Township of Chatsworth Planning Committee Agenda Wednesday May 2, 9:00 a.m.

Transcription

1 Township of Chatsworth Planning Committee Agenda Wednesday May 2, 9:00 a.m. 1) Call to Order 2) Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest 3) Minutes of Previous Meetings 3.1 Planning Committee minutes from April 18, ) Committee of Adjustments Public Meeting: 4.1 Consent application B01/2018 Part Lot 20, Concession 4 Sullivan Wakelin, Ross & Lalonde 4.2 Consent application B02/2018 Part Lot 19, Concession 12 Holland Cornfield 4.3 Minor Variance application A01/2018 Part Lot 17, Concession 11 EGR Holland Backhouse 5) Adjournment

2 Members Present: Chair Mayor Bob Pringle Member Brian Gamble Member Shawn Greig Member Elizabeth Thompson Members Absent: Member Scott Mackey Staff Present: Township Planner: Ron Davidson Secretary-Treasurer: Nicole Martin 1. Call to Order Township of Chatsworth Planning Committee Minutes Wednesday April 18, :30 P.M. Chair Pringle called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof. None 3. Planning Committee/Committee of Adjustment It was: Moved by Shawn Greig Seconded by Elizabeth Thompson That the Planning Committee of the Township of Chatsworth adopts the minutes of January 3, Carried 4. Planning Committee Public Meeting 4.1 Zoning amendment Z02/2018 Part Lot 32, Part Lot 33, Plan 126, Geographic Township of Holland, Township of Chatsworth Katherine Parker Public in Attendance Katherine Parker 1 P a g e

3 Township Planner Ron Davidson explained that the purpose of the Zoning By-law Amendment was to change the zoning of a property in Holland Centre from C1 to R1 in order to permit the use of the entire structure as a detached dwelling. He provided an overview of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment including a review of the Amendment within the context of the Grey County Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. He also read the comments received from the various commenting agencies. No concerns were raised by the Committee or any member of the general public. Following a brief discussion by the Committee, it was: Moved by Shawn Greig Seconded by Brian Gamble Be it resolved that the Zoning application Z02/2018 for Part Lot 32, Part Lot 33, Plan 126 Holland be approved. Carried 4.2 Zoning amendment Z01/2018 Part Lot 22, Concession 4, in the former Township of Sullivan, now the Township of Chatsworth - Leari Holdings Ltd. Public in Attendance Larry Freiburger Paul Seibel Sam Folkerson Loreen Freiburger Susan Seibel Gary Seibel Larry Folkerson Ann Marie Lennic Jim Lennie Rosemary Sokolowski Bill Brydges Ramona Brydges Marg Fidler Ann Marie Ferraro Paul Ferraro Val Slomke Jeff Slomke Keith Dietreh Paul Patton Darren Foster Rick Nicholls Matt Nelson Susan Brenner Tony Brenner 2 P a g e

4 Chris Sherman Lois Birnie Maria Sir Mike Sedlezky Kevin Haxell Sandi Holland Chris Bults Ron Bults Cindy Moore Dan Moore Donna Kral Doug Kral Doreen Wagner Sue Wagner Wayne Wagner Kelly Coates Susan Hayes Steve Meyer Wayne Hinkele Lee Hanna Eric Friderici Brogan Cook Shirley Lalonde Maria Lalonde Irene Brandon Brad Law Martha Hicker Neil Bouius Ruth Bouius E. Flewelling Celeste Eickholdt David Ellingwood Carol Law Nick Law Dave Nelson Leanna Struyk Rick Struyk I. Bajnok Township Planner Ron Davidson explained that the purpose of the Zoning By-law Amendment was to amend the A2 zoning of a portion of the subject property to allow for a private campground comprising nine campsites. He provided an in-depth explanation of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment including a basic review of the Amendment within the context of the Grey County Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. Mr. Davidson also read the correspondence received from the various commenting agencies and 3 P a g e

5 summarized the comments submitted by the general public. He concluded his presentation by advising that a follow-up Planning Report, complete with a recommendation, would be prepared and discussed along with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment at a future Council meeting. David Ellingwood of Cuesta Planning Consultants, the Planning Consultant acting on behalf of the owners of the subject property, provided a brief review of the development s compliance with the relevant policies of the County Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. He advised that an electrical permit for the installation of hydro services to each of the nine campsites had been received. Matt Nelson of GM BluePlan Engineering, the Engineering Consultant representing the subject land owners, provided a provided a brief overview of his servicing report. Leanna and Rick Struyk, the owners of the subject property, stated that their family and friends had been camping in commercial campgrounds in the past but found it difficult to book enough campsites in a group setting, and therefore they had decided to host camping for friends and relatives on their own property at McCullough Lake. They stated that they weren t aware that the Zoning By-law did not allow for private camping. The Struyks also advised that the greatest number of people to have camped on their property last year was 30. They also stated that the people camping on their property never use McCullough Lake for swimming, boating or any other purpose. Lee Hanna advised that he wasn t aware that the campground was being constructed. He stated that the campground causes no harm and should be allowed. Brogan Cook stated that he owned an adjacent property and finds the campground to be acceptable. Nick Law spoke against the application and asked for clarification regarding their right to appeal. Mr. Davidson attempted to answer Mr. Law s questions. Celeste Eickholdt raised several concerns regarding the campground, including: transients have disregard for public safety; a campground is incompatible with residential uses; and, the environment around McCullough Lake needs to be protected. Irmajean Bajnok, president of the McCullough Lake Cottagers Area Association, provided a power point presentation outlining the concerns of the property owner s association, which included: potential health hazards regarding sewage run-off; increased garbage; potential decrease in property values; 4 P a g e

6 regular policing of campground, meaning increase in taxes; does not appear to be a private campground since the property is registered in a company name; over use of lake by swimmers and boaters; increased noise; increase air pollution the engineering report s requirement for a septic system doesn t reflect the system that was recently installed; the SCVA s revised hazard land mapping renders much of the land inaccessible for a septic system; the illegal construction and use of the campground downplays the severity of breaking by-laws; approval of this By-law would be precedent setting; what is the value added to the Town from a tax perspective?; how will the well be regulated? Paul Seibel raised the following concerns: campground is not resource-based; proposed use affects the financial well-being of the municipality; septic system can t fit within the area to be rezoned; spot zoning represents poor planning; the owners have had blatant disregard for the law; the campground is incompatible with the area s land uses; the campground will impact on property values; and, temporary trailers are acceptable, and he doesn t care how many trailers are used on site; however, by providing septic, water and hydro hookups, the use becomes permanent and he is opposed to permanent camping. Larry Freiburger asked why the two wetlands in the area haven t been addressed in any of the reports and also raised concerns regarding the significant woodlands on the Struyk property and the adjacent lands. He also asked if test pitting was conducted in support of the engineering work. Mr. Ellingwood advised that the development is in compliance with the woodland policies of the County Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement, and stated that he d look further into the wetland matter. Township Planner Ron Davidson stated that he wasn t aware of wetlands in the area but would also investigate this matter. Engineering Consultant Matt Nelson stated that test holes were dug as part of the septic system review. Susan Hayes asked if an entrance permit had been granted for the East Park Road access. Darren Foster and Sam Folkerson also asked questions about entrance. Jamie Morgan, Township Operations Manager, stated that this entrance has existed for many years and that a permit to improve the entrance was recently granted. He advised that the entrance has been deemed sufficient. 5 P a g e

7 Paul Patton asked what would happen to this private campground should the owner s sell it. Mr. Stuyk advised that he would sign an agreement to close the campground should his family sell the property. Kevin Haxwell stated that since the property is registered in a company name, the property could possibly be sold by selling the shares in the company without actually changing the name of the owner on the deed. Eric Federici asked questions regarding the amount of water being used. Mr. Nelson advised that the water usage will be below 50,000 litres per day, and therefore a Permit To Take Water would not be required from the Province. He added, however, that he would confirm the water requirements associated with a nine site campground. At that time, it was: Moved by Shawn Greig Seconded by Brian Gamble Be it resolved that Zoning Application Z01/2018 for Part Lot 22, Concession 4 Sullivan be received for information. Carried 5. Closure of Planning Committee Meeting It was: Moved by Elizabeth Thompson Seconded by Shawn Greig Be it resolved that the Planning Committee adjourn at 8:46 p.m. Carried Bob Pringle, Chair Nicole Martin, Secretary-Treasurer 6 P a g e

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 Page 2 April 9 th, 2018 Appendix B of the County OP also identifies McCullough Lake adjacent to the subject property. Policy 2.8.6(5) states, no development shall be permitted within 30 metres of the banks of a stream, river, lake, or Georgian Bay. No site alteration or development is proposed as part of this application; therefore, County planning staff have no concerns with respect to the identified wetlands and hazardous lands. County planning staff have no concerns with the subject application. The County requests notice of any decision rendered with respect to this file. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me. Yours truly, Stephanie Lacey-Avon Planner (519) ext stephanie.lacey-avon@grey.ca cc. Ron Davidson Grey County: Colour It Your Way

15 SENT ELECTRONICALLY ONLY April 19, 2018 Township of Chatsworth Land Division Committee Highway 6 RR#1 Chatsworth, ON N0H 1G Bruce Road 12, P.O. Box 150, Formosa ON Canada N0G 1W0 Tel , Fax , publicinfo@svca.on.ca, ATTENTION: Nicole Martin, Secretary-Treasurer Dear Ms. Martin, RE: Application for Consent B01/ Concession 4 Part Lot 20, Concession 4 Roll No.: Geographic Township of Sullivan Township of Chatsworth (Wakelin, Ross and Lalonde) Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority (SVCA) staff has reviewed the application for consent in accordance with the SVCA s mandate, the Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority Environmental Planning and Regulations Policies Manual, Approved May 16, 2017, and the Memorandum of Agreement between the SVCA and the Township of Chatsworth relating to plan review. The purpose of the application for consent is to sever a vacant waterfront lot into two parcels, with each parcel being added to adjacent properties. The application for consent is acceptable to Authority staff, and the following comments are offered. Natural Hazards Portions of the property are designated Hazard Lands and Wetlands in the Grey County Official Plan (OP) and zoned Environmental Protection (EP) and Wetlands Protection in the Township of Chatsworth Zoning By-law No In general, no new buildings or structures are permitted within the Hazard Lands designation or within the EP zone. In the opinion of SVCA staff, the Hazard Lands designation in the OP and the EP zone do not appear to accurately reflect the existing site conditions. SVCA staff recommend that the Hazard Lands designation and EP zone be updated to match the hazardous lands mapping plotted by SVCA staff at the next available opportunity. Please find enclosed map dated April 16, Watershed Member Municipalities Municipality of Arran-Elderslie, Municipality of Brockton, Township of Chatsworth, Municipality of Grey Highlands, Town of Hanover, Township of Howick, Municipality of Morris-Turnberry, Municipality of South Bruce, Township of Huron-Kinloss, Municipality of Kincardine, Town of Minto, Township of Wellington North, Town of Saugeen Shores, Township of Southgate, Municipality of West Grey

16 Township of Chatsworth Land Division Committee Application for Consent B01/2018 (Wakelin, Ross and Lalonde) April 19, 2018 Page 2 of 3 Natural Heritage The Significant Natural Heritage features affecting the subject property are Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), Fish Habitat and Significant Wildlife Habitat that have been identified on or near the property. Provincially Significant Wetlands The wetlands on the subject property and adjacent lands form part of a larger Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW), known as the Minkes and Stewart Lakes PSW. Section of the Grey County OP indicates that no development or site alteration is permitted within the PSW, and no development or site alteration may occur within the 120 metre adjacent lands of the PSW unless it has been demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. It is the opinion of SVCA staff that the ecological functions of the PSW will not be negatively impacted by this application for consent. As such, we are not recommending the preparation of an EIS. Fish Habitat McCullough Lake is located on the property and on the adjacent lands, and is considered fish habitat by SVCA staff. In addition, Hamilton Creek flows through McCullough Lake. Section of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014) indicates that, among other things, development and site alteration shall not be permitted on the adjacent lands of fish habitat unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on fish habitat or on their ecological functions. SVCA staff is of the opinion that the negative impacts to the lands adjacent to fish habitat as a result of this proposal will be negligible, and we are not recommending the preparation of an EIS. Significant Wildlife Habitat While there is no County-wide mapping of significant wildlife habitat, it has come to the attention of SVCA staff that significant wildlife habitat may be located on or adjacent to the property. The Grey County OP states in part that development and site alteration shall not be permitted within significant wildlife habitat, unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts to the habitat or its ecological functions. It is the opinion of SVCA staff that an EIS regarding Significant Wildlife Habitat is not warranted at this time. SVCA Regulation Please be advised that the entirety of the property is subject to the SVCA s Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 169/06, as amended). This Regulation is in accordance with Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act R.S.O, 1990, Chap. C. 27, and requires that a person obtain the written permission of the SVCA prior to any development within a Regulated Area or alteration to a wetland or watercourse. Development and Alteration Subsection 28(25) of the Conservation Authorities Act defines development as:

17 Township of Chatsworth Land Division Committee Application for Consent B01/2018 (Wakelin, Ross and Lalonde) April 19, 2018 Page 3 of 3 a) the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind, b) any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure, c) site grading, or d) the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere According to Section 5 of Ontario Regulation 169/06, as amended, alteration generally includes the straightening, diverting or interfering in any way the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or the changing or interfering in any way with a wetland. To determine where the SVCA s Approximate Screening Area is located, associated with our Regulation on the property, please refer to the SVCA s online mapping program, available via the SVCA s website at Should you require assistance, please contact our office directly. Permission for Development or Alteration If development or alteration including construction, reconstruction, conversion, grading, filling or excavation, including agricultural tile drainage, is proposed within the Approximate Screening Area, the SVCA should be contacted, as permission may be required. Conclusion All of the plan review functions listed in the Agreement have been assessed with respect to this development proposal. The application for consent is acceptable to SVCA staff. We trust you find this information helpful. Should questions arise, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Emily Payton Environmental Planning Technician Saugeen Conservation EP/ Encl. cc: Ron Davidson, Planner, Township of Chatsworth (via ) Brian Gamble, Authority Member, SVCA (via )

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 TOWNSHIP OF CHATSWORTH Highway 6, RR 1 Chatsworth, Ontario N0H 1G0 Telephone Fax March 21, 2018 Township of Chatsworth Committee of Adjustment R.R. 1 CHATSWORTH, Ontario N0H 1G0 Dear Chair Pringle and Committee Members: Re: Application for Severance Part Lot 19, Concession 12, Geographic Township of Holland, Township of Chatsworth ( Sideroad) File No. B02/2018 Owner: Keith and Diane Cornfield The following has been drafted to provide the Committee of Adjustment with planning comments concerning the above-noted Consent application. Purpose of Application: Keith and Diane Cornfield own a 37.9 hectare property upon which a detached dwelling and shed are located. This residence is surplus to the residential needs of the owners and therefore they propose to sever the house, along with the shed, on a new 2.3 hectare lot under the surplus farmhouse consent policies of the Grey County Official Plan. The Subject Lands: The subject property is located at the southwest corner of the 60 Sideroad / Euphrasia- Holland Townline intersection. Situated on the property are the aforementioned detached dwelling and shed. Two other structures previously existing on the site, as illustrated in the 2015 aerial photograph, but were recently removed. This clustered area of existing and previous buildings is heavily tree covered. P a g e 1

28 Situated in the northeast corner of the farm is a cemetery. Whereas the cemetery appears to be situated on its own parcel of land, the Cornfield s lawyer has advised his client that those lands were never properly conveyed and therefore still form part of the subject property. This issue has no bearing on the severance application. The balance of the property is cash-cropped. Adjacent Lands: The neighbouring lands appear to be represented by a mixture of agriculture, forestry and non-farm residential lots. Official Plan: The subject property is designated entirely Agricultural on Schedule A to the County of Grey Official Plan. The 'Agricultural' consent policies generally prohibit lot creation except where the severance results in farms lots (both severed and retained) that are 40 hectares in size or greater or in situations where the severance involves a farmhouse that has been rendered surplus as a result of a bona fide farmer enlarging his/her farm holdings. With regard to the severing of a surplus farmhouse, the policies of Section state (edited for relevancy): Consent Policies (1) A consent for one lot may be permitted provided the original farm parcel is a minimum of 40 hectares and no lot creation has been provided for in the past. The creation or acquisition of a lot by a public body (e.g. for a road deviation) will not be considered as a previous severance providing this does not result in an additional remnant lot. The options for a consent would be: Comment: The subject property comprises just under 40 hectares of land and no severance has been provided for in the past. Even if the cemetery was, in fact, a separate parcel, that severance would fall under the same category as creation or acquisition of a lot by a public body and would not disqualify the farm property from severing the surplus farmhouse. (b) Where a residence is deemed surplus to a farm operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that: (i) The owner of the lands to be severed is a bona fide farmer. For the purposes of this policy, the bona fide farmer must have a Farm Business Registration number. A bona fide farmer shall be defined as to include a limited company, sole proprietorship, incorporated P a g e 2

29 company, numbered company, partnership and other similar ownership forms; Comment: Mr. and Mrs. Cornfield own and actively farm three other nearby parcels. (ii) The lot proposed for the residence and buildings surplus to the farming operation shall be limited in area and shall only be of sufficient size to accommodate the residence surplus to the farming operation, accessory buildings (where including accessory buildings does not render the lot excessively large), a well and a sewage disposal system, while ensuring that as little land as possible is removed from the agricultural lands; Comment: During the consultation discussions with the Township, the size of the proposed lot was carefully determined, taking into account the buildings, septic, well and the forested portions of the site. Township staff is satisfied that the proposed lot is of an appropriate size. (iii) The remnant parcel shall be rezoned to prohibit the future erection of a residential dwelling of any type on the agricultural lands provided that a residential dwelling does not exist at the time of severance; Comment: As a condition of approval of the severance application, the retained parcel must be rezoned to prohibit the erection of a detached dwelling. (iv) The severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation must comply with Provincial MDS Formulae. All livestock facilities within the vicinity of the proposed severance, including any livestock facility situated on the farm parcel from which the surplus farm residence is being severed, shall be used in determining Provincial MDS Formulae compliance; Comment: A livestock facility exists 450 metres to the east of the proposed lot. This setback exceeds the Minimum Distance Separation requirement for that barn. (vi) The existing residence is habitable at the time of application. Comment: The dwelling is habitable. Based on the foregoing, the proposed severance would appear to conform to the County of Grey Official Plan. P a g e 3

30 Provincial Policy Statement: The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) strongly encourages the preservation of prime agricultural land and generally prohibits the creation of smaller farm parcels or residential lots in areas having strong agricultural capabilities. That notwithstanding, in a manner identical to the County's Official Plan, Section Lot Creation and Lot Adjustment of the PPS gives consideration to severances in prime agricultural areas involving: c) a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that: 1. the new lot will be limited to a minimum size needed to accommodate the use and appropriate sewage and water services; and 2. the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance. The approach used to ensure that no new residential dwellings are permitted on the remnant parcel may be recommended by the Province, or based on municipal approaches which achieve the same objectives. Comment: The proposed severance and future rezoning will be consistent with these policies, as explained earlier in this Planning Report. Zoning By-law: The subject lands are zoned A1 (Rural). The minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage requirements of this zone are 20 hectares and 180 metres respectively. The severed parcel must be rezoned to reflect a new lot comprising 2.3 hectares with 179 metres of frontage. This required Zoning By-law Amendment will also place a no dwelling clause on the retained farm lands, as per the requirements of the County Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. Conclusion and Recommendation: The proposed severance conforms to the Official Plan and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Based on the above, the severance application has merit and should be given favourable consideration. This opinion is provided without the benefit of having received comments from any other P a g e 4

31 agency or any adjacent land owners. Should new information arise regarding this proposal, the Committee of Adjustment is advised to take such information into account when considering the applications. I trust this information will be of assistance. Sincerely, Ron Davidson, BES, RPP, MCIP Township Planner P a g e 5

32

33 Page 2 April 9 th, 2018 parcel may be recommended by the Province, or based on municipal approaches which achieve the same objective The options for a consent in Agricultural lands are described in County OP policy 2.1.4(1)(a) & 2.1.4(1)(b): A consent for one lot may be permitted provided the original farm parcel is a minimum of 40 hectares and no lot creation has been provided for in the past. The creation or acquisition of a lot by a public body (e.g. for a road deviation) will not be considered as a previous severance providing this does not result in an additional remnant lot. The options for a consent would be: (a) One lot severed to create a farm parcel of generally 40 hectares in size, provided the Development Criteria of Section has been satisfied, or (b) Where a residence is deemed surplus to a farm operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that: (i) The owner of the lands to be severed is a bona fide farmer. For the purposes of this policy, the bona fide farmer must have a Farm Business Registration number. A bona fide farmer shall be defined as to include a limited company, sole proprietorship, incorporated company, numbered company, partnership and other similar ownership forms; (ii) The lot proposed for the residence and buildings surplus to the farming operation shall be limited in area and shall only be sufficient size to accommodate the residence surplus to the farming operation, accessory buildings (where including accessory buildings does not render the lot excessively large), a well and a sewage disposal system, while ensuring that as little land as possible is removed from the agricultural lands; (iii) The remnant parcel shall be rezoned to prohibit the future erection of a residential dwelling of any type on the agricultural lands provided that a residential dwelling does not exist at the time of severance; (iv) The severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation must comply with Provincial MDS formulae. All livestock facilities within the vicinity of the proposed severance, including any livestock facility situated on the farm parcel from which the surplus farm residence is being severed, shall be used in determining Provincial MDS formulae compliance; County planning staff would recognize a surplus farm dwelling severance provided it meets the above noted tests outlined by both the PPS and the County OP. The applicants are bona fide farmers, owning and actively farming three other farm properties in the area. There is a cemetery located on the north east portion of the subject property, and still forms part of the subject property according to a legal opinion Grey County: Colour It Your Way

34 Page 3 April 9 th, 2018 received by the applicant. If/when the cemetery is legally recognized as a separate parcel, this would not conflict with the proposed severance, as the cemetery lands would be considered under the policy creation or acquisition of a lot by a public body, and would not be considered as a previous severance. County planning staff would also like to highlight that these policies speak to ensuring the new proposed lot shall be limited in area. This lot should be large enough to simply accommodate the existing house, shed, and the sewage and water services. Section 2.3.3(1)(b) of the OP states, new land uses, including the creation of lots, or new or expanding livestock facilities shall comply with the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae. It shall be ensured MDS requirements can be met. Appendix B of the County OP identifies Significant Woodlands in proximity to the subject property. According to policy 2.8.4(1), No development or site alteration may occur within significant woodlands or their adjacent lands unless it has been demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Study that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. County planning staff recommend comments are received from the local conservation authority. Provided positive comments are received from the local conservation authority, MDS requirements can be met, and surplus farm dwelling severance tests are met, County planning staff have no concerns with the subject application. The County requests notice of any decision rendered with respect to this file. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me. Yours truly, Stephanie Lacey-Avon Planner (519) ext stephanie.lacey-avon@grey.ca cc. Ron Davidson Grey County: Colour It Your Way

35 SENT ELECTRONICALLY ONLY April 17, 2018 Township of Chatsworth Land Division Committee Highway 6 RR#1 Chatsworth, ON N0H 1G Bruce Road 12, P.O. Box 150, Formosa ON Canada N0G 1W0 Tel , Fax , publicinfo@svca.on.ca, ATTENTION: Nicole Martin, Secretary-Treasurer Dear Ms. Martin, RE: Application for Consent B02/ Sideroad Part Lot 19, Concession 12 Roll No Geographic Township of Holland Township of Chatsworth (Keith and Diane Cornfield) Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority (SVCA) staff has reviewed the application for consent in accordance with the SVCA s mandate, the Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority Environmental Planning and Regulations Policies Manual, Approved May 16, 2017, and the Memorandum of Agreement between the SVCA and the Township of Chatsworth relating to plan review. The purpose of the application for consent is to sever a 2.3 hectare property containing a detached dwelling that is surplus to the residential needs of a bona fide farmer; and to retain a hectare farm property. The application for consent is acceptable to Authority staff, and the following comments are offered. Natural Hazards In the opinion of SVCA staff, the property is not affected by any natural hazards. Natural Heritage The Significant Natural Heritage features affecting the subject property include Significant Woodlands and potentially the Significant Habitat of Endangered Species and Threatened Species. Watershed Member Municipalities Municipality of Arran-Elderslie, Municipality of Brockton, Township of Chatsworth, Municipality of Grey Highlands, Town of Hanover, Township of Howick, Municipality of Morris-Turnberry, Municipality of South Bruce, Township of Huron-Kinloss, Municipality of Kincardine, Town of Minto, Township of Wellington North, Town of Saugeen Shores, Township of Southgate, Municipality of West Grey

36 Township of Chatsworth Land Division Committee Application for Consent B02/2018 (Keith and Diane Cornfield) April 17, 2018 Page 2 of 2 Significant Woodlands The woodlands on the adjacent lands are shown as Significant Woodlands in the County of Grey Official Plan (OP) Appendix B Constraint Mapping. SVCA staff is of the opinion that the negative impacts to the Significant Woodlands as a result of this proposal will be negligible. Therefore it is the opinion of SVCA staff that an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) regarding Significant Woodlands is not warranted for this particular proposal. Habitat of Endangered Species and Threatened Species It has come to the attention of SVCA staff that the habitat of endangered and threatened species may be located in the area of the proposed development. Section of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014) indicates that development and site alteration shall not be permitted in habitat of endangered species and threatened species, except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure the endangered species and threatened species policy referred to in the PPS has been appropriately addressed. Please contact the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) for information on how to address this policy. MNRF inquires in Grey County can be directed to Jody Scheifley, Management Biologist, phone: , jody.scheifley@ontario.ca. SVCA Regulation The property is not subject to the SVCA s Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 169/06, as amended). Conclusion All of the plan review functions listed in the Agreement have been assessed with respect to this development proposal. The application for consent is acceptable to SVCA staff. We trust you find this information helpful. Should questions arise, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Emily Payton Environmental Planning Technician Saugeen Conservation EP/ cc: Keith and Diane Cornfield, Applicant (via ) Ron Davidson, Planner, Township of Chatsworth (via ) Brian Gamble, Authority Member, SVCA (via )

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50 Page 2 April 23 rd, 2018 an Environmental Impact Study (EIS), that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. The development site is within the adjacent lands. SVCA conducted a site visit to the subject property and provided written comments March 26 th, The conclusion was such that, the proposed location for the garage was acceptable to SVCA staff, and the requirement for an EIS could be waived. Provided no further comments are needed from the local conservation authority, County planning staff have no concerns. The County requests notice of any decision rendered with respect to this file. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Stephanie Lacey-Avon Planner (519) ext stephanie.lacey-avon@grey.ca Grey County: Colour It Your Way

51

52

53 SENT ELECTRONICALLY ONLY April 20, 2018 Township of Chatsworth Highway 6 RR#1 Chatsworth, ON N0H 1G Bruce Road 12, P.O. Box 150, Formosa ON Canada N0G 1W0 Tel , Fax , publicinfo@svca.on.ca, ATTENTION: Nicole Martin, Secretary-Treasurer Dear Ms. Martin, RE: Application for Minor Variance A01/ Concession 10 Part Lot 17, Concession 11 EGR Roll No Geographic Township of Holland Township of Chatsworth (Backhouse c/o Smythe) Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority (SVCA) staff has reviewed the application for consent in accordance with the SVCA s mandate, the Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority Environmental Planning and Regulations Policies Manual, Approved May 16, 2017, and the Memorandum of Agreement between the SVCA and the Township of Chatsworth relating to plan review. The purpose of the application is to increase the maximum building height provision for an accessory building from 7.0 metres to 9.12 metres. The increase would accommodate a second storey loft to provide additional storage and studio space. The building would have a footprint of square metres and a total floor area of square metres. SVCA staff conducted a site inspection on the property on March 22, The application is acceptable to Authority staff, and the following comments are offered. Natural Hazards In the opinion of SVCA staff, the property is not affected by any natural hazards. Natural Heritage The natural heritage features affecting the subject property include Significant Woodlands, potentially Significant Wildlife Habitat and potentially the Habitat of Endangered Species and Threatened Species. Watershed Member Municipalities Municipality of Arran-Elderslie, Municipality of Brockton, Township of Chatsworth, Municipality of Grey Highlands, Town of Hanover, Township of Howick, Municipality of Morris-Turnberry, Municipality of South Bruce, Township of Huron-Kinloss, Municipality of Kincardine, Town of Minto, Township of Wellington North, Town of Saugeen Shores, Township of Southgate, Municipality of West Grey

54 Township of Chatsworth Application for Minor Variance A01/2018 (Backhouse c/o Smythe) April 20, 2018 Page 2 of 3 Significant Woodlands Significant Woodlands are identified in Appendix B Constraint Mapping of the Grey County Official Plan (OP) and are shown to cover the majority of the property and the adjacent lands. The Grey County OP states that no development or site alteration may occur within Significant Woodlands or their adjacent lands unless it has been demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. Significant Wildlife Habitat While there is no County-wide mapping of significant wildlife habitat, it has come to the attention of SVCA staff that significant wildlife habitat may be located on or adjacent to the subject property. Section of the OP indicates that development and site alteration shall not be permitted within wildlife habitat, or their adjacent lands, unless it has been demonstrated through an acceptable EIS that there will be no negative impacts to the natural features or their ecological functions. Environmental Impact Study In accordance with Section (2) of the Grey County OP, SVCA staff is of the opinion that the requirement for the preparation of an EIS be waived, as the preparation of an EIS would serve no useful purpose for the protections of the natural heritage features mentioned above. In the opinion of SVCA staff the impacts to the significant natural heritage features will be negligible as the accessory building is proposed to be constructed on the existing gravel pad without removing any trees. Habitat of Threatened or Endangered Species It has come to the attention of SVCA staff that Habitat of a Threatened or Endangered Species may be located on or adjacent to the subject property. Section of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014) indicates that development and site alteration shall not be permitted in habitat of endangered species or threatened species, except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure the threatened and endangered species policy referred to in the PPS has been appropriately addressed. Please contact the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) for information on how to address this policy. The Owen Sound office MNRF Management Biologist for Grey County is Jody Scheifley ( , jody.scheifley@ontario.ca). SVCA Regulation The property is not subject to the SVCA s Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 169/06, as amended). A permit from the SVCA will not be required for the proposed accessory building. Conclusion All of the plan review functions listed in the Agreement have been assessed with respect to this development proposal. The application for minor variance is acceptable to SVCA staff.

55 Township of Chatsworth Application for Minor Variance A01/2018 (Backhouse c/o Smythe) April 20, 2018 Page 3 of 3 We trust this information is helpful. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, Emily Payton Environmental Planning Technician Saugeen Conservation EP/ cc: Elizabeth Backhouse, Owner (via ) Richard Smythe, Permitting, Post Farm Structures Inc., Applicant (via ) Ron Davidson, Planner, Township of Chatsworth (via ) Brian Gamble, Authority Member, SVCA (via )

56

57

58 TOWNSHIP OF CHATSWORTH Highway 6, RR 1 Chatsworth, Ontado NOH 1G0 Telephone Fax Department Review X Fire Department Water Department X Building/Septic Department æ Owner: Applicant: Description: Address: File No.: Elizabeth Backhouse Post Farm Structures c/o Richard Smythe Paft Lot t7, Concession 11 EGR, Geographic Township Holland, Township of Chatsworth Concession 10 A01/2018 of

59