The Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent met in the Council Chambers, Town Hall Victoria Park, at 7:00 pm., Thursday, June 19, 2008.

Transcription

1 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT AND CONSENT MINUTES Sections 45(1) and 45(2) of the Planning Act Meeting COA # Thursday, June 19, 2008 The Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent met in the Council Chambers, Town Hall Victoria Park, at 7:00 pm., Thursday, June 19, Members Present: Members Absent: Town Staff Present: Joe Yaworski, Chair John Vanderzand, Vice-Chair Anthony Price, Member Géza Gaspardy, Member Heather Brown, Member All present Elizabeth Cunningham, Committee Secretary-Treasurer Deborah Johnson, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer (Ref: A-08/024/M) Bronwyn Parker, Planner The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest by Committee Members. The Chair confirmed that a quorum was in attendance. The Chair announced that Application D13 (A-08/025/M Nourkov) had been deferred by Staff, prior to public notice, with the agreement of the applicant and pending further consultation with Heritage Milton. There were no further requests for deferral or withdrawal of applications. 1.0 MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS 1.1 D13 (A-08/024/M) THIBIDEAU/AGHOLD HOLDINGS LTD. Barton Street 1.2 D13 (A-08/026/M) D ALESSANDRO Meadowland Crescent, Campbellville 1.3 D13 (A-08/027/M) PERSAUD Winter Crescent 1.4 D13 (A-08/028/M) HOOPP REALTY INC. Escarpment Way 1.5 D13 (A-08/029/M) FAITH MISSION (IN CANADA) 2 nd Line (Nassagaweya) 1.1 Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/024/M) Thibideau/Aghold Holdings Ltd. 91 Barton Street Lot 11, R.P. 20M-392 Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton Applicant: Present: Kevin Agnew, Aghold Holdings Ltd. Kevin Agnew, Aghold Holdings Ltd., Purchaser/Agent- Sworn in. Barbara Tapper, 85 Barton Street (neighbouring property owner) The following minor variance application was reviewed within the context of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. The Chair asked whether there was anyone in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the application. A show of hands indicated that there were person(s) present concerning this application. Applicant Overview: Mr. Agnew has purchased the property known as 91 Barton Street and wishes to demolish the existing dwelling and rebuild a new single-family dwelling. Mr. Agnew stated that the newly constructed home will be in keeping with the characteristics of the neighbourhood and will remain a one-storey dwelling. However, the new dwelling will be approximately 2700 square feet and will, therefore, require additional lot coverage.

2 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 2 of 14 Public Deputations: Barbara Tapper, 85 Barton Street, Milton ON L9T 1C8 Is this going to be a family home or owned by the holding company? Will the construction be completed? Ms. Tapper noted concern about a home in the neighbourhood that has been left unfinished. Will the construction area be kept clean? Applicant Response: Mr. Agnew wishes to build the house very quickly with construction to start in the summer and hopes to have the house completed by November. The house was purchased by Aghold Holdings Ltd. and Mr. Agnew is the sole owner of that company. The property will not be a rental but will be a family home. It is Mr. Agnew s intent to keep the construction area clean at all times (having already asked the existing tenants to remove certain personal items). Committee Questions: Committee Member Brown asked whether Mr. Agnew s family will be living at the property as he only indicated that a family will live there. Will it be a resale property or a rental? Committee Member Brown also asked if Mr. Agnew spoke to any of the neighbours about what he was planning for the property. Mr. Agnew replied that it may be a resale once completed depending on his circumstances as he owns another property. Mr. Agnew stated that he does not live in the area; however, he did speak to the next door neighbour about the proposed plans. Committee Member Gaspardy inquired about the number of mature trees on the lot, specifically a Colorado Blue Spruce in the rear yard. According to the site plan, the drip line is close by. Is this drawn to scale and will the foundations of the new garage protect this tree? Also what is the fate of the trees on the other side of the property? Mr. Agnew replied that as far as he knew, the drawings are to scale and the tree will be protected. With regard to the trees on the other side of the property, Mr. Agnew indicated that he hoped to save them but some may have to come down. Committee Chair Yaworski asked if there was living space behind the windows above the garage. Mr. Agnew said no. Committee Chair Yaworski noted that Heritage Milton had no objections to the proposed reconstruction. Mr. Agnew indicated they Heritage Milton made suggestions with regard to the doors. MOTION TO APPROVE Following discussions and having regard for the requirements of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, and Chapter P13: and the Committee, in its opinion, finds: 1. That the application is considered to be minor; 2. That the application is considered to be desirable for the appropriate development or use of the property; 3. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan; 4. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. The requested variance regarding lot coverage is minor in nature, conform to the general policies and intent of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and are appropriate for the development and use of the land because the proposed single family dwelling: Will be in keeping with the characteristics (i.e. setbacks, massing, scale, amount of amenity space) of the surrounding residential area; and Negative impacts on surrounding property owners are not contemplated as a result of this proposal. Is consistent with the Character Area policies of the Town s Official Plan.

3 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 3 of 14 GASPARDY PRICE THAT Minor Variance Application D13 (A /M) to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to allow an increase in maximum lot coverage to 31%, WHEREAS Section 6.2 of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a maximum lot coverage of 25% on Lot 11, R.P. 20M-392, municipally known as 91 Barton Street in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the owners submit an application for site plan approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. That a demolition permit be applied for and received prior to commencement of demolition of the existing single detached dwelling. 3. That a building permit be applied for and received, prior to commencement of construction of the new single detached dwelling. 4. That the approval be subject of an expiry of one year from the date of decision if the conditions are not met, if the proposed development does not proceed and/or a building permit is not secured. End of Conditions Notes: 1. Plans Examination staff note that the great room would be classed as a living room from a Building Code perspective and that a living room requires a minimum 10% window area. There does not appear to be any windows in this room. This will be reviewed at time of submission for building permit. 2. A detailed grading plan is to be provided for review upon application for a building permit. This plan is to indicate overland flow direction, associated land slopes and drainage management on all sides of the proposed site. 3. Development charges are applicable in accordance with the Town of Milton, Halton Region and both Halton District and Halton Catholic District School Board s respective development charges by-laws. They are due and payable at the time of final building permit issuance at the rate in effect at that time. End of Notes MOTION CARRIED Those persons in attendance were advised of the 20-day appeal period from the date of this decision being rendered. 1.2 Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/026/M D Alessandro) 170 Meadowland Crescent, Campbellville Lot 26, Plan M369 and Part Lot 25, described as Part 2, Reference Plan 20R (Nassagaweya) Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton Applicant/Agent: Present: Joe D Alessandro, Property Co-owner Joe D Alessandro, Property Co-owner Sworn in. Kay Mighton, Neighbouring Property Owner (190 Meadowland Crescent) - Sworn in. The following minor variance application was reviewed within the context of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. The Chair asked whether there was anyone in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the application. A show of hands indicated that there were person(s) present concerning this application.

4 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 4 of 14 Applicant/Agent Overview: Mr. D Alessandro advised that he and his family had lived in the community for the past 15 years, with the last 5 years at their current Campbellville address. Shortly after moving to Meadowland, he came up with a long-term landscape plan for the backyard, and began implementing the plan in phases and according to priorities. When the overall landscape plan was initiated, it was based on the zoning in effect at that time. The first priority was the construction of a shed to store outdoor items, including an a.t.v., tractor, lawn furniture, etc. The reason for building the shed (and building it first) was to reduce undesirable clutter in his yard and stay in keeping with the character/upkeep of the neighbourhood. Mr. D Alessandro obtained a building permit and proceeded to build the coach house-type shed in heritage style (using 100-year old brick) to stay in keeping with/complement an old barn situated behind/beyond his property. When application/drawings for the swimming pool and pool house phase were submitted this year, the applicant was advised that the zoning standards had changed since the creation of his original landscape plan. Once aware of the changes, Mr. D Alessandro adjusted the drawings to accommodate the new zoning insofar as possible. However, in order for the proposed pool shed to have the same pitch/dormers as the existing coach house/shed, the height would not comply with the current zoning. As well, an additional variance was identified since the zoning provisions for overall area permitted for accessory structures had changed. The proposed pool house will be used to house pool equipment, a change area, entertaining area, and will provide additional overhead storage as well. The location of the pool, as proposed, is the only possible location on the property due to the location of the existing septic bed and reserve septic bed. Mr. D Alessandro advised that he had tried to retain as many mature trees as possible and had pushed the proposed pool house further back on the property to do so. While having taken down some older Austrian Pines, he had kept deciduous trees on the property. Mr. D Alessandro briefly explained the history of his property relative to the neighbouring property. The builder for the previous (original) owner of his home built the house partially on the neighbouring property at 190 Meadowland. After the error was discovered, a Court Decision ordered a lot line adjustment so that the house at 170 Meadowland could remain as constructed vs. being demolished. More activity/building has taken place closer to the mutual lot line than may have otherwise occurred, based on the as-constructed location of the two neighbouring houses. Public Deputations: Kay Mighton, 190 Meadowland Crescent, Campbellville ON L0P 1B0 Mrs. Mighton is the co-owner and a next door neighbour to the D Alessandro Family. She prefaced her remarks by saying it is wonderful to have a pool, pool house and large yard for children to play in and acknowledged that Mr. D Alessandro keeps his property nice and tidy. Further to Mr. D Alessandro s previous remarks, she also referred to the history of the lot creation/adjustment and noted that as a result of builder error, they have found themselves somewhat squished on their own lot. Mrs. Mighton submitted photographs which were circulated to the Committee Members. Existing accessory structure: In Mrs. Mighton s opinion, she is concerned that the existing accessory structure: is more of a house than shed, in terms of extreme height and finish. is not of a style similar/complementary to the neighbouring barn. She feels that the board and batten used in their yard is much more in keeping with the barn. has reduced their view of the Niagara Escarpment. Proposed pool house: Mrs. Mighton: is upset about how much more of their view of the Escarpment will be disrupted by the height; doesn t consider the specifications and impact of the pool house to be minor. Suggested that some negotiation as to size etc. might be in order.

5 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 5 of 14 Brick Wall: Although not part of the minor variance application, Mrs. Mighton had significant concerns about the brick wall as shown on the site plan drawing submitted with the application, including the following: o Concerned that the D Alessandro property will become overloaded and that the wall will be overpowering, particularly in the area closest to the mutual lot line. o Concerned that the brick wall + 2-storey red brick building will cause the property to resemble a compound, rather than a single family dwelling with appropriate accessory buildings. o Concerned about the impact on ambiance/style that a series of similar variances could create. (Note: It was clarified to Mrs. Mighton that if such a series of applications were to be made, each one would be judged on its own merits. Moreover, if this application were to be approved, it would not necessarily set a precedent.) Response by the Applicant: Location: Spent a lot of time trying to situate the pool house and swimming pool, paying particular attention to the grades/slopes and location of existing septic (and reserve) bed. Height & Size of Proposed Pool House: Over on height since that is dictated by pitch. Not a second storey; intended to provide extra space for storage. Interior is 10x18 + patio with an extended roof. Committee Questions/Deliberations: Committee Member Brown asked the applicant if he had considered any other design(s) for the proposed pool house. Mr. D Alessandro replied that while he had contemplated other designs, anything with a lesser pitch wouldn t be as complementary to either his lot and home or the neighbourhood in general. Committee Member Price questioned the reasoning for the long brick wall and asked the applicant if he had discussed his plans with the neighbours. Mr. D Alessandro advised that he had approached all of his neighbours regarding his overall proposal and they had all (including Mrs. Mighton) signed in favour of the requested variances. Responding to comments by the neighbour and Committee Members, Mr. D Alessandro advised that he is looking for the associated fence/wall to: o be as maintenance-free as possible (wood fence represents ongoing maintenance); o provide privacy (wrought iron doesn t provide privacy); o provide security (there have been break-ins in the area, with his own yard possibly having been used as access); o create a windbreak for the swimming pool; o create somewhat of a noise barrier from 401 noise; o Provide security from and minimize noise from any potential future commercial development that may locate behind his property (property was recently sold for redevelopment). Committee Member Gaspardy referenced the signed support letter from the neighbours, noting that: o the neighbour on one side has sold their home and so wouldn t have the same vested interest as an incoming neighbour (or others) might; and o the abutting neighbour at 190 Meadowland seems to have changed perspective Committee Member Gaspardy referenced the possible drainage impact that would occur as a result of the proposed pool house. Mr. D Alessandro noted that he will add pipe to redirect drainage from neighbouring property to his own. In working with Mr. Mighton, he has tried to accommodate their concerns about drainage. Mr. D Alessandro is also willing to buy plant material, etc. for neighbours to soften any impact that may be created as a result of the brick wall and feels that, with plantings; the wall could fit in quite nicely to their own yard.

6 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 6 of 14 Committee Vice Chair Vanderzand noted that: o Wall will be stepped, resulting in height variations; less intrusive. Engineering Staff has approved the wall in principle. o Height & Size of Proposed Pool House 2 1/2 feet additional height Square footage = building will be longer than permitted The Planner advised: o that a site visit was conducted by Planning and Engineering Staff; Engineering wanted to be sure about drainage and has already reviewed grading. o that while the drainage from wall impacts rest of property; it has been okayed by Engineering. Notwithstanding, Engineering intends to monitor the situation. o (referring to the difference between the lowest point on the D Alessandro property and the walkout deck on the Mighton s property) that because neighbouring property is minimum 8 feet higher and the initial D Alessandro shed is already built, the current proposal should not further detrimentally impact neighbour. o The original proposal located the pool house even closer to the mutual lot line. The wall was actually proposed to be part of accessory building (pool house) Responding to Committee Chair Yaworski, Planning Staff confirmed that the current proposal represents significant compromise on the part of the applicant to date, to a point where Staff could now support the proposal. Responding to questioning by Mrs. Mighton, the Planner advised that the area of a 2-storey structure is calculated based on the footprint only and is intended to ensure that the site is not overcrowded. Planning Staff noted that even with the proposed increase in area of accessory structures, a large amount of open amenity space remains on the subject property. Committee Vice Chair Vanderzand noted that it is reasonable to consider the fact that the applicant started his backyard project 4+ years ago and that his vision was based on the standards of the old Zoning By-law. MOTION TO APPROVE Following discussions and having regard for the requirements of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P13: and the Committee, in its opinion, finds: 1. That the application is considered to be minor; 2. That the application is considered to be desirable for the appropriate development or use of the property; 3. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan; 4. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. Committee Members consider that the requested variances are minor in nature, conform to the general policies and intent of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and are appropriate for the development and use of the land because the proposed pool cabana: does not alter the view, sightlines or personal enjoyment of the subject property, nor any neighbouring properties; and the upper floor will be used solely for the purpose of personal storage, ancillary to the residential use of the property.

7 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 7 of 14 VANDERZAND PRICE THAT Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/026/M) to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to allow: an increase in maximum height for an accessory structure to 4.57 metres, WHEREAS Section (Table 4A) of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a maximum height for an accessory structure of 3.7 metres; and an increase in total (maximum) area of all accessory buildings/structures to 68 square metres, WHEREAS Section (Table 4A) of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a total (maximum) area of all accessory buildings/structures of 40 square metres on Lot 26, Plan M369 and Part Lot 25, described as Part 2, Reference Plan 20R (Nassagaweya), municipally known as 170 Meadowland Crescent, Campbellville in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That a building permit be applied for and received, prior to commencement of construction of the pool cabana; 2. That the applicant provide the Town of Milton with an Undertaking acknowledging that the existing detached shed, and second storey of the proposed pool cabana will be solely used for the storage of personal items and will not be used for any human habitation or commercial/industrial purposes. 3. That the approval be subject of an expiry of one year from the date of decision if the conditions are not met, if the proposed development does not proceed and/or a building permit is not secured. End of Conditions Notes: 1. A detailed grading plan is to be provided for review upon application for a building permit. This plan is to indicate overland flow direction, associated land slopes and drainage management on all sides of the proposed additions. End of Notes MOTION CARRIED Those persons in attendance were advised of the 20-day appeal period from the date of this decision being rendered. 1.3 Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/027/M Persaud) 1219 Winter Crescent Lot 288, R.P. 20M-926 Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton Owner/Agent: Len Persaud, Property Owner Present: Len Persaud, Property Owner Sworn in. The following minor variance application was reviewed within the context of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. The Chair asked whether there was anyone in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the application. There was no response. Other than the applicant/agent, there were no other person(s) present concerning this application. Applicant/Agent Overview: Mr. Persaud explained that he purchased a gazebo kit from Costco and, upon subsequently checking with the municipality, learned that the finished product would be slightly higher and larger than the current zoning permits.

8 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 8 of 14 In follow-up discussions with Town Staff, Mr. Persaud came to also realize that an existing shed on his property didn t comply with the by-law standards (size, height and setback). Public Deputations: None Committee Questions/Deliberations: Responding to Committee Member Brown, Mr. Persaud explained that: o He built the shed himself; o His lot is large and pie-shaped and can accommodate both the gazebo, at the proposed size, and the existing shed; and o The shed walls are 22 inches away from the lot line and the drip line is 8 inches away. The Engineering Department has visited the site and has no concerns regarding drainage. He indicated that his neighbours were in support of the variances needed to permit his existing shed and proposed gazebo. MOTION TO APPROVE Following discussions and having regard for the requirements of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P13: and the Committee, in its opinion, finds: 1. That the application is considered to be minor; 2. That the application is considered to be desirable for the appropriate development or use of the property; 3. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan; 4. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. Committee Members consider that the requested variance is minor in nature, conforms to the general policies and intent of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is appropriate for the development and use of the land because the existing accessory structure (shed) and proposed accessory structure (gazebo): do not alter the view, sightlines or personal enjoyment of the subject property, nor any neighbouring properties; and the shed will be used solely for the purpose of personal storage, ancillary to the residential use of the property. VANDERZAND BROWN THAT Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/027/M) to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to allow: an increase in the maximum height of an accessory structure (proposed gazebo) to 3.2 metres, WHEREAS Section of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a maximum height of accessory structure of 3.0 metres; an increase in the maximum height of an accessory structure (existing shed) to 3.28 metres, WHEREAS Section of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a maximum height of accessory structure of 3.0 metres; a decrease in side yard setback to an accessory structure (existing shed) to 0.2 metres, WHEREAS Section of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, requires a minimum side yard setback to an accessory structure of 0.6 metres; and an increase in total area of all accessory structures (existing shed + proposed gazebo) to square metres, WHEREAS Section of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a total area of all accessory structures of 10 square metres on Lot 288, R.P. 20M-926, municipally known as 1219 Winter Crescent in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

9 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 9 of That building permits be applied for and received for the existing shed, proposed deck and proposed gazebo and that they be secured prior to commencement of construction of both the deck and gazebo; 2. A detailed grading plan is to be provided for review and subsequent approval upon application for building permit for the existing shed. This plan is to indicate overland flow direction, associated land slopes, drainage management and elevations for the property and on all sides of the existing shed. 3. That the approval be subject of an expiry of one year from the date of decision if the conditions are not met, if the proposed development does not proceed and/or a building permit is not secured. End of Conditions Notes: 1. Any changes to the drainage patterns of the property must not adversely affect adjoining properties and/or existing buildings. End of Notes MOTION CARRIED Those persons in attendance were advised of the 20-day appeal period from the date of this decision being rendered. 1.4 Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/028/M HOOPP Realty Inc.) Escarpment Way Block 1, R.P. 20M-952 Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton Agent: Present: Mike Mittleman, Belrock Construction Build Inc. for HOOPP Realty Inc. Mike Mittleman, Belrock Construction Build Inc., Agent Sworn in. The following minor variance application was reviewed within the context of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. The Chair asked whether there was anyone in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the application. There was no response. Other than the applicant/agent, there were no other persons present concerning this application Agent Overview: Mr. Mittleman explained that a related site plan application for the second phase of the HOOPP development is currently being processed by Town Planning Staff. At a May 11, 2008 meeting, Town Staff identified the need for a variance for a widened driveway. Final site plan approval is contingent upon final approval of the required driveway variance. Public Deputations: None Committee Questions/Deliberations: Responding to Committee Chair Yaworski s question about timing, Mr. Mittleman clarified that HOOPP is ready and anxious to complete this project.

10 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 10 of 14 MOTION TO APPROVE Following discussions and having regard for the requirements of Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P13: and the Committee, in its opinion, finds: 1. That the application is considered to be minor; 2. That the application is considered to be desirable for the appropriate development or use of the property; 3. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan; 4. That the application is considered to be within the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. Committee Members consider that the requested variance is minor in nature, conforms to the general policies and intent of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and is appropriate for the development and use of the land because the proposed increase in driveway width: Conforms to the Provincial Drawing Standards as required by Engineering Services; Will not impact the adjacent properties; and Is appropriate for the industrial use of the subject lands. BROWN PRICE THAT Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/028/M) to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to allow an increase in maximum driveway width to 12.0 metres, WHEREAS Section 5.5.1(i)(b) of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, permits a maximum driveway width of 7.5 metres on Block 1, R.P. 20M-952, situated on Escarpment Way in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That a building permit be applied for and received, prior to commencement of construction; 2. The site plan approval be granted for the proposed industrial buildings; 3. That the approval be subject of an expiry of one year from the date of decision if the conditions are not met, if the proposed development does not proceed and/or a building permit is not secured. End of Conditions Notes: 1. The Town s Development Engineering Staff notes that, as a result of the site plan review process, the driveways may need to be relocated, and the increased driveway width is supported for any new location (to be determined and approved through the site plan process), as Engineering requires the driveways to conform to OPSD (attached as Schedule 2 ) and allow for safe movement of the 53-foot trailers. 2. Conservation Halton notes that development within Conservation Halton s regulated area would require permission pursuant to Ontario Regulation 162/ Halton Regional Health Department requirements, if any, will be addressed through site plan approval. 4. The Owner will be required to pay all the applicable Regional development charges prior to the issuance of any building permits. 5. Development charges are applicable to all future development in accordance with the Town of Milton and both the Halton District and Halton Catholic District School Board s respective development charges by-laws. They are due and payable at the time of final building permit issuance at the rate in effect at that time. End of Notes MOTION CARRIED Those persons in attendance were advised of the 20-day appeal period from the date of this decision being rendered.

11 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 11 of Minor Variance Application D13 [A-08/029/M Faith Mission (in Canada)] Second Line Part Lot 13, Concession 3 (Nassagaweya), described as Part 1, Reference Plan 20R-9433 (Nassagaweya) Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton Agent: Present: John Bennett, For: Faith Mission (in Canada) John Bennett, For: Faith Mission (in Canada) Sworn in. Ken Griffiths, nd Line (Nassagaweya) Sworn in. Ian Jones, nd Line (Nassagaweya) Sworn in. The following associated minor variance application and application for permission respecting an existing legal non-conforming use were reviewed within the context of Sections 45(1) and 45(2) of the Planning Act respectively. The Chair asked whether there was anyone in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the application. A show of hands indicated that there were persons present concerning this application. Applicant/Agent Overview: Mr. Bennett noted that approvals were required from the Committee of Adjustment to: o accommodate a two-storey addition/upgrade to their existing Retreat Centre; and o allow the parking area to be gravel-surfaced rather than tarmac/hard surfaced, as required by zoning. He noted that the Faith Mission doesn t expect to need as large a parking area as Zoning Staff has suggested. The additional interior space is not intended to attract more people to the site, rather to better accommodate a similar number of people. The increased interior height within the building is intended to facilitate alternate indoor activities (sports, etc.) in cases of inclement weather. Public Deputations: Ken Griffiths, nd Line (Nassagaweya) Mr. Griffiths advised that he lives across the road from the Faith Mission property. Has objections, as follow: o Use - The proposal does not seem to be maintaining the existing use; appears as though a full church is being proposed vs. a continuation of the existing retreat centre. o Parking Area - Concerned about the removal of trees to accommodate the additional parking area. Questioned whether parking area could be shifted back to save trees. Also concerned about dust that would be generated by gravel. o Traffic concerned that traffic will be compounded, especially during weekend events. Questioned why Faith Mission couldn t be allowed to continue to use grassy area for excess/occasional parking. Committee Questions/Deliberations: Responding to questioning by Committee Chair Yaworski, Mr. Bennett clarified that the large open area internal to the building is actually an auditorium vs. a standard church and the pews identified in associated drawings are actually folding chairs. Parking The Planner explained that the Zoning By-law requires that all parking areas (urban and/or rural) be asphalted (or similarly hard surfaced) and that typically parking calculations are made on each individual use, whether those uses are concurrent or not. Staff prefers gravel in this situation, however, agrees that active dust suppression would be a neighbourly practice. Notwithstanding, Staff also advised that if dust were to become a significant problem, a neighbour can contact the Town s by-law Enforcement Staff. Traffic The Planner advised that the proposal is subject to site plan control and traffic is typically a

12 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 12 of 14 component of that review. A Noise and Traffic Study could be required as part of that process and, if required for the Faith Mission proposal, could be made available for public viewing. Trees Committee Vice Chair Vanderzand was equally concerned about tree removal and questioned why an additional variance for reduced parking had not been requested. The Planner agreed that this was a valid point and noted that Staff doesn t want to see trees removed unnecessarily. Suggested that applicant may be able to explore possibilities of shifting the parking area further back on the property through the associated site plan process. Further Public Deputations: Ian Jones, nd Line (Nassagaweya) Mr. Jones noted that he has lived at nd Line for 28 years and he is supportive of both the Faith Mission and Mr. Griffiths. He commented that Mr. Griffiths has done a great job of upgrading his property and has always found Faith Mission to be thoughtful and accommodating. He is quite confident that they would be supportive of any plan that could minimize disruption to the land and trees. Mr. Bennett responded that he loved the idea of reduced parking, if the Town deems it possible. Respecting additional use/traffic, he explained that they generally hold only two large events per year, one in the summer and the second nearer to Christmas. Weekend events are typically at a much smaller scale. He acknowledged that he hadn t anticipated that tree removal would be required, especially since Faith Mission had planted the trees in the first place for screening, etc. He went on record saying that he would like to retain the trees, if there was any way to do so. Discussion followed amongst the public, Staff and Committee Members regarding alternatives to the requested variances, including: o Possible reduction in number of otherwise required parking spaces; o o Possible shift in location of parking area; Possibility of a grassed parking reserve area to be identified on the associated site plan; to be available for conversion to parking, if and as needed. The Committee Secretary-Treasurer confirmed that, if a revision to the application was required to address the concerns raised at the meeting, an associated Town fee would not be applied. Those in attendance were in agreement that a one-month deferral of the application would be in everyone s best interests and would allow time for effective and acceptable alternatives to be explored. That being the case, Mr. Bennett requested a deferral and the Committee agreed. Under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act: MOTION TO DEFER Following discussions, and having heard concerns regarding the extent of and actual need for increased, graveled parking area, the Committee finds it reasonable to defer final consideration of the application, pending further review of parking requirements and possible alternatives. The applicant, neighbours and Staff were all in agreement with the Committee s suggestion to defer the application for one month. VANDERZAND BROWN THAT Minor Variance Application D13 (A-08/029/M) to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to allow a parking area to be gravel-surfaced, WHEREAS Section 5.1(ii) of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, requires all required parking spaces/areas to be surface treated with asphalt, concrete, or similar material on Part Lot 13, Concession 3 (Nassagaweya), described as Part 1, Reference Plan 20R-9433 (Nassagaweya), Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton, municipally known as Second Line in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE DEFERRED FOR ONE MONTH WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE APPLICANT; - and -

13 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 13 of 14 Under Section 45(2) of the Planning Act: MOTION TO DEFER In conjunction with the deferral of the associated variance respecting a graveled parking area, the Committee suggested that it would be appropriate to defer the application in its entirety. The applicant, neighbours and Staff were all in agreement with the Committee s suggestion to defer the complete application for one month. VANDERZAND BROWN THAT Minor Variance Application D13 [A-08/029/M Faith Mission (in Canada)] to the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent requesting permission to permit the expansion of a legal non-conforming use, WHEREAS Section 10.2 of Comprehensive Zoning By-law , as amended, allows the uses permitted under the A2 Zone on Part Lot 13, Concession 3 (Nassagaweya), described as Part 1, Reference Plan 20R-9433 (Nassagaweya), Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton, municipally known as Second Line in the Town of Milton, Regional Municipality of Halton BE DEFERRED FOR ONE MONTH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE VARIANCE RESPECTING THE PARKING AREA, WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE APPLICANT. MOTION CARRIED Those persons in attendance were advised that the entire application would be rescheduled; likely to the July 24, 2008 Public Hearing and that the Town would provide additional written public notice to them, prior to that time. 2.0 MINUTES FROM COA MEETING NO HELD ON MAY 22, 2008 PRICE VANDERZAND THAT MINUTES OF COA MEETING NO HELD ON MAY 22, 2008 BE APPROVED, AS READ. MOTION CARRIED 3.0 OTHER BUSINESS/INFORMATION UPDATES The Committee Secretary-Treasurer updated Members regarding upcoming applications.

14 MINUTES - Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent Page 14 of ADJOURNMENT VANDERZAND YAWORSKI THAT this meeting of the Milton Committee of Adjustment and Consent do ADJOURN at 9:00 p.m. with the next regularly-scheduled meeting to be held on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chamber at Town Hall Victoria Park. MOTION CARRIED John Vanderzand, Vice-Chair FOR: Joe Yaworski, Chair Deborah Johnson, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer FOR: Elizabeth H. Cunningham, Secretary-Treasurer Executed copies to: Town s web site ( Milton Clerks Department (original) Milton Planning and Development Department Halton Regional Planning Department Minor Variance Application Files (Extract for each file)