Committee Of Adjustment - 12 Sep 2019 - Agenda

Published September 12, 2019

Word Count 10179 words

Reading Time 48 min read

Body: Committee of Adjustment Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee Date: September 12, 2019 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Committee of Adjustment/2019/Committee Of Adjustment - 12 Sep 2019 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA TIME: DATE: PLACE: 1.

7:00 PM, Thursday, September 12, 2019 Council Chambers.

Call to Order

a) 2.

Adoption of Agenda

a) 3.

Declaration of pecuniary interest

Approval of Minutes – August 8, 2019

a) 5.

Consent Applications:

S-15-19-S (Sands & Weatherby) Location: Part Lot 24, Concession 11, being Part 2 & 3 on Plan 13R12560 and Part 2 on Plan 13R-19790, Cranesnest Lake, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 1206B Burnt Hills Road. Purpose of Application: consent to create one new vacant lot consisting of approximately 2.43 hectares (6 acres) with 76 metres (250 feet) of road frontage along Burnt Hills Road and 91.44 metres (300 feet) of water frontage. The retained lot contains a single detached dwelling, detached garage and shed and will consist of approximately 8.09 hectares (20 acres) with approximately 152.4 metres (500 feet) of road frontage along Burnt Hills Road and 137.16 metres (450 feet) of water frontage.

3 - 17

S-16-19-B (Schaal) Location: Part Lot 7, Concession 3, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 7 Beechwood Lane, Thirty Island Lake Purpose of Application: Consent of a conveyance of a lot addition consisting of approximately 0.036 hectares (0.089 acres) with approximately 9.144 metres (30 feet) of water frontage and a width of 39.55 metres (129.77 feet) to be merged with the property addressed as 11 Beechwood Lane which contains an existing cottage, gazebo and shed. The retained lot, consists of approximately 0.58 hectares (1.43 acres) and approximately 112.78 metres (370 feet) of water frontage and is vacant.

18 - 33

Minor Variance Applications:

MV-11-19-B (Kimmett) Location: Part Lots 23 & 24, Concession 10, being Parts 1-3 & 8 on Plan 13R20629, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 966 Lee Road, Wolfe Lake. Purpose of Application: To alter and enlarge a building or structure located within the 30 metre setback from the highwater mark and within 120 metres of the Provincially Significant Wetland, said building is located at 18 metres (60 feet) from the highwater mark/Provincially Significant Wetland. The height of the building will

34 - 64

Page 1 of 101

increase as will the overall footprint of the seasonal dwelling. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.10.2, Existing Buildings within 30 Metres (98.4 feet) of a Waterbody or Watercourse, 8.3.3 Waterfront Residential Zone (RW) Regulations, and Section 8.5 Special RW – Waterfront Residential Zones (RW-35). b)

MV-28-19-B (Wagar & Sinclair) Location: Part Lot 1, Concession 4, municipally known as 42B Windy Bay Lane, Desert Lake, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac Purpose of Application: To reduce the waterbody setback from 30 metres (98.4 ft) to 12.2 metres (40 ft) to permit the construction of a 300 ft2 sleep cabin behind the existing cottage. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2a Flooding and Shoreline Erosion Hazards and Section 10.3.1 of the Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone which requires a 30 metre setback from the highwater mark located in the Limited Service Residential Waterfront (RLSW) Zone.

65 - 83

MV-29-19-B (Hollinsworth & Murphy) Location: Part Lot 7, Concession 13, Parts 3 & 4 13R17713 municipally known as 1101 Lloyd Lane South, Howes Lake, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac Purpose of Application: To reduce the waterbody setback from 30 metres (98.4 ft) to 19 metres (62.3 ft) to permit the construction of a 1008 ft2 single detached dwelling and to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 5 percent to 5.5 percent. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2a Flooding and Shoreline Erosion Hazards and Section 10.3.1 of the Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone which requires a 30 metre setback from the highwater mark and Section 10.3.1 maximum permitted lot coverage for a property located in the Limited Service Residential Waterfront (RLSW) Zone.

84 101

Other Business

Adjournment

Page 2 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING REPORT – CONSENT APPLICATION Report Date: Application No: Owner: Location of Property:

September 6, 2019 S-15-19-S Heather Sands & Craig Weatherby Part Lot 24, Concession 11, being Part 2 & 3 on Plan 13R12560 and Part 2 on Plan 13R19790, Cranesnest Lake, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 1206B Burnt Hills Road Purpose of Applications: Consent for Creation of One New Vacant Residential Waterfront Lot Date of Hearing: September 12, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and that the Committee of Adjustment defer making a decision on application S-15-19-S for the creation one new vacant waterfront lot to allow the applicant an opportunity to work with Planning staff to explore the options of creating a residential lot that is a more suitable location on the subject property.

Proposal An application for consent has been submitted for the creation of one new vacant waterfront lot at Part Lot 24, Concession 11, being Part 2 & 3 on Plan 13R12560 and Part 2 on Plan 13R-19790, Cranesnest Lake, District of Storrington, Township of South Frontenac, addressed as 1206B Burnt Hills Road (see attached map). The subject property is located on the north side of Burnt Hills Road. The property has an existing single family dwelling, detached garage and shed. Existing cottages are located to the east of the subject lands. An existing driveway from Burnt Hills Road provides access to 1206B Burnt Hills Road and to the two cottages to the east of the subject lands. In review of the severance application, Planning staff do not feel that the dimensions and shape of the proposed new lot is suitable for the purpose that it is proposed to be severed. Staff recommend deferring the application to allow the applicant with the opportunity to revise the application. Once an amended consent application has been received from the applicant, a detailed report will be prepared with a planning analysis and recommendation which will be brought forward to a future Committee of Adjustment meeting for discussion and approval. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Date of Site Visit: August 15, 2019 Attachments: Map of Sands/Weatherby property.

Page 3 of 101

Page 4 of 101

Page 5 of 101

Page 6 of 101

Page 7 of 101

um:

E_m: 0:3

_omE6 m 19: 2

:_.

Em 2::

:EB mag 3 m:coEam

o«Q_m.B:om

mum

ag o: Em %o_.8_

<m8_c:mq 3

mag Em

?zo

Page 8 of 101

Page 9 of 101

Page 10 of 101

Inset Map Cranesnest Lake

Little Cranberry Lake

BURNT HILLS ROAD IU ILL TR M N LA

SANDS / WEATHERBY S-15-19-S

Cranesnest Lake

JOES

L ANE

1206B BURNT HILLS RD

Cranberry Lake

Legend

PROPOSED SEVERANCE

Sands Parcel Proposed Severance Parcel Fabric River / Stream Provincially Significant Wetlands

Waterbodies

RETAINED LOT

Water Area, Permanent Wetland Area, Permanent

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2015. 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 11 of 101

Scale 1:3,000

RO AD BURNT HILLS

15 30

Meters UTM Projection NAD 83

120

. ‘

KFL&A Public Health

CONSENTTO SEVER INSPECTIONREPORT

http://www.kflapublichea|th.ca

Environmental Health Department File Number:

Receipt Number:

S-15-19»S

K—34«2019

Owner(s):

Heather Sands & Craig Weatherby Municipality:

Ward / Former Township:

Township of South Frontenac

Storrington

Pt 24

Part(s): 2 & 3 and Part 2

Registered Plan:

Concession:

Lot:

13R12560 & 13R19790

Plan of Subdivision:

General Description (existing buildings, surface features, slopes, site services for water and sewage, etc)

Severed:

No existing buildings, mostly treed.

Retained:

Residential home, mostly treed.

Soil type, depth and water table on each part of potential leaching bed areas. Indicate water table with bar. Show estimated permeability (good, fair, poor) for each part where natural soil is acceptable.

Retained

Depth of Soil

Severed

N/A

0.0 m 0.3 m 0.6 m 0.9 m 1.2 m 1.5 m

TH~~1silty sand/ TH—2Sand,Clay mix

Percolation rate (estimated): [min/cm]

NOTE: the approval of any new lot is based on its suitability to provide an area for a Class 4 septic tank system for an average 3 bedroom home. Approval to build a larger home on this lot will be subject to availability of sufficient area for a larger septic tank system.

Suitability for on-site sewage disposal:

SEVERED

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Site Flexible

I‘

Site Specific

RETAINED

Conditions:

Soil conditions fou nd on the lot will require additional suitable granular soil to construct a sew age disposal system. Specific requirements for additional soil will be indicated on an Application to Construct a Sewage System prior to site development. The proposed lot is capable of providing flexibility in siting a sewage disposal system, dependen ton the proposal submitted through an Application to Construct a Sewage System.

Conditions:

Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Site Flexible Site Specific

Sarah Van Dijk CPHl(C), Public Health Inspector

Inspector:

I 7

Approved:

Date:

I‘ .4‘ '

’

1 A

August 27, 2019

PLEASEFORWARD A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DECISION TO KFL&APUBLIC HEALTH. Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Building Code Act, and will be used for the administration of Public Health programs. Any questions about the collection of this information should be directed to the Manager of Environmental Health, l<FL&APublic Health, 221 Portsmouth Avenue, Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5, (613) 549-1232 ext. 1243 or 1-800~267»7875.

Page 12 of 101

“s

2*‘ K2. ‘1 / /‘»_’:;*t.7 K

‘tfxéqj ICE?!

Ms. Trudy Gravel, Planner Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 Sydenham, Ontario KOH 2T0 Dear Ms. Gravel: Re:

Application for Consent to Sever S-15-19-S (Sands / Weatherby) Part Lot 24, Concession 11; 1206B Burnt Hills Road Township of South Frontenac (Storrington) Waterbody: Cranesnest Lake / Dog Lake

Staff of the Rideau Waterway Development Review Team (RWDRT), made up of staff from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority (CRCA) and Parks Canada, has reviewed the above-noted application for consent to sever and offer the following comments for the Land Division Committee’s consideration.

The applicant has requested severance of a 2.43 hectare parcel of land from the property known as 1206B Burnt Hills Road (lot to be severed). It is proposed that the lot to be severed will have 76 metres of road frontage onto Burnt Hills Road and approximately 91 metres of water frontage onto Cranesnest Lake. The lot to be retained would be approximately 8.1 hectares in area with approximately 152 metres of water frontage.

The subject property is located on the north side of Burnt Hills Road and the severed and retained parcels have water frontage onto Cranesnest Lake which is hydrologically attached to Dog Lake. The lot to be severed is presently vacant and is proposed to be used for residential purposes. The lot to be retained contains a residence, a detached garage and associated development. The property is currently designated ‘Rural’ in the Of?cial Plan and ‘Rural’ (RU) in the implementing Zoning By-law for South Frontenac Township. Cranesnest Lake itself is zoned ‘Environmental Protection’ (EP) in the Zoning By-law.

:.-“01‘I<i11U’lbqethez' m One !:.11vironn'1<:nt D x,»

l?arks(1z!zmd;I~Rid-c:u1(Tuna!

-M3 35%?! 719‘?

RiLlc:1L1';?!c3={‘innsur";t!inu.<\u!hnriIy I (‘Z:mu’z:quiR0§’,i£’)I1(‘3m1.~~asr':1Iinn:\ulh:‘»ril§y (v!f~~(W’=‘_"—.‘>57¥

61.‘. 54:3 -1223

Page 13 of 101

Ms. Gravel (S-15-19— S) August 19, 2019

Discussion

The main interests of the RWDRT in this application are the avoidance of natural hazards (e. g. ?ooding and erosion) associated with the shoreline of Cranesnest Lake, the protection of the water quality of the lake, and the conservation of the cultural and natural heritage and scenic values of the Rideau Canal National Historic Site and UNESCO World Heritage Site. Natural Hazards The maximum recorded water level for Cranesnest Lake is|!’.|:!!iI;|I’|.p;|’¢|g¢.:.;|.:.|;|: Flooding: 98.95 metres geodetic. For F.3Fhn:th;|;11’urLII|ITn1rI’?EilIin:|radf|:rI:l’u’.¢.|.‘u.n1.?q ]”.’l: ‘?ll:-!Il’|lI|=|1-1.|I.I!I.’l:rE-E|5I.llI:|’?|fI|-:1:I|’|!-III -I-|I|I|‘II!‘I-’:I’.I Cranesnest Lake, the maximum recorded water level is used in lieu of an engineered ?ood plain. The -:I|:|‘J.|Ii-:I.|I.|ThJIE:?.::I:I-clulu?-|.I|.-:|-.|IH.r C’H’E|‘I.‘I E’I.I’E|:|.’n.1 for CRCA’s Guidelines |.:I:|:I|-::n.’d.’:I.|Ontario Regulation 148/06 |I|-‘L’|:!5I::II:I.‘Ihu"q:It’I.:||!|I:InIII_I (see description below) requires En Implementing LII: r::r:i::Ithat all development be set back a minimum of 6 metres from the regulatory ?oodplain of a waterbody. ilk‘-’d.Im:?.h:diI.l::mu.md?nmu&@Lkrm’J.tnj’l3::h.:hd’Lw:-‘bd1 Based upon elevation mapping data, there is considerable area for development to occur beyond the required setback from the ?ood plain. Erosion: Section 5.8.2.b) of the Zoning By-law speci?es that no building or structure or septic tank installation shall be located within a minimum of 15 metres horizontal of the top of bank of any embankment, the slope of which is greater than 30% from horizontal. The CRCA de?nes the extent of potential erosion hazards to include an allowance for toe erosion, a stable slope allowance for rock of 1(h):1(v), plus an erosion access allowance of 6 metres. Based upon available mapping data, staff have concluded that the lot to be severed contains a suitable development envelope outside of the erosion hazard setbacks described above. Therefore, staff have no concerns with the application 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 Of?cial 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, the CRCA’s Planning Policy (April 2015) contains provisions that seek to support these objectives. The Of?cial Plan 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.

Policy 6.1.6 of the CRCA’s Planning Policy suggests that development setbacks should be based on the ?ndings of lake management plans and site evaluation guidelines if available. For Precambrian shield lakes such as this one, Appendix G of the Planning Policy is used to establish an appropriate setback for future development. Appendix G was developed in consideration of the ?ndings of a report entitled “Assessment of Municipal Site Evaluation Guidelines for Waterfront Development in Eastern Ontario’s ‘A.jn!f?’m:q:Jhbhr?.lt:nU’mHhnhrW:h’£1!lJI’.‘Lhp?.nEjtiEI:tnu’I Lake Country” completed by Hutchinson Environmental Sciences Ltd. (April 2014). LIh’l:::?h’:.’§?.:dh1.’|-.h::hh.11n’h=n.=hLbi::n1f;H.|J.p:| These guidelines 1|:|1|I-fl. ‘f!|-.I,Fndul’|‘Ide?ne horizontal a water setback distance based upon site characteristics such as soil texture and depth, hzn-I-.1dq;:I1_ slope and vegetation along the shoreline. Based upon observations made during the site visit, the ?i?q;n’n:iil’aI:|‘I’rH.ru?.&I’I’|“J’.np’L|I?|..‘I|t..¢. IJ:|IpI:ndI.II.j’|:I.I II.I’I’|’:|’.I.l’.nI’I.|I’|.I. I’Ia:I’:I’|.l’|u’IuIu1nhI’r.I.I1’.luin£‘l’.’.Ii|u|I-..|‘HI.I’I’H.’|l.u.H’?r.uI:I’r?.|l:I|.:|;I1.|.gI.IHI1£I|-L|hu|I’I recommended minimum depth of shoreline buffer for development for the lot to be severed should be 40 metres to protect the water quality of Cranesnest Lake.

Page Page 2 of 4 14 of 101

Ms. Gravel (S-15-19-S) August 19, 2019

In order to ensure that futureresidential development is consistent with the 40 metre setback noted above, staff recommend that additional controls be placed on the severed lot. Speci?cally, it is recommended that the severed lot be rezoned to a site speci?c waterfront residential zone that requires a 40 metre setback provision for new development (including the septic system). It is also recommended that the severed lot be subject to site plan approval to control the location of buildings, structures and also recommend that the municipality require that the area within site alteration on the subject lot. Sta?’ 30 metres ofthe highwater mark be maintained in a natural state.

Staff note that there appears to be a suitable development envelope outside of the recommended 40 metre setback from the lake on the lot to be severed.

Rideau Canal National Historic Site and UNESCO World Heritage Site Similarly, RWDRT staff strive to preserve and enhance the cultural, natural and scenic values of the national historic site and world heritage site so that all Canadians can enjoy this legacy into the future. This can be achieved through the maintenance of a natural shoreline, the maintenance and enhancement of vegetation on the property, development which complements the visual character of the landscape, and the maintenance of a minimum 30 metre setback of all development from the water. RWDRT staff believe that impacts to the visual character of the landscape will be minimized by maintaining a natural vegetated buffer within 30 metres of the lake. Recommendation F|‘l||1’.I’I:T :I?’|‘nIII u’h.|.::I.nI’. ‘|-1|?-H based |’.|.I.I.’| on u r|’.|..“;II|‘I’|.’|’.r-l’.q;I_’l|‘I.’:n.’.I1 r.r.a.;r n;I.I.p.;|¢|’|::..;.|;. 5:1the approval of application E‘-I-E staff have n1 S-15-19-S no objection for to RWDRT our consideration El?£h?’-L?Jd?l’H?Jm?H?i?¢.Ii-EH1-Hiu?iqauiup?i?i?mp??upu-Hp] natural hazards, natural and cultural heritage, and water quality and quantity protection policies provided If.i1’I"fI’-Fl‘-‘Ir.-’-I’;*l’-‘Ib’l’-1” I’I.?IL-.-I-‘I-I-I-I-I-I-I I-I–II-1-ill-IIII-I-I-III that 40 metres from the highwater mark III’-’-‘I-’l’I’l’llLiII development be set back a minimum of on the severed lot to the Lake. achieve recommend of staff Cranesnest To rezoning the severed lot water quality this, protect to a site speci?c waterfront residential zone requiring a 40 metre setback for development and that the lot be subject to site plan control. It is also recommended that a 30 metre natural vegetated buffer be maintained through the site plan control.

Reg1_11atory Reguirements Parks Canada Rideau Canal Of?ce oversees all in-water and shoreline works along the Canal system. PnhC.:d.I-Ja?nfnull?rnulnl?m-r?n’n£in.’£uwuh£n’ll:l;nlJn’hu. II.1u1IE’.n.|’. |flh:l:|dun1u::IIL?n.t:-:nT5’nIu:n1u-1’:tu::rLhu’:Iul’n’u’h the landowner wishes to carry out any in-water or shoreline works in the Rideau nth:the future, If Canal F:t:rr..hI I’r—$n1?hLn1rI:j-Irl1uHmur?n?’.?hmé?LwmhJwIw?-5-1-IJraI.wn&n?nn Of?ce must be contacted and written approval obtained prior to the commencement of construction.

The CRCA, under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interferencewith Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, regulates development within 15 metres of a ?ood plain or erosion hazard, and within 15 metres of the top of valley. Therefore, a permit may be required for proposed development on the severed and retained lots. The applicant or future owners of the lands 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 of?ce of any decision made by the Committee with regard to this application. If you have any questions, please contact Andrew Schmidt at (613) 546-4228 extension 244 or by email at aschmidt@crca.ca.

I|‘q.II:d+ PagePage 3 of 4 15 of 101

Page 16 of 101

Report from Roads to Committee of Adjustment S-15-19-S Application Number: ___________________________________________________

Sands/Weatherby Applicant’s Name: _____________________________________________________

11 24 Storrington Concession: _________________ Lot: _______________District:

Burnt Hills Road (Easterly portion of 1206B) 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? Proposed entrance location on a blind corner due to horizontal and vertical curvature of the road at this location. The topography of the proposed entrance is not ideal for an entrance and the maximum 12% Grade will not be achievable.

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?
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 Widening Required? ✔ Yes □ No □ Any specific requirement?

Widening would support straightening horizontal curve located midway through proposed severed lands.

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

Signature on behalf of Public Services

August 15, 2019

Date

Page 17 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING REPORT – CONSENT APPLICATION Report Date:

September 6, 2019

Application No: Owner: Location of Property:

S-16-19-B Richard Schaal Part Lot 7, Concession 3, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 7 Beechwood Lane, Thirty Island Lake Purpose of Application: Consent for a lot addition Date of Hearing: September 12, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from the public and pending comments received approve application S-16-19-B for the consent of a lot addition to Part Lot 7, Concession 3, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 7 Beechwood Lane, Thirty Island Lake.

Proposal An application for consent has been received for the conveyance of a lot addition from an existing waterfront property at Part Lot 7, Concession 3, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 7 Beechwood Lane, Thirty Island Lake to an abutting property municipally known as 11 Beechwood Lane, Thirty Island Lake (see attached map). The existing lot is a vacant waterfront lot that has frontage on Beechwood Lane and water frontage on Thirty Island Lake. The applicant is proposing to sever approximately 0.036 hectares (0.089 acres) with approximately 9.144 metres (30 feet) of water frontage and a width of 39.55 metres (129.77 feet) to be added to a developed waterfront lot with water frontage on Thirty Island Lake. S-16-19-B Consent application S-16-19-B is for the conveyance of approximately 0.036 hectares (0.089 acres) of land with approximately 9.144 metres (30 feet) of water frontage and a width of 39.55 metres (129.77 feet) from an undeveloped lot municipally known as 7 Beechwood Lane. The lands will be added to a developed waterfront lot with water frontage on Thirty Island Lake municipally known as 11 Beechwood Lane. The proposed benefitting lands will increase in size from 0.43 acres to 0.519 acres. This will bring the benefitting lands closer to compliance with the current provisions for residential waterfront lots. The property at 11 Beechwood Lane contains an existing A frame cottage, gazebo at the water and shed. No development is proposed for the property at 11 Beechwood Lane. Retained Lot The property at 7 Beechwood Lane presently consists of 1.43 acres and 370 feet of water frontage along Thirty Island Lake. With the conveyance of the lot addition to 11 Beechwood Lane, the lands will consist of approximately 1.34 acres with approximately 340 feet of water frontage. No further development is proposed for the retained lands. The applicant owns 7 Beechwood Lane and is the estate beneficiary of 11 Beechwood Lane. The applicant is proposing this lot addition to legally transfer the parking that has been created for 11 Beechwood Lane in the event that one property is sold the parking will be transferred with the property. No development is proposed for either property.

Planning Analysis Consistent with Provincial Policy Statement, 2014: Current Official Plan Designation: Application conforms with Official Plan, 2003: Current Zoning: Complies with Zoning Bylaw 2003-75:

Yes Rural Yes Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone Yes

Provincial Policy Statement (2014) The 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides direction on matters of Provincial interest related to land use planning and development. The PPS promotes efficient land use and development patterns that support strong, liveable and healthy communities, protect the environment and public health and safety, and facilitate economic growth. When assessing consent applications on rural Page 18 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT lands, planning authorities must comply with Section 1.1.5.1 of the PPS; this section requires application of relevant policy of Section 1: Building Healthy Communities, Section 2: Wise Use and Management of Resources, and Section 3: Protecting Public Health and Safety by the approval authority. Section 1: Building Healthy Communities of the PPS promotes the building of strong, healthy communities and includes policies about avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns. Section 1.1.5.2 of the PPS permits limited residential development on rural lands and Section 1.1.5.4 promotes development that is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels. The proposed lot addition will increase the benefitting lands to create a lot that is closer to meeting the minimum lot area requirements in the Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone in the South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-Law, 2003. Section 2: Wise Use and Management of Resources of the PPS contains policies that encourage the protection of natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral and cultural heritage and archaeological resources for their economic, environmental and social benefits. No further development is proposed for the lands to be conveyed; the benefitting lands are already developed and the additional lands will enlarge an existing undersized waterfront lot. Section 3: Protecting Public Health and Safety directs development away from areas of natural or human-made hazards where there is an unacceptable risk to public health or safety or of property damage. The application was circulated to the Quinte Conservation Authority for review of natural hazards and natural heritage features under the PPS. Staff are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with Section 3.1 of the PPS as there is sufficient area for development outside of any natural of flood-related hazard. County of Frontenac Official Plan, 2016 The County of Frontenac Official Plan is a framework for guiding development in the County through the management and protection of the natural environment and by providing direction and influence on growth patterns. It is focused on the six themes of economic sustainability, growth management, community building, housing and social services, heritage and culture, and environmental sustainability. Section 3.3 Rural Lands provides policies for all lands outside of the settlement areas. The Plan recognizes that rural lands are used as an alternative location for those preferring a rural lifestyle. The proposed consent application will increase the size of the befitting lands to bring the lands closer to being in compliance with the County of Frontenac Official Plan, 2016. Township of South Frontenac Official Plan, 2003 The subject property and benefitting lands are designated as Rural in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan. Policies of the Rural designation speak to permitting development that is consistent with maintaining the Township’s rural, natural heritage, and cultural landscape. Section 5.7.7 Limited Service Residential Policies is generally located in the Rural area of the Township on a body of water or a natural water course where the primary means of access is from a private road or a navigable waterway. The lot addition application does not count towards the creation of a new rural residential lot as there is no increase in development proposed. The proposal will bring the benefitting lands closer to conforming to the policies for lot sizes for limited service residential uses. The retained lot will continue to meet the general intent of the Official Plan. Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw, 2003 The subject property is zoned Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) in the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law, 2003. The intent of the RLSW Zone is to permit a seasonal dwelling or a single detached dwelling. The benefitting lands are zoned Limited Services Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) in the Township Zoning Bylaw and is developed with an existing cottage. The consent application will increase the size of the benefitting lands to bring it closer to compliance with the current zoning provisions. The properties at 7 Beechwood Lane and 11 Beechwood Lane will remain in the Limited Services Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) Zone.

Page 19 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Agency Analysis and Comments Public Works Department – This department was not required to be circulated given the nature of the application Public Comments – As of the time of writing, no written comments have been received from the public. KFL&A Public Health – KFL&A Public Health have indicated that they have no objections to the proposed lot addition. Quinte Conservation – Comments dated August 26, 2019 indicate that Quinte Conservation have no objection to the application. Staff at Quinte Conservation reviewed the application within the context of Section 2.1 Natural Heritage, 2.2 Water and 3.1 Natural Hazards of the PPS; Ontario Regulation #319/09 (Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses) and Quinte Region Source Protection Plan which is not applicable. The owners will be required to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to any future proposed development (construction/filling/excavation/site grading) within 30 metres of the 1:100 year floodplain of Thirty Island Lake.

Recommended Conditions 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 notice of decision, in which time the deed must be registered. Severed Lands
The land to be severed by Consent Application S-16-19-B shall be for a lot addition with an area of approximately 0.089 acres to be conveyed only to 11 Beechwood Lane. (Roll No. 102902004007700).
The lands to be severed are for the purpose of a lot addition only to the adjacent lands described as Part Lot 7, Concession 3 (PIN 36251-0075), and any subsequent transfer, charge or other conveyance of the lands to be severed is subject to Section 50(3) (or subsection 50(5) if in a plan of subdivision) of the Planning Act. Neither the lands to be severed nor the adjacent lands are to be reconveyed without the other parcel unless a further consent is obtained. The owner shall cause the lands to be severed to be consolidated on title with the adjacent lands and for this condition to be entered into the parcel register as a restriction. 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 the Notice of Decision [Planning Act, ss. 53(17) and 53(24)]. Municipal Requirements
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 stamping of the deeds.
The Township of South Frontenac shall receive $100 in lieu of parkland [Planning Act, s. 51(1)].

Page 20 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7. In the event that there are abandoned wells located on the property being severed, and the retained property, they be sealed in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment and that this work be accomplished prior to the stamping of the deeds. Zoning 8. Where a violation of the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law is evident, the appropriate minor variance or rezoning shall be obtained to the satisfaction of the Municipality. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Date of Site Visit: September 5, 2019 Attachments: Map of Schall property.

Page 21 of 101

Page 22 of 101

vmc?mm .o._ 262

mmmm_n_ mv>w__

mm.< £o_mo

wmmEo…_

.m.m» :0

cmom :0 ommEo.u_

®Z vmmoqoi

.. 9:.

o__o. 9:.

.©

.m_._.Oz

coavvm

.o_26: %. 9:.

“Shoo

mmEo.n_

v mmmEo… of.

Page 23 of 101

um:<

.33”

mx $3.0:

.83<$:.o:

o:_$ <.v

Page 24 of 101

\§

(‘5

so 9:.

o._»®Z

w:mmE

m5 202

Ou_ »®Z

®..._.

N_,

38 m .w..m»

: 202

omEma

o._ »oZ

two. 9: cam wmoom

5 um9 E9_:u2

m._

9:.

m_._.Oz

owzamn

26:

.8 oEmz m

zowmc m

Bmo?c

Page 25 of 101

Page 26 of 101

Em 8 Emom Eoo o: w>m: Q<:wEsO ash

.8 QommeB o__aq<:m:»O __mq_o_c:Em5 8 :o:mo__Qqm

..1u..m

a<:oEsO 9:.

m;co_..mo__oEm

ow6 9:_ownm

o=mo__aam o5

v m.wo5_EEoO

_ m5 o:mEO __ma_o_c:E m5 q<:mc»Ooch

:_m:m .m.m:cm_a ..E So5»

o:9.m_ao5qm m_.aoEqm m5 Q<:mc»OmE.. o;.. a<:w._»O

mc_Eowmaw um.com5<

5 9

Page 27 of 101

).__....-‘…._

.coN.

\ I

__ ...

ROAD

5 ACN)N;v.:r:

L01‘

mun-Hen \ll1H AND sun: T0 an’ nor ‘4 av!!! Exxsnna nuns Acnoss Lon 7.3.5. con. 4. YO run. ROAD IN

LAND

LAKE

INST

154166

Page 28 of 101

Page 29 of 101

SBION

E|O:| (3350

38 OJ. J.ON SI d‘v’WSIHL

JO} 5; pue

ensBuwddew1euJe1u| ue uJoJ;1nd1no3_ue1s pa1eJeue6 J3S|‘1 2 sndew snqi

a|qeg|aJ as;/vuauuo JO ‘wanna ’e1eJn33eeq lou /(em JO /(em dew sup, uo Jeadde J,eq1sJeAe|123,20 /(|uo e3ueJe;eJ

NO|J.VE)|/\VN

SJe1ew0”)|

96,0 0

“P11dn0J953!‘-|d9J5°99 9P”1!19’|

eueqd5‘/LIeg|gxnv‘Jo1e:uaw‘qeM’vg5 fgg)/v\

Page 30 of 101

Thirty Island Inset MapLake

Sangster Lake

LD GO

ES JAM

SO WIL

T DUS

E LAN

AD N RO

OOD CHW BEE

L AN

STE VE B

ABC

SCHAAL S-16-19-B

KL ANE

7 BEECHWOOD LANE

Sand Lake

Legend Schaal Property

Retained Lot

Proposed Severance Benefitting Lot Parcel Fabric River / Stream Provincially Significant Wetlands

Waterbodies

Water Area, Wetland Area,

Proposed Severance

Thirty Island Lake

Page 31 of 101

Scale 1:1,200

Benefitting Lot

5 10

Meters UTM Projection NAD 83

KFA

Public Health REQUESTSFOR COMMENTS

To;

Application Number:

S»16~19B

Lot Addition

Applicant Name(s):

Schaal, Richard

PIanmng Departmen t or Agency:

Fa1x§8f§‘I32) http://www.kflapublichea|th.ca 6z77’;:7§‘97

Ms. Michelle Hannah Secretaxy-Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON KOH 2T0

Type of Application or Proposal:

Locatlon:

Environmental Health Department 1130 Elizabeth Street Sharbot Lake, Ontario KOH2P0 (613) 279-2151

Lot 7, Concession 3, Bedford 7 Beechwood Lane

Comments:

Township of South Frontenac (Bedford)

KFL&APublic Health has no objections to the proposed lot addition.

Inspector:

Date:

September 03, 2019

PLEASEFORWARD A COPY OF THE NOTICEOF DECISIONTO KFL&APUBLICHEALTH. Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Building Code Act, and will be used for the administration of Public Health programs. Any questions about the collection of this information should be directed to the Manager of Environmental Health, KFL&APublic Health, 221 Portsmouth Avenue, Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5, (613) 5491232 ext. 1243 or 1-800-267-7875.

Page 32 of 101

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. PL0202-2019 Municipality:

Township of South Frontenac

Owner:

Richard Schaal

Location:

7 Beechwood Lane

Roll #:

1029-020-040-07600-00000

Application Description:

Consent Appl’n File No. S-16-19-B

Regulated Feature:

Thirty Island Lake

Part Lot 7, Concession 3

Bedford

Sever approximately 0.036 hectares for the purposes of a lot addition to 11 Beechwood Lane which currently has an existing cottage, gazebo and shed. The proposed retained parcel is approximately 0.58 hectares in size and vacant.

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) (2014). 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. Staff are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with section 3.1 of the PPS as there is sufficient area for development 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 Thirty Island Lake (by virtue of Ontario Regulation #319/09 – Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses). Please note that the owners will need to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to development (construction / filling/ excavation/ site grading) within 30 metres of the 1:100 year floodplain of Thirty Island Lake. Comments:

Quinte Region Source Protection Plan Quinte Conservation provides Risk Management services as prescribed by the Clean Water Act, 2006 on behalf of member municipalities. Part of this is reviewing building and planning applications to ensure no new significant drinking water threats as outlined in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are created. Policies for significant threats in the Quinte Region Source Protection Plan are not applicable to the subject property as it 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:

Quinte Conservation has no objection to the application as presented.

August 26, 2019 Date

Sam Carney Planning and Regulations Technician Page 1 of 1

Page 33 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING REPORT – VARIANCE APPLICATION Report Date: Application No: Owner: Location of Property:

September 9, 2019 MV-11-19-B Tony & Michele Kimmett Part Lots 23 & 24, Concession 10, being Parts 1-3 & 8 on Plan 13R20629, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 966 Lee Road, Wolfe Lake. Purpose of Application: To alter and enlarge a building or structure located within the 30 metre setback from the highwater mark and within 120 metres of the Provincially Significant Wetland for a building located 18.29 metres (60 feet) from the highwater mark/Provincially Significant Wetland. The height of the building will increase as will the overall footprint of the seasonal dwelling. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2 a. from the 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of a Waterbody or Watercourse, Section 5.10.2. Existing Buildings within 30 Metres (98.4 feet) of a Waterbody or Watercourse, 8.3.3 Waterfront Residential Zone (RW) Regulations, and Section 8.5 Special RW – Waterfront Residential Zones (RW-35) and Section 32.3 within 30m EP zone Date of Hearing: September 12, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from members of the public and that the Committee of Adjustment approve minor variance application MV-11-19-B subject to conditions.

Proposal The application for minor variance was submitted for the property located at Part Lots 23 & 24, Concession 10, being Parts 1-3 & 8 on Plan 13R20629, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 966 Lee Road, Wolfe Lake (see attached map). The request is to raise the existing cottage 24 ft by 32 ft consisting of 720 ft2 in order of pouring footings and installing foundation walls and to construct a kitchen addition of 16 ft x 18 ft. with an area of 288 ft2 to enlarge the existing structure. The applicant is proposing to demolish and replace the existing deck and increase the height of the deck from 3 feet to 4 feet. The existing cottage is located within the 30 metre setback from the highwater mark and within 120 metres of the Provincially Significant Wetland. The existing building is located at 18.29 metres (60 feet) from the Provincially Significant Wetland. The height of the building will increase as will the overall footprint of the seasonal dwelling. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2a, 30 m setback from the Highwater Mark of a Waterbody, Section 5.10.2, Existing Buildings within 30 m (98.4 feet) of a Waterbody or Watercourse, 8.3.3 Waterfront Residential Zone (RW) Regulations, and Section 8.5 Special RW – Waterfront Residential Zones (RW-35). In support of the minor variance application, a preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) dated May 23, 2019 was prepared by Reg Genge as submitted. The property owners received approval for minor variance MV-23-17-B on May 11, 2017 to permit construction within 30 metres of the setback from the water to raise the existing dwelling a maximum of six feet to permit the reconstruction of the foundation and the creation of a crawlspace underneath the cottage to locate services. No additional living space was permitted with the approval. The property owners decided not to move ahead with exercising the approved variance (MV-23-17B). Rather they have now decided to submit a new variance application to obtain permission to construct and addition as well as increase the height to reconstruct the foundation, to create a crawlspace underneath the cottage (MV-11-19-B) and replace the deck. The subject property has a site specific zoning on it Rural Waterfront (RW-35) Special Provisions. This zoning establishes specific setbacks from the Provincially Significant Wetland within Wolfe Lake and on the northwest portion of the lot. The RW-35 zoning was established on the subject property in 2013, a condition of the creation of this lot.

Page 34 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT The following variances are required in order to facilitate the reconstruction of foundation crawl space and to permit addition are located within the required setback from the 30m highwater mark of Wolfe Lake:

Section 5.8.2 a, b, c.: The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres. Requested variance from this section: a. Seasonal Dwelling with Proposed Kitchen Addition: 60 feet for the kitchen addition (18.29 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 11.71 metres/38.41 feet) b. Seasonal Dwelling with Proposed New Deck: 55 feet for the replacement deck (21.34 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 8.66 metres/28.4 feet)
Section 5.10.2, Existing Buildings within 30 Metres (98.4 feet) of a Waterbody or Watercourse. Requested variance from this section: Existing Seasonal Dwelling (erected prior to the date of the passing of the By-law) with Proposed Kitchen Addition and Deck Replacement to increase in height not to exceed 1.83 metres (6 feet) and encroachment into the 30 metre setback by 18.29 metres from the highwater mark.
Section 8.3.3 Waterfront Residential Zone (RW) Regulations. The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres (98.4 feet) for properties zoned RW. Requested variance from this section: a. Seasonal Dwelling with Proposed Kitchen Addition: 60 feet for the kitchen addition (18.29 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 11.71 metres/38.41 feet) b. Seasonal Dwelling with Proposed New Deck: 55 feet for the replacement deck (21.34 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 8.66 metres/28.4 feet)
Section 8.5 Special RW – Waterfront Residential Zones (RW-35). The uses permitted in the RW-35 Zone are subject to a site plan agreement specifying the siting of all buildings and septic systems 30 metres from the inland wetland, 15 metres from the top-of-bank of the inland wetland and 120 metres from the provincially significant wetland within Wolfe Lake and at the northwest portion of the lot. Requested variance from this section: a. 60 feet for the kitchen addition (18.29 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 11.71 metres/38.4 feet) and the Wolfe Lake PSW b. 55 feet for the replacement deck (16.7metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 13.1 metres/ 43 feet) and from the Wolfe Lake PSW
Section 32.3 h – Environmental Protection Zone. Requested variance from this section: a. 60 feet for the kitchen addition (18.29 metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 11.71 metres/38.4 feet) and the Wolfe Lake PSW b. 55 feet for the replacement deck (16.7metres) from the high water mark of Wolfe Lake (variance request of 13.1 metres/ 43 feet) and from the Wolfe Lake PSW Under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act there are four tests a minor variance must meet. A variance may be authorized from the provisions of the zoning by-law, if, in the opinion of the Committee of Adjustment, the request meets all of the following tests: • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? • Is the application desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question? • Is the application minor? Page 35 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Background The subject property is approximately 24.28 ha (60 acres) in area with an approximate road frontage of 274 metres and with an approximate water frontage of 365 metres on Wolfe Lake. The average depth of the lake has been determined to be 35.6 metres. The records of the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority indicate that the presence of provincially significant and unevaluated wetlands and organic soils. Steep slopes are located on a portion of the site but not in the area where the proposed reconstruction and addition are located. Based on a site visit of the property, it was determined that the cottage is located at the southern portion of the lot at a point within the 30 metres setback of the highwater mark of Wolfe Lake. The area is fairly level with a raised treed and vegetated embankment along the shoreline which acts as a buffer from shoreline erosion. The EIA indicates that four trees will be removed from the property to accommodate for the work including a maple close to the cottage and an aspen close behind the building which is identified as a dangerous and hazardous tree. The scope of work will include backfilling and grading around the foundation wall to bring the grade up to the natural grade evident on the north side of the building. The EIA concludes that the proposed footprint of the addition is already culturally impacted and there are no identified habitats for species at risk in the building envelope. There are no environmental constraints to completing this project. A full EIA was not required. The owners applied for a minor variance MV-23-17-B in 2017 for the request to raise the existing cottage in order of pouring footings and installing foundation walls to a height not to exceed 1.83m (6 ft). A preliminary EIA prepared by Ontario Lake Assessments & Environmental Education Services, dated April 6, 2017, was submitted in support of the application at that time indicating that there are no long-term impacts expected as a result of the proposal. Appropriate construction measures were recommended in the report including the maintenance of the native shoreline buffer of trees adjacent too and in front of the cottage. The requirement for a full EIA was not required with the submission of MV-23-17-B.

Page 36 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Current Official Plan Designation: Rural and Environmental Protection The property is designated as Rural and Environmental Protection in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (2003). Official Plan policies regarding the Rural designation speak to the importance of maintaining rural character, natural heritage and cultural landscape in the Township. Section 5.7.4 Rural Residential includes seasonal residential dwellings as permitted uses. Lots to be developed are to be serviced with private water and sanitary disposal. The Environmental Protection designation applies to lands which play an important role in the preservation of the Township’s natural heritage systems including wetlands, watercourses and lakes and significant portions of habitat of threatened or endangered species. KFL&A Public Health have issued a permit BE-5-19 for the sewage system. Current Zoning: Special Waterfront Residential (RW-35) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone The property is zoned Special Waterfront Residential (RW-35) Zone and Environmental Protection (EP) Zone in the Township of South Frontenac Zoning Bylaw. The intent of the RW-35 Zone is to permit development with uses restricted to residential and ancillary along the waterfront. All buildings and septic systems are required to be 30 metres (98.4 feet) from the inland wetland, 15 metres (49.2 feet) from the top-of-bank of the inland wetland and 120 metres from the Provincially Significant Wetland within Wolfe Lake and at the northwest portion of the lot. The construction of all dwellings and structures are required to be 30 metres from the highwater mark; this is stated in the zone regulations as well as the general provisions of the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-Law. The applicant is proposing to request is to raise the existing cottage with proposed kitchen addition and deck replacement to increase in height not to exceed 1.83 metres (6 feet) and encroachment into the 30 metre setback by 18.29 metres from the highwater mark. Within the EP Zone no person shall use any land, erect, alter, enlarge, use of maintain any building or structure for any use other than as permitted in the EP Zone. No construction is proposed or permitted in the EP Zone. A site visit was conducted on July 26, 2019, to observe site characteristics and determine desirableness of the proposed construction.

Agency Analysis and Comments KFL&A Public Health – Comments dated September 3, 2019 indicate that KFL&A Public Health has no objections to the minor variance as the owner has submitted an application under permit number BE-5-19. Rideau Valley Conservation Authority – Comments dated July 11, 2019 from the RVCA indicated that they have no objection to the subject application and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is minor based on their review. A number of conditions have been requested to be included in the Development Agreement. Public Comments – As of the date of preparing the report, no comments have been received from the public.

Conclusion The proposed application to permit the raising of the cottage a maximum of 1.83 metres (6 feet) to pour a foundation, to add a kitchen addition of 288ft2 and to replace the existing deck and increase the height from 3 feet to 4 feet at Part Lots 23 & 24, Concession 10, being Parts 1-3 & 8 on Plan 13R20629, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 966 Lee Road, Wolfe Lake meets the four tests for a minor variance: • The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the proposed construction is consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement including Section 2.1 Natural Heritage which then meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) have reviewed the EIA and agree with the study as along as Page 37 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT mitigation measures are followed and that a soils bearing report is submitted to address Section 3.0 of the PPS. • The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw as the existing cottage will be improved with the addition of footings and a foundation, kitchen addition and decking that will be replaced and elevated an additional foot. • The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question as the scope of the proposed work will be an improvement to the existing cottage. The Conservation Authority has confirmed that it is not feasible to achieve a 30 metres setback for existing buildings on the subject site. Planning staff concur with the comments of the Conservation Authority as the redevelopment will require a new up to date septic system that meets the current regulations. The new system will replace an older system. • The variance is minor as the proposed construction as the addition is considered to be minor and only adds a proposed kitchen to make better utility of the modest seasonal dwelling on the subject property. The increase in height provides the opportunity to strengthen the existing structure. The proposed addition has no negative impact on the Wolfe Lake PSW. A new septic system will replace the existing system which is setback outside of the 30m setback from the high water mark. No variance is required to inland wetlands.

Recommended Conditions Conditions are a decision of the Committee of Adjustment, the conditions below are recommended. The final approved conditions will be included in the signed decision

The minor variance approval is for permission to raise the existing 720 ft2cottage at a setback of 60 feet from the highwater mark and PSW of Wolfe Lake. to install footings and foundation walls with a height not to exceed 1.83m (6ft) and to construct a kitchen addition of 16 ft x 18 ft. with a maximum area of 288 ft2 at the same height as the raised 720ft2 cottage. A variance is also granted to allow for the construction of a new deck with a maximum area of 256 ft2 setback 55ft from the highwater mark and PSW of Wolfe Lake. The proposed structures are to be built as per the plans submitted with Minor Variance application (MV-11-19-B). All other setbacks of the RW-35 Zone shall be complied with.
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 the following matters outlined in the July 11, 2019 letter from the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) and the recommendation of the May 23, 2019 EIA and Township environmental standards: 

Surface and roof water runoff management shall be implemented by directing runoff from eaves trough placement and outlets to natural or constructed leaching pits/areas allow for maximum infiltration of rood runoff as much as possible away from the services, lake and wetland area.



Appropriate construction soil stability measures must be implemented to prevent the disruption of the native soil mantle and offsite loss of fill material by way of erosion into the lake during construction. Excavation materials removed from the foundation area that are surplus to the backfill requirements must be removed from the area to the borrow pit area near to the Lee Road entrance. No filling of the nearshore area or any other low lying areas using the excavated material is permitted.



The native shoreline buffer of trees adjacent and in front of the cottage are required to be protected from damage by heavy equipment during the construction period. The trees are required to be flagged and a protective measure put in place so equipment operators avoid damaging the trees.



Backfill is to be strictly limited to volumes which will accommodate foundation drainage only. Page 38 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT 

A lot grading and drainage plan shall be provided to demonstrate no/minimal grade alterations and that runoff will be accommodated on site. No grade changes will be supported within 10 metres of the water of closer to the wetland boundaries associated with the outlet to the south.



A soils bearing capacity report shall be forwarded to the RVCA when completed demonstrating that 75kPa has been met or exceeded on-site.



Sediment controls shall be shown on the lot grading and drainage plan (sediment fencing and/or mulch/straw bales shall be set in place around the construction site, upland of the lake and wetland area) prior to commencement of work and will remain in place until the site is stable and revegetated.



The owners shall maintain and enhance the existing waterfront vegetative buffer. The owners shall demonstrate plantings to a minimum of at least ten metres from the water/wetland areas on the waterfront as a protection from drift of nutrient and sediment to the lake and to guard against nearshore aquatic weed growth over the long term.



All materials from construction (such as demolished materials or excess soil) will be disposed of 30 metres or more from the normal highwater of Wolfe Lake at a proper disposal site.



Should any work be undertaken along the shoreline of Wolfe Lake, permits would be required by the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 (Development Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses)

The decision on MV-11-19-B hereby replaces the previous approval of minor variance MV-2317-B by the South Frontenac Committee of Adjustment and renders MV-23-17-B to no longer be in effect.
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 approval from the Township of South Frontenac.
Minor variance MV-11-19-B is applicable only to South Frontenac Township Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Date of Site Visit: Site Visit July 26, 2019 Attachments: Map of Kimmett property.

Page 39 of 101

f?PLlCATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONI

j .=’ PlanningA(;t,R

Dgte Received:

991), c. P.13 as amended

FileNo ?V-11-l$8

briri Q r QCi40

?-c:zuts

1 . Name of Owper(s):

?op ,jll I ( r) PLANNING D PAR’

Full Mailing Address

er(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

€ Loughborough

a Storrington

<Q3/;"?q i Name of Road/Sfreef: ‘i,“E-jL(:{ -’? Street Number: ?” 1’ fi r Reference Plan Number: l ,?)‘R ,4 D (o-’-) q Part Number(s):?F’T l J:S “) ea

Concession Number: ‘. (l;

Lot Number:

ROII Number: ’l€J.’ :?->)C% Cw t(,: C ?C’, %C:;J l (>(.,(.,=<H]??,? 3

Page 40 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

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

Frontage(onwater): %:§3’

Frontage(onroad/lane):CICC

Depth: l p

Area:

(oC’ c?ges

s. The current zoning of the subject land:

,’)(jQs(’.:‘i?icJ (f>?Rt.C(G (? Y

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

‘?@’??v:6 cy(N(3,<?-V->l<5c?,l? [(:1,iSe

C'*'y ?av'?

‘k-, oC24 ‘rt s,,’-c,A-e( %

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

KYes

€No

Name of Road/Lane:

lee? “?-ko 9. 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.

What are the existing uses of the subject land?

S(LRs8>ossry’l Ctb'6wq(4 11 . Please indicate whether there are any EXISTING buildings or structures on the subject land. (I.e. residence, garage, shed, etc.)

!yi

[No

Page 41 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICAT?ON FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

If the answer to item 11 is yes, for EACH building or structure indicate:

m Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

(2)

!L,

aY>’> S,, SC= " < S ) % cx

lx(g ta ras V ’s - Ce

(4)

(3) a-’:’%.

J,’ it:(3c

Setback from Front Lot Line

(

(2 r’, '

b . ,j. < (”, u

) (. :

Setback from

Rear Lot Line

1 1<

), ), ,i.

Setback from Side Lot Line

Height of Building (Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

.’)-.-)== '

./% jl % sj ,’>l

-J}’

‘) s6D

; ;– a’

.’) -6 “.->

3SitQcl’i

<,,‘7-s e- 5 ‘,-i’C-%

‘=’-o’

IE’

Dimensions of

<,) .’l(3)

Floor Area

(i,,Z-

;WC-.’

Setback from High Water Mark

(lf applicable)

i +

/r’

tr ‘i!,’. l.;

“-.‘2 ‘(-’

%’+ %.

!L=

1 3.The proposed uses of the subject land:

Se< 5Ex?i cb’- <i0 ‘p,cjC( o.1

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?

dYi’es

€No

Page 42 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

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

Setback from

Front Lot Line

Setback from

Rear Lot Line

Setback from Side Lot Line

-p, !J-,..,

,“CA l"i: l =’s-x

(r C=[, /t

Outside Dimensions of

Building/Structure

-fe.p ( x=.<a eczy<’ .

‘, 70

s a)

) ’t<

Q—’

*Th

-:) ‘-’)’:

Height of Building (Also indicate if it is one story or two story)

(4)

,’):’>:)

l l.,-. ’ #%,, l ((.i <’> Q ‘,’)-‘rO’ o’% , i, ’ , ,,,

1!.C:+ Y y’-i

Type of Structure (E.g. residence)

(3)

(.,),

(1).

e :l’S [-2- a-

Setback from

High Water Mark (lf applicable)

(h(?’

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.

DoyourplansincludeanyDEMOLITIONofexistingstructures?

3?o

If yes, please provide details: ((.,T?0 f,” (’

! V’% S iJe

=er:m<- (’(.?C-‘QS'5

aSO

s-c-Ak- c=a.,(,3

?4cQ c-’< l O v’> 6

Page 43 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

.gYes

Do your plans include the RAISING of an existing structure?

[]No

If 7es, please prov!de deta!Is: I y ’l,??! <,D’-)Aci-C- e l r’s S *1 ? (” ‘?a’ ( r rcF ?ca’iy5 18. What are the uses of the proposed development? (a) Increase in number of bedrooms

€ Yes

(b) Increase in plumbing fixtures

,Ves

€No

;di

[No

(d) Will the addition or structure encroach on the existing septic system?

€ Yes

.-bo

The date the subject Iand was acquired by the current owner:
The date the existing buildings and structures were constructed on the subject Iands:

<-2(S-v yecr<:> 1-

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

,;,:i'3-1-L,<(2.a-x-s T

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:

a % i t ?) (?A a 23. 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: l?}

‘i

Is storm drainage provided by sewers, ditches, swaIes or by other means? 111 A€

‘)’s Gl::S t.g,-?

Page 44 of 101

rOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

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

a Yes @No 26. 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). ‘?es

€No

t’

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

MV-93-ll'6 29. A SKETCH must be submitted showing the following: i) 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 Iandmark such as a bridge or railway crossing. iv)

The Iocation of all abutting (neighbours’) lands.

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.

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

Page 45 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended 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, 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. The Owner/ApplicanUAgent 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, Iawyers 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. 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 ofl .25% per m0ntM (1 5% per annum) on accounfs overdue more ?5an 30 da7s, 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

Page 46 of 101

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC APPLICAT?ON FOR MINOR VAPIANCE

Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990, c. P.13 as amended

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. 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 Iane 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 ‘1 029’ which appears on your tax bill. Please take time to look it up before submitting the application.

Frontage, depth, area, acres: All parts of this question must be completed.
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.
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 Iine than the principal building.
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.
Roads: Municipally maintained roads are looked after by the Township; private roads are Ianes that residents maintain themselves (not private driveways, but lanes that provide access to your property and that are generally shared with others).

Page 47 of 101

- FER6FECTIVE VlELu F-OR ILLu6T

ts g smi i s i m m a m i m ma ! s a g mm mm m g m m s s m m s ms m & m ss m m m m ma m r tw a m s* a l

l i m h m ie s N *

I I

B W! y a a a ss m t m m s m! I

s mm m ! s 11 g m m m m mi m r 1 s ! l m m s sm {

a sm

sfl s

l mi mu

ms w

l iaii l s m

m m

qi m lm a m f

ns a s Ns m m mmea

affl M l m lm gs ta mml m l

il i !l

mm ms m m gkl mm m ss i m mi s M !

J l

m s

‘sa*p- H

l li l

l t

6!‘Q 1 R ’lrl’i’:i

’ ti (.gl;’

Wl 1 q

l t

T O ‘A/ ‘- ‘! S H i o- O F S O U T H F’RON-r ENAC

BUlLDiNC’. ri)EP,ARTt’x=4Ef’JT

i l

‘?

11 i

& m

sm s

For: Miche

mm * m

mm m

‘1

ffi

966 Les

6outh Fr<

1 1 N

k 1

k !

i i

Apr{l c

Page 48 of 101

48’-O ta

32’-O” v

All exterIor dlitieneilonei takeri rrom outside

or ICF continuoue rIgId Ineulattori

3’-Ok;i” y

Llns or ‘81g r-

(

‘4 ‘i-

€-i

oTh-

-i-j ? TT

l’

6talr -

-l

i?’l-

‘:tTE-

0lCi

cci l’

Nomlnal 11? ICF Foundatlon ulall

,;i z

et!’

‘?

.ilg fl

ill

cct l’

“n

il ji li

-:l

ICF ‘oackflll hsi)ghte ae per manufacturesre epeclrlcatlone or ae per tabls 9.l5.4.5.A. or o.b.c.

01-’

Llns or opan

‘:’,: TO ll(iH’:

sh61l E btalra.

noel+iB

not let

‘, uP6TAIR6

ab psr

wh’l ’l

arsa ak>ove

o s

-ffi

ijl

:’

BEAM FOCKET )

(TYP.)

alS

‘f

piii ,Ql ‘El!!.

*l,,

NEIU POuNDATION AND

S(N

2? riaid Iriaulatloii r-10 (mlii.) 24? (min.) vnder babammt hlab In

‘=IR

E3A6EMEN? Concrete slabi

-,laJ

,*l1l

the hpmontal poaltlon.

4? (min.) 25 mpa coiicrats slab 2? rlBld lnsulatlon r-10 (niln.) 6? clisan akone

‘H:

rootlne3 to be a (mln.) 4’ - C B(ade err beilld yock

2x6 PRE66uRE TREATED 61ll- PlATE? l/4? 61LL CiAhKET

or ab bhouin otheruilse

’l -i

’l’i 17

-ttm l l

(1 *?

*(l

4’??

E’lc]?0? {0. ))e b.leeVe.d ulhare 2x8? PT ulood Isdger c/iu apptovsd han2sr* ? pae’ae t?rou’J’ r00aln’;30 ata2gprd l/2? dlarn’eter Ia2 ‘b4ruih @ 24? ‘oa.

li (i

&pac.!p@ ta&taned ko rlnl JOlbt

Exts+id 8? concie.te iuall

c/w bi<Ib? etrlp fooklne3 ab rstalnmJ nnall to suIt Z to gupport poych eeam

e’

TYP 6x6? PT uiood pobt ui/ beam bracket?

-aa

10? Dla. Corcrete’ plsr ui/ p06t bracket

-0

2eix2Bi<e? Concreke’Pad Foo’xlr?B

i. d?

I l

l l l l

16? x 611 6? (mln.) comcrete roo’ (for latahral eupport),

6? clean stohs ovsr bIB ?o? 4? bIB ?o? around perlmater TYFICAL 61!u A66Er-16LY, l/2? DIA. ANCAOR EIOLT 0 T2? o.c.

o;>

Fookli’n9

on undlsturbsd boll or rock.

ill

ko suppo

+-IAIN PLOOR CON6TRuCTlON

(f} (N

I a

c/iu 6x20

2? rlBld liiaulatloh r-10 (mlh.) 24?

.B i’i=

g)” Extend B

lllalk-out lii*ulatloiii

vertical poartron,

ffil

15’-3?

41ffl (min.) besloui Brads in ths 017

15’-4?

61S!

‘=ii

amxed to concre{e iuall sill 3-2xB? FT buIlt-up wood beam

?r:==a,’=-’-?

‘zyi: :::: :4::=: ::i q q lja0 ::::::::::: :q=: g h: 5z,qq :hq: t :g:: ::::: gtt:ltt?7 €I €#€ffi # ::=i :%?4 : :tJJj?,7 €L€ €E : :qm

s–4–*

1’-10?

-b

1’-10?

‘1’-10?

1’-19

4B’-O?

r’a

’e

r%h

(,?%

’l/X”?”"’

a/"’/

General Notes:

These plans were designed in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Building Code. All dimensions are to be checked on site, prior to construction.

s SV l fiil ?

-V ./5

(l/&

)

All dimensions are structural.

6? AA7/

&‘u

’l].

ts’,?’, S

X N,

’t s

1-.

Approved Eleam brackst I

:xQ???i/ l-MsC??:X<

Drawings must not be scaled. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and minimum code requirements and shall report any discrepancy to the Designer before proceeding with any work. Plans are copyrighted - unlawful for use without company’s express and written permission.

?These plans form the basis for permit issuance and deviation from these plans and details? including the ventilation system, heating system, woodstoves, fire? decks, balconies and finished basements, will require a revised drawing and clearance by the build inspection department".

The mechanical and electrical layout is only schema items in plan cannot be placed exactly as shown, infi Designer prior to installation. All mechanical, electrical and plumbing shall conforn O.B.C. and all applicable codes.

-<)?"/haveveviewedandtakevesponsibiljtyfovthedes0gnactivityrelatedtothisplan

Page 49 of 101

4E5’-O v

32’-0? Exl6TINci (RENOVATED)

8’-d3>!/5}?

3ffi" -

2’-O’ x 4-O’

)’l’

-Tl

4TO? x 3’-6?

ffl

4’-O? x 3’-6’

ITTI

Loui nnall/ hIgh floor?

50 CFM

11 11

Headroom over staIr

E3EDROO+-I 2

ri ijl

.’!s

0 l l

50!F!l

l l

)

l l

;? 11’}

2’-6?

L.AV

’t

[

l’

-4 T

-71F

{

2’-O?

o ‘;t

‘y

-‘I’To "

s:=sll

3’-2?

-l l -x 0i 9 “’l

’l b ’l

)

/ e

<=”

]

?tooA ffl

d’l

icoiqbmicrioiy A ADDITIONI

2 - 2? x 10? iuood lliitels over all

openlng*, unlsee otheriulae noted.

lOuNCiE

l-’lA6TER E3EDROOM

:l 9 ll -,!) 11

-J

/i/l

‘11

‘%

e’s

l l

sf5

lit

?!-11

2’-2’

DEN

‘Tfr,ai

3’-3?

r1,11

(

10’-l?

8’-l?

‘F?’l ?ll ??

e-,+ll

9’-8

9’-4’

4’-85

3’-O? x 6’-O?

2’-10?

): ffl /-

iiyr 3’-O’

-m x

–,

DECK

COI

z ::::

s 11.11 (l) 1111

i. 1111 N a’a’

3% 11

6X6? FT PO6T6

iEEjuoi=isstsisittn=iii’.a==;;;;:

r%* /%

.‘J /6

G-

1’-ll?ll

All dimensions are structural.

’ 6,,?AA’l/

Drawings must not be scaled. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions

l L

/’}

,-10 /

S Mr

11’-10%?

requirements of the Ontario Building Code. All dimensions are to be checked on site, prior to construction.

‘xS ?:a

a}r!

General Notes:

‘vS ‘4i

%‘41 l.a

ili i/

1 Th

megF"iiiEiiiiigiiiti!3

1.1

‘,/

These plans were designed in accordance with the

-QXv)

1111

-lal-Ilj6" 3!6"

?;“r

‘A7-

r% ‘-J?’l -? ‘V %

0’ i?<

I’[

14’-I”

r ,%,,76.s.u.

3- 2Xel? PT 6ulLT-uF VOOD EIEAM

1’-10?

1111 1111

ao’ - ’ -

1’-10"

llill

(0 ll’ll , llll ‘%?

1’-10"

11:11

‘y

ll’ll

111

‘,N

1111

11:11 Ilill

o;>

(i 6’-O? x 6’-0?

it it

5'4’

dIm

3’-O? x 6’-O?

il it it

il it

ai"?

‘T

d. h

b T€

lfl

2 PLY 9 l/2’:

lit l}

llil

111

‘.-l

and minimum code requirements and shall report any

discrepancy to the Designer before proceeding with any work. Plans are copyrighted - unlawful for use without company’s express and written permission.

l 4

6’-9’

4B’-O?

12’-2?

5b?

’l

?These plans form the basis for permit issuance and deviation from these plans and details; including the ventilation system, heating system, woodstoves, fire decks, balconies and finished basements, will

require a revised drawing and clearance by the builc inspectiori department". The mechanical and electrical layout is only schema items in plan cannot be placed exactly as shown, inf Designer prior to installation. All mechanical, electrical and plumbing shall confora O.B.C. and all applicable codes.

<-< “/rs,have veviewed and take respons0b0fiity fov the design activity redated to this plan”

Page 50 of 101

EXlelTNCi RE8ulLi CIVER )4Elll POuNDATION

ADDITION

1111111

?aevesi)

R615T v@mllB{l@( raiic a:r ilriv va

aa yidBa l*vai.

l l

6teel RooflnB

Top or?F

i n 1[] 4 r r 1 i E [ffll E (l ! t m1 7 1[ mr r Fl 1 7 ‘k

ffi

‘:’

‘%

TF?ai

l ?Ep??ht

l l l l l l l l l

1111111

3’.!6?

:::

111

6ubl

3pp??o?r Decklnq

.11,

U PayBlne3

t?i-’;-.11,IY r

rstalrilre3 uiall: j 4’?(?’ Mln. or to l

TE5edrock

" Poundationllnsel l

l,..

Concrata

‘I’-11?*

lsvsl r———

[:j?

[::]

1’

[:ji? -?

[alj

–

-l

Top br Fog

[:1]

WINDOW 80HEDULE

FRC)NT

‘Vayleb

[::I:]

[::]

ioplNINa ID WIDTH 141aHT ’ iJiARY )imi" 10(111)ITlOl’ffNW W lwlndovAcasemen( l ’ 1 ’ 13e.Gsm

6CALE. l/8" . I’-O"

l 2 3'0’ 6'0a wlndswscasMmeffi{?l?4 iia.oiJ l 3 5’l)a 3a?6a windoivlsjtlrr-’ l-‘1 iiz.saJ

l 4 9’€’ 6’-Oa WlndowSCasemsnt ! 54.0r41i.

11 a l-’ l’-oa l IW l’Vllntlowsslldei ’ l 2 114.O xI l 1 12151m lW'6'4? ’lwllldovAca*emen{ l 1 iis.oiJ l g z’sa a’ba vr:naowscaaemem ua.an l A S’-8a 6'4’ EyjenarDoorVtehth 1 ?W l R 5'8a 8’l!a Ev!vloyDoorsFpnc:’l-?’-1-’-l-4D.2sn

VENT lNCi

12 ‘03

61DINCll ?;:

35>p??o?f Plate

% %

l C 2'40a6’aa Ex!byiorDoo(yFphxh 1 20.9i4{j. l U 6'0a 6'4a Ex!eYcn-OoorS%nchl 1 i41.4sJ

(l(o?)

ti It rT

THplcal Alum FabQla’

111

?r .(

ane:I 5ofrlt venter:I

111 111 iiii iiii -111

111

6X6? PO6T

411 uil+dwi 16 eanLerm to t% rqulram? aL 4amMwhWaba lOlll.b.lla44r>-06 ?n}L{ - nes.h wyican yrbbiyaiion

T61

MliaUl. deiesb. l {kJllqhu?.

/ /

xs o*r e.i.A.l. ol b.b.e.

ORIZOMAL 61DINCi lla’,

-11)

nl?s

(IQ’)

nlndovs locabd wlthln 16’ - 6’lr4a) d adlaeani gwffl laval, xh&ll aeMoim lb alr? b.S.’s d lha abeyva

xlmelarel. 01 oar 9.16.3. oL a.‘o.a.

% s

‘111

J’

ffi"?P. or eublloor ?T?gi?or Foundaklon

(srade level’

::;’-: - ‘- ‘- ‘i ‘= LEFT 6CALE. i/.

i- ,o 11

,5?5 ‘=€J

General Notes:

“These plans form the basis for permit issuance anc

These plans were designed in accordance with the

deviation from these plans and details; including the ventilation system, heating system, woodstoves, fire

requirements of the Ontario Building Code. All dimensions are to be checked on site, prior to construction.

decks, balconies and finished basements, will

All dimensions are structural.

require a revised drawing and clearance by the built

inspection department”.

The mechanical and electrical Iayout is only schem= items in plan cannot be placed exactly as shown, in Designer prior to installation. All mechanical, electrical and plumbing shall confori O.B.C. and all applicable codes.

-’-t’? .,,-<“lhavevevieweiandtakevesponsibilityforfhedes0gnactivityrelatedtothisplan”

Page 51 of 101

llstal roofinB egrithstlc uridsrlagmsrit

I/2? qxuce p%uiood u.?lth ?h? clips prs. siig. rooF trueese 0 24? o.c.

eA.s.el toorlriB psir elsvatlonb Ics 4 uiatgr ehmld ror eaveb 4 vallegb sgrithstlc uriderlagrnarit

attIc aIr Fl0ut Venk l/300 - ‘>0% (ii r-b2 (mlri.) Irisulatlori

6 roll polg alr/vapour barrIer

a{r vsnt bameab

rsslllsnt charinsl 0 16? o.c. r-bO

pre. enB. krueeeb

l/2? drguiall

Irisulatlon

l/2? eprucs pl5uiood

X?rssllisnt chanriel

raecla board

Ll/2? drquiall ‘Ll/2? drguiall

/‘1

ali.im. ven’teid eoFr{t-J / ?J? charinsl vln,11 s{dlng

2? x 6? top platee vapour barrIer

(dahhsd)

Rsplacg Aand Frairied hhaa roori Flnlshsd 66 per ‘uyplcal rooF… c/ui 2x6? e24?oc. Inllrie ovsr iruee

ctui 2X4? 3ack e+.ud ovet uiall ror Interniedlats support

2x4? 024?oc. cslllnB Jolst c/ur bomt to m6tch

I/2? drguiall

l? contlnuoua Irisulatlori

1/16" or&> ehsath{ng

2? x d>? rramln3

‘J

ui/ r-19 batt irisulatiori Jai

6tarabdara.d EEaves Detal

1 ulood bsarn

6x6" post

.-back rc

Add b)ied r

l/2? drguiall vlngl atdlne3 ?

2? x 6? rramin;3 l? con’tlnuous Insulatlon???l

ui/ r-19 bau Ineulatlon

sub-floor shsathlng

‘1/16? ohb shsathlng -j?:

Th Ypr-apour bamer

rtm ‘ooard -.:#

€l?‘Th’ “it’

6111 plate ui/Basket

’e. enB. Jolete

anchor bott

parBln;3

ICF rouridatlori

(daahed) r-22 batt Inaulatlon

l ‘![.‘i

lerl2er ‘ot wood brsam

6x6? pobt

damp-proorlriB

l/2” drguiall

rlri{ahsd to suIt

‘11’

XFoet 4 plsr as psr plan

Fouridlatforb

Top - 6[dframq

4? DIA. LUEEPING TILE 6" CRu6HED 6TONE (( COl%lNECTED TO DRY

7rt!- oF" r’.

‘:SaS??’

These plans were designed in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Building Code.

?Ttiese plans form the basis for permit issuance and deviation from these plans and details; including the ventilation system, heating system, woodstoves, fire?

All dimensions are to be checked on site, prior to construction.

decks, balconies and finished basements, will

All dimensions are structural.

require a revised drawing and clearance by the build

Drawings must not be scaled.

inspection department". The mechanical and electrical Iayout is only schema items in plan cannot be placed exactly as shown, inf Designer prior to installation. All mechanical, electrical and plumbing shall conforn O.B.C. and all applicable codes.

General Notes:

i5,?A:fl’

:=?

Contractor shall ver:fy and be responsible for all dimensions and minimum code requirements and shall report any

discrepancy to the Designer before proceeding with any work. Plans are copyrighted - unlawful for use without company’s express and written permission.

have veviewed anrJl take respons0bffgify fov the design activity related to this plan Page 52 of 101 ffl

PLAN

#7 x 76 mm [3) scriws @ sao .. -

.-AXON€XflETR[C

TOP RAIL - - -. ..,,, - -..,, #7 x 63 rnm [2 !A"] SCREW.-.-.- -,-.-

o. 38 x 89 (2’ x 4’)

RAIL - - – - - — - - - -

2 47 x 76 (31 7 2 - #8 x- SCrlEW3ATEACH 63 mm [2 !A"

8CREWS 25 x 140 (5/4o x (51 BOARD

SEE NOTE 5

‘S S

[H] m

oo 0

.=l

x!.

BLOCKING @ 400 mm (1 6") a

FRONTELEVATaON SlDEELE

Detail ED-2 ExterBor Coineetmon: Cantilevered PWeket 8erewed to RJgn aomst,

ausrd ParalNel to Floor Jomsts Notes:

Provideasuitablepost,return,orsolidsupportateachendoftheguard.
Wood for can!ilevered pickets shall be Douglas Fir-Larch, Spruce-Pine-Fir, or Hem-Fir Species.
Fasten rim joist to blocking wa(h 3 - 82 mm (3%") nails.
Dimensions shown are in rnm uriless otherwise specified.
Where 38 mm (2 nominal) thick boards ate used, the length of }he wood screws shall be not less than 76 mm (3). SB-7 Page24

:,(,:? (,‘f- (). %-

iaev

General Notes:

These plans were designed in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Building Code. All dimensions are to be checked on site, prior to construction.

“These plans form the basis for permit issuance and deviation from these plans and details; including the ventilation system, heating system, woodstoves, fire? decks, balconies and finished basements, will

All dimensions are structural.

require a revised drawing and clearance by the build

Drawings must not be scaled. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and minimum code requirements and shall report any

inspection department”. The mechanical and electrical layout is only schema items in plan cannot be placed exactly as shown, infi

discrepancy to the Designer before proceeding with any work. Plans are copyrighted - unlawful for use without company’s

Designer prior to installation. All mechanical, electrical and plumbing shall conforn O.B.C. and all applicable codes.

express and written permission.

“/ have veviewed ana take vesponsibility for the design activity related to this plan” Page 53 of 101

QLA

Ontario Lake Assessments

RR#3 Harrowsmith Ontario KOH IV0

& Environmental Education Services

Tel: (613) 376-3863 Fax: (613) 376-6128

RECEIVED May 23, 2019 Tnidy Gravel, Planner Township of South Frontenac 4432 George Street, p.o. Box 100 Sydenham, ON, KOH 2TO

MAY 2 3 2019 TOWNSHIP OF

SOUTH FRON-rFNAC

PLANNING DEPARTMENT

REGARDS: Preliminary EIA, Tony Kimmett MV Application MV-11-19-B; 966 Lee Road, Bedford District,

South Frontenac Township, Wolfe Lake / PSW - Proposed Addition to a Cottage and to Raise the Cottage to Install a Foundation to Create Storage Space

Dear Tmdy Gravel: A Preliminary EIA was conducted for the above site and reported in a letter dated Apri? 6, 2017 and addressed to J. Kapusta, Planning Assistant SFT. The proposal at that time was to raise the existing cottage to create storage space and accommodate utilities. The discussion in that letter under the heading Nahiral Heritage Concerns remains relevant for this application. The 2019 Proposal: The 2019 proposal is to raise (elevate) the existing cottage (24’ x 32’) in order to pour footings and install foundation walls to a height not to exceed l .83m (6 ft). The proposal also includes a l 6’ x 18 ’ addition on the north end that will also include the footings and foundation. The renovation will both level and stabilize the building while creating living space and needed storage space; the number of bedrooms will remain the same; the building at present sits on cement blocks.

The cottage has a deck across the front (on the east side facing Wolfe Lake (see photographs 1, 2 and 3 below). The foundation will not encompass the area under the deck. The deck may be replaced with a new deck. Included in the proposal is backfilling and grading around the foundation wall to bring the grade up to the natural grade evident on the north end of the building. An existing small out building is situated on the northwest side of the cottage. As part of the proposal, there are four h?ees to be removed (marked on the photographs with a red star), one is a maple very close to the gable end on the south side of the cottage and the other is an aspen close behind the building that is being removed as a dangerous and hazardous tree to injury and property damage. Two large trees will also be removed near to the north side where the proposed addition will occur. Natural Heritage Concerns: (See discussion in letter dated April 6, 2017) Potenttal for Impacts and Remedial Measures: There are no long-term environmental impacts expected as a result of this proposal. There is however the potential for disruption of the native soil mantle andfor offsite loss offill material by way of erosion into the lake during the construcaon due to the close proximi0i to the lake and wetland. Appropriate construction soil stabili0i measures must be implemented to prevent this from occurring during cotistruction and afterwards. Excavation materials …2

Page 54 of 101

-2-

removedfrom the foundation area that are surplus to the backfill requirements must be removedfrom the area to the borrow pit area near to the Lee Road entrance. There cannot be any filling of the nearshore area or any other low lying area using the excavated material.

Also the native shoreline buffer of trees adjacent too and in front of the cottage need to be protectedfrom damage by heavy equipment during the construction period. The trees should be flagged and a protective measure put in place so equipment operators avoid damaging these trees.

While not a condition of this Preliminary EIA, serious consideraaon should be given to relocating the dock to the east shoreline in front of the cottage at the site of the present east access location and then replanting the shoreline at the south water access point. It is important wetland habitat and should be left as natural as possible. While this addition will be a further intrusion into the 120 metre zone of influence distance from the PSW and further intrusion into the 30m buffer next to Wolfe Lake, the proposedfootprint of the addition is already culturally impacted and there are no identified habitats for species at risk in the building envelope. The proposal does not include the needforfilling, excavaang, draining or changing the wetland in any manner and therefore the wetland feature and functions will not be compromised. There are no environmental constraints to completing this project. In my opinion, there will not be a need to undertake a full EIA with respect to this proposaL If you have any questions in the above regard, please contact me. Respi

70urS,

7 ,eB aId Genge B.Sc. Ontario Lake Assessments

3654 Stage Coach Road RR#3

HARROWSMITH, Ontario KOH IVO

rgenge(ixplornet.ca 613-376-3863

Copy to: Tony Kimmett RR #4

Napanee, ON K7R 3K9

(Two pages of photographs #l through #3 attached)

Page 55 of 101

Page 56 of 101

N ’l’

] N

affi’!

‘4

?J ?’ ?

‘?

-,N %

&’

l r!

kb? V

ffl

;W’;

? ‘Jf-

h r

‘j

‘M b".

:l d!

! (%

1 l: MI4i

l1ff

‘j

‘1

J IP.

4% Qi

.’l

/ 11’

‘K

? ;42? .’ r’

v r

lllj

l ?l 7

-;i4* fj.l

}

’l

–%

J jA &

Photograph 3-Deck on east side of cottage - Maple tree at South Gable to be removed -

Page 57 of 101

ge id

Lee Ln

er on St Ln

pL n

d Lee R

nt Ln

Tr Ln Eagle

Be lkn a

Wolfe Lake

oi Fox P

Wolfe Lake

d Lee R Stoneridge Ln

KIMMETT MV-11-19-B 966 LEE RD

Wolfe Lake

Legend

Judy Pond

Kimmett Property Provincially Significant Wetlands Waterbody

Wolfe Lake

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2015.

Page 58 of 101

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

Scale 1:5,500 0 15 30

120

Meters

UTM Projection NAD 83

Environmental Health Department 1130 Elizabeth Street Sharbot Lake, Ontario KOH2P0

KFA

Public Health

(613)279-2151

pai(;8((e);(i:2.2) http://www.kf|apub|ichealth.ca 6277:37:97

REQUESTSFOR COMMENTS

To;

Application Number:

Ms. Michelle Hannah Secretary-Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON KOH 2T0 MV»11—19B

Type of Application or Proposal:

Minor Variance

Applicant Name(s):

Kimmett, Tony & Michele

L°°at’°"‘

Plann’n I g De P art me nt or Agency:

Comments:

Lot 23/24, Concession 10, Bedford 966 Lee Road

Township ofsouth

Frontenac (Bedford)

KFL&APublic has no to the variance as the owner has submitted an application under permit number BE—5—19.

Health objections minor ’

Inspector:

< ukv/Vloanne, CPH|(C), Public Hea

Date:

September 03, 2019

spector

PLEASEFORWARD A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DECISIONTO KFL&APUBLICHEALTH. Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Building Code Act, and will be used for the administration of Public Health programs. Any questions about the collection of this information should be directed to the Manager of Environmental Health, KFL&APublic Health, 221 Portsmouth Avenue, Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5, (613) 549-1232 ext. 1243 or 1—800~~267~~7875.

Page 59 of 101

July 11, 2019 19-SFR-MVA-0020 (BEDFORD)

Township of South Frontenac Committee of Adjustment P.O. Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON K0H 2T0 Attention:

Michelle Hannah

KIMMETT, Tony & Michele; Application MV-11-19-B – 966 Lee Road, Part Lot 23, Concession 10; Former Township of Bedford, Now the Township of South Frontenac; Roll Number: 1029010101921000000 ——————————————————————————————————————————Subject:

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

Section 2.1 Natural Heritage, 2.2 Water and 3.1 Natural Hazards of the Provincial Policy Statement under Section 3 of the Planning Act; The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (“Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses” regulation 174/06 under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act); The Rideau Lakes – Wolfe Lake Catchment Report; The Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Plan; The Rideau Lakes Study

The Proposal The RVCA understands this proposal to be an application for a minor variance to seek relief from Sections 5.10.2 (existing buildings within 30 metres of a waterbody), 8.3.3 (Waterfront Residential Zone Regulations) and 8.5 (Special RW – Waterfront Residential Zones) of the Township’s Zoning By-law in order to permit reconstruction/raising of an existing cottage with a 27.5 m2 kitchen addition.

Page 60 of 101

Importantly, no structures are proposed to be reconstructed closer to the water than currently exists. The Property The subject property is indicated as being approximately 24.28 hectares in area with road frontage of 274 metres and with a water frontage of 365 metres on Wolfe Lake. It has an average depth of 35.6 metres. A review of our records indicated the presence of provincially significant and unevaluated wetlands and organic soils. Steep slopes were observed on a portion of the site, but not in the vicinity of the proposed reconstruction and addition. Review Comments Provincial Policy Statement Our office does not have any concerns in respect of Section 2.1, natural heritage, associated with this development. Our office reviewed the submitted EIA in support of this application and observed that its author concluded there were no negative impacts to the adjacent wetland so long as certain mitigation was followed. Staff ecologists at RVCA agree with this impact. We do have recommendations based on this EIA. Regarding Section 2.2, water, our office is of the opinion that standard best management practices can serve to ensure maintenance and possibly improvement to water quality. Recommendations regarding how to make this possible are included below. In summary, so long as the recommendations are included as conditions, our office is satisfied that section 2.2 of the PPS is respected by this development. Based on our desktop review, organic soils have been identified within the vicinity of the proposed addition and related works. Organic soils are identified as a natural hazard within the meaning of Section 3.0 of the PPS. During the site visit, the proposed location of development was observed to be sandy and rocky, with no immediate evidence of organic soils. Our office would recommend that a soils bearing capacity report, to the satisfaction of the CBO, be included as a condition. With this condition, our office is satisfied that Section 3.0 of the PPS is addressed. Ontario Regulation 174/06 The applicants should be aware that the majority of the subject property is is regulated, either as a provincially significant wetland, adjacent lands or watercourse under Ontario Regulation 174/06. As such, and in the context of the proposed construction, prior written permission from our office is required in accordance with our regulation (Development, Interference with Wetlands, Alterations to Shoreline and Watercourses) made under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Also, the current proposed addition requires a regulatory permit from our office before construction can commence.

Page 2 of 4

Page 61 of 101

Rideau Lakes – Wolfe Lake Catchment Report The water quality report for Wolfe Lake is “fair” according to the Catchment Report. Nutrient concentrations are generally low-moderate according to the Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) with few exceedances. Efforts such as the diversion of runoff and enhanced shoreline buffers are important to continue to protect and enhance water quality and reduce future nutrient increases. This is particularly important for roadways and dwellings that border the lake. Residents can help minimize their impact on the lake by reducing nutrient inputs through practices such as proper septic maintenance, keeping shorelines natural and using phosphate free soaps and detergents. Wolfe Lake is characterized by warm water fish species. Opportunities for action within Wolfe Lake are indicated as being: • • •

Reduce pollutant loadings to Wolfe Lake through application of shoreline and stormwater best management practices, including consideration of low impact development methods. Proper septic system maintenance, Maximizing setbacks from the normal highwater mark as indicated in the Rideau Lakes Study.

Source Water Protection The subject property is identified as overlying a highly vulnerable aquifer. These are aquifers that are vulnerable to surface contaminants due to thin or absent soils overlying bedrock that may be fractured. Where these conditions exist, it may be possible for contaminants to enter drinking ground water supplies. For this reason, care should be taken to avoid land uses and practices that may inadvertently lead to undesirable effects on groundwater. Discussion and Recommendations Should the Township allow the variance, the RVCA would have the following recommendations for conditions of any implementing agreement or as conditions of the variance in the absence of an agreement:

Surface and roof water runoff management shall be implemented by directing runoff from eaves trough placement and outlets to natural or constructed leaching pits/areas allow for maximum infiltration of roof runoff as much as possible away from the services, lake and wetland area.

Remedial measures as summarized on page 2 of the EIA are enacted. In particular, backfill is to be strictly limited to volumes which will accommodate foundation drainage only. A lot grading and drainage plan shall be provided to demonstrate no/minimal grade alterations and that runoff will be accommodated on site. No grade changes will be supported within 10 metres of the water or closer to the wetland boundaries associated with the outlet to the south. We agree that the removal of spoils/excess fill to the borrow pit at the extreme rear of the lot and at least 30 metres from the wetland area.

Sediment controls shall be shown on the lot grading and drainage plan (sediment fencing and/or mulch/straw bales shall be set in place around the construction site, upland of the lake and wetland area prior to commencement of work and will remain in place until site is stable and revegetated. Page 3 of 4

Page 62 of 101

Maintenance and addition to the waterfront vegetative buffer as may be possible (we have forwarded our Rural Clean Water Program and Shoreline Naturalization brochures to the owner for additional site plantings). We encourage the owners to augment plantings to a minimum of at least ten metres from the water/wetland areas on the water front as a protection from drift of nutrient and sediment to the lake and to guard against nearshore aquatic weed growth over the long term.

RVCA agrees that the second water access would best be retired, to be shown on the plan. This will help to restrict indiscriminate pedestrian traffic along the water and reduce the likelihood of further deterioration of the shore, result in less compaction on the waterfront and over the long term, less nutrient and sediment drift to the lake/wetland.

That a soils bearing capacity report shall be forwarded to the RVCA, when available, demonstrating that 75 kPa has been met or exceeded on-site.

The following statement should be included in any agreement, should one be required as a result of this development: “Should any work be undertaken along the shoreline of Bobs Lake permits would be required by the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 (“Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses”).”

Conclusions In conclusion, The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority has no objection to the subject application and it is the opinion of the reviewing planner that the requested variance is minor. The RVCA would like its comments and recommendations noted on any decision from the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (613) 267-5353 x 131 should you have any questions. Please advise us on the Committee’s decision respecting this application or any changes in the status of the application. Yours truly,

Phil Mosher Planner Cc – Mr. Kimmett, owner Cc – Joanne McGurn, KFLPHA

Page 4 of 4

Page 63 of 101

in .. :

..n

Page 64 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MINOR VARIANCE – PLANNING REPORT Report Date:

September 6, 2019

Application No: Owner: Location of Property:

MV-28-19-B Bruce Wagar & Pam Sinclair Part Lot 1, Concession 4, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 42B Windy Bay Lane, Desert Lake Purpose of Application: To vary Section 5.8.2 a and Section 10.3.1 of the Township of South Frontenac Zoning Bylaw to reduce the waterbody setback from 30 metres (98.4 ft) to 12.2 metres (40 ft) from the highwater mark to permit a 300 ft2 sleep cabin behind the existing cottage Date of Hearing: September 12, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from members of the public and that the Committee of Adjustment approve minor variance application MV-28-19-B.

Proposal

An application for minor variance has been submitted to permit the construction of a 300 ft2 sleep cabin located between the existing cottage and the rear lot line at Part Lot 1, Concession 4, District of Bedford, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 42B Desert Lake (see attached map). The property has water frontage on Desert Lake and is accessed by Windy Bay Lane, a private lane which is accessed from Abrams Lane from Canoe Lake Road. The property is an existing developed undersized lot that contains an existing one-storey cottage at the eastern shore of Desert Lake. Desert Lake is identified as a moderately sensitive Lake Trout Lake. The applicant is proposing to construct a sleep cabin. The approximate dimensions will be 7.6 m (25 ft) by 3.7 m (12 ft) totalling no more than 300 ft2 to be located between the existing cottage and the rear lot line and will be set back 12.2 metres (40 ft) from the high watermark of Desert Lake. The location of the proposed sleep cabin is an elevated area. The lands to the rear of the sleep cabin contain a treed rocky hill area. An existing holding tank is located to the southeast of the existing cottage and an existing shed is located east of the existing cottage closer to the entrance into the property. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2.a and Section 10.3.1 of the Zoning Bylaw which both require a 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of Desert Lake. The proposed sleep cabin will be 12.2 metres to the closest point of the highwater mark. Minor variance is required to permit the construction of a 300 ft2 sleep cabin to the rear of the existing one-storey cottage:

Section 5.8.2 a.: The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres. Requested variance from this section: a. Proposed 300 ft2 sleep cabin: 40 feet (12.2 metres) from the high water mark of Desert Lake (variance request of 17.8 metres)
Section 10.3.1: The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres for properties zoned RLSW. Requested variance from this section: a. Proposed 300 ft2 sleep cabin: 40 feet (12.2 metres) from the high water mark of Desert Lake (variance request of 17.8 metres) Under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act there are four tests a minor variance must meet. A variance may be authorized from the provisions of the zoning by-law, if, in the opinion of the Committee of Adjustment, the request meets all of the following tests: • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? • Is the application desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question? • Is the application minor? Page 65 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Background The subject property is a waterfront lot with 112 feet (34 m) of waterfrontage along Desert Lake and is approximately 0.33 acres (0.13 ha) in area. The property has a low bank along the lake where the existing cottage is located, rises up to a small plateau area where the proposed sleep cabin will be located and rises steeply towards Windy Bay Lane to the east. As the property has topography challenges and is an existing undersized lot, the location for the proposed sleep cabin is the most appropriate area for the new structure. The proposed sleep cabin, will be constructed in the approximate dimensions of 7.6m (25 ft) by 3.7 m (12 ft) and will be 3.7m (12 ft) in height and shall be no greater in area than 300 ft2. The applicant has indicated that the sleep cabin will include a 3 piece washroom to be connected to the existing holding tank but not a kitchen (a kitchen is not permitted in a sleeping cabin as indicated in the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2003-75). The property has a number of existing trees located on site and a rock outcropping near the driveway. The surrounding area contains existing seasonal dwellings located along the eastern shore of Desert Lake.

Planning Analysis Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 The 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides direction on matters of Provincial interest related to land use planning and development. In respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decisions affecting planning matters “shall be consistent with” policy statements issued under the Act. When assessing development on rural lands, planning authorities must comply with Section 1.1.5.1 of the PPS; this section requires application of relevant policy of Section 1: Building Healthy Communities, Section 2: Wise Use and Management of Recourses, and Section 3: Protecting Public Health and Safety by the approval authority. Section 1: Building Healthy Communities of the PPS promotes the building of strong, healthy communities and includes policies about avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns. Section 1.1.5.2 of the PPS permits limited residential development on rural lands including resource-based recreational uses and Section 1.1.5.4 promotes development that is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels. Section 2: Wise Use and Management of Resources of the PPS contains policies that encourage the protection of natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral and cultural heritage and archaeological resources for their economic, environmental and social benefits. While Desert Lake is identified as a moderately at capacity like in the South Frontenac Official Plan, based on consultation with staff from the Carataqui Region Conservation Authority an Environmental Impact Study/Lake Impact Study was not required for the proposed development as the proposed sleep cabin will be further from the shoreline than the existing cottage and is located outside the regulatory flood plain and outside the defined erosion hazard limit as reviewed by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. Section 3: Protecting Public Health and Safety of the PPS contains policies that speak to directing development outside of hazardous lands. Conservation Authorities have Provincially been delegated responsibilities to represent Provincial interests regarding natural hazards under section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (2014). 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. The CRCA have indicated that they do not have floodplain mapping for Desert Lake. The maximum recorded water level for Desert Lake is 136.31 metres geodetic. For Desert Lake, the maximum recorded water level is used in lieu of an engineered flood plain. The CRCA’s guidelines for implementing Ontario Regulation 148/06 requires that all development be set back a minimum of 6 metres from the regulatory floodplain of a waterbody. Based on elevation mapping data, the proposed development will be located outside the setback from a regulatory flood plain and CRCA staff have no concerns with the proposal from a flooding hazard perspective. Page 66 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Current Township of South Frontenac Official Plan, 2003 Designation: Rural The property is designated as Rural in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (2003). Official Plan policies regarding the Rural designation speak to the importance of maintaining rural character, natural heritage and cultural landscape in the Township. Section 5.7.7 (“Limited Service Residential Policies”) include residential development as a permitted use. Lots are to be developed with private water and sanitary sewage disposal. An approved holding tank was installed in 2012. Given the existing size and dimensions of the lot, the location of the proposed sleep cabin will achieve a greater setback to the highwater mark of Desert Lake than the existing cottage. Desert Lake is identified as a moderately sensitive lake trout lake in the Township. An Environmental Impact Assessment/Lake Impact Assessment was not required given the location of the proposed sleep cabin. The CRCA have determined the assessment is not necessary to support this application. Section 5.2.7 (b)(ii)(3) of the Official Plan indicates that a reduction from the 30 metre setback may be permitted for existing dwellings if 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. New development within the 30 metre water setback will be considered if there is no reasonable alternative for locating the development outside of the highwater mark setback, the development is not closer to the water than the existing development and is set back as far as possible from the water, given the existing topography of the property, and complies with the maximum lot coverage. Section 5.2.8 of the Official Plan requires that development adjacent to a moderately sensitive lake trout lake may require the proponent to undertake a Lake Impact Assessment. Township staff have consulted with staff at the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority and it was determined that a Lake Impact Assessment is not necessary to support this application. Current Zoning in Township of South Frontenac Zoning By-Law, 2003-75: Limited Service Waterfront Residential (RLSW) Zone The property is zoned Limited Service Waterfront Residential (RLSW) in the Township of South Frontenac Zoning Bylaw. The intent of the RLSW zone is to permit waterfront development with uses restricted to residential and ancillary uses which are accessible on a private lane. The lot is an existing undersized lot as per Section 5.12 of the Zoning By-law. A suitable building location has been identified for the location of the sleep cabin that is outside a hazard area. A 30 metre setback from the high water mark is required for the construction of all dwellings and structures. When completing the site visit, planning staff noted that as the site is constrained, increasing the setback from the highwater mark could not be achieved given the topography and size of the lot. The proposed sleep cabin does not encroach closer to the water than the existing development, is in a reasonable location to site constraints and complies with the maximum lot coverage and all other zoning provisions in the Zoning By-law for the RLSW Zone.

Agency Analysis and Comments KFL&A Public Health – Comments dated September 4, 2019 indicated that KFL&A Public Health has no objections to the proposed minor variance as the owner has submitted an application under permit BE-17-19 as the sleeping cabin will be connected to the existing holding tank. Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority – Comments dated September 5, 2019 from the CRCA indicate that staff have no objection to the approval of application MV-28-19-B based on their consideration for natural hazards, natural heritage, and water quality and quantity protections policies. A permit will be required to be obtained from the CRCA under Ontario Regulation 148/06 prior to development taking place. Staff recommend that roof runoff from the sleep cabin be directed away from the lake (which will be included as a condition in the Development Agreement). Public Comments – As of the date of preparing the report, no comments have been received from the public.

Page 67 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Conclusion The proposed application to permit the addition to the existing dwelling at Part Lot 1, Concession 4 municipally known as 42B Windy Bay Lane, Desert Lake, District of Bedford, meets the four tests for a minor variance:

• The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the proposed sleep cabin to be constructed at the rural waterfront property will maintain the setback of the existing cottage. The constraints on the lot prevent the sleeping cabin from achieving a greater setback. A Lake Impact Assessment was not required to be submitted in support of this development. • The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw as the existing waterbody setback of the existing cottage will be maintained and the sleep cabin will be set back to the rear of the existing cottage. Achieving the 30 metre setback would not be possible as the existing structure is within the 30 metre setback to the highwater mark. The proposed sleep cabin does not encroach closer to the high watermark than the existing development, is in a reasonable location due to site constraints and complies with the maximum lot coverage provisions in the Zoning By-law for the RLSW Zone. • The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question as the addition of the sleep cabin will increase the functionality of the property given the size of the existing cottage while maintaining the existing waterbody setback and character of the lot. The sleep cabin will not be visible from Desert Lake or from Windy Bay Lane. • The variance is minor because the proposal seeks to maintain the waterbody setback with the addition of the sleep cabin, while not impacting the character of the waterfront. The application does not encroach closer to the water than the existing development, is in a reasonable location due to site constraints and the development on the lot complies with the maximum lot coverage provisions in the Zoning By-law.

Recommended Conditions Conditions are a decision of the Committee of Adjustment, the conditions below are recommended. The final approved conditions will be included in the signed decision

Minor variance is for the construction of a sleep cabin to the rear of the existing cottage consisting of a total gross floor area of no greater than 300 ft2 (27.9 metres2) in the approximate dimensions of 3.7 metres (12 ft) by 7.6 metres (25 ft) and 3.7 metres (12 ft) in height consistent with the drawing submitted with MV-28-19-B. The proposed sleep cabin will be 40 feet (12.2 metres) to the closest point of the highwater mark in the Limited Service Waterfront Residential Zone.
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 the matters outlined in the September 5, 2019 letter from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority and requirements of the Township. A condition of the agreement shall incorporate the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority recommendation 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 and the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.
The Owner is required to obtain a permit prior to development commencing from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority under Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, which is administered by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.
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.

Page 68 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Minor variance MV-28-19-B is applicable only to South Frontenac Township Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws.

Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Date of Site Visit: June 6, 2019 Attachments: Map of the Wagar/Sinclair property

Page 69 of 101

Page 70 of 101

c» or

__o£

vcm

om:

Emz

omm2

ao m wmoo.m

oa ms

\s,.?as;» .©

®£._.

9:.

kw?§§_._,

mg…

hoe

E9n_

Eo: mch

Page 71 of 101

ommu

Page 72 of 101

Page 73 of 101

m <%m3.

Emma

Page 74 of 101

Page 75 of 101

nLce+ 2‘;

Page 76 of 101

Page 77 of 101

NORTH

‘Don’

15 W IN

‘Z

nwnc

HW N1

,1.

LB Ale

7 en

’2M

3"7A

back,

S1‘!

((3

STING co-r1-75Gc_.

PR°Po561s $L.Gs’.~’p Cgallv

H|LL

TREE.) 1zoc<“l

Houmuc

5'1<-o

Manna

LAME

{ pm“;

Av 39?

Bkucos WAG!-M;

)°°

30.48 M

BA Y

LA N

Desert Lake

AM S AB R

K LA OE

E LA N

WAGAR & SINCLAIR MV-28-19-B

42B WINDY BAY LANE

Inset Map

Legend

Desert Lake

Wagar & Sinclair Property Parcel Fabric Wetland Provincially Significant Wetlands Waterbody Roads

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2015.

Page 78 of 101

IN W

Y BA

NE LA

Scale 1:700 0 2.5 5

Meters

UTM Projection NAD 83

Environmental Health Department 1130 Elizabeth Street Sharbot Lake, Ontario KOH2P0 (513) 279-2151

KF.

Public Health

Fa1X’f(‘;‘1"32) http://www.kf|apub|ichealth.ca 5277’;?37;97

REQUESTSFOR COMMENTS

To;

Ms. Michelle Hannah Secretary—Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment Township of South Frontenac P.O. Box 100 4432 George Street Sydenham, ON KOH 2T0

Application Number:

MV—28—19B

Type of Application or Proposal:

Minor Variance

Applicant Name(s):

Wagar, Bruce and Sinclair, Pam Lot 1, Concession 4, Bedford 423 Windy Bay Lane

I’°°at’°”:

PIannmg Depa rt men t '

or Agency:

Townshipofsouth

Frontenac(Bedford)

KFL&APublic Health has no objection to the proposed minor variance as the owners have submitted an application under permit BE—17-19.

Comments:

’

Inspecton

Date:

«.1

/7/2‘ / ra/2,/bi/i-lI£Pub|ic I35" .

Hea

nspector

September 04, 2019

PLEASEFORWARD A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DECISION T0 KFL&APUBLICHEALTH. Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Building Code Act, and will be used for the administration of PublicHealth programs. Any questions about the collection of this information should be directed to the Manager of Environmental Health, KFL&APublic Health, 221 Portsmouth Avenue, Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5, (613) 549-1232 ext. 1243 or 1-800-267-7875.

Page 79 of 101

Page 80 of 101

Ms. Gravel (MV-28-19-B) September 5, 2019

TknlLhh’_n£‘E:lJ.Ei;hEu’w?u-1n11nIh1ikluLE$ndILm’H[¢.$II3h1£?Ir1 The main interest of the CRCA in this proposal are the avoidance of natural hazards (e. g. ?ooding and erosion) associated with the shoreline of Desert Lake and the protection of the water quality of the lake.

Natural Hazards Flooding: The CRCA does not have ?oodplain mapping for Desert Lake. The maximum recorded water level for Desert Lake is 136.31 metres geodetic. For Desert Lake, the maximum recorded water CRCA’s Guidelines for Implementing Ontario level is used in lieu of an engineered ?ood plain. The I.|.‘I.‘rJ:I1’.I:|2|.:I:|:I|:?::’.1’::|LI-:|I:I|’.|:I.::I. |t:||:lIiL.1’I|.r.:IhlJ.::IIEI.I:L:I:IIL’lII?1:E?’|al2I|ll’|Il 6 I-t’rj|I’::|.u’:I’i?.IJJ-:|ur|I:|u:|:?.bulnE’!II:I.l:n’.:i.:I:n LE6 Regulation 148/06 (see description below) requires that all development be set back a minimum of II….I’.:h’I1’.II-I.I’l2Il-[1-:Iu;’|;n::| H.jn;?Hu|.‘I’?|.::I:I.qI?.|:EtI.‘iI|:’:I|:I.& upon elevation mapping data, the proposed metres from the regulatory ?oodplain of a waterbody. Based rr.uIi.1rI1?lrIlI.l.n:I’|.“f.rr|:|iIIul’L:|rII.’:|.l:’:a.tg.’. ?ood plain. Therefore, staff have regulatory the from setback the of located outside development will be .jp.?pp?u1H?t¢h?+pj¢a,?5jj:f1u|.?ld:Mnjuni.IJlnjf|h:£’?.u.. -i|’-. |‘lr.’.’|’.I|I |’.u.I.III II|l’-I:I’||.II. -u the proposal from I.a ?ooding hazard perspective. concerns with rl—n-I.’.|.|I_l|.’|.|I-I no .n-.-.-D$u1.’|?lL1EA:E&:IE:uhdn[juh?.I]:uim3:m’hb‘nIIL?rH?d-‘IrH’FH1¢ The CRCA de?nes the extent of potential erosion hazards to include an allowance for toe Erosion: II’dm.1hIIHIh?ihrmnafJ|u’u’tJ|:|¢|a'3jJ|h’E|hudi:I.]+1umiaLmmI erosion, a stable slope allowance of 3 (vertical):1 (horizontal) for till shorelines, plus an erosion access .|I’l:|II.II.I’.n.Iu1r?.‘I’|.?’-. allowance of 6 metres. Staff note that the proposed development will be located outside of the de?ned 1h?:authdd’Ip’q::IddlrI.:;:n?wdJEnl:-?u!-n:ti?:af’E-¢?.::Il erosion hazard limit. Therefore, 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 j-..|.--..j–—. .||.:::Itr.?5’.E:|l.‘Eu:H.|’|.:II:|E.:I:I’.q the Of?cial Plan and Zoning improve or restore the quality and quantity of water. Accordingly, protect, Fu.I:I.|r|F:|I.I:II’—u’lItIlq1.Ih1’:.’.l’:|q.nl’n1’|InfII’m’. for the Township of South Frontenac provide guidance with respect to how development should By-law Eyu1?qt.!Tql?H;qP5:q¢.Hmw£Fn’Hlp.:h’nIH1rqldhhatdlr1q=:d.:£n£d consideration of protecting, improving and restoring water quality within the municipality. in occur m::i:u.nH:u5u.un£ngnw?LgE:pm~:au£-nn4dq.IuIq-Hhyt??-turminp?h contains provisions that seek to support these ?.:|.i.h:-|5.IJ:|:|l’.‘FI.II’A'1F”.|::|:|:::F’-.|&-:.|‘u:|-J the CRCA’s Planning Policy (April 2015) Similarly, H1!’||!-:rEh’.li:|!-:|I’I:I-I:-Illt?-I-I-lllll:-I.|:!¢l1l|‘Hll Z I-CIZr —jj

-.__

1–

objectives. ?;pJ_ununt?rhI.F1Il’:[Jh1ld=u:dunh[Hyz¢u1L.iITruu:hJ;.n?-::LEas noted above, Desert Lake is identi?ed as a highly sensitive Lake Trout lake, and as such, the Also, is afforded additional protection to ensure development does not negatively impact the water waterbody q?.n??’:fi.?;.??y??{r?pmlq5um-lnb.i'5I’utHnnmn.‘uu?11:n?:n’:h’ HI:-.’|.iI:|:|5.2.8(b)(i) the Of?cial Plan suggests the municipality may require the of quality of the lake. Section !.E.=!I:’!|’|I|[I H"|IrlI|J’DiIIJF1IllF|.|Il|Il|‘iWlfI=|JIl3Tr?-l1fl|’ll|1’E|l to undertake a Lake Impact Assessment to determine if the lake can accommodate the q?h|?h:&hhILinhq’n.1.l—&u?1Ji?H?HI?“Il’H:¢I:?IF#II?TI5-l?ll applicant |:I’:|::&:hI.’:I:|I|:I.l|i development. proposed '

Staff note that development within the water setback may be considered when there are no reasonable for locating the development outside of the water setback area, the development is no closer alternatives ??[?j’a??¢?qn[i?q.jnH;p1.mu1.:??rE?lIII’.tl¢uq?lmI.‘dam.dIm-$1 than existing buildings or structures on the property the development complies with the the water I1nuaiui’h.?-iiundmanru?-dirlual-zr?li-IiaIH=m11’?lI|‘h?I to I:-Ih-1-nun lot coverage provisions of the Zoning By-law, and suitable methods to minimize negative LIE!-‘EI.i.|.E|]:IiI.IlI1l.H.H|‘IlIlI|I:-1IIlJTliZiJIlHllf’|‘H maximum development proposal is located :::|:I:tI::|l’:l::-:|’:Iht:r:|’|!hdn.’|In’EitnlhI-E|:’-.’d.i. T’.‘I:IJI:’|I:i.I.I|:I:::?lI|’|2I|!-:IIII:.iJ’|I2Ii|I-IIII-*~ on water quality are incorporated into the development. The impacts closer to the water than existing development and it is in a reasonable location since there is limited no mda—‘h1II?n’?nlq.lmi;tI.I?.J|lpntHhmL:I1—3hb£.m:qIr!n’uh|.id;nd T’h: opportunity to locate development outside of the water setback due to topographic constraints. The ¢.?|y1phgf11hnn.dl’.ii11T.:lr=ndlH1ut?&l:t?n1nl.u|q’q:h:%h. coverage ‘:|’:I_|‘iI’il-l”i“l’|:-51”-’l’ than ‘I-1’? tI- the III Zoning By-law (less -:-an-|:-I.i-I-i with the maximumlot I=I’I-iiprovisions also complies development Ibo -1-a-.~H-a-|:-H-II |‘I’I’r-‘II–I in ||IHhIH:|.?.llrIlm’I:hIpI.::I1lIjl::I.?l1E?H"|IrhJJ-F'5’I’ Therefore, in the opinion of total), and the development is permitted under the RLSW zoning. =‘III|“l.|: 7|’|Il’?‘I|‘l-.|’|5lH’l|=|I|FIl|’|’ 10% recommend that instance. |IF?’-I’||I|‘I:|IlIII||IlITFHI|’ staff, a Lake Impact Assessment is not necessary in this £I.’I:EI:?f..’|.j.iJZ1—Ij:|’-:?£I?|. If approved, sta?’ fromthe sleep cabin be directed away fromthe lake. roofruno?’ ‘

1’

Page 2 of 3

Page 81 of 101

Page 82 of 101

Page 83 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MINOR VARIANCE – PLANNING REPORT Report Date:

September 6, 2019

Application No: Owner: Location of Property:

MV-29-19-P Dana Hollinsworth & Maureen Murphy Part Lot 7, Concession 13, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 1101 Lloyd Lane South, Howes Lake Purpose of Application: To vary Section 5.8.2 a and Section 10.3.1 of the Township of South Frontenac Zoning Bylaw to reduce the waterbody setback from 30 metres (98.4 ft) to 19 metres (62.3 ft) from the highwater mark and an increase to the maximum permitted lot coverage from 5 percent to 5.5 percent to permit a 1008 ft2 single detached residential dwelling Date of Hearing: September 12, 2019

Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment receive comments from members of the public and that the Committee of Adjustment approve minor variance application MV-29-19-P.

Proposal

An application for minor variance has been submitted to permit the construction of a 1008 ft2 single detached dwelling unit at Part Lot 7, Concession 13, District of Portland, Township of South Frontenac, municipally known as 1101 Lloyd Lane South, Howes Lake (see attached map). The property is located on the east side of Lloyd Lane South and has water frontage on Howes Lake. The property is accessed by Lloyd Lane South, a private lane which is accessed from Mustard Road to the north and from Craig Road to the west. The property contains an existing licenced trailer near the waterfront, which is not visible from the lane and a shed closer to the driveway. The applicant has indicated that the trailer will be removed from the property should this minor variance be approved. The applicant is proposing to construct a single storey 1008 ft2 single detached dwelling, in the dimensions of 7.3 m (24 ft) by 12.8 m (42 ft) and will be set back 19 metres (62.3 ft) from the high watermark of Howes Lake. A septic system was previously installed on the property closer to Lloyd Lane South and an existing well is located east of the septic system closer to the waterfront. The property is terraced with a series of timber retaining walls and a dock is located at the waterfront. The single detached dwelling will be located on a level elevated grassed area of the lot. Howes Lake is not identified as being either a highly or moderately sensitive lake trout lake. The applicant is seeking relief from Section 5.8.2.a and Section 10.3.1 of the Zoning Bylaw which both require a 30 metre setback from the highwater mark of Howes Lake and to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 5 percent to 5.5 percent. The proposed single detached dwelling will be 62.3 feet (19 metres) to the closest point of the highwater mark. Minor variance is required to permit the construction of a 1008 ft2 one-storey single detached dwelling:

Section 5.8.2 a.: The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres. Requested variance from this section: a. Proposed 1008 ft2 one-storey single detached dwelling: 62.3 feet (19 metres) from the highwater mark of Howes Lake (variance request of 11 metres)
Section 10.3.1: The minimum required setback from the highwater mark or floodline of a waterbody shall be 30 metres for properties zoned RLSW. Requested variance from this section: a. Proposed 1008 ft2 one-storey single detached dwelling: 62.3 feet (19 metres) from the highwater mark of Howes Lake (variance request of 11 metres)
Section 10.3.1: The maximum permitted lot coverage shall be 5 percent for properties zoned RLSW. Requested variance from this section: Page 84 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT a. Proposed lot coverage for the 1008 ft2 one-storey single detached dwelling: increase from 5 percent to 5.5 percent Under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act there are four tests a minor variance must meet. A variance may be authorized from the provisions of the zoning by-law, if, in the opinion of the Committee of Adjustment, the request meets all of the following tests: • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? • Does the application conform to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? • Is the application desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question? • Is the application minor?

Background The subject property is a waterfront lot with 131 feet (40 metres) of waterfrontage along Howes Lake and is an existing undersized lot consisting of approximately 0.41 acres (0.168 ha) in area. As the property has topography changes and is an undersized lot, the location for the proposed single detached dwelling unit is the most appropriate area for the new structure. Quinte Conservation staff have already issued Permit No. REG131-2019 for construction of the cottage and to remove the timber retaining wall and regrade the shoreline bank. The property was subject to a previous minor variance application MV-15-06-P in 2006 and received approval for a reduction to the setback to the highwater mark. The applicants purchased the property in October 2017 and have determined that the approval at that time could not accommodate for the proposed 1008 ft2 residential dwelling given the location of the existing septic system and well on the property and the existing lot configuration. The property has a number of existing trees located surrounding the site and a sandy shoreline with dock. The surrounding area contains existing seasonal and year round dwellings located along the shoreline of Howes Lake in proximity to this site.

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT erosion, dynamic beaches and unstable bedrock. Generally the policies of the PPS direct development to areas outside of hazard lands. Staff at Quinte Conservation are satisfied that the application as presented is consistent with Section 3.1 of the PPS as there is sufficient area for development outside of any natural or flood-related hazard. Current Official Plan Designation: Rural The property is designated as Rural in the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan (2003). Official Plan policies regarding the Rural designation speak to the importance of maintaining rural character, natural heritage and cultural landscape in the Township. Section 5.7.7 (“Limited Service Residential Policies”) include residential development as a permitted use. Lots are to be developed with private water and sanitary sewage disposal. An approved septic system was previously installed to accommodate for the new dwelling unit. A performance review was undertaken by the KFL&A Public Health Unit in review of this application. Section 5.2.7 (b)(ii)(2) of the Official Plan indicates on vacant lots existing on the day of adoption of this Plan, a minimum 30 metre (98.4 ft.) setback from the high watermark for all proposed structures shall be required. Consideration may be given to very slight reductions to the minimum 30 metre (98.4 ft.) setback requirement but only if it is not physically possible to meet the setback anywhere on the parcel. Where it is not physically possible to meet the setback, then the structure shall be constructed as far back as possible from the highwater mark. Current Zoning: Limited Service Waterfront Residential (RLSW) Zone The property is zoned Limited Service Waterfront Residential (RLSW) in the Township of South Frontenac Zoning Bylaw. The intent of the RLSW zone is to permit waterfront development with uses restricted to residential and ancillary uses which are accessible on a private lane. A 30 metre setback from the high water mark is required for the construction of all dwellings and structures. When completing the site visit, planning staff noted that as the site is constrained, increasing the setback from the highwater mark could not be achieved given the topography, size of the lot and the locations of the existing well and septic system. The location of the proposed dwelling unit will be located in a reasonable location due to site constraints. With the exception of the setback to the highwater mark and lot coverage, the proposed dwelling complies with the zoning provisions in the Zoning By-law for the RLSW Zone.

Agency Analysis and Comments KFL&A Public Health – Comments dated August 26, 2019 indicated that KFL&A Public Health has no objections to the minor variance application. A performance review has been performed and the existing septic tank was recently replaced to accommodate the proposed dwelling (PO-23-19). Quinte Conservation – Comments dated September 5, 2019 from Quinte note they have no objection to the application as presented. The owners will need to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to development (construction/filling/excavation/site grading) within 30 metres of the 1:100 year floodplain of Howes Lake. The property lies outside of an intake protection zone or wellhead protection area for a municipal drinking water system. A Section 59 Clearance Notice is not required. Public Comments – As of the date of preparing the report, no comments have been received from the public.

Conclusion

The proposed application to permit the development of the one-storey 1008 ft2 dwelling at Part Lot 7, Concession 13 municipally known as 1101 Lloyd Lane South, Howes Lake, District of Portland, meets the four tests for a minor variance: • The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the proposed single detached dwelling unit will be constructed on the rural waterfront property as far back as possible from the waterfront given the constraints on the lot that prevent the cottage from achieving a greater setback. Page 86 of 101

REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT • The variance conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. As per Section 5.12 of the Zoning By-law, the lot is an existing undersized lot and a structure may be erected provided a suitable building envelope, outside of any hazards, can be accommodated for the intended use. An appropriate building envelope has been determined to be acceptable for the dwelling. The proposed dwelling complies with the zoning provisions in the Zoning Bylaw for the RLSW Zone with the exception of the setback to the highwater mark and lot coverage. Achieving the 30 metre setback would not be possible as the existing structure is within the 30 metre setback to the highwater mark. • The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands in question as an existing licenced trailer will be replaced with a permanent residential dwelling. • The variance is minor because the proposal seeks to maintain the waterbody setback given the location of the existing well and septic system. The residential dwelling will be located in a reasonable location due to site topography and constraints of the property.

Recommended Conditions Conditions are a decision of the Committee of Adjustment, the conditions below are recommended. The final approved conditions will be included in the signed decision

The Minor variance is for the construction a single storey 1008 ft2 single detached dwelling, in the dimensions of 7.3 m (24 ft) by 12.8 m (42 ft). as per the drawings submitted with MV-29-19P. The proposed single detached dwelling will be 19 metres (62.3 ft) to the closest point of the highwater mark of Howes Lake in the Limited Service Waterfront Residential Zone.
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 the matters outlined in the August 26, 2019 letter from Quinte Conservation and requirements of the Township, including a clause 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 and Quinte Conservation.
Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit under the Building Code, the Owner is to ensure that the existing licensed trailer is removed from the property; the Development Agreement noted above shall outline this requirement.
The Owner is required to obtain a permit prior to development commencing from Quinte Conservation under Regulation 319/09: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, which is administered by Quinte.
The Owner is to ensure that as per Permit No. REG0131-2019, issued from Quinte Conservation that work for the construction of the cottage and removal of the timber retaining wall and regrading of the shoreline bank shall be consistent with the approval provided.
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.
Minor variance MV-29-19P is applicable only to South Frontenac Township Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75 and not to any subsequent zoning by-laws. Submitted by: Trudy Gravel, CPT, AMCT, Planner, Township of South Frontenac Approved by: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services, Township of South Frontenac Date of Site Visit: September 5, 2019 Attachments: Map of the Hollinsworth/Murphy property

Page 87 of 101

D 902.390:

vommm

o«:m1:m: =o:.

Page 88 of 101

?”>*

..mr_» .Or

mooom

.._.m

mo: 9: ucm wm:___oE w:

*0 QEMZ

m>_a m mo

m 9: mooo ..w

9:.

...

9:.

wmm:mck

0 “Egan.

mm?coi

m_... ..n mm.Eo._..

Page 89 of 101

vmouommu V.

Page 90 of 101

a.O>OD .©_\

umm_._.Oz

E. __ C

2§>

.m:

8__.__% E

xom?mw

=u_=m

w:¢E_n

23:0

a:8__2._

om_<V

z: ._o foam am .o.

o__=m 3 Em_o_._

xom?ow

_ “on. $5

xomnawm

_3.. Ram

3.. E9”.

... xom?ow

.m.m=: .3

u_mw._ “.0 25

mcm. w£

Page 91 of 101

{muS)

mag m .0 m<m#m3.

a. oEm_. ém?mw

m?ma Emma

”

Page 92 of 101

.3 Q N

/.~——

Page 93 of 101

E“

32+

’‘

Page 94 of 101 I

‘ T

l2J«2\

'l‘? $‘5" E*L€s¥x

I008 QR‘ JAR X Ua?r

T 133% IQ0.11»)

5 \ 4‘-\———>e. C-13¢: FFIWD 1’‘,

LO.V\E

?roQo$.e& Co~\c\a.Lc)Q_

HOh)eS

;@<¢7

Page 95 of 101

4‘

T “!‘*T’ T._,1 I

‘

Page 96 of 101

:1:

.lHVd

...………=..,

rvzu Mg …m;.

WV!

quzpuo

SNl)!d0H

suaxanyns

pun1

/(.l.tIH.’)

‘am

unhnuxs

U (M)

rm -15W: M-N4

(519) 2195492‘ “J 99z6—r9e (£19) in G212 dbl 0I2IY.lN0 ‘N0.LSONl)! unaa SIHHDN 9£9~r£9

mmkuluxuvxnoummn.

.133/‘D2~[d

107

/0 dwmrmu

171?>17«Wd N03 4 I £6?-6102 °N

uoq

me but

wsnm

8 no-wma an

)

hung

|-|-WIDP

/Jnoxma

um ans

MHVWHONEE‘N30 (srn

P45P’W7S

am;

As];

1n:K 001 |

Mp?? pu1uu£.us}7u,7

M117 nyuag JWWHII-0

7'43? 4319]

p1mo.|5.npu?

/‘0 M7 muss mm /o um] mm; P°‘W4“0 W»! 7 /il.‘7‘1/I

may

pu1I.n.|5.L7pII./1

sun umazs was /0 wprrwvs

nuumg

[Donuts

au._I7

run

-UNJOI-I7

—I—

HIS

913:

.51;

ru )

N 0 I

njouzp

GZ 9 l

u_I|poo|[

‘52‘)

pajunyd

nanunnanIizrung p1mu_.[

;umm..,,

‘V3 “NI

41:5 “WI wwu-was1-M43

mu]

(punm) mg

mum

mu me:

(as;

as;

1:/u7.4g

mp?g

/0 35:03 [n my

pnauuao

r\‘n

U»./

3:71»;

‘3.

_‘l

x:=>

?nd

nun um:

3.4;‘

—

;

2‘

‘D

mu .

ncnug M15

aauzg

awe In mama was In It-u

r.mum,,

l|l._l7‘

’

W0?

‘9N[

(INV7

-6102’

Lumop

S’NI)Id0I-I

unjd

saauny?g

I0 Amnoc)

0020-‘ I =.f~I7V.’JS

z(.£.Lll-[.9

-HJON

un Guywu aumg am no no 5 uo5)nAa|3

;o nonw«3|a 96113;?

95:9 Lung

OVNJJNOHJ

SHOAJAHDS

u 0;

sanaw ggg‘

9l¢‘.{.L3IV

no umoyg

11.; am

I-LLHOS .110 c{IHSNMO.L puz)7;u.oC[ ojuqdzu?oag fo d’L’l[S’U,n’LOL[, 8! NOISSJONOO ‘4 J07 f0 .LHVc{ /[V7d OZH

QVNHJNOHJ

5° 27

gzmgg

pnog am:-. pang pa mac; mowuauaq

spy‘;

mm saga”

2:; mm

more ?n ?umwa ?e 7321 01 pa;.Larmo_7

Rd Craig Rd

Howes Lake

n Howe s Lak e Ln

Ke ns L Bailey Ln

Lloyd Ln S o

n lle Ma

Road

d i ll e r R

Doucette Ln

uth

Inset Map

HOLLINSWORTH MV-29-19-P 1101 LLOYD LANE S

McGuire Lake

Legend Road Hollinsworth Parcel Parcel Fabric Lloyd Ln South

Provincially Significant Wetland Waterbody Wetland

Howes Lake

Page 97 of 101

Scale 1:600

0 2.5 5

Meters UTM Projection NAD 83

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. PL0203-2019 Municipality:

Township of South Frontenac

Owner:

Dana Hollinsworth

Location:

1101 Lloyd Lane South

Roll #:

1029-080-050-18200-00000

Application Description:

Minor Variance Appl’n File No. M-29-19-P

Regulated Feature:

Howes Lake

Part Lot 7, Concession 13

Portland

Reduce high water mark setback from 30 metres to 19 metres from Howes Lake to allow for the construction of a 7.3 metre (24 foot) by 12.8 metre (42 foot) residence; and to allow for an increase in lot coverage from 5 percent to 5.5 percent.

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 Howes Lake (by virtue of Ontario Regulation #319/09 – Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses). Please note that the owners will need to apply to the Conservation Authority for a permit prior to development (construction / filling/ excavation/ site grading) within 30 metres of the 1:100 year floodplain of Howes Lake. Comments:

Note, QC staff have already issued Permit No. REG0131-2019 for construction of the cottage and to remove the timber retaining wall and regrade the shoreline bank.

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. Page 1 of 2

Page 98 of 101

Final Comments:

Quinte Conservation has no objection to the application as presented.

August 26, 2019 Date

Sam Carney Planning and Regulations Technician

Page 2 of 2

Page 99 of 101

.9.

Environmental Health Department 221 Portsmouth Avenue Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5 (613) 549-1232 1-800-267-7875

KFL& Public Health A FOR

Fax: (613) 549-7738

htt p://www.kf|apublichealth.ca Claire Dodds Township of South Frontenac P.0. Box 100, 4432 George Street Sydenham, Ontario, KOH2T0

Application Number:

MV-29-19-B

Type of Application or Proposal:

Minor Variance

Applicant Name(s):

Hollinsworth, Dana

Location:

Part Lot 7, Concession 13, Parts 3 & 4 13R17713 municipally known as 1101 Lloyd Lane South, Howes Lake, District of Portland,

Township of South Frontenac

Planning Department or Agency:

Comments:

| nspe ct or‘ -

Date:

Township of South Frontenac (Portland)

No objections to the minor variance application. A performance review has been performed and the existing septic tank was replaced to accommodate the proposed dwelling (P0-23-19).

’

‘6

£76

Sarah van Dijk,CPHl(C),Public Health Inspector

August 28, 2019

PLEASEFORWARD A COPY OF THE NOTICEOF DECISIONTO KFL&APUBLICHEALTH. Personal information on this form is collected under the authority of the Building Code Act, and willbe used for the administration of Public Health programs. Any questions about the collection of this information should be directed to the Manager of Environmental Health, KFL&APublic Health, 221 Portsmouth Avenue, Kingston, Ontario K7M 1V5, (613) 549-1232 ext. 1243 or 1-800-267 7875.

Page 100 of 101

KFL&A

Entered

APPLICATION#

~\ ‘I

Public Health

KINGSTON,FRONTENAC AND LENNOX & ADDINGTON PUBLIC HEALTH FINALINSPECTION REPORT FOR CLASS2, 3, 4, 5 SEWAGE SYSTEM Inspection Details

owNERI)&l>l? ……… .w.oQI’l .H0.bL..lNS

……………. ………

INSTALLER

Work has been satisfactorily completed and Includes:

/holdin

tan

war In

treatment

apa ity

tre SEO nstructed of

oncrete

El plastic

I.Q.§e.o.aun.

serving“……..‘_..eP&.!z.QQSE …….. Make/ModelofTank’

b) Leaching / Filter Bed

__ metres

of _

I:il$ …nszll e

‘

m‘ Contact Area …………………..

runs and fed by……………………………………… laid in……………. I4

and product description)

p’ e of

m‘

c) Treatment Unit Make / Model.

Level

d) Chamber System Make / Model:

II of Pleces ………….

el Leaching Bed GPS Coordinates:

4‘

…… …………………………………………………………………………. .. Longitude W

Latitude N.

Location: The sketch below indicates the location of all componen Ontario Building Code.

of the Sewage System and eparation distances as required under the

Inspection Date

Inspector

…..3 990/?

The Sewage System was inspected and it has been determined that the installation complies with the requirements of Regulation 332/12made under the Building Code Act for the following property located on Lot ______

L!» Concession

__l

«tn. ….. 14

Final Compliance Inspection

—

the following work

__Part(s) ______ __

E@:DNTEN.?C …… …

M-micinalitv

(Ame

Plan ofsubdivisiantl

Sn.uTl’l‘. Sublol

ggrlgencompleted:

Qé?tem has been backfilled with suitable granular fill Eus?ding to shed run-off and divert water around leaching bed has been completed loped surfaces are stabilized

I2"l€psoi| has been put on the leaching bed to establish grass cover

KFL&APubic Health (FEB16

Page 101 of 101

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.