(“Q

The current zoning of the subject land:

(20

The nature and extent of the relief from the Zoning By-law:

Tt1j1g\L.?Z’bLx)l‘.‘L §?f# BE-T?jnlb Fxgg IINQ ?fiftfa? é//é’b?g 22 —L/"/6

/VQ cfoirgogz

§jr)?L€’

The reason why the proposed use cannot comply with the provisions of the Zoning By-law:

bx’

’

,3/EA

T1a;“u ggg?gg

E war

x)éT7’1UCnDrQ

/$55/61:”. No

Does the subject property front on a municipally maintained road? , No l Yes OR a privately maintained road? Name of Road/Lane: gas:-3-

_—

What are the existing uses of the subject land?

Please indicate whether there are any EXISTING buildings or structures on the subject land. . (l.e. residence, garage, shed, etc.)

’.«s

If the answer to item 11 is yes, for EACH building

or structure

indicate:

Page 191 of 200

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINORVARIANCE Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

T(‘é’?§.3Z:st§:§tcf)° éyi-’r(zP£;.5X

/‘

6??.‘I=trr
Setback from Front Lot Line

‘

Setback from Rear Lot L’me

q L\9 pa ‘

Setback from Side Lot Line

Height of Building

\ .10f~(
l

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

Dimensions of

3.2‘ x Lia‘

Floor Area

Setback from High Water Mark I (if applicable) I

i I i I

13.The proposed uses of the subject land:

?amxty Qg’sibB0ci’:’

Ni?!/\J

SP5.

14.Are any bui|ding(s) or structure(s), or additions to existing bui|ding(s) or structure(s), PROPOSED to be built on the subject land?

XVES

If the answer to item 14 is yes, for each proposed addition, building or structure indicate:

Page 192 of 200

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINORVARIANCE as amended Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.

P.r3

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

Setback from Front Lot Line

Setback from Rear Lot Line

Setback from Side Lot Line

Height of Building

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

\bEN(_)¢/ (gym? / /Q66

‘lll?m Q3.LHM lmloM

7i‘.W.

\6l.\°\rv\

759201

oooI?">’U-Zn) ONI.75‘ID(77/

(Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

I2‘

Outside Dimensions of Building/Structure

Setback from High Water Mark (If applicable) NOTES:

83 X loll‘ 90‘x 90‘ ‘LxvJ

If the subject property is on waterfront, and on a private lane, the setback from the front lot line and the setback from the high water mark will be the same.
The dimensions required in this question relate to the NEW CONSTRUCTIONONLY, and NOT to the total size of the completed building.

Do your plans include any DEMOLITION of existing structures?

a Yes

If yes, please provide details:

Do your plans include the RAISING of an existing structure?

Yes

‘?(?o

Page 193 of 200

Page 194 of 200

2887 BATTERSEA RD

MCGARVEY ROAD

Inset Map

2965 MCGARVEY RD

2969 FRONTENAC RD

2871 BATTERSEA RD

BA TT

MV-45-21-S

2855 BATTERSEA RD

(TULETT) 538 MOUNT CHESNEY RD SE

Legend

BA TT

Subject Property Frontenac Townships Provincially Significant Wetlands Wetland Wooded Area 538 MOUNT CHESNEY RD

Water

518 MOUNT CHESNEY RD

Parcel Fabric Road Railway

556 MOUNT CHESNEY RD

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

Page 195 of 200

Scale 1:1,000

Meters UTM Zone 18 NAD 83

Date: 2021-10-27

To: Committee of Adjustment Prepared by: Development Services Department Date of Meeting: November 11, 2021 Subject:

Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S, Andrew Tulett, 538 Mount Chesney Road, Storrington 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) in the projected front yard of the main building subject to conditions, as this application meets the four tests of a minor variance outlined in section 45(1) of Planning Act. This report recommends that the Committee of Adjustment deny the portion of this application for zoning relief for an accessory building (shed) in the front yard.

Background Official Plan Designation: Rural Zoning: Rural – Special Provision (RU-26) Zoning Relief Requested Section 5.24.2 Accessory Building – to permit two accessory buildings (detached garage and shed) in the projected front yard of the main building, whereas the Zoning By-law requires accessory buildings 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.

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

Page 196 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S, Andrew Tulett, 538 Mount Chesney Road, Storrington District

Discussion/Analysis Property Description The 1.0 hectare property has frontage on Mount Chesney Road and Battersea Road. The entrance to the property is on Mount Chesney Road because the Battersea Road frontage consists of a high embankment and deep ditch that is not safe or practical for an entrance. A drainage swale was constructed on the property to ensure that water from one of the Battersea Road culvert flows directly to a Mount Chesney Road culvert instead of ponding on the property. The property is developed with a 1280 square foot garage that is setback approximately 23 metres from the front lot line (abutting Mount Chesney Road), and that is centred on the property. A sewage system that services the garage is located to the east of the garage. An 800 square foot shed is under construction without a building permit, approximately 10 metres from the front lot line, to the southwest of the garage. The shed consists of two shipping containers spanned by a roof. The setback measurement is based on site observations of the shed relative to the position of the garage, not the measurement provided in the application (23 metres). Summary of Proposal The owner proposes to construct a 5312 square foot single detached dwelling between Battersea Road and the existing garage. The dwelling will either be serviced by the existing sewage system which would be upgraded, or by a new sewage system. The location of the dwelling would make the garage and shed non-compliant with Section 5.24.2 of the Zoning By-law, which requires accessory buildings and structures to be located behind the main building. An application for minor variance was received to permit two accessory buildings (the garage and shed) within the projected front yard of the proposed dwelling on the subject property. Department and Agency Comments The application did not meet the criteria for circulation to Township departments and to agencies.

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

Page 197 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S, Andrew Tulett, 538 Mount Chesney Road, Storrington District

Building Services is in receipt of a building permit application for the shed. 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 or does not meet the four tests as explained below. 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 type and amount of development on Rural lands must maintain the rural character, natural heritage, and cultural landscape in the Township. The proposed dwelling and accessory buildings, such as the garage and shed, are permitted uses on a property in the Rural designation. Does the variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law?  



The proposed variance for the garage maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, but the variance for the shed does not. The RU-26 zone permits one accessory storage building or structure prior to the construction of the primary use on the property. The existing garage is therefore a permitted use. The dwelling must be located behind the garage because it is not physically possible to locate a dwelling between Mount Chesney Road and the garage. The Rural zone requires a minimum 20 metre front yard for a dwelling, and the garage is setback 23 metres from the front lot line. The garage is centred on the property such that the dwelling could not be located in line with the garage. The garage is located a suitable distance from the front lot line, exceeding the minimum 20 metre front yard depth required for a principal building in the Rural zone. Additional accessory buildings, such as the shed, would be a permitted use once a principal building is established on the property, per the RU-26 zone. However, permitting both the garage and the shed in the projected front yard of the dwelling www.southfrontenac.net Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive, Rural Leader.

Page 198 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S, Andrew Tulett, 538 Mount Chesney Road, Storrington District

would take the property farther from compliance with the Zoning By-law. Staff are also concerned with the placement of the shed and its 10 metre setback from the front lot line. Is the requested variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure in question?  The requested variance relative to the garage is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The garage is a legally established use on the property. The proposal to construct a single detached dwelling brings the property into greater compliance with the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.  The location of the garage on the property and relative to Mount Chesney Road makes it necessary to locate the dwelling behind the garage. The Battersea Road frontage consists of a high embankment and deep ditch. It would not be safe or practical to relocate the property entrance to Battersea Road in order to change what would be defined as the front yard.  The location of the shed is not desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land as it crowds the front yard, which is contrary to the intent of the by-law that accessory buildings should not be the focal point of a residential property. Is the variance minor? 



The requested variance relative to the garage 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 requested variance relative to the shed is not minor as it does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

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

Page 199 of 200

Township of South Frontenac Staff Report - Minor Variance Application MV-45-21-S, Andrew Tulett, 538 Mount Chesney Road, Storrington District

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and, pending comments received, approve minor variance application MV-45-21-S 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 permitting a shed within the front yard of the dwelling.

The minor variance is to permit the existing garage to be located in the front yard of the proposed dwelling, and to be set back approximately 23 metres from the front lot line.
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.
The shed shall be removed through demolition permit obtained under the Ontario Building Code, to the satisfaction of the Township Chief Building Official or his designate within 6 months of the approval of application MV-45-21-S.
Minor variance MV-45-21-S 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 Reviewed By: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services

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

Page 200 of 200

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.