COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR MINOR VARIANCE MINUTES Monday, June 24, :30 p.m. Town Council Chambers Page 1

Transcription

1 Page 1 1. CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair K. Parlett called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and the following were recorded as being present. Committee Members: Staff: Committee Member, K. Parlett Committee Member, W. Moore Committee Member, A. Taylor Secretary-Treasurer, M. Holmes 2. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Nil. 3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM JUNE 3, 2013 MEETINGS Moved by: Seconded by: Committee Member W. Moore Committee Member, A. Taylor That the Minutes of June 3, 2013 be approved. 4. MINOR VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 A/09/13 by Heather and Larry Laidlaw for Part of Lot 20, Concession 7, Oakley Ward of the Town of Bracebridge being Parts 2, 3, 4, and 6 of Plan 35R-21493: The applicants are requesting relief from Section (*5) of By-law , as amended, which requires a sleeping cabin to have a maximum gross floor area of 23 square metres (247.5 square feet), to recognize a sleeping cabin built with a gross floor area of 23.6 square metres (254 square feet), a variance of 0.6 square metres (6.5 square feet). The applicants are also requesting relief from Section and Section of Bylaw , as amended, which requires a minimum front yard setback, being from the high water mark of Wood Lake, of 30 metres (98.4 feet), to recognize a sleeping cabin built at a front yard setback of 18 metres (59.1 feet), a variance of 12 metres (39.3 feet). At the time the sleeping cabin was constructed, the front yard setback was 20 metres (66 feet), however as that By-law is no longer in effect, the variance must be from the current setback of 30 metres (98.4 feet). The applicants are also requesting relief from Section vi) of By-law , as amended, which requires a garage to have a maximum height of 4.5 metres (14.76 feet) to the midpoint of the roof and 6.7 metres (21.98 feet) to the peak of the roof, to recognize a garage built with a midpoint height of 4.72 metres (15.5 feet) and a peak height of 6.86 metres (22.5 feet), variances of 0.22 metres (0.74 feet) and 0.16 metres (0.52 feet).

2 Page 2 The applicants are also requesting relief from Section vi) of By-law , as amended, which the second floor of a garage to have a maximum gross floor area of 37 square metres (398.3 square feet), where the ceiling height exceeds 2.0 metres (6.6 feet), to recognize a garage built with a second floor gross floor area of 57.9 square metres (623 square feet), a variance of 20.9 square metres (424.7 square feet). The subject lands are located at 1057 Honey s Way Private. Committee examined photographs, an aerial map, and a site plan of the subject lands. A staff report prepared by Dana Rahkola, Assistant Director of Development Services and Trent Bos, Planning Student was read outlining the purpose of the application, property description, surrounding area, comments received, Official Plan policies, Zoning By-law requirements, and recommended conditions, if approved. Comments were received from the Chief Building Official indicating that the septic system will need to be verified that it will support the Bunkie and any additional construction in the future. Heather and Larry Laidlaw, applicants, attended on behalf of this application. Mr. Laidlaw stated they had inherited the current legal non-complying structures when they purchased the property. He stated that they had inquired at the Town if there was a building permit for the garage and they were advised that there was one issued by the Town. He indicated that it was later discovered that the permit was actually for the neighbouring property and the garage on the subject lands was constructed without a permit. Committee chairman Kim Parlett questioned if the garage contained living quarters. Mr. Laidlaw stated that the previous owners had used the garage for living quarters but that they were using the space as storage and they were aware that it could not be used for living quarters. Committee chairman Kim Parlett questioned if the garage contained any plumbing fixtures. Mr. Laidlaw stated that the garage did not contain any plumbing fixtures. Committee chairman Kim Parlett questioned if the bunkie contained any plumbing fixtures. Mrs. Laidlaw stated that the bunkie did not contain any plumbing fixtures. She indicated that the bunkie contained two bedrooms and a small living room area.

3 Page 3 ALLEN TAYLOR, WAYNE MOORE: THAT Application A/09/13 be APPROVED to recognize a sleeping cabin built with a gross floor area of 23.6 square metres (254 square feet), a variance of 0.6 square metres (6.5 square feet) and APPROVED to recognize a sleeping cabin built at a front yard setback of 18 metres (59.1 feet), a variance of 12 metres (39.3 feet) and APPROVED to recognize a garage built with a midpoint height of 4.72 metres (15.5 feet) and a peak height of 6.86 metres (22.5 feet), variances of 0.22 metres (0.74 feet) and 0.16 metres (0.52 feet) and APPROVED to recognize a garage built with a second floor gross floor area of 57.9 square metres (623 square feet), a variance of 20.9 square metres (424.7 square feet). CONDITIONS: 1) That the septic system will need to be verified that it will support the Bunkie and any additional construction in the future. 2) That the garage not contain any living quarters. REASONS: The application is minor in nature, as no concerns were expressed by neighbour property owners. The application is appropriate, as the structures have been in existence for 20 years and the applicants are legalizing the situtation. The application meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law, as the structure are well buffered from the lake. The application meets the intent of the Official Plan, as the uses are permitted within the Waterfront designation. 4.2 A/10/13 by Pierre and Theresa Talon for Part of Lot 29, Concession 14, Oakley Ward of the Town of Bracebridge being Parts 13, 18, and 41 of Plan BR-796: The applicants are requesting relief from Section of By-law , as amended, which requires an accessory building to not be located in front of the dwelling, to allow a garage to have a front yard setbacks of metres (90 feet), while the dwelling has a front yard setback of metres (139.5 feet) a variance of metres (49.5 feet). The subject lands are located at 1149 Cridiford Road. Committee examined photographs, an aerial map, and a site plan of the subject lands. A staff report prepared by Dana Rahkola, Assistant Director of Development Services and Trent Bos, Planning Student was read outlining the purpose of the application, property description, surrounding area, comments received, Official Plan policies, Zoning By-law requirements, and recommended conditions, if approved. Pierre and Theresa Talon, applicants, attended on behalf of this application. Committee member Wayne Moore indicated that based on the pictures it appeared that the property was well treed, however the staff report indicated that the property was not significantly treed. The Committee was advised that the side and rear yards were well treed but the front yard was open to the road. Committee chairman Kim Parlett questioned if the garage was proposed in the location of the car port shown in the photographs.

4 Page 4 Mrs. Talon stated that the garage was proposed to be located where the carport is currently situated. Mrs. Talon provided correspondence to the Committee on why the garage could not be located in the side or rear yard, description of the subject land, proposed design of the garage, and photographs of the subject lands. Committee chairman Kim Parlett questioned if the garage was proposed to be located on an angle like the carport. Mrs. Talon stated that the garage would be parallel to the driveway. Committee member Allen Taylor questioned if the applicants were proposed living quarters above the garage. Mrs. Talon stated that there would not be living quarters above the garage, and she was aware that they were not permitted. ALLEN TAYLOR, WAYNE MOORE: THAT Application A/10/13 be APPROVED to allow a garage to have a front yard setback of metres (90 feet), while the dwelling has a front yard setback of metres (139.5 feet) a variance of metres (49.5 feet). REASONS: The application is minor in nature, as there are no neighbouring properties to impact. The application is appropriate, as it will be in character with the area. The application meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law, as the structure well setback from the road. The application meets the intent of the Official Plan, as the uses are permitted within the Waterfront designation. 4.3 A/11/13 by Doug Nelson Limited for Part of Lot 32 of Plan 35M-578, Muskoka North Ward of the Town of Bracebridge being Parts 8, 9, and 10 of Plan 35R-12220: The applicant is requesting relief from Section of By-law , which requires a structure in a Business Park Industrial (M1) Zone to have a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres (24.76 feet), to allow a structure to have a rear yard setback of 6.1 metres (20.1 feet), a variance of 1.4 metres (4.6 feet). The applicant is requesting relief from Section of By-law , which requires a structure in a Business Park Industrial (M1) Zone to have a minimum interior side yard setback of 3.0 metres (9.84 feet), to allow a structure to have an interior side yard setback of 1.22 metres (4.0 feet), a variance of 1.78 metres (5.84 feet). The subject lands are located at 370 Ecclestone Drive. Committee examined photographs, an aerial map, and a site plan of the subject lands. A staff report prepared by Dana Rahkola, Assistant Director of Development Services and Trent Bos, Planning Student was read outlining the purpose of the application, property description, surrounding area, comments received, Official Plan policies, Zoning By-law requirements, and recommended conditions, if approved.

5 Page 5 Correspondence was received from Tom Hookings, Chief Building Official indicating that depending on the use of this structure and the type of construction, the Ontario Building Code may govern the minimum setback from the property line. No one attended on behalf of this application. The Committee was informed that a previous variance was approved on the property on November 17, As part of the approval the Committee had imposed a condition that the variance was only applicable for three years. The applicant was also required to enter into a site plan agreement with the Town. The Committee was informed that the structure is used for storage and work on the applicant s boat. They were also informed the applicant also owns the property to north, which abuts the side yard with the requested variance. ALLEN TAYLOR, WAYNE MOORE: THAT Application A/11/13 be APPROVED to allow a structure to have a rear yard setback of 6.1 metres (20.1 feet), a variance of 1.4 metres (4.6 feet) and to allow a structure to have an interior side yard setback of 1.22 metres (4.0 feet), a variance of 1.78 metres (5.84 feet). CONDITIONS: 1) That the variance is only applicable to the current structure and if the current structure is replaced or removed, the structure will have to conform to setbacks of the Zoning By-law. REASONS: The application is minor in nature, as no concerns raise by neighbour property owners. The application is appropriate, as the structure has been in existence for 5 years with no impact on neighbour lands. The application meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law, as the structure will be well setback from neighbouring structures. The application meets the intent of the Official Plan, as the uses are permitted within the Business Park designation. 5. CORRESPONDENCE Nil. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Nil.

6 Page 6 7. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 6:15 p.m. The next regular meeting for the Committee of Adjustment for Minor Variances will be held on July 15, Chair Secretary-Treasurer